• 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.

Stellaris Dev Diary #61 - Indoctrination, Unrest and Faction Interactions

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. Today's dev diary is going to be about a few different features coming in the Utopia expansion and associated Banks update: Native Indoctrination, Unrest and Faction Interactions.

Native Indoctrination (Paid Feature)
Anyone who's ever accidentally enlightened Fanatic Purifiers should be well familiar with the perils of not checking the ethics of a primitive civilization before deciding to enlighten or infiltrate them. In Utopia, we've added a new tool for players to interfere with primitive civilizations: Indoctrination. Indoctrination is a new observation station mission that allows you to 'educate' primitives in your clearly superior way of thinking. While active, it will greatly increase the attraction of your Governing Ethics for the Pops on the primitive planet, and cause them to drift towards those ethics over time. As the Pops start changing ethics, the Governing Ethics of the primitive ciivlization will change along with them, and you will be notified that your mission is making progress. Given enough time to do its job, this mission will eventually cause the primitive civilization's ethics to precisely mirror your own. The Indoctrination mission requires the Active Native Interference policy and so will be available to all ethics.
2017_02_16_0.png

2017_02_16_1.png


Unrest (Free Feature)
Back in Dev Diary #54 we talked about the ethics and faction rework, and mentioned that details on how rebel factions work would come later. After some testing and iteration, we ended up deciding that the new faction system didn't really fit the old rebel style of faction, and consequently separated it into its own system called Unrest. Each planet has an Unrest value from 0 to 100 determined by local conditions and, sometimes, empire-wide effects. Unrest is primarily increased by unhappy Pops and decreased by happy Pops and the presence of garrisoned armies. Free Pops, happy or not, will have a higher effect on Unrest than enslaved ones, representing their ability to better organize against their 'oppressors'.

Unrest has directly detrimental effects on the planet's ability to produce resources, and can also result in a number of different events depending on the severity on the situation. The effects of such events are primarily political, with your population turning towards a particular ethic or against a government that is unable to protect it from violence and terrorism. However, Unrest can also turn more serious when it is coupled with the presence of a particularly discontent or oppressed group, such as an enslaved underclass or a nationalist movement. When such a group begins to organize, you will get an event warning you of the situation that gives you some time to try and get the Unrest under control. If you fail to do so, the situation will escalate, resulting in events of increasing severity such as hunger strikes, riots, and possibly even a full-blown armed revolt.
2017_02_16_3.png

2017_02_16_3_2.png

2017_02_16_4.png


Faction Interactions (Free Feature)
Also mentioned in Dev Diary #54 was the ability to use Factions to shift your Governing Ethics. The new Faction Interaction system allows you to both influence which Ethics will take root in your empire, as well as change your Governing Ethics when a particular Ethic grows strong enough. Each Ethic has at least one associated faction, such as the Supremacist Faction for Xenophobes, and by promoting or suppressing that faction you can spend a monthly influence cost to increase or decrease the attraction of its associated Ethic across your empire. If a faction grows strong enough, you can also Embrace that faction, shifting your Governing Ethics to more closely align with theirs.

In most cases, shifting your Governing Ethics will involve moving a single step towards that ethic, for example moving from Xenophobe to Fanatic Xenophobe or from Fanatic Xenophile to Xenophile if shifting towards Xenophobe. As this will typically result in having too many or too few Governing Ethics, it will also automatically adjust your other ethics to follow the 3 ethics points rule, downgrading, upgrading, removing or adding ethics as necessary. Which ethic is lost or added is determined by attraction, so if you are Spiritualist, Xenophobe and Authoritarian and make a shift towards Militarist, whichever of Spiritualist, Xenophobe and Authoritarian has the lowest attraction in your empire will be lost as a Governing Ethic.
2017_02_16_7.png

2017_02_16_7_2.png


That's all for today! Next week we'll be talking about the last of the major feature reworks coming in Banks: Government and Civics.

We'll also be talking about Hive Minds.
 
I'd love to see the ability to have your government overthrown by an uprising, and the option to continue playing as the newly formed empire.
The Total War: Empire solution was to have the civil war play out exclusively in your home theatre, with the option to play as either side. What the rebels stood for depended on which class of citizen you'd pissed off up to that point.

If you won, the side you picked took over the empire and installed its own preference of government. If you lost, game over.
 
I'd like to be able to funnel credits/minerals/support to planets bordering my Empire but controlled by another Empire to foment unrest, rebellion, etc. Possibly they'd just become independent and then I could snap them up. Perhaps they'd even petition to join my Empire. Closing borders would slow (but probably not stop) this sort of action. Obviously there'd be a chance you'd get caught with disastrous consequences for your relationship with your neighbor.

Maybe in a future espionage-based expansion?

I could think of tons of futuristic espionage stuff that would be fun.
 
