• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Stellaris Dev Diary #54 - Ethics Rework

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Now that 1.4 is out, we can finally start properly talking about the 1.5 'Banks' update, which will be a major update with an accompanying (unannounced) expansion. As of right now we cannot provide any details on when 1.5 will come out, or anything about the unannounced expansion, so please don't ask. :)

Today's topic is a number of changes coming to ethics in the 1.5 update. Everything in this diary is part of the free update. Please note that values shown in screenshots are always non-final.

Authoritarian vs Egalitarian
One of the things in Stellaris I was never personally happy with was the Collectivism vs Individualism ethic. While interesting conceptually, the mechanics that the game presented for the ethics simply did not match either their meanings or flavor text, meaning you ended up with a Collectivist ethos that was somehow simultaneously egalitarian and 100% in on slavery, while Individualism was a confused jumble between liberal democratic values and randian free-market capitalism. For this reason we've decided to rebrand these ethics into something that should both be much more clear in its meaning, and match the mechanics as they are.

Authoritarian replaces Collectivist and represents belief in hierarchial rule and orderly, stratified societies. Authoritarian pops tolerate slavery and prefer to live in autocracies.
Egalitarian replaces Individualist and represents belief in individual rights and a level playing field. Egalitarian pops dislike slavery and elitism and prefer to live in democracies.

While I understand this may cause some controversy and will no doubt spark debate over people's interpretation of words like Authoritarian and Individualist, I believe that we need to work with the mechanics we have, and as it stand we simply do not have good mechanics for a Collectivism vs Individualism axis while the mechanics we have fit the rebranded ethics if not perfectly then at least a whole lot better.
2016_12_08_1.png

2016_12_08_5.png


Pop Ethics Rework
Another mechanic that never quite felt satisfying is the ethics divergence mechanic. Not only is it overly simplified with just a single value determining if pops go towards or from empire ethics, the shift rarely makes sense: Why would xenophobe alien pops diverge away from xenophobe just because they're far away from the capital of a xenophobic empire? Furthermore, the fact that pops could have anything from one to three different ethics made it extremely difficult to actually quantify what any individual pop's ethics actually mean for how they relate to the empire. For this reason we've decided to revamp the way pop ethics work in the following way:
  • Each pop in your empire will now only embrace a single, non-fanatic ethic. At the start of the game, your population will be made of up of only the ethics that you picked in species setup, but as your empire grows, its population will become more diverse in their views and wants.
  • Each ethic now has an attraction value for each pop in your empire depending on both the empire's situation and their own situation. For example, enslaved pops tend to become more egalitarian, while pops living around non-enslaved aliens become more xenophilic (and pops living around enslaved aliens more xenophobic). Conversely, fighting a lot of wars will increase the attraction for militarism across your entire empire, while an alien empire purging pops of a particular species will massively increase the attraction for xenophobic for the species being purged.
  • Over time, the ethics of your pops will drift in such a way that it roughly matches the overall attraction of that value. For example, if your materialist attraction sits at 10% for decades, it's likely that after that time, around 10% of your pops will be materialist. There is some random factor so it's likely never going to match up perfectly, but the system is built to try and go towards the mean, so the more overrepresented an ethic is compared to its attraction, the more likely pops are to drift away from it and vice versa.
2016_12_08_3.png


So what does the single ethic per pop mean in terms of how it affects pop happiness? Well, this brings us to the new faction system, which we will cover briefly in this dev diary, and get back to more in depth later.

