Pancakelord

General
43 Badges
Apr 7, 2018
2.130
6.917
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings III
  • War of the Roses
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • March of the Eagles
  • Darkest Hour
I think the GC could do with some extra settings that lets players/AIs pass resolutions that makes the GC vote based on
  • Pure diplomatic weight (default)
  • Pure Diplomatic weight - fleet power (FP is grossly overinflated, and easily leads to the player running away with votes)
  • Military Power only.
  • Economy Power only.
  • Technology Power only.
  • Pops only (So the "largest" members get the most say).
  • One vote One Nation (2 votes for council members)
    • In such a case, each envoy assigned to the GC would reduce the voting period by 1% (by default they add 10% dip weight, which is a bit useless if everyone gets 1 vote).
    • Favours are disabled. OR (this would require some work on PDX part) are mutually exclusive & limited to 1 - if you get my 1 favour I cant vote when you use it. Council members can give a favour away and still use their other to vote.
  • One vote per envoy assigned to the GC - nations with many envoys/diplo civics are more diplomatically powerful [suggestion from @Roboduck3000] #Edit 1
These would be mutually exclusive so you dont need to progress through them and can vote on any at any time, though once one has been passed, another cant be passed for say 25 years.

AIs with particularly strong fleets or economies might vote for one of those related voting types, whilst particularly weak or small nations might vote for "one vote one nation". If one GC member [read: the player] is leading the way with fleet power the others might collectively vote for Pure - FP to offset their rampant voting power before it gets too large.

A separate policy could also be passed that would benefit hiveminds greatly:
  • Ignore pop happiness: Yes / No
This would mean that all pop happiness is ignored and all pops are treated as though they have a weight of 1 in the GC DipWeight Calculation.
 
Last edited:
  • 6Like
  • 3
Reactions:

MateuszS

General
70 Badges
Mar 31, 2015
1.968
539
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury Pre-order
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma Pre-order
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Darkest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars Pre-Order
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
Yes to all, but I'd separate favours from that - these things should be reworked (using favours in voting should cause either to abstain or vote in favour instead adding diplo weight).
 

Pancakelord

General
43 Badges
Apr 7, 2018
2.130
6.917
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings III
  • War of the Roses
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • March of the Eagles
  • Darkest Hour
Yes to all, but I'd separate favours from that - these things should be reworked (using favours in voting should cause either to abstain or vote in favour instead adding diplo weight).
Probably yeah, I was mostly interested in the voting calculation itself for this. Favours in general are definitely underbaked (see my sig) either way, and need to be modified somehow.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

mammonmachine

First Lieutenant
16 Badges
Jul 13, 2017
280
414
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Surviving Mars
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
We already change how diplomatic weight is calculated by passing the main resolution lines. I don't understand what your intention is to how your proposed resolutions interact with that - they would appear to strip away those bonuses by fiat. It seems to me that it makes quite subtle calculations pretty crude.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Pancakelord

General
43 Badges
Apr 7, 2018
2.130
6.917
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Surviving Mars
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Cities: Skylines Industries
  • Imperator: Rome Deluxe Edition
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Crusader Kings III
  • War of the Roses
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • March of the Eagles
  • Darkest Hour
We already change how diplomatic weight is calculated by passing the main resolution lines. I don't understand what your intention is to how your proposed resolutions interact with that - they would appear to strip away those bonuses by fiat. It seems to me that it makes quite subtle calculations pretty crude.
This would be a higher tier of resolutions under galactic reforms - like custodian reforms - and would suppress those effects.

Honestly the main resolution lines are too bloated, some policies have things in them that shouldnt be there. That might be understandable for real-world politics & bills, where actual consensus is important, and editing stuff in/out is a thing that happens. But in a game, it's unnecessary. It's part of why the GC is full of increase X decrease X and sanction proposals after a while.

By stuffing a dozen issues into one GC bill, you leave nuance on the cutting room floor.
1614459178075.png
Instead of having debates over just
  1. Or some authoritarian empires being OK with certain purge types getting outlawed - like the livestock one - but not forced labour (because that's what they're using),
  2. Or Warrior culture Empires just wanting certain Bombardment types outlawed (e.g. Pox bombardment or Armageddon but not Indiscriminate - as it's "dishonourubu") but not all the other baggage that comes with Rules of war
  3. the morality of planet cracking weapons - and maybe tying in events to that [like having envoys attached to the GC getting in to fist fights over the idea (there is literally artwork for this too)]
    1614459292228.png
    • Other events could have been created for other Resolution voting topics too, like your populace questioning why you've supported AI rights if you're a spiritualist government. But that simply isn't possible when there's literally a dozen+ issues being voted on simultaneously.
Everything is all jumbled in to one bill. And for some unknown reason Pacifism attraction [and a LOT of it too] magically kicks in at T4 / T5 of RoW. Like, What? removing WMDs and the "atrocities" of war would only sanitise it and lead to more war in the galaxy, I'm not going to go hit the guy with a planet cracker if there's a chance he might actually get a shot off or be legally fine with purging my people if I lose territory.

Then there's the question of the AI and why it votes the way it does. Have you looked at the AI weights for these large resolutions? They're an absolute Fking mess, with 8 ethos all mixing and overlapping - and even varying in support / oppose by tiers.
Its no wonder nobody can work out which way the AI will vote (nobody's had the energy to try putting the weights on to the wiki, even, for example) and instead we see threads like (Make my federation vote my way - make my vassals vote my way -- because noone knows why whose voting for what, really).

So I wouldnt say those calculations and resolutions are subtle - I wouldn't even say they're well thought out.
I'd say it was Rushed for time and it really shows when the GC gets bogged down with confused AIs voting crap up and down repeatedly and plenty of players probably have no clue where DipWeight is coming from. ***
The GC should probably have 2-3 times as many resolution branches as it does, each one tackling one - five (at most) issues at a time.

***And I can say this with confidence, as I actually worked out Economic Weight manually once for someone to explain how it all comes together. And that's only one of the FOUR (though admittedly the largest to calculate) variables DipW uses (others being FP, Science, and #Pops * happiness of pop - or *1 if drone/nerve stapled/non-sapient machine).
It's about 2 A4 pages worth of maths and explanation, requiring me to use Excel (literally), the wiki as a base reference and then file-diving to confirm various variables.
1614460056865.png

 
Last edited:
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions: