Some "worries" about Utopia

[pgt1027]

I have an idea that might solve this.

In many really existing slave societies, a sort of ideology evolved around the slaves that posited that slaves were like children, naive and foolish, and required direction from their masters, who were to be like father figures.

Many people even noted the sort of insidious way this perpetuated the slave system. As Oscar Wilde put it, "the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves, and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it"

So you might have a civic that looks like this:
*Paternalistic Ethic
-Regulated slavery reduces productivity of slaves and/or increases consumer goods consumption
-Slaves more attracted to authoritarian ethos

 

[Magnificent Genius]

Why exactly does everyone think that you need to be a pacifist, egalitarian, or xenophile to you know, think that GENOCIDE is morally wrong?
Just asking.

Because this is a space GSG. Also, Paradox games bring out the inner genocidal dictator in all of us.

 

[Slynx]

Why exactly does everyone think that you need to be a pacifist, egalitarian, or xenophile to you know, think that GENOCIDE is morally wrong?
Just asking.

because nothing wrong with it. uless you have some sort of morale or emotions towards pops.
pacifists have strange thoughs that life is precious and etc.
xenophiles care about other species
and egalitarian think that pops have rights
unlike their counterparts

 

[Shermanator]

because nothing wrong with it. uless you have some sort of morale or emotions towards pops.
pacifists have strange thoughs that life is precious and etc.
xenophiles care about other species
and egalitarian think that pops have rights
unlike their counterparts

I can see your point but I think it only works to an extent. A Militarist might believe might makes right and violence is useful for solving problems, but that doesn't mean they don't have morals, that they don't believe horrible brutality is wrong. Authoritarians believe that people should obey the state and that a strong state is the best way to have a functioning society, they might be wrong, but again, that doesn't mean they don't believe hurting other people is ok. (in fact, most authoritarians in real life believe a strong government is needed to stop people from hurting each other) That just leaves non-pacifist, non-egalitarian xenophobes as the ones who's distain for aliens makes them believe that genocide of other species is morally justified.

 

[Slynx]

that they don't believe horrible brutality is wrong

and yet they use full bombardment that destroys buildings and kills billions...and potentially can wipe the whole planet.

that doesn't mean they don't believe hurting other people is ok

yet there are examples in literature and history when people were sent away to meet their doom or executed ...if it benefit the government. especially true for totalitarianism.

xenophobes

as i said on this forums before the problem with xenophobes is that they are extreme racist. they think that their race is somewhat different from others and mustn't be purged\enslaved the same way as xenos.

yes. not everyone is evil. in fact we can imagine xeno-purging individualists and others...

 

[Shermanator]

and yet they use full bombardment that destroys buildings and kills billions...and potentially can wipe the whole planet.

yet there are examples in literature and history when people were sent away to meet their doom or executed ...if it benefit the government. especially true for totalitarianism.

as i said on this forums before the problem with xenophobes is that they are extreme racist. they think that their race is somewhat different from others and mustn't be purged\enslaved the same way as xenos.

yes. not everyone is evil. in fact we can imagine xeno-purging individualists and others...

Yes, there is truth to that.
I suppose I will say that I'm not saying that it doesn't make sense for anyone to be pro purge, just that your average person would be against it. Accepting some violent actions as a justified necessity isn't the same as believe the mass extermination of a group of people is right.

As for militarist, the use of full bombardment isn't the same as outright purging. They aren't trying to kill lots of people, or doing it just to do it, they just accept a high civilian body count as a necessity in order to defeat the enemy. To use a real life example, many people believe that the use of the atomic bombs on Japan was justified in order to end the war and save the lives of American soldiers, but that doesn't mean they believe that America should have started systematically purging the Japanese after they surrendered.

I agree that egalitarians, pacifist, and xenophile empires would get angry at purging much more than others, but other, non purging empires should still dislike purging empires because they think genocide is wrong. After all, if you have the purging policy turned off due to the fact that your ethics will not allow it, it's probably because you think purging is wrong. When people think something is morally wrong, they not only tend to not do that thing themselves (barring hypocrisy) but they tend to be against other people doing that think to.

 

[GC13]

As for militarist, the use of full bombardment isn't the same as outright purging. They aren't trying to kill lots of people, or doing it just to do it, they just accept a high civilian body count as a necessity in order to defeat the enemy.

But in Stellaris (and apparently Bablyon 5), all the Full Bombardment does is get you to victory faster. Those fortifications don't even drain twice as quickly going from the weakest bombardment to the heaviest. (Not that Full Bombardment is even particularly devastating, mind you.)

 

[Slynx]

but other, non purging empires should still dislike purging empires because they think genocide is wrong.

thats why it is an option for others to disallow the purges, while it is completely banned for pacifists and others

 

[SuiciSpai]

Yeah, but you can usually find more than five habitable systems in the first 15-20 years of the game

That depends on your options, I usually play with 25% planets. Probably the base core systems should be dynamic depending on the galaxy size and % of habitable planets, instead of always 3 systems.

