Splitting Ethos into 6 Axes

[BrokenSky]

Basically the idea is to split the collectivist-individualist ethos axis and the xenophile-xenophobe ethos axis, to have 6 axes rather than 4. these new axes would be Hierarchical and Egalitarian (provisional names) which is basically the axis of state power vs. popular power. This would inherit the government mechanics of collectivist-individualist. Basicly the new axes would look something like this:

Hierarchical vs. Egalitarian
Hierarchical locks democracies, Extremist locks Oligarchies.
Egalitarian locks autocracies, Extremist locks Oligarchies.
Hierarchical gets bonus spy defense*, increased tolerance slavery existing.
Egalitarian gets bonus happiness, reduced tolerance of slavery existing.

Collectivist vs. Individualist
Collectivist unlocks 'collective' governments.
Individualist unlocks 'individualistic' governments.
Individualist gets increased differing ethos tolerance, reduced unit and building maintenance*, reduced tolerance of being a slave.
Collectivist gets reduced ethos shift, reduced food consumption, increased tolerance of being a slave.

* indicates an empire level effect.

With 'Individulistic' governments:

Competitive Rule (democratic):
"Several overlapping governments compete with one another for citizens by offering different rights, laws and taxes".
+/- Increased migration (people vote with their feet ) [downside: cannot turn off migration for citizens]
+ Increased happiness (everyone gets the government they want, or at least something close to it)
+ Reduced planetary edict cost

Plutocratic oligarchy (as current)

Mobile Hierarchy
"Upon reaching maturity, people are expected to fend for themselves. Rulership is usually given to whoever manages to take it, by cunning, intelligence, charisma or strength of arms."
+ Increased governor, ruler staring level
+/- On ruler removal, the new leader may be chosen from one of the existing goveners
+/- Rulers and governors are sometimes pushed out of office by a rival (gives and automatically appoints a new leader.
+ more leaders (fewer than peaceful bureaucracy though)
Can build an oversized Statue (giving influence)

And the generic oligarchy becomes aristocratic oligarchy or something?

And 'Collectivist' governments:

Local Assemblies
"Decisions are taken on a local level by a meeting of all the citizens at regular intervals. Everyone's perspectives are heard and the best course of action for everyone is voted upon"
+ Increased number of sectors
+ Reduced unrest in sectors

Meritocratic Hierarchy
"People are promoted based on competence until they reach the limit of their abilities. Someone promoted beyond their competency is demoted (though the stigma for this is on the one who promoted them unduly)"
+/- Increased effect of positive species traits and of ruler traits (including bad ruler traits)
+ increased bonus from leader level

United Society
"Everyone is assigned a role based upon their abilities and the demand for a job. The best scientists think. The best warriors fight. The best ruler rules."
+ Increased food output from slaves
+ Reduced ethics divergence
Can build an oversized Planetary Administration (additional tier, giving its bonus to adjacent tiles of adjacent tiles).

[Some of this is based off an idea which was discussed across several threads including "Collectivist vs. Individualist actually Hierarchical vs. Egalitarian" - Link: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-actually-hierarchical-vs-egalitarian.914588/ - though some of the effects have been changed]

In addition a new ethos axis, Isolationist vs. Internationalist (again, provisional name - better name suggestions would be good ) might also be added. This, similar to xenophobe and xenophile would not add government types, but would have on-pop effects.

Isolationist vs. Internationalist
Isolationists get increased influence gain* from all sources except rivalries, population less likely to migrate away, increased number of sectors*
Internationalists get extra embassies*, happiness from open borders, higher war tolerance, increased bonus from research agreements.

[This is based off the suggestion of An Elder Thing in the "Diversity: Overpowered?" thread - Link:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/diversity-overpowered.920100/ - though again some of the stuff has been modified]

The reason for having 2 splits is simple. With 4 axes, 3 points fits well (with 2 cost for fanatic). The next sensible number of points is 4, with 6 axes.

 

[Pandoricus]

You could do the same with spiritualist vs Materialist, but it really would not be worth it. It would add more confusion and decrease the players ability to roleplay if you want to nail it down like that. In my play through I am going fanatical Materialist with my leader title being ArchProphet. The current set up is fluid enough to do something like that.

 

[BrokenSky]

You could do the same with spiritualist vs Materialist, but it really would not be worth it. It would add more confusion and decrease the players ability to roleplay if you want to nail it down like that. In my play through I am going fanatical Materialist with my leader title being ArchProphet. The current set up is fluid enough to do something like that.

Well the main motivation for splitting Collectivist and Individualist is that it doesn't make sense for them to be tied to democracy / autocracy. I mean yeah, you can think of examples of autocratic collectivists, but you can think of examples of democratic collectivists too. Surely having stuff like that that limits what people can play as is bad for RP? Or do you think that this wouldn't fix it?

Likewise the Isolationist / Internationalist suggestion came about, as I understand it, because a guy was unhappy with having xenophobe be the closest ethos to isolationist, because xenophobe ethos gives exactly zero bonuses to isolationists. Plus what if you wanted to play as an Isolationist xenophilic empire?

