|
PETA: People Eating Tasty Aliens
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:52 |
|
|
Anticheese posted:I think those would be factions. Can someone be a member of multiple factions? Can factions trump ethos? Could a "robots have souls" faction arise in a spiritualist empire and adopting their ethos gives robots full rights while not actually affecting your spiritualism ethics?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
Everything seems to indicate pops can only ever be in one faction at once, and your actions -as well as events- will shape ethics attraction along with your civ ethoses. I'd love to see special interests like pro-robot spiritualists, or the Friends of the Worm, or an expansionist lobby that pushes for new planets by any means necessary. Or even a group that realises that democracy and autocracy are irrelevant distractions. All shall work together as one under Shen-Ji Yang. All hail the Human Hive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Now I'm wondering how they distinguish the monarchy/dictatorship variants for different ethics. Apparently from the Twitter replies civics also influence final government type. I'm guessing ethics influences civic choices which together with authority determine the government name with the actual effects coming from the picks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
DLC is taking too long to drop 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Apparently from the Twitter replies civics also influence final government type. That makes sense, yeah. eta: Are the government-specific icons going away, I wonder? And the government-specific bonuses? (Would they instead come from civics entirely?)
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
I honestly think this is shaping up to be not only the best Paradox DLC of all time, but the best DLC in any game of all time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Could do. Like distributed hive mind (original Borg) distributed hive mind with queen (post-First Contact Borg) an actual hive (ants) etc. Or the most sensible - mega colonies where each pop represents a single distributed organism. Queen based hives where there is one individual "in charge" are the dumbest thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:I honestly think this is shaping up to be not only the best Paradox DLC of all time, but the best DLC in any game of all time. Basically Stellaris 2.0 "How it was supposed to be released".
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
I am actually sort of hoping they dont do hive minds in this dlc anyway, feels like something that really deserves an entire dlc of its own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
I'm the deviant that loves long-rear end lists in a small box with a tiny vertical scrollbar.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
Duodecimal posted:I'm the deviant that loves long-rear end lists in a small box with a tiny vertical scrollbar. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Duodecimal posted:I'm the deviant that loves long-rear end lists in a small box with a tiny vertical scrollbar.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
I wonder how they'll do leaders in a hive mind society.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:Why isn't the purge button doing anything???? Actually, this raises an interesting question: Purge policy is set species-by-species in Banks. So is there any way to purge pops of a species who don't have "undesirable" status? If you wanted to get rid of dissidents, say. If not, I wonder how easily one could mod a virtual "species" defined as "any pop with an ethos diverging from the dominant empire ethos" to make them undesirables. (eta: Or to set any of their other rights policies as an exception to what their species would otherwise provide. And if there were also a virtual "conformist" species, you could theoretically give them better rights.) ...Jesus Christ what did I just type, this patch is dark af. GunnerJ fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Feb 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
I started a new game with fanatic materialist xenophile parrots. Two jumps from my starting system is a ruined ringworld with a curator station, and half a dozen jumps from that is a fanatic xenophile fallen empire who have given me a research boost. I'm also on the edge of the galaxy and the hyper lane layout gives me clear room to expand along the rim with only a couple of frontier stations needed to keep out the riff-raff. I think the game wants me to win.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Actually, this raises an interesting question: Purge policy is set species-by-species in Banks. So is there any way to purge pops of a species who don't have "undesirable" status? If you wanted to get rid of dissidents, say. If not, I wonder how easily one could mod a virtual "species" defined as "any pop with an ethos diverging from the dominant empire ethos" to make them undesirables. I, too, hope that we can purge the undesirable if they refuse to be reeducated. Btw, I'm kinda hoping the new patch makes the crazy ethics divergence bonuses Fan-Spiritualists Collectivists running dictatorships stay in a new form because it is wonderful. Making them Extremely Adaptive and they just spread everywhere. I'm just sad I had to make them slow breeders, I wish I coulda gotten that part out at a decent time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Or the most sensible - mega colonies where each pop represents a single distributed organism. And yeah that's a cool image, but mechanically identical to the current pop mechanics. My first race I made in the game was actually based on that idea (sedentary, unsocial, nonadaptive, some other things I forget. I picked the collectivism ethic without reading what it did, was very surprised to find it meant hooray for slaves)
