|
I really liked the policy matrix from SMAC.  You could make just about any society from it, specially after you unlocked the "future" policies. They were vague enough that it let you fill in the blanks with your own narrative. You could make a brutal soviet style empire with a police state, planned economy, and power value. Or you could make utopian communists with a democratic planned economy. The choices we've seen so far for stellaris seem a little less flexible, or too specific. It's probably all super easy to mod though if any of it offends. I just hope for a system flexible and general enough that you could make anything from the Empire of Man to Culture to Star Trek to Alien in terms of your society. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Jan 4, 2016 |
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 11:54 |
|
|
I hope socialism is the worst and the best government type is a theocratic libertarian society just to see the response
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Yeah SMAC is basically the gold standard for me when it comes to this kind of thing, it's weird how that mechanic fitted a future setting so much better than it did the Civ series' historical one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:They're literally Space Rome, when did Rome ever see a new culture and not either gently caress them up or culturally subsume them (or attempt but fail to do one of those things)?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I really liked the policy matrix from SMAC. What's a Eudaimonic society? Just trying to make your citizens really happy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:What's a Eudaimonic society? Just trying to make your citizens really happy? Yeah I think it's like some sort of post-scarcity give everyone absolutely everything they want to be happy and fulfilled people sort of thing. Cybernetic was always the correct choice though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:What's a Eudaimonic society? Just trying to make your citizens really happy? Earth in star trek. Post scarcity, no money, citizens work to better themselves and others.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Yeah I think it's like some sort of post-scarcity give everyone absolutely everything they want to be happy and fulfilled people sort of thing. Cybernetic was always the correct choice though. Why would you not pick what sounds like utopia?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
If it's not as efficient as something else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:Why would you not pick what sounds like utopia? Because why would you work for utopia when you can hand the keys over to an AI and let it enforce utopia?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:Why would you not pick what sounds like utopia? Depends on your situation, but the actual stats for cybernetic generally worked out the best. And its fluff description also sounded equally utopian and nice, just different. Cybernetic is Culture, eudomonic is Star Trek.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
There's also the fact that your utopia is under threat from up to six scheming bastards who want to see it ended, which means it might not be time for utopia just yet, but instead some ugly compromise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Depends on your situation, but the actual stats for cybernetic generally worked out the best. And its fluff description also sounded equally utopian and nice, just different. Cybernetic is Culture, eudomonic is Star Trek. Oh right. I kind of pictured cyberpunk dystopia for that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
The Cybernetic Consciousness also had a special trait that removed the police penalty from cybernetic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Here's the fluff: Cybernetic "In the far future, citizens may turn many of the tasks of governing society over to artificially intelligent computers, increasing efficiency and freeing individuals for more creative tasks. But will workers displaced by computers sink into despair, poverty, and possible unrest?" The answer: no, because you're also a planned or green economy and have an awesome society where no one gets left behind the the automation translates into more free time for everyone rather than unemployment and growing income disparity. Eudaimonic "Perhaps the most pleasant to contemplate living in, this far future society takes its name from an ancient Greek word for fulfillment and happiness. Eudaimonic society encourages each citizen to achieve happiness through striving to fulfill completely his or her potential. Population, Economy, and Industry all experience healthy growth. Violence fades as society grows more tolerant and just, and even when this society’s hand is forced it often shoots to subdue rather than to destroy." Basically star trek utopia, bonuses for everything but a big penalty for military support. Thought Control "The ultimate in “Big Brother” methods, Thought Control effuses subtle neurochemical triggers into the atmosphere to render its population obedient, loyal, and resistant to outside ideas. But significant resources are required to maintain this level of control." Basically useless by the late game in terms of bonuses and also a pretty gross future. I always imagined my Cybernetic choice as just a very slightly different flavour of Eudaimonic that focused a bit more on automation and AI to free up time for the proletariat to enjoy and fulfill its self. But that exact same "cybernetic" choice in say a Capitalist Wealth-focused dictatorship would absolutely be a cyberpunk nightmare. That's what's great about the system in SMAC, a few simple choices let you more or less model what ever society you want where each pick has very different implication based on the others.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
What society choices should you take to turn the Australian super commies into Smurfs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
*playing a game about galatical domination and warfare* WTF? I can't play a non-violent government?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Why can't I play a Red Cross nurse in WW2 shooters
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Haven't they actually said already that it is a design goal for Stellaris that you will be able to play a mostly non-violent game? Obviously you need a military for self defence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
