Is the Ethos based game system too restrictive?

[Ixal]

Currently the Ethos of your species decides a lot of mechanics in the game. Based on ethos you either can or can't enact policies (most notably purging and slavery) and also the new political factions are ethos based.

This works if you "powergame" so to speak and pick you starting ethos based on a specific strategy.
But if you pick your ethos based on roleplay it gets difficult. You have to comprimise to get access to the policies you want or have trouble pleasing political parties as your playstyle is not reflected by any single ethos and this you hardly get a party >60% happiness.

I do not want to make ethos less important. In fact I am all for it that every ethos gets a speciality like spiritualists get with psionics. But for things like policies I would want a more fluid system where neigbouring ethoses can also access the policies although at the cost of unrest and ethos drift.
As for political parties imo there should also be hybrid parties between two neigbouring ethos.

That would allow you to play more freely in Stellaris without having to preplan everything at game start. Some people might say that this is not the "correct" way to play but I think given all the customization option and open ended gameplay it should also be supported.

 

[TandooriChicken]

Can you provide an example of how ethos restrains role-playing? I find that, if anything, it reinforces role playing (and undermines "power gaming") by keeping you from selecting an ethos just for the bonus and then playing in a completely inconsistent way...

 

[TehJumpingJawa]

This was a valid concern when you couldn't change your governing ethos..... but now you can.

 

[krios41]

Can you provide an example of how ethos restrains role-playing?

I can!
Meet the Fox Federation!

We are a nation founded on war. Trough war on Conquest we prevailed, We where sick of those nations unable to govern themselve. It is our devine duty to take them under our wing. We war for peace, we conquer for stability. Guided by our supreme Ruler, Emperor Codrales I, FLuffs bless his name, we will guide the galaxy to everlasting peace!


Okay, there is some RP stuff, now i have this neighbour, teh Hiffnar Regime, using the same race, government, Ethics and even teh exact same colour!
But allas! the traitors are materialist instead of Spiritualists! The Hiffnar Regime, our sworn rivals. We don't want their kind in our empire!

But... i can't expell them? i can't mark them as "undesirables". Why? because i don't have a xenopbohe or authoritarian ethic while i do have an authoritarian regime (imperial).

This is one example how it can restrict RP. It also doesn't make sence that i can't mark them as undesriable solely ebcause i'm not authoritarian/xenophobe

 

[TandooriChicken]

Imperial authority doesn't necessarily imply an authoritarian regime. Your imperium might be fiercely devoted to the protection of individual rights or cosmopolitanism. It might be inculcated in every generation of royalty that this is their holiest duty!

If you want to do what you are describing, maybe take only militarist rather than fanatical militarist and use the leftover point for xenophobe or authoritarian...

Cmon, tell us the truth... were you maybe powergaming just a *teensy* bit with that fanatical militarist selection?

 

[krios41]

Cmon, tell us the truth... were you maybe powergaming just a *teensy* bit with that fanatical militarist selection?

Perhaps....

Your imperium might be fiercely devoted to the protection of individual rights

-retarded screeching about how you can't have individual rights in a non democratic government because fuck logic-
I should stil be able to say "No, we don't want your kind here" without needing to be authoritarian or Xenophobe. America, the real life Democratic Crusaders, would go batshit crazy if it was forced to take in communists

 

[-Marauder-]

The only thing I find odd is, that as soon as we picked some options we automatically become neutral towards all others. So I am fanatic militarist and somewhat authoritan. I however have no stance on Xenophobe/Xenophile and never heard about Religion or Materialism. Seems odd that defaulting towards neutrality is a thing.

 

[Thomas Gideon]

America, the real life Democratic Crusaders, would go batshit crazy if it was forced to take in communists

News flash! There is a Communist Party in the USA! http://www.cpusa.org/

That's the price of freedom. People you don't like are ALSO allowed to join you. They get to say things that you may not like, and may even find offensive. You have to be mature enough to deal with it.

 

[Aries666]

No, if anything it should be more restrictive to create unique playstyles.

 

[Deep Space Explorer]

I find ability to purge being exclusive to xenophobe ethic quite restrictive.

 

[krios41]

News flash! There is a Communist Party in the USA! http://www.cpusa.org/

That's the price of freedom. People you don't like are ALSO allowed to join you. They get to say things that you may not like, and may even find offensive. You have to be mature enough to deal with it.

Tell that to Trump who wanted to ban inhabitnats from 7 country's. granted, that didn't go trough, but my nation is an imperial one where what i say, is law. not a democracy where i have to deal with party's and judges. i am the judge.