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Duodecimal posted:I'm the deviant that loves long-rear end lists in a small box with a tiny vertical scrollbar.  Deceitful Penguin posted:Dark? Comrade, the only thing wrong with the supposed new system is that as far as I know, there isn't the logical middle step of putting people in the Gulag. If people refuse to see the light of Space Communism they may try and seek it in the Soviet in the Sky or go to the Gulag in the ground, as it goes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Haha, I only just now noticed the honeycomb symbol at the center of the Ethos wheel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Poil posted:Surely you meant to type Goulash? Also we don't have horse aliens yet I think. But yeah, I think it's rather weird that we don't have pop-reeducation, though the new ethics attraction system might change that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Promoting a faction might qualify as that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Actually, this raises an interesting question: Purge policy is set species-by-species in Banks. So is there any way to purge pops of a species who don't have "undesirable" status? If you wanted to get rid of dissidents, say. If not, I wonder how easily one could mod a virtual "species" defined as "any pop with an ethos diverging from the dominant empire ethos" to make them undesirables. (eta: Or to set any of their other rights policies as an exception to what their species would otherwise provide. And if there were also a virtual "conformist" species, you could theoretically give them better rights.) Given that ethoses are percentage based, purging pops with heretical views will just turn some percentage of your loyal pops to dissidents to make up the numbers, I'd wager. What I think you'll need to do is reduce the percentage to turn your bad pops good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:Given that ethoses are percentage based, purging pops with heretical views will just turn some percentage of your loyal pops to dissidents to make up the numbers, I'd wager. What I think you'll need to do is reduce the percentage to turn your bad pops good. Eh? Aren't ethoses (and divergence, etc.) pop-by-pop? Or is this changing in banks?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Yeah, I was pretty sure those percentages reflect the number of pops subscribing to an ethos. Removing a pop subscribing to an ethos would make its share go down in that case, it's not like the percentage is causing pops to turn to an ethos due to some external force. You have to support a faction aligned with that ethos to make that happen. At least, as I understand the system.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Do pops still have individual happiness from policies or has that been folded into factions or something else? There's some policies that make people unhappy if they don't have a certain ethos. For instant you need to be materialist to be ok with robots having rights. Previously with pops having the same number of ethos as the empire you could have have robot rights and full bombardment policies and everyone be happy because everyone in your empire is both a materialist and a militarist. But in the Utopia system, you'd have maybe half your population as materialist and half as militarist with the materialists angry at the bombardment policy and the militarists unhappy at robot rights. How's this all work now with single ethos?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
I think one of the dev diaries or a stream laid all this out but iirc, pop happiness as it relates to policy is based on their membership in a faction and how well policies align with the faction's agenda.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:But yeah, I think it's rather weird that we don't have pop-reeducation, though the new ethics attraction system might change that? That's what the Orbital Mind Control Laser is for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Also the Ministry of Benevolence. Really, anything with -Divergence counts. Like the art piece you can get off the Artist Enclave, which even the lore text notes is screwing with people's head to get the effect. Meanwhile the Symbol of Unity also does this, but without justification. Something in the shape, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Going back to the first ethics dev diary it says happiness will be based on the faction the pop belongs to and that faction's happiness. Will obviously have to see it in-game, but I just worry you'll get situations where what before was a militarist materialist empire totally happy with your policies will now be two militarist and materialist factions that may be at odds with each other. People now just have a single issue, no nuance. Before we could have pops that have strong feelings about robots and war, representing some sort of ideology that views the universe in an extreme materialist way that's also give them a "might makes right" morality, thus materialist-militarist. Or Spiritual Pacifist. The ethos combine together to describe a wider array of beliefs and ideologies. Now we have pops only caring about a single thing. A pop will now simply be "spiritualist" but is this a pacifist religion or a "convert by the sword" religion? Before a pacifist spiritual pop and militarist spiritual pop could represent two very different things, now they can only represent a single thing. The new ethos and faction system sound really good, but it feels like there should be more factions that are attractive for multiple ethos. Or for pops to have primary and secondary ethos. You could have a faction of "Holy Crusaders" who attract both spiritualist and militarist pops but at the same time a "Saint of Peace" movement that attracts both spiritualist and pacifist pops.