Diplomacy: Ethics or government types

[Crapcookie36]

Is there a case to be made using an empires government type for diplomacy rather than the founding species ethics? Thinking about it it might make diplomacy more dynamic if empires were aligned more so on their goverment type not ethics (ie democratic gov types tend to like each other more and authoritarian gov types like each other more). Theres definitely good reasons to keep it based off ethics but at least in my experience it also means that the same kind of empires will always be friends regardless of what you do e.g. a materialist is never going to be friends with a spiritualist they will instantly despise you upon contact and there is little you can do to change that. What does everyone else think?

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

IMO further refinement of the AI personality types is the best option. More personalities, and deeper scripting for their behaviour and opinion modifiers. I actually quite like that it isn't as simple as "democracies like democracies".

(EDIT: Also my current game I was a Fanatic Materialist surrounded by various Spiritualist empires and then became friends with the "Pacifist" one who helped fend off the pair of militarist ones- i.e., I had a Spiritual Seeker allied with my hypercorporate oligarchy that was mass-producing robots because they also didn't like the pair of Evangelizing Zealots near them...)

 

[dying0d]

It makes more sense that a xeno would be more apt to treat with those that share similar values, so ethics would play more a role in relation than a government type

 

[dying0d]

Many sci-fi realms expound upon that, maybe there is a slight dislike of certain aspects of xeno society, the higher moral evolution portrayed puts more value in the species sharing similar ideologies.

Since those subordinate ideologies are subset of ethics, in real world and even furthermore tied to them in game, I don't see much a point to this idea.

Not that I think it is bad, just that the lens one views the world in is based on their underlying ethos, and not their masters level of control

 

[Crapcookie36]

It makes more sense that a xeno would be more apt to treat with those that share similar values, so ethics would play more a role in relation than a government type

This is why I still feel like there is absolutely value in using ethics as the model for diplomacy with other empires. Thinking about the time span of the game and how after even 100 years my founding species is no longer even the majority population group within my empire it seems odd that the diplomatic relation of the empire is determined by a minority population if the government was say a democracy with xenos leadership for example. Honestly I don't know whats the 'best' answer so I'm interested to see how others feel. Maybe if there was a way to pay a large influence cost and use social research as a project to change the 'official' ethics that we choose when creating an empire, we could still have a more dynamic diplomacy still using ethics as the chief factor for relations.

 

[dying0d]

I'd love to see pop modifiers based on diplomacy. It would make the founding principle of the game, the fill the map with empires? Now try to keep it from fracturing as you deal with other empires, part more fun.

Think of all the fun divergence + ethos based diplomatic pop modifiers would entail. More factions, bigger factions, more instability,.

Befriending an oposing ethose? Defense pact between your spiritualist empire and the nasty materialist neighbors? Bet your ass the space Jews in your empire will be displeased...

Point is, while OP has a valid idea, it really isnt like the triangle of hoi3, as even these days on earth some authoritarian governments are tolerated because they share basic rights with the more egalitarian governments, which basically says they share similar ethos (in stellaris the "rights" are tied to them, Irl they derive from them)

Now the one point we agree on, is empire ethics... I agree that makes little sense. It also makes little sense the democracies and republics only elect supreme leaders and not other local leaders as well(and that empire ethics stay stable in that regard)

I figure that because in stellaris, government is derived from ethos as well, you get this problem

 

[dying0d]

IMO further refinement of the AI personality types is the best option. More personalities, and deeper scripting for their behaviour and opinion modifiers. I actually quite like that it isn't as simple as "democracies like democracies".

But it is as simple as that, as democracies derive from similar ethic choices, or similar governments, if you prefer

 

[Derp]

Unless said local leaders turn out to be free governors, I'd rather that not be modeled. I mean it's pretty reasonable to assume that, in a functioning space democracy, there are thousands or even millions of elected officials in every level of government, but it's the sort of thing that can and should be abstracted out.

 

[dying0d]

Unless said local leaders turn out to be free governors, I'd rather that not be modeled. I mean it's pretty reasonable to assume that, in a functioning space democracy, there are thousands or even millions of elected officials in every level of government, but it's the sort of thing that can and should be abstracted out.

If that were the case, you would get free leaders, that would disappear if they list.

I didn't expunge much on that but I was thinking along the lines of Vicky, something akin to that and eventually modifying empire ethics.

They'd have to add in a fluid empire ethic though (the empire wide bonus of ethics may make it difficult)

Though, I wouldn't say any space empire ever even be close to homogeneous, and that remote parts wouMD effectively be seperate empires to an uninformed outside observer.

