Stellaris Dev Diary #160 - Origins Full Reveal

[BlackUmbrellas]

Kinda wish they got mad at dangerous research again.

Same. It did feel sort of weird from a mechanical perspective, though, that the Materialist FE outlawed AI. Like... it was clever, they damn well know about how risky it is (especially when it was a galactic crisis), but it felt weird.

 

[Methone]

I *really* miss the way the old Crisis stuff worked. That researching the high end techs would trigger the unbidden or an AI revolt rather than "the contingency".

But... isn't that how it works now? you need Jump Drives for the Unbidden to be at all possible, and you need Synths for the Contingency to be at all possible, with the Prethoryn as a Default crisis.

 

[Shadowstrike]

Ad hominem attacks are not actually useful in refuting an argument, and usually indicate that you don't actually have a valid argument against it.

There are plenty of instances where you can imagine multiple nations might share a planet. You could be settling a world with primitives without conquering them. You might imagine a case where that is an acceptable compromise to a contested system. You might be too weak to stop someone else from colonizing part of your planet. There is any number of reasons why that could happen, and no particular reason why it couldn't happen.

As for "the game isn't set up that way", I've literally just given you an example of how this could work. Now it would suck if making a colony first isn't enough to keep someone out of settling somewhere, but that's kind of what having a navy is for. There are plenty of examples of places where settling first doesn't mean other people weren't also able to settle there.

 

[Duuk]

Same. It did feel sort of weird from a mechanical perspective, though, that the Materialist FE outlawed AI. Like... it was clever, they damn well know about how risky it is (especially when it was a galactic crisis), but it felt weird.

Not to me. To me it felt like the only thing that made actual sense about why FEs were small. They conquered the whole galaxy. They were masters of all they saw. And then they unleashed an AI menace on the galaxy and fought a galactic war against it. They won, but had to consolidate and retreat tens of thousands of years ago.

Now, any time they see a petty baby race starting up that hill they smack them down hard.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Not to me. To me it felt like the only thing that made actual sense about why FEs were small. They conquered the whole galaxy. They were masters of all they saw. And then they unleashed an AI menace on the galaxy and fought a galactic war against it. They won, but had to consolidate and retreat tens of thousands of years ago.

Now, any time they see a petty baby race starting up that hill they smack them down hard.

It still felt weird.

"No robots" is mechanically a Spiritualist thing, while Materialists get explicit mechanical bonuses to robots. So it definitely felt weird from a mechanical perspective that the Fanatic Materialist Fallen Empire... refused to use robots/synths and hated AI. It was mismatched.

Clever from a lore perspective, weird from a practical one.

 

[Methone]

Ad hominem attacks are not actually useful in refuting an argument, and usually indicate that you don't actually have a valid argument against it.

You don't seem to understand what an ad hominem is.

"You're wrong because you're an idiot" - Ad Hominem.

"You're wrong, idiot" - Is just an insult and does not show anything about the person's argument's validity, just their temper.

There are plenty of instances where you can imagine multiple nations might share a planet. You could be settling a world with primitives without conquering them.

Your argument is approaching this from a 'story' angle. Others are approaching why you couldn't through a mechanical angle, and saying you couldn't because the game is not mechanically set up to allow that. Your demands to 'prove' it, as I have said, come off as demanding a 'proof' that 1+1=2; it's so blatantly obvious that one is confounded as to how to prove it.

I mean good god, 'sharing' the district building with the AI like you'd recommended sounds like something that'd make me take a railroad spike to my head.

 

[Foefaller]

Ad hominem attacks are not actually useful in refuting an argument, and usually indicate that you don't actually have a valid argument against it.

There are plenty of instances where you can imagine multiple nations might share a planet. You could be settling a world with primitives without conquering them. You might imagine a case where that is an acceptable compromise to a contested system. You might be too weak to stop someone else from colonizing part of your planet. There is any number of reasons why that could happen, and no particular reason why it couldn't happen.

As for "the game isn't set up that way", I've literally just given you an example of how this could work. Now it would suck if making a colony first isn't enough to keep someone out of settling somewhere, but that's kind of what having a navy is for. There are plenty of examples of places where settling first doesn't mean other people weren't also able to settle there.

The game doesn't allow for two full-fledged empires to own the same planet, with control over the same districts and building slots. The closest you could probably get is to divide a planet into two halves that are treated as two separate planets for colonies, but there would still likely be weirdness and/or major issues around things like invasion, bombing, starbase ownership, and Collosus weapons.

Any sort of "two species sharing a planet as equals/rivals" origin would have to have the second "empire" not actually be a real empire. It would have to be more like the subterranean civilization colony event, represented by tile blockers and/or planetary features. If their pops exist, they would have to have a special, immutable citizenship type which gives them their own strata and job. Most of all, if they are "competing" with you for colonies, there would need to be a really, really good reason why they only bug you and not your neighbors (and they can't bug your neighbors, unless you want it to be compared with the worst race of the worst MoO game.)

 

[UnitedBlorgFreinds]

You don't seem to understand what an ad hominem is.

"You're wrong because you're an idiot" - Ad Hominem.

"You're wrong, idiot" - Is just an insult and does not show anything about the person's argument's validity, just their temper.


Your argument is approaching this from a 'story' angle. Others are approaching why you couldn't through a mechanical angle, and saying you couldn't because the game is not mechanically set up to allow that. Your demands to 'prove' it, as I have said, come off as demanding a 'proof' that 1+1=2; it's so blatantly obvious that one is confounded as to how to prove it.

I mean good god, 'sharing' the district building with the AI like you'd recommended sounds like something that'd make me take a railroad spike to my head.

And as I pointed out in my post, the most logical way to handle this is to split planets into multiple segments, which has lots of mechanical/lore issues.