I'd love to see the ability to have your government overthrown by an uprising, and the option to continue playing as the newly formed empire.

Sounds no different from the thing you were just criticizing a couple posts above.

What's the point if there's no risk of actually losing the game? It's just tedium for tedium's sake.
 
Sounds no different from the thing you were just criticizing a couple posts above.

What's the point if there's no risk of actually losing the game? It's just tedium for tedium's sake.

you can still get conquered by foreign empires, and if a rebel faction breaks off as a separate entity and then declares war on you, then yeah, you also lose then.

a rebellion where the aim is to overthrow your government however, unlike a separatist movement, is the prospect of being taken down a policy, ethics or government-form path that you don't necessarily want to go (or maybe you do)
 
if a rebel faction breaks off as a separate entity and then declares war on you, then yeah, you also lose then.
This is how rebellions are going to work in all likelihood. And you already lose the game if you get regime-changed.
 
Question. Let's say I have got another hostile empire nearby mine, and I want to liberate it. Can I join forces with a dissident faction inside of it to stage a rebellion on the inside when I start the liberation war?
 
That's sad, throw a game over screen at me then, but at least give me the option of continuing on with the regime changed empire and seeing how it plays out.

Why? You were talking about injecting "real life" into the game a couple posts above, so why is it surprising you'd not be able to play as a empire that conquers you? If you really want to play as the winning empire, just use the console and type "Play 24" or whatever the rebels ID is when you've started losing and win as them.
 
Why? You were talking about injecting "real life" into the game a couple posts above, so why is it surprising you'd not be able to play as a empire that conquers you? If you really want to play as the winning empire, just use the console and type "Play 24" or whatever the rebels ID is when you've started losing and win as them.

I think you misunderstood my original post. I was talking about injecting 'life', that doesn't really mean realism, it means personality, a galaxy that feels alive. I think one of the things Stellaris does so much better than other 4x is take your empire and galaxy on a story that becomes your own.

You don't play your 'ruler' in Stellaris, you play an abstracted disembodied influencer. If the fate of your empire is to fall to despotism in a coup, you should be able to experience that story.

It's the same way pretender rebels in EUIV can actually defeat you, and you continue playing, but with the new ruler that just defeated you, or the way other types of rebels can force social or political changes against you.

The emphasis is that you experience these stories as they play out.

now if your empire is conquered and snuffed out, that's a game over. your story ends. (although the idea of somehow rising back onto the stage after centuries of enslavement in a successful uprising is a cool idea, i can't think of a nice way to implement that gameplay wise) But if your empire continues existing in some form, you should be able to continue with that story, it's a big part of what makes the game feel alive.
 
Last edited:
This will be a Tremendousss update, believe me when I say it.

Hope you'll add the "Build a big Wall in Space" issue to help us protecting the southern border of our Huuuuuge Empire.

Just in case... :D
 
So if I set up a custom empire to play a certain style, I could be forced to change my ethics and have to play a style I have no interest in playing? Or end up with endless revolts?

I hope not. We don't need a 'Dutch revolt' where you have to have a very specific set of conditions to avoid getting your country (empire) wrecked.
You're not going to get very far if you aren't willing to butcher droves of your own people. Personally I recommend gene warriors, they always perform above and beyond the call of duty when it comes to butchering poorly armed enemies.
 
"Unrest is ... decreased by ... the presence of garrisoned armies."
Will the strength of the armies come into play? IMO a regiment of gene warriors would be quite the deterrent to would-be rebels.



On a completely unrelated note: Have you considered making it so that the firepower of a fleet, and not just the numbers, affect its efficiency when attacking a planet? It makes sense that a destroyer armed to the teeth with top-tier plasma launchers and disruptors would be better suited at a siege then one that has a bunch of point defence. (Carriers would be even better due to their ability to exercise a greater amount of area control, but that might be going to much into detail.)
 
On a completely unrelated note: Have you considered making it so that the firepower of a fleet, and not just the numbers, affect its efficiency when attacking a planet? It makes sense that a destroyer armed to the teeth with top-tier plasma launchers and disruptors would be better suited at a siege then one that has a bunch of point defence. (Carriers would be even better due to their ability to exercise a greater amount of area control, but that might be going to much into detail.)
No idea as to the balance, but I could imagine fightercraft and bombers somehow pulling double-duty as additional (special) armies during invasions. You'd be incentivized to use them more if they could help with conquering planets more directly.
 
Regarding the Hive Mind...could it be possible to have the option of developing a mind network that doesn't abolish the concept of individual?

Like the Borg cooperative in star trek Voyager.
 
Regarding the Hive Mind...could it be possible to have the option of developing a mind network that doesn't abolish the concept of individual?

Like the Borg cooperative in star trek Voyager.

I hated what they did with the Borg in voyager. The Next Gen Borg were much better as an antithesis to individualism and diversity of the Federation.