 

[Cattlehunter]

Yes, there is truth to that.
I suppose I will say that I'm not saying that it doesn't make sense for anyone to be pro purge, just that your average person would be against it. ...

I wouldn't say it's necessary for the average person to be against it unless you assume that most species think the same way that humans do, and that most societies would develop in the same way that ours has in the last few generations and that they'd then never again change from that point on. Which would be a pretty boring universe to live in, if most the aliens are just humans that look slightly different or have some minor quirk but still think in exactly the same way.

 

[Shermanator]

I wouldn't say it's necessary for the average person to be against it unless you assume that most species think the same way that humans do, and that most societies would develop in the same way that ours has in the last few generations and that they'd then never again change from that point on. Which would be a pretty boring universe to live in, if most the aliens are just humans that look slightly different or have some minor quirk but still think in exactly the same way.

Yes that is a point but the reality is that in most space opera, including Stellaris, the majority of alien races pretty much are just humans with different cultures and different biology. Even ones that veer differently tend to be planet of hats or are based off of a single historical civilization.
There is a good reason for this, it makes aliens much easier to write and relate to, so there isn't anything wrong with it, but that's jus the way it is.
I mean in Stellaris, every species goes through the same ages until they get to space, they are all capable of holding any ethic and they can all be ruled over effectively by the same forms of government.

 

[-Marauder-]

... did you even try playing as Collectivist slaver recently? Sectors can't tell Slaves from normal pops and if you want to get any relevant bonus from having slaves, you will have to invest tons of influence to be allowed to micro the heck out of your core systems to gain some minerals. Past the early game, Slaves are a pain to play with.

If you do not set up the planets manually that is. You are blaming Paradox approach to sectors and punishing players for not acting the way the AI does as an inherent problem with slavery and micro management. It's like saying "upgrading buildings is a pain, so it's great we have sectors!" presenting these as the only two choices. Ignoring that any other decent game has a frigging auto upgrade function.

It gave players a big advantage over AI, who can't possibly handlethat. and fairness, which I can approve of.

The AI on higher difficulty gets various other advantages such as a higher resource income, lower costs, doesn't have to deal with various problems the player does etc. In general trying to bring the player down to the levels of the Ai is, a horrid approach. Especially since the Ai has these advantages. It's trying to fix bad AI by stacking the system in favour of the AI pretending some kind of equity has to be achieved. When the Ai itself really does not care.

So, they nerfed a little but your favourite "playstyle" and you're not happy with it.
I'm seriously hesitating to throw a "gitgud" at you.

So they buffed your favorite playstyle while taking the sledgehammer to the opposite one and you are extremly happy with it. Now pretending that's fine because it benefits you.

By the way, it's core system count. A ring world system would count as one.

No shit? Not like it's been that way for a long time! It's still them forcing sectors on people and trying to have the player play the game as little as possible.

That's kinda the point. If are playing with the fanatic purifiers civic (and thus have auto purge), you are not interested in diplomacy.

Fanatic purifiers are NOT the only ones who can or do purge.

What was the view point in reducing core sectors?

Sectors, sectors everywhere. Also bringing people down to the level of AI.

Why exactly does everyone think that you need to be a pacifist, egalitarian, or xenophile to you know, think that GENOCIDE is morally wrong?
Just asking.

An Empire that engages in purging has no reason to be upset about purging unless it is done to themselves. The parties involves are NOT THE SAME SPECIES processing humans on an industrial scale is a horrible act for most humans. Processing chickens, cows or any other animal? Not so much. Also morality and ethics are NOT universal but learned. It is for that very reason genocide has regularly occured with the ones engaging in it usually not seeing much wrong with it.

 

[Slynx]

judging by the growth of dislikes on a previous post(and any similar post)...i'm starting to think that if you'll say that "Purge is ok" you'll immediately get dozens of them
guys, relax. you're probably too pacifist\individualist\xenophile on the ethos scale.
besides, even our literature or media shows us lots of examples where genocide was ok.(some of them were even justified...like with self-defense, or my favorite "we're so different!")

The parties involves are NOT THE SAME SPECIES processing humans on an industrial scale is a horrible act for most humans. Processing chickens, cows or any other animal? Not so much. Also morality and ethics are NOT universal but learned. It is for that very reason genocide has regularly occured with the ones engaging in it usually not seeing much wrong with it.

this!

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

An Empire that engages in purging has no reason to be upset about purging unless it is done to themselves. The parties involves are NOT THE SAME SPECIES processing humans on an industrial scale is a horrible act for most humans. Processing chickens, cows or any other animal? Not so much. Also morality and ethics are NOT universal but learned. It is for that very reason genocide has regularly occured with the ones engaging in it usually not seeing much wrong with it.

There's a wealth of sci-fi, speculative fiction, bad vampire romance stories and dolphin safe tuna that all disagrees with you.