 

[The Founder]

Same. It did feel sort of weird from a mechanical perspective, though, that the Materialist FE outlawed AI. Like... it was clever, they damn well know about how risky it is (especially when it was a galactic crisis), but it felt weird.

One of hte goals of the FE reworks was that they would stop "interfering with Playstyles".
That is the reason the Xenophiles no longer care about Slavery.

Unless we talk about setling close to Xenophobes or Holy Worlds, it is damn near impossible to even get them to attack you before War In Heaven or Endgame Crisis.

Ad hominem attacks are not actually useful in refuting an argument, and usually indicate that you don't actually have a valid argument against it.

As I can not find anyone insulting you, the only one doing such a non-argument distracation seems to be you.

 

[UnitedBlorgFreinds]

As I can not find anyone insulting you, the only one doing such a non-argument distracation seems to be you.

Could you please explain?

 

[Zarpaulus]

Scion: Start as the vassal of a Fallen Empire. (Federations)
Someone, please help the question. So what is benefit of being the vassal of the Fallen Empire?

Common Ground: Start with as the leader of a Galactic Union federation, and with The Federation tradition unlocked. (Federations)

Hegemon: Start with as the leader of a Hegemony federation, and with The Federation tradition unlocked. (Federations)

What is different between a Galactic Union federation and a Hegemony federation?

Sorry for my ignorance on this topic?

A couple Dev Diaries ago had the different Federation types.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...aris-dev-diary-158-federation-rework.1270552/

 

[thedesserted]

Im kinda on the fence about buying this. I want it, but the late game performance is nigh unplayable for me.

 

[Corvexi_IX]

If Fallen Empires are set to 0 and a player still picks Scion, it will force spawn a one-system Fallen Empire. The AI will never get the Scion Origin if FEs have been turned off, though.

What if it is a forced spawned Empire?

 

[Knotz]

This is akin to asking "Want to explain why 1+1=2, instead of just asserting this is true?"

But why is 1+1 = 2?

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

One of hte goals of the FE reworks was that they would stop "interfering with Playstyles".
That is the reason the Xenophiles no longer care about Slavery.

Unless we talk about setling close to Xenophobes or Holy Worlds, it is damn near impossible to even get them to attack you before War In Heaven or Endgame Crisis.

Which is a shame, IMO. Would have preferred more of a middle ground.

 

[stilgarpl]

But why is 1+1 = 2?

By definition. Two is defined as the next number after one. Essentially all natural numbers are defined as next number after some other number. Adding one to any number is just asking about next number of that number. For one it is two. Therefore one plus one equals two.

 

[SeekingEtermity]

I don't know why they dislike it, just that they do. One of the effects imposed on their subjects is to force you to outlaw AI. It doesn't make sense for materialist subjects too, because robots are one of the defining materialist things in stellaris, but for machine empires it makes even less sense. Regular empires are at least organic.

Robots != AI. Only two things (for non-machine empires) are AIs: sentient combat computers and sentient synths. You can quite easily get all the way to Synths without ever giving them sentience (this will restrict them to Droids-allowed jobs, but they will still get the production bonus).

The full explanation of why the Fanatic Materialist FE/AE don't like AI is a little spoilerish, but are you aware that even today, some very smart real-world computer scientists, physicists, engineers, and so on are deeply worried about full AI? Let's just say that, in the backstory of the Keepers of Knowledge, they have good reason to be leery of full AI.

Also, the spiritualist AE vassal type simply ethics shifts you towards fanatic spiritualist, so the spiritualist AE is more tolerant of AIs then the materialist AE.

Technically true, but in practice... only sort of. Being [Fanatic] Spiritualist only prohibits giving AIs full rights, not merely having them exist. However, being shifted to Fanatic Spiritualist will quickly cause a Spiritualist faction to form, and they will be pissed if you merely toe the letter of the law (game rules around ethic restrictions) and don't also remove AI sentience and ideally forbid robots altogether. Sure, you're not actually obligated to keep the faction corresponding to your fanatic ethic happy, especially since the reworks to pop happiness, faction impact thereon, and faction influence generation (although allowing sentient synths is one of the few ways to actually drive a faction approval to zero without specifically trying to), but it's still not completely toothless.

 

[SeekingEtermity]

"No robots" is mechanically a Spiritualist thing, while Materialists get explicit mechanical bonuses to robots. So it definitely felt weird from a mechanical perspective that the Fanatic Materialist Fallen Empire... refused to use robots/synths and hated AI. It was mismatched.

Again, Robot != AI. The Keepers of Knowledge (and Watchful Regulators) make extensive use of robots. They use robotic (technically, Synth) pops in all their colonies. They use robotic armies instead of risking a hair (or feather, or leaf, or whatever) of their cybernetic bodies in ground battle, even though yes, they are all cyborgs!

They use highly-developed machines all over the place. They just don't let them think.

 

[Druplesnubb]

And that difference is relevant because...?

Base game fetures are available to everyone. Thus everyone who buys an expansion will be able to utilise features that build upon them. If a feature from expansion A is based on a feature that requires expansion B then if I buy expansion A that's not enough to unlock the feature even though it's supposedly a feature of expansion A that I just bought.

I appreciate you straight up admitting you don't have an argument beyond not liking to pay for things if you can help it.

I have no problem paying for things. I have a problem paying for things and not actually getting the things I supposedly paid for, and having to pay multiple times for a single product.

 

[Verx90]

But... isn't that how it works now? you need Jump Drives for the Unbidden to be at all possible, and you need Synths for the Contingency to be at all possible, with the Prethoryn as a Default crisis.

Nope , those things increase theyr chance , evry endgame can happen anytime after the lategame hit . Prethorion have increased chance overtime , while the other crysis need events/tech/particular % of pops to increase theyr chance .