 

[corny.1234]

Well the main motivation for splitting Collectivist and Individualist is that it doesn't make sense for them to be tied to democracy / autocracy. I mean yeah, you can think of examples of autocratic collectivists, but you can think of examples of democratic collectivists too. Surely having stuff like that that limits what people can play as is bad for RP? Or do you think that this wouldn't fix it?

Likewise the Isolationist / Internationalist suggestion came about, as I understand it, because a guy was unhappy with having xenophobe be the closest ethos to isolationist, because xenophobe ethos gives exactly zero bonuses to isolationists. Plus what if you wanted to play as an Isolationist xenophilic empire?

Xenophilic isolationist, liking everybody who's not around?

 

[anomalacaris]

I think these are good as mod ideas.
For base game though it will be of course be much more efforts to balance more options. Idea groups in EUIV are still very lopsided.
4 groups with 2 directions each sounds like a reasonable number to me. (This is purely from a game design point of view, I'm not commenting on RP or realism aspects)

 

[BrokenSky]

Xenophilic isolationist, liking everybody who's not around?

Taken straight from the Diversity: Overpowered thread [in response to the question "What would an isolationist xenophile be like?"]

* The Alpharian Republic believe themselves to have created the ultimate and perfect society. They believe it unfair that some aliens have the bad fortune to be born in other, lesser empires though, so they actively encourage immigration, so that everyone might know the joy of belonging to their great republic. They look down on other empire and see intervening in their problems to be beneath them. Their solution to any crisis is to accept refugees, but they will not send aid.

* The United Etan Kingdoms are a nation on the edge of civilized space. They control large amounts of space uncontested, and this, combined with their slow natural birth rate, means that the population is incredibly thinly spread. A significant amount of their population growth comes from immigrants and so they have become tolerant of outsiders and aliens of many species; it is widely held that a person's value comes from their mind and their emotion, rather than their physical characteristics. That said, they are separated from most of the rest of the galaxy by a wide arm of dark space, sharing a border with only a couple of smaller empires coreward. Their physical isolation has bred in them an ideological isolationism, and they do not intervene in outside politics, believing any war, crisis or threat to be far from their borders, and hence not their problem.

* The Sigman Empire is a large empire near the galactic core. While it is a large empire, covering space native to several species, and was in the past openly warlike and expansionist, since the last great civil war, the war of seven kings, the empire has begun looking inwards to it's own affairs. Intervention by several outside powers (generally in support of losing contenders, but also one incident of significant ill repute, in which the forces of the Klanxian People's Republic changed sides as soon as their candidate began to win, in an effort to keep the situation destabilized in preparation for a subsequent, failed, invasion) lead to a general dislike among both the populous and the administration of outside intervention in internal politics. Within a few generations it became common wisdom that matters of internal succession were just that - internal, and the onus to instigate government change was on the people under that government, not of neighboring states. As this view became popular and more extreme, the Empire slowly stopped engaging in diplomacy with the outside world, eventually becoming a neutral grey zone which neighboring states had to work, ally and war around. Those who made the mistake of sending fleets through their space would see them destroyed by the Sigman border enforcement, but after their retreat or destruction, no further reprisals would follow. The peoples of the Sigman empire are varied and tolerant of aliens, but regard outside political interference with disgust.

 

[DàbiànLājīdàrén]

I'm pretty sure it's Axis, not axes. Axes are tools for chopping stuff.

 

[BrokenSky]

I'm pretty sure it's Axis, not axes. Axes are tools for chopping stuff.

Axis is singular.

Like Codex, Codices; Axis, Axes.

 

[TheBeautifulVoid2]

I'm pretty sure it's Axis, not axes. Axes are tools for chopping stuff.

Axes is the plural of axis.

@BrokenSky, this sounds like an interesting idea for a mod. It would probably be of no interest to the people who want to purge the xenos and blob across the map, but might be interesting to those who want to play it as an internal-politics simulator. (Such as me.)

I really like your ideas for new government types too. Normally the mechanics for fan-made government types tend towards eyerollingly broken, but those are flavourful and well thought out.

 

[BrokenSky]

I think these are good as mod ideas.
For base game though it will be of course be much more efforts to balance more options. Idea groups in EUIV are still very lopsided.
4 groups with 2 directions each sounds like a reasonable number to me. (This is purely from a game design point of view, I'm not commenting on RP or realism aspects)

Axes is the plural of axis.

@BrokenSky, this sounds like an interesting idea for a mod. It would probably be of no interest to the people who want to purge the xenos and blob across the map, but might be interesting to those who want to play it as an internal-politics simulator. (Such as me.)

I really like your ideas for new government types too. Normally the mechanics for fan-made government types tend towards eyerollingly broken, but those are flavourful and well thought out.

Well the main problem with the mod idea is the UI. I'm not sure how one would go about adapting the whole circle of ethos thing they have going on atm to make it work for 6, rather than 4, axes.

Well that and the increased size planetary Administration upgrade.

 

[vyshan]

I like your ideas. Though I am curious would any of your new governments be monarchies?

 

[BrokenSky]

I like your ideas. Though I am curious would any of your new governments be monarchies?

What do you mean by monarchy?

United society and Mobile Hierarchy were meant to be autocratic typed, with local assembly and competitive rule being democratic typed and plutocratic meritocratic hierarchy being oligarchy typed, but neither United society nor Mobile Hierarchy would have rulers described as king by default?