 

[Serenity84]

America, the real life Democratic Crusaders, would go batshit crazy if it was forced to take in communists

America doesn't give a shit about promoting freedom and democracy. If it suits their imperialist goals they'll promote democracy. And if it suits their goals they'll promote authoritarianism. See South America.

 

[krios41]

Guy's, my point is.
There is absolutly no valid reason why i shouldn't be able to mark certain species as undesirables.
I'm not asking for slavery, i'm not asking for neutering or whatever. I'm just asking to be able to mark certain races as undesirables.
I can understand i wouldn't be allowed if i had a democratic regime, or was some form of egalitarian, but my nation is NONE of that.

 

[Thomas Gideon]

Okay, lets look at this from the real world:
Your nation has encountered a situation where their philosophy has been challenged. They are deciding that they find a particular group undesirable. In the real world, when this happens, governments get reformed (either peacefully or violently). I suggest you REFORM YOUR GOVERNMENT TO SUIT THE PLAY YOU WANT TO EXPERIENCE.

Seriously, if you want this in RP terms, there you go. It suits how governments and nations evolve over time. Your people's martial discipline has been eroded and replaced with xenophobia. Rather than seeing others who are different as brothers who shed blood with you, you see them as alien and "other", and can no longer accept them in your population.

 

[krios41]

Your nation has encountered a situation where their philosophy has been challenged.

It's not "challanged" not at all.

They are deciding that they find a particular group undesirable. In the real world, when this happens, governments get reformed (either peacefully or violently).

uhm... In teh real world this would result in the emperor saying "They are not allwod here anymore" simple as that. My governemnt is already good for what i want to do, it's the ethics restrictions that are the problem here.
Ethics =/= Government

 

[Ixal]

Please guys, no real world politics.

Displacement or generally marking others as undesirables is a prime example of how restricting ethos is. Even as fanatic spiritual or militarist with a dictatorial government you can not displace people unless you also tolerate slavery or hate xenos.
And if you chose one of those two options just so that you can use displacement you will have a large political party which you won't be able to please as the authoritarian party wants a caste system and can't be pleased otherwise.
In the worst case you can end up influence starved as your RP playstlye does not fit into any of the ethos boxes and you end up with all political parties at around 50 happiness giving you a stable government but 0 influence.

 

[Frederick III]

It's not "challanged" not at all.

uhm... In teh real world this would result in the emperor saying "They are not allwod here anymore" simple as that. My governemnt is already good for what i want to do, it's the ethics restrictions that are the problem here.
Ethics =/= Government

Yes, and you did not choose the authoritarianism ethic, so don't complain when you can't do authoritarian things.

 

[krios41]

you did not choose the authoritarianism ethic, so don't complain

There is absolutly no valid reason why i shouldn't be able to mark certain species as undesirables.

I think you missed the point of this threat, we're complaining because how it is now, is too restricting. Also, if i am dissatisfied with how a certain thing is done, i am allowed to complain and try to get things changed.

 

[Frederick III]

I think you missed the point of this threat, we're complaining because how it is now, is too restricting. Also, if i am dissatisfied with how a certain thing is done, i am allowed to complain and try to get things changed.

Your complaint makes no sense, though. Ethics are supposed to capture the moral character of a nation and its inhabitants. You're RPing as an authoritarian ruler of an authoritarian government, but your population is largely non-authoritarian. Dictators can't do just whatever they want - they're constrained by political elites, by social and political norms. Less constrained that Democratic rulers sure, but still most certainly constrained. Go ask Louis about it, he'll tell you.

So you want to purge people from your nation. Okay. How do you do this? You need to convince the military or the political rulers of planets or even continents of planets to begin discouraging those people from living in your territory, and ideally convince the average public to actively discriminate and punish them to add to their incentive to leave.

But the only people in your whole nation that agree with you are your fellow authoritarians. Everyone else is like... meh, I don't care, or even worse, meh, I refuse. Plus your government isn't authoritarian, so the people you really need to go along with the plan... aren't going to just go along with the plan. And punishing people who disobey means needing to convince still more people to do the punishing, and that redoubles all your initial problems.

If you want to win the whole political fight to remove these undesirables from your realm, well, the first step is making sure you have solid control over the government and have the power to achieve these desired ends. Guess what - there's a mechanism in the game that represents that now. Go embrace the authoritarian faction.

 

[krios41]

So you want to purge people from your nation.

I don't want to purge, that's not it.
I want to mark some people as undesirables, that's not purging.
I feel restricting pop acces to your empire should be dicated by your government type, not ethics. It would make more sense

edit: i made a slight msitake, okay, that would make that i "purge" people. Displacement is good enough for my intents. THat's not teh same as neuturing or outright killing them!