Faction Rework
One thing we feel is currently missing from Stellaris is agency for your pops. Sure, they have their ethics and will get upset if you have policies that don't suit them, but that's about the only way they have of expressing their desires, and there is no tie-in between pop ethics and the politics systems in the game. To address this and also to create a system that will better fit the new pop ethics, we've decided to revamp the faction system in the following manner:
  • Factions are no longer purely rebel groupings, but instead represent political parties, popular movements and other such interest groups, and mostly only consist of pops of certain ethics. For example, the Supremacist faction desires complete political dominance for their own species, and is made up exclusively of Xenophobic pops, while the Isolationist faction wants diplomatic isolation and a strong defense, and can be joined by both Pacifist and Xenophobe pops. You do not start the game with any factions, but rather they will form over the course of the game as their interests become relevant
  • Factions have issues related to their values and goals, and how well the empire responds to those issues will determine the overall happiness level of the faction. For example, the Supremacists want the ruler to be of their species and are displeased by the presence of free alien populations in the empire. They will also get a temporary happiness boost whenever you defeat alien empires in war.
  • The happiness level of a faction determines the base happiness of all pops belonging to it. This means that where any pop not belonging to a faction has a base happiness of 50%, a pop belonging to a faction that have their happiness reduced to 35% because of their issues will have a base happiness of only 35% before any other modifiers are applied, meaning that displeasing a large and influential faction can result in vastly reduced productivity across your empire. As part of this, happiness effects from policies, xenophobia, slavery, etc have been merged into the faction system, so engaging in alien slavery will displease certain factions instead of having each pop individually react to it.
  • Factions have an influence level determined by the number of pops that belong to it. In addition to making its pops happier, a happy faction will provide an influence boost to their empire.
2016_12_08_4.png

2016_12_08_2.png


We will come back to factions in greater detail in a later dev diary, going over topics such as how separatists and rebellious slaves will work, and how factions can be used to change your empire ethics, but for now we are done for today. Next week we'll be talking about another new feature that we have dubbed 'Traditions and Unity'. See you then!
 
Last edited:
  • 367
  • 53
  • 17
Reactions:
Constitutional guarantees of both freedom and equality fundamentally limit the powers of the leader in a democracy.
Neither of which are exactly what you'd consider "standardized" or guaranteed.

Modern Russia is, after all, a democracy- but you'd hardly consider Putin to be operating under many restrictions, would you?
 
Constitutional guarantees of both freedom and equality fundamentally limit the powers of the leader in a democracy.

Who says a democracy must have a constitution and who says a despotic hegemony can't?
 
  • 11
  • 1
Reactions:
Authoritarianism does not necessitate oppression. You're free to ban slavery and roleplay a benevolent autocrat, but it doesn't make your society in any way equal. As for things like hive minds, as I said, they can't really be done well under the current ethics system period, this does not change that.

Likewise authoritarianism doesn't necessitate autocracy, which correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems to be what you're getting at there.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Likewise authoritarianism doesn't necessitate autocracy, which correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems to be what you're getting at there.

I'd say fanatical authoritarianism should, and it does.

Far as I'm concerned Humans are precisely in the middle of egalitarianism vs authoritarianism. It seems to me that if we get lazy, we drift towards plutocracy, not democracy or autocracy. Being a complete despot of a human country today is actually really hard, so is keeping your democracy entirely pure.
 
  • 6
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Banning slavery means just handicapping yourself for a RP while Authoritarian\Collectivist being all about slavery means they are all about oppression. Playing them without it is rather meaningless.
In short, game have no merits for playing a "benevolent autocrat" and it automatically makes Autocratic ethos the ethos of slave-drivers and purgers.

Speaking from experience, I usually ban slavery and purging as my Collectivist/Pacifist civ. The happiness bonuses I rack up from a well-treated, ethically homogenous society provide a pretty decent bonus in of itself, one which doesn't stack onto enslaved pops. And I can usually convince unhappy pops to at least behave rather than purging or whipping them into submission. So the diplomatic malus simply isn't worth the trouble.

Neither of which are exactly what you'd consider "standardized" or guaranteed.

Modern Russia is, after all, a democracy- but you'd hardly consider Putin to be operating under many restrictions, would you?

This sort of situation can be best modeled as a democracy that's neutral on the Egalitarian/Authoritarian ethos. Which is perfectly possible in Stellaris.
 
  • 6
Reactions:
Banning slavery means just handicapping yourself for a RP while Authoritarian\Collectivist being all about slavery means they are all about oppression. Playing them without it is rather meaningless.
In short, game have no merits for playing a "benevolent autocrat" and it automatically makes Autocratic ethos the ethos of slave-drivers and purgers.

I disagree about slavery, it's entirely possible to keep your empire highly functional on high happiness and/or internal stability instead.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Can't really agree with the Authoritarianism versus Egalitarianism thing but it's kind of a irrelevant issue and I can sort of understand why they did it.