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Going back to the first ethics dev diary it says happiness will be based on the faction the pop belongs to and that faction's happiness. Will obviously have to see it in-game, but I just worry you'll get situations where what before was a militarist materialist empire totally happy with your policies will now be two militarist and materialist factions that may be at odds with each other. That sounds awesome, though. quote:People now just have a single issue, no nuance. Factions actually have have multiple issues they care about, though, if I recall something that came up in the stream correctly. Two different militarist factions might care about different sets of issues, so it seems you could please one with policies and annoy another. Honestly, "a militarist materialist empire totally happy with your policies" sounds a lot more one-dimensional than multiple factions aligned to the same ethos that interpret it in different ways can care about different things. However, I do agree that factions that can encompass a blend of ethics (and attracts pops from two or more ethics) would be cool. eta: Whoops, misread your post as talking about two militarist factions rather than one militarist and one materialist. Welp, most of what I said is probably the same either way so w/e GunnerJ fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Feb 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:Basically Stellaris 2.0 "How it was supposed to be released". Actually unironically this. I have to say I was not expecting to just have an entirely new dynamic way of selecting government types dumped on us in this patch, but I'm not gonna complain. I assume that the way it will work is that your exact government is determined by a combination of your ethics, civics, and authority choices. Certainly opens up for a lot more interesting possibilities!
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Yeah I might be the odd one out, but I felt that the way that you set up species really contributed to the sameyness per run. It was actually an ugh experience hitting that screen, as well as the way the ethics played very similarly to each other once you launched. The redesigned species selection is actually pretty huge for me and is a really cool surprise. Looking forward to some 1.5 runs even more now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
I really disagree, again, that a hive mind should play out any differently than a democracy. A hive mind is just a democracy where they communicate through some other way than talking and writing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:I really disagree, again, that a hive mind should play out any differently than a democracy. A hive mind is just a democracy where they communicate through some other way than talking and writing. im sure D&D would love to hear your takes on this, you should go post them there
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:I really disagree, again, that a hive mind should play out any differently than a democracy. A hive mind is just a democracy where they communicate through some other way than talking and writing. Vote your displeasure by transmitting pain.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:I really disagree, again, that a hive mind should play out any differently than a democracy. A hive mind is just a democracy where they communicate through some other way than talking and writing. "hive mind" is really ambiguous though and we all have our own ideas on what it really means. Maybe it's an actual insect-like hive society. There's a queen or leadership cast or maybe just an emergent intelligence made up by the interactions between members who also form a strict biological caste system. Maybe voyager style borg where everyone's basically a zombie slave controlled by a collective consciousness but with no "vote" because everything is directed by a Queen. Is it biological and unique to the species and other species cannot be integrated willingly or not, or is it some sort of forced cybernetic or parasite transformation? Even if it's some sort of society with no concept of the individual and no dissent or factions, that society would still have an ethos of some sort. Are they militaristic or pacifist for example? What if your borg queen is just a chill nice lady who'd be down for some federation building? Hive mind doesn't have to be some aggressive menace, but it could be. Curious how they'd implement it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
single issue voters sounds pretty realistic actually
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
I have a suspicion that Hive Mind might be a 2 or even 3 point pick, and that it would offer some materially different playstyle. Like, no ethics and no ethics divergence on those pops.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:52 |
|
|
Baronjutter posted:"hive mind" is really ambiguous though and we all have our own ideas on what it really means. Maybe it's an actual insect-like hive society. There's a queen or leadership cast or maybe just an emergent intelligence made up by the interactions between members who also form a strict biological caste system. Maybe voyager style borg where everyone's basically a zombie slave controlled by a collective consciousness but with no "vote" because everything is directed by a Queen. Is it biological and unique to the species and other species cannot be integrated willingly or not, or is it some sort of forced cybernetic or parasite transformation? That hive mind symbol (if that's what it is) appears dead center in the ethos wheel, which to me implies that it is truly beyond any ethos at all. Which, since it is literally a single collective sapient entity spanning millions or billions of brains, makes sense. There's only one "person's" opinion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2017 20:21
|
|