Unique governments other than the Hive Mind

[Me_]

Now that the Hive Mind is pretty much certain as unique government and ethics, what other crazy governments do you think could be added in the future.

I'll start with dual government - you start the game with not one species but two. Each one with their own leader that gives half of usual trait bonuses. This can come in all varieties - democracy/oligarchy/autocracy/monarchy. Your cannot give other (than the two) species full citizenship, but you can have two specialized species from the start.

 

[Princess Stabbity]

In the future (probably far future because just the implementation of supporting mechanics would require a DLC of its owm) I'd love to see some form of nomadic civilisation. Like ME Quarians and their Migrant Fleet.

The way i imagine it, their population would live on enormous ships functioning as mobile habitats. They would have only rudimentary production capabilities of their own but the fleet could occupy planets and systems they visit to aggressively harvest resources and add them to their stockpile before moving on. They would also have unique tech options to improve their navy, offset maintenance, make harvesting more efficient and such.
They would be able to do all those things inside the borders of other empires, but obviously that would carry diplomatic consequences so the nomads would have to strike a balance between stealing from sedentary empires and trading with them as a way of securing a more sustainable income.
If at any point the nomadic fleet decided to settle down, they could colonise a planet with one of their liveships. The rest of them would then immediately convert into stationary habitats, they'd lose access to harvesting and for all intents and purposes would become a regular empire.

I thought about it way too much XD

 

[BlackUmbrellas]

Now that the Hive Mind is pretty much certain as unique government and ethics, what other crazy governments do you think could be added in the future.

I'll start with dual government - you start the game with not one species but two. Each one with their own leader that gives half of usual trait bonuses. This can come in all varieties - democracy/oligarchy/autocracy/monarchy. Your cannot give other (than the two) species full citizenship, but you can have two specialized species from the start.

More-or-less confirmed with Syncretic Evolution- you get 4 POPs of another species adapted for manual labour. Presumably this is in order to make a slaver-species easier.

 

[Xoatl]

Presumably this is in order to make a slaver-species easier.

Or you know, you can treat them fairly. Understand that they come with their own pros and cons like any other individual and species. Reward them for doing the much needed digging and harvesting, at a faster pace than the maste- I mean, starting race. Everyone has a part to play in the empire. Essentially sync evo can be good for xenophile pacifists as well.

 

[Maverikfreak]

I want to see stateless civilizations, from libertarian anarchist based absolutely on the people affinities and demands to Mega corporation dominions based on the decisions of diverse conglomerates of power.

Of course with new mechanics (New challenges and rewards for the player due the independence of the powers) and without a individual leader in both cases.

 

[Xoatl]

I want to see stateless civilizations, from libertarian anarchist based absolutely on the people affinities and demands to Mega corporation dominions based on the decisions of diverse conglomerates of power.

Of course with new mechanics (New challenges and rewards for the player due the independence of the powers) and without a individual leader in both cases.

A sixth authority at the most left hand side for "anarchy". Then pick and choose civics to shape the details. No leader, reduced resource output, increased divergence. But what would the pros be? Has to be more than happiness. I mean, to keep true to the idea of anarchy, whatever the pros it should involve automation and self-sufficiency. Corporations starting their own colony expeditions, buildings created spontaneously, ships with random weapons/parts spawning thanks to empowered citizens. Perhaps the chance of proc tied to POP happiness?

More I think of it the more I can see anarchy as being a compelling wild card. The ethos and government mod was big but clunky and over encumbering. Perhaps certain slaver/pirate civics can be open. Letting you designate privateers to go out raiding as well as being neutral with existing pirates.

 

[Kat Tsun]

Anarchy sounds like a frustrating way to lose quickly the first time you encounter someone else.

It would be better as an AI mechanic.

 

[Xoatl]

Anarchy sounds like a frustrating way to lose quickly the first time you encounter someone else.

It would be better as an AI mechanic.

Perhaps give you an assload of core systems too. The authority options seem to cover a gradient of decentralization/centralization. With anarchy there is zero over sight or standards. So long as the colonists keep calling themselves part of your empire they are. Perhaps with all these bonuses and hands-off "gifts" your factions have a lowered threshold for revolt? Makes total sense, whereas civilizations are always on the brink of collapse, anarchy is always on the brink of order. All it takes is some powerful corporation, or warlord, cartel boss, or general to centralize a bit of power and it's no longer anarchy.

A better question for a proposed anarchy authority is how the ethos and assigned civics will look like. I don't think it needs brand new ones like hivemind but the names are the tough part.

Xenophobe slaver guilds might call the government type Anarchistic Slavers.
Materialist, technocrats might be called Anarcho-Transhumanism.
Spiritualist might result in a Divine Syncretism
Pacifism Anarcho-Pacifism
Militarist Anarchistic Raiders
Egalitarian Anarcho-Socialism
Authoritarian huuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhh, my brain hurts
Xenophile ???

 

[Maverikfreak]

But what would the pros be?

I think the pros can be:

1. Very cheap maintenance: very low consumer goods(1.5 new mechanic) / Energy for factories and ships. (No tributes/intermediaries)
2. Boost to happiness
3. Boost to food (Agrarian emphasis, all citizen have waranteed the basics)
4. Bonus in defensive wars, specially in land (They fight for their independence).

 

[Xoatl]

I think the pros can be:

1. Very cheap maintenance: very low consumer goods(1.5 new mechanic) / Energy for factories and ships. (No tributes/intermediaries)
2. Boost to happiness
3. Boost to food (Agrarian emphasis, all citizen have waranteed the basics)
4. Bonus in defensive wars, specially in land (They fight for their independence).

