• 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:
I don't agree, fundamentally even the most collectivist empire is less the Bugs or Rachni or Borg than it is just being The Empire from Star wars or the like. Hell, collectivism even references humankind from W40k in some specific technology.

You can't truly play or oppose a proper Hive Mind, which I don't know if it's a time constraint and something that might be added eventually, or was never planned to begin with.

I don't want to play it, but I kind of want to live in a galaxy where there might be more fundamentally different factions to face.

Short time after release i suggested some more diversity in species creation. Most aspects regarding hives or species behaviour in general are, at least in my opinion, better to be modelled in species creation and not in ethics. Ethics should be routed in species traits imo.
Because the way i see it is that most behaviour arises from needs and most needs are rooted in biology whether we like this idea or not. Every emotion is anchored deep within our brains chemistry which evolved over millions of years, which in turn is based on our DNA which evolved over billions of years through several iterations of life until today. Some creepy animal, long extinct, may still be affecting our behaviour through our DNA, hormon production etc.

And although culture and all its joys and fears is an evolution in its own regard, once someone is facing a biological need our civilized selfs are facing hard times staying civilzed.

So rooting certain aspects in traits seems more reasonable. And since the most pressing problems of the game since release have been adressed, we can beging to think about the future of the game. Please feel free to add your thoughts here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/make-aliens-alien-again.938193/
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I don't know how many share my opinion, but I am getting excited for Stellaris' future for the first time in months. This is the right direction: Not dumbing down features for simplicity but instead making them meaningful and complex. Thank you developers.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Incorrect- the Soviet Union claimed to be an equal society but was not, in any way, actually equal.

We all know that debate could go on forever. The point is that egalitarianism is, as he said, too ambiguous. And I would add that framing the ethics as Authoritarianism vs. Egalitarianism creates a false dichotomy as well. Authoritarianism vs. Libertarianism is the normal, proper arrangement.

A state can be both authoritarian and egalitarian at the same time. It doesn't take much of a stretch of the imagination to see that egalitarians can be supplemented by authoritarianism to achieve their egalitarian goals through force.
 
  • 6
  • 2
Reactions:
I don't know how many share my opinion, but I am getting excited for Stellaris' future for the first time in months. This is the right direction: Not dumbing down features for simplicity but instead making them meaningful and complex. Thank you developers.

Agreed, these are overall positive changes. We can sit and talk about what we want in the long term, but right now the game is going one way regardless, the one path is needs regardless of direction: Forward.

Every update has had sharp criticism, yet 1.4 is far superior to 1.0 in the overall scheme of things, and I believe 1.5 will be better still.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I like the things I'm hearing about the faction changes.

Not so much the Authoritarian/Egalitarian ethos. I prefer Authoritarian-Libertarian and adding more ethos to expound upon government economy vs free trade economy and finally collectivist vs individualist. I really think there are a lack of good ethos to choose from anyway.

At a minimum the Authoritarian icon needs to be changed.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Not to mention that Paradox setting the ethics up as Authoritarian vs. Egalitarian is telling players who would want to create an egalitarian-authoritarian faction they they cannot do this. That will be a lot of frustration those players who see socialism as a system of equality and social ownership that want to create a strong no-nonesense socialist state that's for sure.
 
  • 9
  • 1
Reactions:
Thank you for the change into Authoritarian and Individualist, that makes so much more sense to me than how it was handled before. Hope the changes to pops and factions will result in an empire that feels much more alive than it does now, looking forward to it :)
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
How will i make my space USSR now?
An Authoritarian/Materialist mix of some sort, presumably, with government type depending on whether you're making an "idealized communist empire" (in which case you'd probably want to go for Egalitarian over Authoritarian and aim for something like a Peaceful Bureaucracy or Direct Democracy) or a more accurate "alt-history USSR in space" with all the corruption, propaganda, and gulags that would entail.
 
  • 4
  • 3
Reactions:
How will i make my space USSR now?

Fanatical Authoritarian, Materialist, Despotic Hegemony, natural engineers, communal.

* Realistic version, mind you. @BlackUmbrellas is right about the ideal being quite different.
 
  • 5
  • 2
Reactions:
Not to mention that Paradox setting the ethics up as Authoritarian vs. Egalitarian is telling players who would want to create an egalitarian-authoritarian faction they they cannot do this. That will be a lot of frustration those players who see socialism as a system of equality and social ownership that want to create a strong no-nonesense socialist state that's for sure.

It will be mostly frustrating to people who think socialism is about being authoritarian...
 
  • 9
  • 3
Reactions:
It will be mostly frustrating to people who think socialism is about being authoritarian...

The only Libertarian socialists are... What? An-coms, syndicalists, et cetera. Groups that most people don't even associate with socialism anyways. When most people hear "socialism" they think "USSR!" whether we like it or not. And Id wager that's what most "socialist" players are going to have in mind when making their empire.
 
  • 13
  • 2
Reactions:
The only Libertarian socialists are... What? An-coms, syndicalists, et cetera. Groups that most people don't even associate with socialism anyways. When most people hear "socialism" they think "USSR!" whether we like it or not. And Id wager that's what most "socialist" players are going to have in mind when making their empire.
Are you American, by any chance?
 
  • 5
  • 2
Reactions:
The only Libertarian socialists are... What? An-coms, syndicalists, et cetera. Groups that most people don't even associate with socialism anyways. When most people hear "socialism" they think "USSR!" whether we like it or not. And Id wager that's what most "socialist" players are going to have in mind when making their empire.

There are parties in Europe calling themselves "socialist democrats" or some versions thereof. They generally don't want to overthrow the democratic multi-party system, though some are Authoritarian, just in different ways than the right-wing parties.
 
I consider Egalitarian to be a perfectly valid antithesis to Authoritarian. A society where most people are at the whim of a ruling elite is not an egalitarian society no matter how well the masses are treated. That doesn't mean an authoritarian society can't have egalitarian elements (for example, a high degree of meritocracy in its bureaucracy) but that's true for all the ethics... even the most pacifist society will have militaristic elements, and I doubt religion and spirituality is completely gone even in the most materialist empires.

All that aside... only polsci freshmen and internet charts believe that libertarianism is some kind of antithesis to authoritarianism. Seriously.
 
  • 57
  • 19
  • 3
Reactions:
I consider Egalitarian to be a perfectly valid antithesis to Authoritarian. A society where most people are at the whim of a ruling elite is not an egalitarian society no matter how well the masses are treated. That doesn't mean an authoritarian society can't have egalitarian elements (for example, a high degree of meritocracy in its bureaucracy) but that's true for all the ethics... even the most pacifist society will have militaristic elements, and I doubt religion and spirituality is completely gone even in the most materialist empires.

All that aside... only polsci freshmen and internet charts believe that libertarianism is some kind of antithesis to authoritarianism. Seriously.

How does a democracy with a very powerful authoritarian government factor into this, though?
 
  • 3
Reactions:
How does a democracy with a very powerful authoritarian government factor into this, though?

I guess they would be at the middle of the scale? It's not like you have to be egalitarian to pick a democratic government.
 
  • 16
  • 1
Reactions:
Status
Not open for further replies.