But a pacifistic communist utopia removes two of the Xs. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Haven't they actually said already that it is a design goal for Stellaris that you will be able to play a mostly non-violent game? Obviously you need a military for self defence. The best defense is a good offence though, so... I'm going to preemptively defend myself against this other empire that has this really great planet. That they could use to build a fleet and attack me with, you see.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
I'm sure you can never declare war and focus on internal development. if your okay with being a space pussy and getting used as a buffer state by a real state SPACE ROMA INVICTA
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Speaking of which I wonder how many Byzantine Space Empires we'll see nerds create when the inevitable expanded custom nations dlc comes out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
You don't understand. The ooze-people of Alpha Centauri stole our glorious Srb clay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
The Greatest Oldest Planet of Bulgar XVIII
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
An entire galaxy of Romes, constantly trying to kill each other
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Anyone who has read The Dark Forest (which you should if you're in this thread) knows that the only option for a space-faring species is the immediate extermination of any other sentient lifeforms.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
Grizzwold posted:An entire galaxy of Romes, constantly trying to kill each other The Western Schism, but in space, the game. But on a more serious note I'm sure this game will end like any other Paradox game; with every major power locking horns in attempt to take over the world/galaxy with schemes to gently caress over their allies the second another common enemy is out of the picture.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:What's a Eudaimonic society? Just trying to make your citizens really happy? A bit late to this but outside of a Star Trek utopia it also calls back to ancient ethics and how public spending and wealth distribution functioned in the mediterranean world. There being no real government bureaucracy (even in the Roman Republic), local elites (who often would hold magistracies or other political offices) were expected to spend their personal wealth (though this could often come from the right to collect tolls or taxes) towards public works such as religious festivals, upkeep of temples and construction and maintenance of basic infrastructure. That is the greatest virtue (and source of personal glory) was seen to lie in contributing personally to further common happiness, welfare and prosperity, that is eudaimonia.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/stellaris-dev-diary-15-fallen-empires.900744/&sdpDevPosts=1 They almost sound like, but not quite, the First Ones from Babylon 5. Although instead of being "fallen", they just consider the rest of the galaxy so far beneath them that they don't see a need to interact with anyone, except for the two that want to burn it all down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
It reminds me more of the state of the Galactic Empire in the second part of Asimov's Foundation, or in Foundation and Empire. A fallen shadow of its former self, yet still quite powerful relative to everyone else around them simply by the mere fact of having the ancient remnants of the space fleets that once allowed them to rule the galaxy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
Palleon posted:They almost sound like, but not quite, the First Ones from Babylon 5. Although instead of being "fallen", they just consider the rest of the galaxy so far beneath them that they don't see a need to interact with anyone, except for the two that want to burn it all down. It sounds like, with most cool poo poo in this game, there isn't just one option. They might be so advanced they don't give a poo poo about lesser races. They might be a stagnant race that's like ancient china and can't fathom anything outside of its borders being better or of any interest and everything is perfect and peeked already so don't change. They might be some once mighty empire that fell apart and had a massive civil war and only a few proud paranoid outposts remain, guarding over ruins full of juicy tech. There might even be the rare one you can negotiate with and serve some ancient purpose and they attempt to use young races to finish some singular and cyclopian game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
8bitlawd posted:Speaking of which I wonder how many Byzantine Space Empires we'll see nerds create when the inevitable expanded custom nations dlc comes out. Any Paradox game in which I cannot play (Space) Byzantium and remove (Space) Kebab is a failure. So far, this is only Hearts of Iron.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
Quorum posted:Any Paradox game in which I cannot play (Space) Byzantium and remove (Space) Kebab is a failure. So far, this is only Hearts of Iron. It just makes me more tempted to make Space Ottomans and use Space Venice to gently caress over crumbling empires. Then post my exploits on the paradox forums. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
Quorum posted:Any Paradox game in which I cannot play (Space) Byzantium and remove (Space) Kebab is a failure. So far, this is only Hearts of Iron. You ever heard of Serbia?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
Grizzwold posted:An entire galaxy of Romes, constantly trying to kill each other It's called AndROMEda
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Quorum posted:Any Paradox game in which I cannot play (Space) Byzantium and remove (Space) Kebab is a failure. So far, this is only Hearts of Iron. not sure I'd get away with renaming fascist greece to neo-byzantine empire
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
I'm not sure you can get away with not renaming them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
podcat posted:not sure I'd get away with renaming fascist greece to neo-byzantine empire
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 11:54 |
|
|
Agean90 posted:I'm sure you can never declare war and focus on internal development. Technically Rome had very few, almost none, offensive wars. Virtually every single conflict was justified as defending Rome or a very important ally whose integrity is being put into question. Rome was always the bullwark against tyranny and senseless aggression.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 17:38
|
|
