I really like the new faction system so far. I think it's far better than the old ethics divergence system where you'd have pops in a loyalist faction and then angry pops that formed separatist movements (on top of recently conquered pops that want to return to their old empires). However, I think a few things should be addressed/changed in coming updates.
1. Factions lack depth - one of the issues with factions is that they're relatively shallow. You have only a dozen or so different groups (which is still many times better than the old system), but it's basically the same deal every game. You have imperialist factions at odds with prosperity factions, xenoist factions at odds with supremacist factions, etc.
Additionally, some of the factions associated with certain ethics don't really make much sense. For example, I imagine that militarist factions in democratic crusader empires would be extremely different from militarists in fanatical purifier empires, narratively speaking. Militarists in democratic crusader empires would probably be more neoconservative/liberal internationalist, and I don't imagine them having much of an issue being in a federation with other democracies like imperialist factions do. But since the imperialist faction is the only kind of militarist faction available, you get this problem.
The same goes for pacifists, who are entirely different in peaceful trader empires than they are in xenophobic isolationist empires. The prosperity faction makes a ton of sense for peaceful traders, but seems less perfect for xenophobic isolationists, who probably only care about keeping to themselves and staying out of galactic affairs.
This leads me into my other point:
2. Pops should have more than one ethic - I think that the way to resolve this discrepancy is to give pops two ethic points. That way, there can be more nuance with factions. Maybe there's a pacifist/xenophile prosperity faction at odds with a pacifist/xenophobe isolationist faction within a federation builder empire with low governing ethics attraction. You can still keep existing factions (the progressive and technologist factions could be the factions for fanatic egalitarians and fanatic materialists, respectively). The game could get very complicated considering the number of combinations, and ultimately the number of factions, possible, and could get even more complicated with different AI personalities and such, but I think it could do wonders for the game.
Overall, the new faction system is far better than the old one, and I'm looking forward to seeing what the dev team does with them in future updates. I'm curious what everyone else thinks.
1. Factions lack depth - one of the issues with factions is that they're relatively shallow. You have only a dozen or so different groups (which is still many times better than the old system), but it's basically the same deal every game. You have imperialist factions at odds with prosperity factions, xenoist factions at odds with supremacist factions, etc.
Additionally, some of the factions associated with certain ethics don't really make much sense. For example, I imagine that militarist factions in democratic crusader empires would be extremely different from militarists in fanatical purifier empires, narratively speaking. Militarists in democratic crusader empires would probably be more neoconservative/liberal internationalist, and I don't imagine them having much of an issue being in a federation with other democracies like imperialist factions do. But since the imperialist faction is the only kind of militarist faction available, you get this problem.
The same goes for pacifists, who are entirely different in peaceful trader empires than they are in xenophobic isolationist empires. The prosperity faction makes a ton of sense for peaceful traders, but seems less perfect for xenophobic isolationists, who probably only care about keeping to themselves and staying out of galactic affairs.
This leads me into my other point:
2. Pops should have more than one ethic - I think that the way to resolve this discrepancy is to give pops two ethic points. That way, there can be more nuance with factions. Maybe there's a pacifist/xenophile prosperity faction at odds with a pacifist/xenophobe isolationist faction within a federation builder empire with low governing ethics attraction. You can still keep existing factions (the progressive and technologist factions could be the factions for fanatic egalitarians and fanatic materialists, respectively). The game could get very complicated considering the number of combinations, and ultimately the number of factions, possible, and could get even more complicated with different AI personalities and such, but I think it could do wonders for the game.
Overall, the new faction system is far better than the old one, and I'm looking forward to seeing what the dev team does with them in future updates. I'm curious what everyone else thinks.