Humans have shown amply that enough of us, alot of us, would not be okay if we started 'purging' a different sentient species. In fact, I'd say the hall mark of higher intelligence is being able to identify and appreciate intelligence even when it's different from us.

 

[Shermanator]

thats why it is an option for others to disallow the purges, while it is completely banned for pacifists and others

Actually you have to be a xenophobe to purge in banks, and in the current version you have to be a xenophobe or a collectivist. (I'm not counting the up and coming displacement here)

An Empire that engages in purging has no reason to be upset about purging unless it is done to themselves. The parties involves are NOT THE SAME SPECIES processing humans on an industrial scale is a horrible act for most humans. Processing chickens, cows or any other animal? Not so much. Also morality and ethics are NOT universal but learned. It is for that very reason genocide has regularly occured with the ones engaging in it usually not seeing much wrong with it.

COWS, CHICKENS, AND OTHER ANIMALS ARE NOT SENTIENT BEINGS.
And when did I say that empires that engage in purging should be against the purge? I am argueing that empires that are not pacifist, xenophile, or egalitarian but do not engage in purging should be against purging.
Nor am I arguing that EVERYONE should think purging is wrong, as long as you have the xenophobe ethic (and not pacifism or egalitarianism), you can purge away! If not, then you probably think genocide of sentient beings is wrong. Those who aren''t xenophile/egalitarian/pacifist obviously wouldn't be nearly as horrified by it as people of those ethics would be, but still.

Sentient beings is the big two words I think many people here are missing. Most people would agree that we think hurting humans is worst then hurting animals not (or at least not just) because they are the same species, but because humans are sentient, intelligent beings rather then animals. Most people, if asked, would agree that if we ever meant intelligent beings that the same would apply to them. (not saying that's how it would end up in practice, its entirely possible in such a situation humans could end up being xenophobes) Not everyone thinks this way of course, that's why we have the xenophobe ethic. Of course, there are even people who go the other direction, and believe that not being a sentient being shouldn't matter, that animals should be treated the same way sentient beings are treated, these people are usually vegetarians and vegans, but further reinforcing the sentient idea is that there is nothing in the game that suggest xenophiles are vegetarians.

In almost every science fiction and fantasy story I have ever seen that involves sentient, intelligent, non human beings who aren't completely evil, everyone, except those who are sufficiently xenophobic enough, don't think that no morals apply to other intelligent species just because they aren't the same species, and I'm not saying that doesn't mean they don't have their own prejudice, but being racist and being Hitler aren't the same thing.

The sentient being idea is the idea I think people here are forgetting about.

 

[Slynx]

COWS, CHICKENS, AND OTHER ANIMALS ARE NOT SENTIENT BEINGS.

whats the difference? in stellaris there is even a gene mod to make species tasty. (and you can even make humans tasty while playing humans)
also...that's racist. don't tell it to animal-people you may discover in space

xenophobe ethic

by your logic it'll make genocide or your own species wrong.

Most people would agree that we think hurting humans is worst then hurting animals not (or at least not just) because they are the same species, but because humans are sentient, intelligent beings rather then animals.

[don't wanna offend someone, so let's pretend that there is a list of few human races that were killed throughout the history]

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

whats the difference? in stellaris there is even a gene mod to make species tasty. (and you can even make humans tasty while playing humans)

One can be eaten by everybody, the other can only be eaten by Xenophobes.

And from what I can tell, there's not actually a way to eat your own population in game. The "livestock slavery" method and the "processing purge" method are done on a species wide level, by dropping the citizen rights of that species to "slave" or "undesirable" respectively. Except you can't mark your core species as a slave or undesirable.

The closest you can come is to mark your core species as "caste system" and while caste definitely has access to chattel and may have access to domestic servitude, I don't think it has access to livestock or battle thralls.

 

[Slynx]

Actually you have to be a xenophobe to purge in banks, and in the current version you have to be a xenophobe or a collectivist. (I'm not counting the up and coming displacement here)

* Added 3 new Purge types: Processing, Neutering and Forced Labor. Processing kills a species at a moderate speed, with each Pop being purged producing a fixed amount of food. Forced Labor kills a species slowly, but allows them to continue producing resources as though they were enslaved. Neutering kills a species very slowly, with only moderate happiness and production penalties

probably will have to wait til april 6 to find out if it's a strict ban like with full bombardment and non-militarists, or huge opinion malus from pops(like slavery for non collectivists non xenophobe)

One can be eaten by everybody, the other can only be eaten by Xenophobes.

i believe if i use google i'll find some info about cannibalism in our history. maybe even related traditions.

 

[Chaos_TLW]

Well, bear in mind they've also nerfed federations by locking them behind traditions and thus, I suspect, making them rarer. That's an indirect buff to the purger playstyle.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that only creating Federations was locked under traditions, joining them was not.

 

[henzington]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that only creating Federations was locked under traditions, joining them was not.

This is correct but diplomacy has other bonuses like increased habitability that means it is useful even for fanatic purifiers.