• 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:
The way I see the problem of Authoritarian/Egalitarian or Libertarian and Collectivist/Individualist is the confusion of pop ethics and approach of the ruling power. I believe the previous names were fine, but the mechanics were wrong.

1) A collectivist population will value the benefits of the society over the benefits of the individual. Thus they should be more accepting of ALL extremes - not only slavery.
They should be equally supportive of both extreme left and extreme right representations of governments, given everything is going fine for the entirety of the species.
  • You are ruling the entire galaxy with extreme despotism but your civilization is the best in (insert secondary ethics here, like if materialism then best in science)? Then there is no problem.
  • You have a democratic utopia but you are the worst in (insert secondary ethics here, like if militaristic your fleet power)? Then they revolt.
2) An individualistic population, on the other hand, should value the individual benefits over the rest. You have a democratic utopia that rules the galaxy with nothing rivaling it, but there is starvation on planets, slavery and lack of entertainment? They revolt.

I believe a pop being authoritarian has nothing to do with an authoritarian regime.

The government being in the form of what the most of the population believes is right is eventually a form of democracy. Authoritarian regimes do not care if their populations are supportive of them or not. The case may be both supportive or unhappy populations, with various examples in history.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Will authoritarian and egalitarian species ethics still be prevented from using certain gov types, or simply receive a negative happiness mod if your gov type doesn't align directly?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Long (very) time lurker, first time poster...

These changes look great and I think they will dramatically increase the potential for roleplay. Should also, hopefully, make the game a little bit more challenging.

I also wanted to point out (as a political junkie - like many PI Studio gamers I assume) how amusing it is to read the amount of political/philosophical debates being had here. On a space game forum!

Kudos to Wiz and the team! I am extremely optimistic Wiz will do great things for this game (as he has done on other Paradox games). Make Space Great Again!

(PS Hope this is one small step towards Vicky 3 :p)
 
  • 9
Reactions:
It'd be interesting to have neighbouring empires' ethics affect those pops closest to the borders. And also rather than have it simply add X amount of attraction to a certain ethic it could polarize the ethic divergence among the population to a degree in which the neighbour's ethics differ from your mean.
 
I wouldn't model it as a democracy if I were creating its analogue in a Stellaris game.
Oh, I've brought up that sort of thing quite frequently- I'm rather fond of that study suggesting America is, functionally, more of an oligarchy than a democracy.

The point remains: that a government is a democracy does not guarantee that it's leaders operate under strict regulation or that its people are guaranteed proper rights and freedoms.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
I don't dislike the replacement of collectivist and individualist, as you say they necessarily make sense before. Although I hope the old ones get added back in with new bonuses sometime in the future.

I'll really have to see how the rest plays out. I'm glad that the ethics of the population will have a more cohesive voice internally now. But will all factions still be able to rebel if they get unhappy enough? Will pops be able to be in more than one faction (like a regional independence one and an egalitarian one) and how will they decide whether to rebel?

Edit: Nevermind, most of what I asked, it seems will be covered in another diary.
 
Last edited:
It'd be interesting to have neighbouring empires' ethics affect those pops closest to the borders. And also rather than have it simply add X amount of attraction to a certain ethic it could polarize the ethic divergence among the population to a degree in which the neighbour's ethics differ from your mean.
I wonder what would work better... an omnipresent passive effect, or maybe something like a "propaganda station"?

Regardless, I'd love the ability to influence the popular ethos and factions of other nations.
 
The factions and revamped drift look absolutely fantastic, especially if they allow for dynamic changes in your species' society as they venture out into the Lovecraftian horror universe that is Stellaris.

I'll deeply mourn collectivism though. Whether you defined it as socialist, "needs of the many", "the greater good", "cogs in the machine" or just the eusocial structure like an ant/bee/termite colony, it is distinctly different to authoritarianism.
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
The factions and revamped drift look absolutely fantastic, especially if they allow for dynamic changes in your species' society as they venture out into the Lovecraftian horror universe that is Stellaris.

I'll deeply mourn collectivism though. Whether you defined it as socialist, "needs of the many", "the greater good", "cogs in the machine" or just the eusocial structure like an ant/bee/termite colony, it is distinctly different to authoritarianism.
I liked the flavour a lot more, but then I despised the flavour of Individualism- it was really offputting to me that the "people should be free" ethos leaned so heavily towards Randian "the social contract was a mistake" bizarro-ness.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I could answer you more concretely if you'd specified what exactly you want sources on. The stuff I've been saying here is based out of a combination of A.) Playing the game, B.) Looking through the files while modding, C.) Having read previous Dev Diaries and remembering what was said in them.

My question about if other ethics were rebalanced to fit into the new system you said that you couldn't see why they wouldn't do it.

That gave me the impression, that you were just assuming all the other answers as well, without knowing anything for sure.
If you really have access to the new files, I guess that's enough of a trustworthy source for me.
 
@Wiz, I was curious if the outlawing of artificial intelligence not deleting and banning robotic armies was deliberate or not. Using common sense, you would think it would. Was this a gameplay decision or was it just something that was overlooked?
 
I'm actually thinking of changing it so unemployment just increases drift away from empire ethics instead, or scrapping the effect altogether. It's not like unemplyoment is really much of a mechanic at the moment.
Can we have pops who have no ethos?
You know, people who just dont care or feel much this way or the other, or are just busy surviving? (despicable neutrals?)
 
Why cant pops have more than one ethic now? Is that not over simplification? Pop ethic drift should have a reason, completely agree on that one, but limiting to one ethic? A more complex system for needs, desires and political opinions would be welcome.
Good news about the factions though. Maybe try to incorporate something like military-industrial complex, or the power ministries as factions in internal politics?
Loved the name of the update. Cant wait to hear about other changes.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I liked the flavour a lot more, but then I despised the flavour of Individualism- it was really offputting to me that the "people should be free" ethos leaned so heavily towards Randian "the social contract was a mistake" bizarro-ness.

I take all the flavors with a pinch of salt. For example, the individualist ethos doesn't mesh with a military democracy - and to be honest, I never understood why collectivism didn't work with military democracy either (I'm primarily thinking of Starship Troopers there - the society is a military democracy that is without a doubt placing the survival of the human race far and above any individual's concerns).

At the same time, one might think that fanatical individualism is actually anarchy, which isn't necessarily the result of a free but social contract-less society.

When it comes to ethics this is why I prefer a spectrum/sliders. Regardless, I don't think anyone is ever going to be happy with the ethos that are in the game because ethics and the perception of their meaning will always be so fluid and personal to each individual. I wouldn't want Stellaris without them though - when you're in the game they mean what they mean to you, not what the flavor text is. Watching society change and adapt to how you play in 1.5 is going to be a sheer RP delight.

Why cant pops have more than one ethic now? Is that not over simplification?

Wiz said yes, it is a simplification for gameplay reasons. Its probably worth waiting and seeing all the other mechanics that are related to this change, as to why that decision was made.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
The factions are really cool and the thing I look the most towards.

As for the ethics change, personally I think we need more ethic choices then what we currently have. Why not have both the old collectivism/individualism and the new authortarian/egalatrainism together?
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Status
Not open for further replies.