Those are good, bonus to happiness is OP (considering everything else) and instead of agrarian you can combine that with lowered food AND consumer good consumption (citizens able to take care of themselves). Bonus to defense yep, low maintenance yes. Extra core systems make sense. But as a con anarchy factions have lowered thresholds for all activities, and increased ethics divergence and perhaps increased maintenance for invasion armies?

 

[Maverikfreak]

The divergence of ethics should be the biggest problem, without a central government promoting unity through nationalism, religion, unified culture, etc.

Maybe with low unity too (1.5 new resource)

 

[Xoatl]

The divergence of ethics should be the biggest problem, without a central government promoting unity through nationalism, religion, unified culture, etc.

Maybe with low unity too (1.5 new resource)

Yeah, the lowered faction threshold also represents this. They'll be quicker to riot, vandalize, and rebel. Just a solid -50% to the cap. Or, since we have that new unrest system revealed last dev diary, each POP might have a base increase to unrest unrelated to what faction they are in or anything else. Meaning, full planets if unattended will almost always eventually revolt.

 

[Mauer]

You cannot suppress factions, and once a faction reaches a certain level its demands are automatically acceded. But this doesn't change your government form, only ethics and your government can have any.

 

[Xoatl]

You cannot suppress factions, and once a faction reaches a certain level its demands are automatically acceded. But this doesn't change your government form, only ethics and your government can have any.

Don't know enough about civics, if you can get more points later, how to change them. If you switch an ethos and you can no longer support a civic you can pick a new one. Unless its certain unique ones like Syncretic Evolution.

 

[PalmettoExplorer14]

Hm....How many Civics points do you get anyhow?

 

[Daedwartin]

Anarchy sounds like a frustrating way to lose quickly the first time you encounter someone else.

It would be better as an AI mechanic.

Anarchy has this tiny issue where if someone can convince a group of people to work with him, he will likely stand a decent chance of taking over said society. Or the group he tries to take over has to form their own group of strongmen to stop them.

At which point you have the issue of having a group of strongmen in your society. And they might not decide to disband. So you are back to square 1. And well, these strongmen need to kept appeased, so better give them some of the pie. And well, those groups overthere are defenseless against our tested and proven force. Why not take them over for the resources they have.

One way or another, you are stuck with the issue that the moment a strong enough group breaks from an anarchy, the system will fail. Organized governments will form. Either because someone decides they want to be on top, or because people are trying to resist those who wanted to be on top.

At best, it turns into a normal democracy. At worst? You are stuck with fuedalism, with everyone as serfs.

Direct Democracy is not a materialist government for no reason. It is needed because the technology needed for it to actually work is very advanced tech. Subconscious Consciousness is basically the closest you can actully come to making anarchy work. And even, that is only because literally everyone is connected into a nation-wide communication netowrk with cybernetic implants. Also, They still have a government and bureaucracy because you can't avoid the fact they are outright needed for planet-wide government.

 

[Bryartuck]

Hm....How many Civics points do you get anyhow?

It appears to be 2 in the current build.

https://twitter.com/Martin_Anward

Syncretic Evolution can only be chosen at start, and cannot be changed

 

[Mackus]

Direct Democracy is not a materialist government for no reason. It is needed because the technology needed for it to actually work is very advanced tech.

No. Just no.
Direct democracies would be easily implementable in the west even today. If someone can make entertainment site like youtube accessible for everyone, so can they make online voting.

 

[The Founder]

Now that the Hive Mind is pretty much certain as unique government and ethics, what other crazy governments do you think could be added in the future.

I'll start with dual government - you start the game with not one species but two. Each one with their own leader that gives half of usual trait bonuses. This can come in all varieties - democracy/oligarchy/autocracy/monarchy. Your cannot give other (than the two) species full citizenship, but you can have two specialized species from the start.

Sounds like a Civic like Syncretic Evolution.

More-or-less confirmed with Syncretic Evolution- you get 4 POPs of another species adapted for manual labour. Presumably this is in order to make a slaver-species easier.

I asume that "Machinists" gives you 4 Robot Pops instead. A quick start into the Robot path.

I want to see stateless civilizations, from libertarian anarchist based absolutely on the people affinities and demands to Mega corporation dominions based on the decisions of diverse conglomerates of power.

Of course with new mechanics (New challenges and rewards for the player due the independence of the powers) and without a individual leader in both cases.

Actually if it is stable, you kind of have a hive mind - where everyone agrees not to agree. A simple mater of headcanon.
Hiveminds might be a good candidate to "not have a leader" (but they might still have one to interact with non-hiveminds).

You cannot suppress factions, and once a faction reaches a certain level its demands are automatically acceded. But this doesn't change your government form, only ethics and your government can have any.

You can supress a faction, reduces thier Ethos Atraction.
On top of just playing so that Ethos is not atractive to begin with. If you got massive deviation from your government Ethos, you are not playing according to that Ethos (a pacifist going to war over and over).

And I heard nowhere that the change is automatic. I guess the "when you miss a Ethos, the additonal Ethos is decided for by Atraction. But that goes back to "how you actually play".

No. Just no.
Direct democracies would be easily implementable in the west even today. If someone can make entertainment site like youtube accessible for everyone, so can they make online voting.

I am sorry, but that is Bullshit. It fails at the first step - secure Identity. Wich goes against the first rule of Voting - anonymity:

With something like Neural Interfaces it should be possible. But current day tech? Heck no.

 

[Arkangilos]

And I heard nowhere that the change is automatic. I guess the "when you miss a Ethos, the additonal Ethos is decided for by Atraction. But that goes back to "how you actually play".

I think he's saying how he would want an anarchy system to work.

I don't think anarchy should be in the game as a viable government type.