What’s the pettiest Stellaris hill you’ll die on?

[ZomgK3tchup]

Alternatively titled: What’s the most trivial or insignificant Stellaris grievance that you feel strongly about?

Here’s mine:

Byzantine Bureaucracy is named after the real life Byzantine Empire, but since spiritualists are excluded from Byzantine Bureaucracy, a Byzantine-themed Stellaris empire can’t have this civic. This civic should be renamed to something else.

 

[Kami-sama]

A few emblems aren't in the center of the flag D:

 

[Sylmyn]

A few emblems aren't in the center of the flag D:
View attachment 952859

Was going to post this
They infuriate me so much

[i will deny all charge of extermination of empire just to purge those flags from galaxy]

 

[Abdulijubjub]

Alternatively titled: What’s the most trivial or insignificant Stellaris grievance that you feel strongly about?

Here’s mine:

Byzantine Bureaucracy is named after the real life Byzantine Empire, but since spiritualists are excluded from Byzantine Bureaucracy, a Byzantine-themed Stellaris empire can’t have this civic. This civic should be renamed to something else.

Alternatively, if you're spiritualist, priests give +.75 stability. 3/4 of the effect, but a spiritualist will presumably have more priests than a non-spiritualist empire would have bureaucrats, and spiritualists are already encouraged to spread their unity jobs around with amenities. Or +1 amenity, +1 stability, instead of +2 amenities.

But, yeah. The irony of the original Holy Roman Empire not being allowed to take the civic that's named after it is amusing (or annoying, if you want to actually play it).

 

[grommile]

The operational texture of spiral galaxies is indistinguishable from the operational texture of elliptical galaxies.

 

[Spaceception]

While Stellaris is far from realistic, it never ceases to bug me when I see habitable planets orbit large stars that can only live for a few hundred million years at best *Looks at Sirius and Deneb*

Like, if you want planets to orbit bright stars, choose an F type star! If you want planets to orbit enourmus stars, choose a Red Giant! At least you can probably craft a realistic way for that to make sense. Those stars are already billions of years old, letting frozen moons like Europa develop life in their subsurface oceans over that time - only to thaw out when their parent star expands, and letting life explode and propagate on the surface once it has the chance.

 

[Zander]

Spiritualists don't like robots, but are given no reasonable alternative to just building them anyway.

 

[Pancakelord]

Not sure if it's since been fixed, but when I first played imperial origin, the overlords homeworld didn't have a randomly generated name, using the planets default one (i.e. [starname] [numeral])

Generally, I'd like to see the AI rename worlds in systems it colonises - though this is pretty easy to script in, now that I think about it.

 

[The5lacker]

The Spiritualist/Materialist ethos divide is bad. Things either provably exist or provably don't exist. Psionic powers provably exist, ergo they are a matter of Material Sciences, not a matter of philosophy or religion.

Also Spiritualists hate Robots exclusively because they needed *someone* to hate Robots. You can believe Robots to be soulless machines unworthy of rights and still find them *useful.*

 

[Abdulijubjub]

Spiritualists don't like robots, but are given no reasonable alternative to just building them anyway.

Robots aren't really necessary. It takes a very long time for a Roboticist to make enough robots to offset the number of pops needed to keep the assembly planet running. 5 energy and 2 alloy is a lot, in the early game, and when they become cheaper, your growth required scaling is higher such that you end up in roughly the same place.

Ex. ~.8 early game technicians, ~.6 metallurgists, ~.9 miner to support the metallurgists, and 1 roboticist means ~3.3 pops working to make 2 assembly per month. 55 months to make a pop means you need 15 years just to replace the pops you initially put into assembly, then another 15 years for enough pop-months of labor to get you back to where you were originally. Assuming that (resources now) and (resources later) are equally valuable, which they're not. In reality, it will be 50-60 years before you catch up, if ever. And if anything happens in the mean time where power now would have been useful (aka, any war), then you'll never catch up.

The reasonable alternative to building robots is to just not build them, and enjoy the rewards of more pops dedicated to research and unity, and a bit of extra alloy.

 

[Abdulijubjub]

The Spiritualist/Materialist ethos divide is bad. Things either provably exist or provably don't exist. Psionic powers provably exist, ergo they are a matter of Material Sciences, not a matter of philosophy or religion.

