• 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:
No, ethics will not be concentrated like this, though planets may have very different ethic makeups based on local conditions.

Rebellions will be covered in a later dev diary.

If factions can be empire-wide and ethically similar pops don't congregate then the "assumed" communications are, by logic, inherently imperative.
In any case it all just begs for more cool edicts and laws (ban the intern.... errr holonet etc).
 
Now we just need fixes for boring wars and broken, stupid warscore mechanics, see here for some ideas.
 
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
I hope the egalitarian is a perfect balance between capitalism and democracy but is that right? and if my assumption was wrong then where's my liberal capitalism?

Depending on your preferred balance between liberal and capitalism, you could either go with an egalitarian Plutocratic Oligarchy, or a fanatic egalitarian Indirect or Direct Democracy. I'd say that's a government form the game models rather well.

If the designers have the secret to the perfect balance between capitalism and democracy, their talents are wasted making computer games (as excellent as those games are).
 
  • 2
Reactions:
It's all up to you and what type of government you select on how you want to play it.

I do dislike this assertion that it's up to you how you play the ethics/government (when wiz and many others made it too). Disregarding the rest of the conversation, some governments give specific bonuses or penalties which either limit certain features (only pacifist governments get extra core systems) or are borderline necessary for certain mechanics (slaves basically need authoritarian).
 
But what of us who want an egalitarian society with the firm, guiding, loving hand of the state to herd up all the xenophobes and elitists against a wall and shoot them?
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
But what of us who want an egalitarian society with the firm, guiding, loving hand of the state to shoot herd up all the xenophobes and elitists against a wall and shoot them?
That wouldn't be egalitarian, those xenophobes and elitists also would need basic rights. It just sounds like an Authoritarian government with egalitarian propaganda.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
But what of us who want an egalitarian society with the firm, guiding, loving hand of the state to shoot herd up all the xenophobes and elitists against a wall and shoot them?
I'd say authoritarian, militarist, materialist is what you're looking for.

I do dislike this assertion that it's up to you how you play the ethics/government (when wiz and many others made it too). Disregarding the rest of the conversation, some governments give specific bonuses or penalties which either limit certain features (only pacifist governments get extra core systems) or are borderline necessary for certain mechanics (slaves basically need authoritarian).
Well in my post I was writing more from a role-playing perspective in that selecting the egalitarian focus could be played as either capitalistic or not so capitalistic. For example, if you want space America, you could go with militarist, egalitarian, materialist with an indirect democracy. Space Soviet Union could be authoritarian, militarist, materialist (see above) or militarist, fanatic materialist with a despotic hegemony. For a more Marxist approach, you could go with fanatic egalitarian, materialist with a direct democracy, I suppose. I wasn't necessarily posting about how to play most efficiently, more that selecting an ethos doesn't mean you're subscribing to one specific government or economic system for you empire.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
So, if @Wiz still reading this thread, i have two questions:

First, is there any mechanic possible for pops in 1.5 to have fanatic ethos (i know they can't, but in the future)? For example some midgame event causing uprising and jihad, with fanatic pops trying to convert others pops or purge them?

Second - how many fractions there can be? Eight is the maximum number of fractions (one for each ethos) or some interesting ones can emerge? For example something like League of Robots, whose goal is simple extermination of all organics, or Replicant Union, with all self-modified pops plotting for world domination?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
"Authoritarian replaces Collectivist and represents belief in hierarchical 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."
Why? Why the odd change? It feels far more Human-centric now and more specific than simply individualism vs collectivism, leaving less to the imagination of the player as to the nuances of their government, or alien governments. With the fanatic collectivist ethic, if you'd play as a hive mind style empire, it could really feel like you're playing as a hive-minded species (the preset Ix'Idar Star Collective as an example), whereas with fanatic authoritarian, from the description, it feels more like the game is outright telling you that you're going to be playing something analogous to Nineteen Eighty-Four's Oceania or the Soviet Union under Stalin. My biggest problem with this isn't a change in mechanics, it's simply the name and filler text because I feel that does have a significant effect on how you play your game and design your empire and species.

It has been stated multiple times : The current ethics system do not handle hive mind at all. So it was poorly done before, the system changed, hive-mind are basically impossible (apart from the swarm ofc) in the new system because they do not fit. However it seems that it will be implemented ulteriorly *crossing fingers*
Hope it helps ;)
 
  • 4
  • 3
Reactions:
With the fanatic collectivist ethic, if you'd play as a hive mind style empire, it could really feel like you're playing as a hive-minded species

One can always write one's own mental story beyond the game mechanics, but I don't agree that the game has ever done a great job of representing a hive mind. The entire structure of pops and leaders with individual characteristics just doesn't fit. I think they are wise to work on improving the individual-focussed system for what it is, rather than limit it because it might be used as a poor approximation of a genuine unitary collective.

One can always just play an authoritarian society that one RPs as a hive mind (though some breakaway drones seem unavoidable), or wait until a DLC or mod implements true hive mind mechanics that fundamentally alter how one plays the game.
 