But that would be based off what I see in humanity, not space foxes or what have you

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

But it is as simple as that, as democracies derive from similar ethic choices, or similar governments, if you prefer

Nnnnnnope. The closest to "democracies liking democracies" is that Individualists like Individualists- but an Individualist civilization is not necessarily a democratic one. The ethos-based diplomacy allows a lot more subtlety than a straight up "governments like the same type of governments" one.

EDIT: Look at it this way... there are 4 axis of ethos, each with two opposing points on it. There are only 3 types of government, which exist on one axis. It makes a lot more sense to base opinion modifiers for diplomacy off of the more numerous set of points- the set of points with oppositions- than the one that has only two opposed points and an "in-between".

 

[dying0d]

You didn't read what was said very well.

Ethics define governments you can choose, so this is inherently in the game somewhat. Im all for ethics based diplomacy as that is closer to a realistic interaction you would get

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

You didn't read what was said very well.

Ethics define governments you can choose, so this is inherently in the game somewhat. Im all for ethics based diplomacy as that is closer to a realistic interaction you would get

What I'm saying is that the ethics-based opinion modifers are not as simple as "democracies like democracies".

 

[dying0d]

I know that, and I never said that. What I was meaning is since democracies come from certain ethics, non democracies that share these similar ethics usually have favorable relations. Depends on the other ethics, but yeah.

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

I know that, and I never said that.

But it is as simple as that, as democracies derive from similar ethic choices, or similar governments, if you prefer

Hm?

 

[dying0d]

And look at how it works in game. Like I was eluding to, 2 identical ethos empires would like eachother, outside of their government choices. Though they could be of the same government type, the diplomatic bonus or malus is based off the ethics chosen.

The fact that I elude to it already being government based diplomacy, is because government choice is based on ethos picks currently, with a couple universal options.

You also handwoven the initial fact I pointed out that ethos is more of the guiding principle of interaction, and not how my superiors treat me, or the fact that government types aren't exclusitory on earth based on democracy vs authoritarianism. Some authoritarian forms of government are respected by democracies and vice versa. Because it is treated by how the subordinate pops are treated (ie things ethos allow/disallow in game)

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

And look at how it works in game. Like I was eluding to, 2 identical ethos empires would like eachother, outside of their government choices. Though they could be of the same government type, the diplomatic bonus or malus is based off the ethics chosen.

The fact that I elude to it already being government based diplomacy, is because government choice is based on ethos picks currently, with a couple universal options.

You also handwoven the initial fact I pointed out that ethos is more of the guiding principle of interaction, and not how my superiors treat me, or the fact that government types aren't exclusitory on earth based on democracy vs authoritarianism. Some authoritarian forms of government are respected by democracies and vice versa. Because it is treated by how the subordinate pops are treated (ie things ethos allow/disallow in game)

The point stands: you can't keep going back and forth over whether or not ethos-based relations are as simplistic as a "democracies like democracies" system would be. It fundamentally isn't- just the inclusion of multiple axis points instead of a single axis renders it more complex.

 

[dying0d]

I'm not going back and forth between them, I'm stating evidence as to why ethos based as it is is more suitable to begin with, and more akin to what we as humans do here as well. Anything that seems otherwise has more to do with adding pop modifiers for factions etc

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

I'm not going back and forth between them, I'm stating evidence as to why ethos based as it is is more suitable to begin with, and more akin to what we as humans do here as well. Anything that seems otherwise has more to do with adding pop modifiers for factions etc

I know that, and I never said that.

But it is as simple as that, as democracies derive from similar ethic choices, or similar governments, if you prefer

Hm?

 

[dying0d]

It makes more sense that a xeno would be more apt to treat with those that share similar values, so ethics would play more a role in relation than a government type

Many sci-fi realms expound upon that, maybe there is a slight dislike of certain aspects of xeno society, the higher moral evolution portrayed puts more value in the species sharing similar ideologies.

Since those subordinate ideologies are subset of ethics, in real world and even furthermore tied to them in game, I don't see much a point to this idea.

Not that I think it is bad, just that the lens one views the world in is based on their underlying ethos, and not their masters level of control

You didn't read what was said very well.

Ethics define governments you can choose, so this is inherently in the game somewhat. Im all for ethics based diplomacy as that is closer to a realistic interaction you would get

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Nothing you can quote can make you not have said earlier that yes, ethos attraction is as simple as "democracies like democracies".

The least you can do is be gracious in being caught in mis-remembering what you've said, then we can move on.