Also Spiritualists hate Robots exclusively because they needed *someone* to hate Robots. You can believe Robots to be soulless machines unworthy of rights and still find them *useful.*

You're mistaking "Materialist" for "rational and objectively correct". The point of the divide is that both sides have such strong feelings about the notion of the supernatural that they are sticking their fingers in their ears and delusionally ignoring something about the universe. They just have different blind spots.

 

[KaiserWilhelmI]

Alternatively titled: What’s the most trivial or insignificant Stellaris grievance that you feel strongly about?

Here’s mine:

Byzantine Bureaucracy is named after the real life Byzantine Empire, but since spiritualists are excluded from Byzantine Bureaucracy, a Byzantine-themed Stellaris empire can’t have this civic. This civic should be renamed to something else.

Byzantine bureaucracy isn't named after the empire. Its used as an adjective, meaning "excessively complicated, and typically involving a great deal of administrative detail."

 

[Abdulijubjub]

Byzantine bureaucracy isn't named after the empire. Its used as an adjective, meaning "excessively complicated, and typically involving a great deal of administrative detail."

And the adjective comes from the empire.

 

[The5lacker]

You're mistaking "Materialist" for "rational and objectively correct". The point of the divide is that both sides have such strong feelings about the notion of the supernatural that they are sticking their fingers in their ears and delusionally ignoring something about the universe. They just have different blind spots.

They only have different blind spots because of arbitrary nonsense. The reason we don't believe people can't move things with their mind is because they can't. If someone could, and you see them do it, then you would.

It's a conflict that only exists because someone decided it arbitrarily needed to be a conflict. Unlike the conflicts between the merits of War and Peace, the merits of Inclusion and Exclusion, or the merits of Authority and Individuality, you have an ethical conflict between... "Do we believe in this objectively true thing or not?" It's dumb. No Ethic should have an objectively true answer one way or the other.

 

[KaiserWilhelmI]

And the adjective comes from the empire.

But if I say "the UN is truly byzantine", I don't mean that the United Nations is the medieval Roman empire.

 

[GrandEurypterid]

They only have different blind spots because of arbitrary nonsense. The reason we don't believe people can't move things with their mind is because they can't. If someone could, and you see them do it, then you would.

It's a conflict that only exists because someone decided it arbitrarily needed to be a conflict. Unlike the conflicts between the merits of War and Peace, the merits of Inclusion and Exclusion, or the merits of Authority and Individuality, you have an ethical conflict between... "Do we believe in this objectively true thing or not?" It's dumb. No Ethic should have an objectively true answer one way or the other.

Personally, I lean towards it more being a matter of 'idealism vs pragmatism', from the perspective of ritual, societal thought, and so on. The spiritualism and the materialism are the end results- spiritualists strongly believe in their culture and its people and whatnot as self-evidently worthwhile and with a predetermined purpose, which gives them the right state of mind to become psionic as a society (ie they have a societally-aligned will and that encourages development into psionic societies, and discourages 'diluting' the society with thoughtless robots), while materialists believe the universe has no fundamental purpose and that they should make of it what they will (ie they don't believe there's any real self-evident point to ritual or origins, so their mindset is a poor seed for psionics and aligns well with robots as a convenience of intelligence no different to themselves).

 

[Abdulijubjub]

They only have different blind spots because of arbitrary nonsense. The reason we don't believe people can't move things with their mind is because they can't. If someone could, and you see them do it, then you would.

Materialists never see a single person move objects with their mind until they see psionic pops. It's only after they're within your borders (so that you get direct confirmation of their abilities) that you can research psionic theory.

As for Spiritualism not existing as an axis: it could be a civic, I suppose. But you need some way to represent "this empire is deeply religious" in the game. It's such a core part of human culture and fiction that its absence would be immediately obvious to anyone trying to reproduce e.g. Star Trek/Star Wars/basically any sci fi franchise's themes in Stellaris.

 

[CocoCincinnati]

Pop growth/Immigration.

 

[HFY]

But if I say "the UN is truly byzantine", I don't mean that the United Nations is the medieval Roman empire.

This complaint isn't about less-literally Byzantine empires which take Byzantine Bureaucracy. Nobody seems bothered by that.

The complaint is that a more Byzantine empire can't.

 

[Meneye]

Countries still sign migration pacts with slaver empires and willingly help their population get enslaved

But perhaps worst of all, the icon for the tundra preference is a tree when there are NO TREES in a tundra because by definition it is above the timberline