I have three questions:

Will factions have their own leaders, not originating from your own staff ?
Will faction leaders have a chance to posses unique traits and agendas(when elected as ruler or governor) connected with factions they represent ?
How many factions can we expect and how they will differ between government types ?
 
Keyword; egalitarian.
But it wouldn't be egalitarian, purging people because they have different beliefs is not egalitarian.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
"Authoritarian replaces Collectivist and represents belief in hierarchical 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."
Why? Why the odd change? It feels far more Human-centric now and more specific than simply individualism vs collectivism, leaving less to the imagination of the player as to the nuances of their government, or alien governments. With the fanatic collectivist ethic, if you'd play as a hive mind style empire, it could really feel like you're playing as a hive-minded species (the preset Ix'Idar Star Collective as an example), whereas with fanatic authoritarian, from the description, it feels more like the game is outright telling you that you're going to be playing something analogous to Nineteen Eighty-Four's Oceania or the Soviet Union under Stalin. My biggest problem with this isn't a change in mechanics, it's simply the name and filler text because I feel that does have a significant effect on how you play your game and design your empire and species.
It has been stated multiple times : The current ethics system do not handle hive mind at all. So it was poorly done before, the system changed, hive-mind are basically impossible (apart from the swarm ofc) in the new system because they do not fit. However it seems that it will be implemented ulteriorly *crossing fingers*
Hope it helps ;)
So if not handle "hive mind", then how about swarm? And yes - you say that it is "basically impossible", but they are in game, so they are possible.
Now... Make a system base on prime hive (main planet), that by use of minerals/energy expand on each segment of planet. And then, create giant bio-cannon to infest all planets in system. Or, expand so much, that bio-structure reach orbit and make hardened cocoon (new hive - colony ship), and/or this is they version of space port.
Btw - Other alien mechanic/race? Whot about crystal/mineral being? Maybe is the same as above, or maybe different, but... Thats require spark of Imagination and will to Use It!
ps - Master of Orion 2 someone? :)

Paradox prefer easy way - make space CK2/EU4, and do not trouble themself with anything creative.
Until they do something about it...
Stellaris - "a rich and enormously diverse selection of alien races" portrait, and no real diversity "as you traverse, discover, interact and learn more about the" lack of diference "of species you will encounter during your travels".
 
  • 8
Reactions:
Paradox prefer easy way - make space CK2/EU4, and do not trouble themself with anything creative.
Until they do something about it...
Stellaris - "a rich and enormously diverse selection of alien races" portrait, and no real diversity "as you traverse, discover, interact and learn more about the" lack of diference "of species you will encounter during your travels".

That's ridiculously harsh. Stellaris implements one of the most nuanced empire management systems the genre has ever seen, and the new faction system looks like it has the potential to expand it in an amazing way. But yes, because there are pops, ethics, leaders, happiness, and other mechanics predicated on species made up of individuals, it doesn't really work for hive minds. Earlier games in the 4x space empire genre were much simpler, and so more of blank slate that could fit whatever you could imagine your empire to look like internally. There is a trade off there. But it is churlish to denigrate the game they designed just because it can't be all things to all people. That's what mods are for.
 
  • 7
  • 2
Reactions:
So if not handle "hive mind", then how about swarm? And yes - you say that it is "basically impossible", but they are in game, so they are possible.
The Prethoryn work the exact same way as every other civilization, mechanically- they just can't do diplomacy and follow different military scripting and special events used to create the illusion of a monolithic hive.

Like, their fleets still have Admiral characters, and if you obtain one through a special event, you can then elect them to the leader of your Military Republic or such. And they work exactly the same as every other elected leader.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The die is cast, there won't be reworks or changes, we are going to be stuck with that faux-Xenophile ethic for now.

But yeah, everything you have said in your post is exactly why I don't like this change, Individualist/Collectivist offered enough gameplay and flavor wise to be left alone, and now you have less way to represent a stellar corporate empire or something like that.

Our only solution, if it will even be possible, will be to mod out that change, we still have the old icons and such, most will be about rewriting some texts and changing some events.

I intend to mod out the change myself for the time being, but I really do hope that the devs dive back into this at a later date and give us an expansion which really fleshes out politics (it could also allow us to actually choose political organisation for our federations and so forth), and makes the ethics system a bit more philosophically sound.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
"Authoritarian replaces Collectivist and represents belief in hierarchical 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."
Why? Why the odd change? It feels far more Human-centric now and more specific than simply individualism vs collectivism, leaving less to the imagination of the player as to the nuances of their government, or alien governments. With the fanatic collectivist ethic, if you'd play as a hive mind style empire, it could really feel like you're playing as a hive-minded species (the preset Ix'Idar Star Collective as an example), whereas with fanatic authoritarian, from the description, it feels more like the game is outright telling you that you're going to be playing something analogous to Nineteen Eighty-Four's Oceania or the Soviet Union under Stalin. My biggest problem with this isn't a change in mechanics, it's simply the name and filler text because I feel that does have a significant effect on how you play your game and design your empire and species.

It's human-centric to even assume aliens would possess something that could be called an ethos
 
Status
Not open for further replies.