I do wonder though how Ethos-dependent technology and buildings will work with this patch cuz I am guessing you won't be able to get the benefits of one ethos' tech and buildings(say, Paradise Dome) just so you can then change to another ethos for extra tech and buildings associated with it(like a Virtual Combat Arena)
 
Are we able to Play our old Galaxys (Saves) in the 1.5 Update?

I cannot make an official statement, but it is very, very unlikely that you will be able to play 1.4 games if your game updates to 1.5. You will probably have to roll the game back to 1.4 if you have Steam.
 
Without going into modern politics too much some issues I have noticed:

1. Authoritarian/Egalitarian - we are moving far too much towards various human societies. What about thing like hive mind societies, which do not follow the "authoritarian" theme? Previously, the in-game description of collectivism was at least partially in that direction.

2. Ethics attraction: seems to to be completely opposite to what happens in reality. Waging constant wars does not turn your population militarist, it's usually goes the other way. That's why we have War Exhaustion in other PI games. Likewise having a lot of aliens will not necessarily lead to xenophilia (Brexit, Trump?). I'm all for empire situation affecting pop ethics and the new faction system, but intuitive, not counter-intuitive.
 
  • 7
  • 3
Reactions:
Speaking from experience, I usually ban slavery and purging as my Collectivist/Pacifist civ. The happiness bonuses I rack up from a well-treated, ethically homogenous society provide a pretty decent bonus in of itself, one which doesn't stack onto enslaved pops. And I can usually convince unhappy pops to at least behave rather than purging or whipping them into submission. So the diplomatic malus simply isn't worth the trouble.
Well, Collectivist/Pacifist have an excellent Government form to balance lack of (or POPs being unhappy with) slavery. And Pacifist ethos is strong itself. But for other ethics combinations with Collectivists profit from slavery a lot.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
So, does that mean governments can change ethics over time now?

And, as a follow-up to that; would the following situation be viable now:
The Authoritarian-Militarist-xenophobe military dictatorship the Russian Starfederation influences the Fanatic Egalitarian-Militarist United Planets of America and through their propaganda elect a supremacist faction in power there, slowly turning the United Planets into their government set-up?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
What are you even trying to say? Modders did something so paradox shouldn't?

No. I'm saying that modders will still be able to extend governments and ethics. Like adding in ones being replaced.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
This looks like it will make your empire feel much more organic and lifelike as it drifts in beliefs depending on your playstyle and circumstances in your empire. Already looking forward to see what all that expansion brings up. May get me interested in playing Stellaris again.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
I hope in future you will add

1) Religion mechanic on Faction basis
2) Cultural Exсhange as trade option with other Empires - to gain additional influence or some kind leverage on factions in another Empire
3) Some other stuff then just influence - maybe militant patriotic factions can muster some additional militia, democratic factions can buy warbonds to support war, religious factions can declare Crusade or Space Jihad against infidels
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I just noticed something in the dev diary:

index.php


Note the simultaneous bonus for being in an empire with authoritarianism... and the malus for being in a democracy.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I just noticed something in the dev diary:

index.php


Note the simultaneous bonus for being in an empire with authoritarianism... and the malus for being in a democracy.
The tooltip is a bit vague- note that it says "The attraction of a Pop to Authoritarian is affected by the following factors", not something like "Pops are moving towards authoritarianism because of these things".

i.e., pops in a democracy will move away from Authoritarianism, as will enslaved pops.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
The tooltip is a bit vague- note that it says "The attraction of a Pop to Authoritarian is affected by the following factors", not something like "Pops are moving towards authoritarianism because of these things".

i.e., pops in a democracy will move away from Authoritarianism, as will enslaved pops.

Ah, good point. Yeah, you're right; it's not clear if it's "this is what's currently affecting attraction" or just "this is what could, theoretically, cause attraction to change".
 
I just noticed something in the dev diary:

index.php


Note the simultaneous bonus for being in an empire with authoritarianism... and the malus for being in a democracy.

I think this is meant to indicate what factors can affect the attraction, rather than what factors do...

edit: ninja'd
 
Status
Not open for further replies.