Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I just think it's kind of dumb that taking any of the first-level traits locks out the other two. The second-level traits are obviously mutually exclusive, but there's nothing wrong with a genetically modified psionic cyborg.

[Culise]

I was unaware that psionics and genetic modification were actually being locked behind ascension, though.  After all, the biological path explicitly says "additional" points and makes it cheaper, which rather strongly implies you can still genetically modify just as you can right now (otherwise, cheaper than what?), and likewise, psionics mentions "new" technologies with no mention of existing techs.  Cybernetics seems to be the only one that you can't pursue without entering the path, but even then, there's nothing saying low-level cybernetics might not get some love as well; I mean, nerve dampeners are already a tech, for instance.

[Retropunch]

I just think it's kind of dumb that taking any of the first-level traits locks out the other two. The second-level traits are obviously mutually exclusive, but there's nothing wrong with a genetically modified psionic cyborg.

I guess it's kinda a balance issue. Whilst normally I'd say balance should take a backseat on fun, I can imagine it might be one way in which Stellaris will finally start differentiating between civilisations more. At the moment, it's frustrating having every civilisation being pretty much the same by mid-game.

It'd also allow interesting late game groupings with all the synthetics sticking together and so on. I'd also like to see a non-ascension path/some rewards for not ascending. This would probably be best done by having some strong negative modifiers for ascension along with the bonuses.

I'm sure anything like that can be modded around with, but I'd be happy to have some more diversity, even if it would slightly limit player freedom.

[forsaken1111]

I was thinking that too. Like humanity in the Culture series, who made some minor alterations to themselves but remained by and large human. They turned over governance to machine minds so they could pursue pleasures and cultural pursuits but they are in no way seeking transcendence, ascendance, evolutionary advancement, etc. They really just sort of want to live and have fun.

They are aware of paths to ascension but by and large have little interest in them. Hell they mostly don't even prolong their own lives too much, even though they have the technology to do so. Most of them see death as the end result of a life well lived.

[Loud Whispers]

Surely Stellaris could allow for more differentiation by simply allowing for more starting traits? As it stands the starting traits don't allow for anny species to really be all that different

[Descan]

then most of them are idiots

but then i'm biased

[Rolan7]

I was thinking that too. Like humanity in the Culture series, who made some minor alterations to themselves but remained by and large human. They turned over governance to machine minds so they could pursue pleasures and cultural pursuits but they are in no way seeking transcendence, ascendance, evolutionary advancement, etc. They really just sort of want to live and have fun.

They are aware of paths to ascension but by and large have little interest in them. Hell they mostly don't even prolong their own lives too much, even though they have the technology to do so. Most of them see death as the end result of a life well lived.

Not to start a morality debate or anything, but hedonism isn't exactly *wrong*.
It just feels wrong sometimes.  If you can fix that, I guess that's one way to win.

[Loud Whispers]

Not to start a morality debate or anything, but hedonism isn't exactly *wrong*.
It just feels wrong sometimes.  If you can fix that, I guess that's one way to win.

Foreman Domai pls, Eudaimonia will not defeat the cybernetics
Hedonism is exactly wrong, Romans sticking their dick in everything and eating to the point of vomiting is not an example to be followed. Albeit, I want that to be an option in Stellaris - got an unhappy pop that is constantly rebelling? Flood them with stimulants or hook their brain up to a matrix that is just non-stop sensory overloads and then bring them back to mainstream populace. If they want a return to the virtual paradise, they'll have to work extra hard and loyally - this system would make for immensely effective control of even the most rebellious of populaces. Unless of course their traits or ethics make them particularly resistant to such methods, which would add more dimensions to all the xenospecies responding to the same carrots as is.

Also rather disappointed that you can't brave new world all your pops yet. Interactions are all rather basic
AND NO CLONES D:
On that note, working towards more end-game civilization development would be rather neat, though I should hope there are more than a mere three. Having all xenospecies start off on the same footing with traits so meaningless they might as well all just be the same species reskinned and then having those species diverge into three groups is pretty underwhelming to say the least. Why not just have more exaggerated trait development possible and have more trait points at start, with civs starting at different tech levels? Then with even just three final endgame states, oh snap would there be some serious flavour to each different species

[Rolan7]

I usually went cybernetic, for obvious benefits in any direction.  But eudaimonia is a beautiful concept also.  Really.

Just, it assumes everyone wants to listen to that inherent need to excel.  What happens to those who don't?
Since this is Alpha Centauri, do they receive stimulants until they have sufficient drive- or die?
I'd understand.  But by putting one's potential above their desires, it actually just puts the many over the individual.

[Loud Whispers]

I usually went cybernetic, for obvious benefits in any direction.  But eudaimonia is a beautiful concept also.  Really.

Eudaimonia + Clinical Immortality + Human Genome project
Winning combination
I like to think it accurately represents just how much of a technological, financial and industrial powerhouse a human faction could become with citizens living for hundreds of years in a society orientated around self-actualization and happiness. Cloning vats + Planetary transit system + Thought control + power + fundamentalist + Miriam always has a special place in my heart though, turns her faction from a backwards mess into a late game monstrosity engulfing the entire map in a sea of believers. Which I think adds to my argument for cloning vats in Stellaris producing pops; if materialists and individualists can industrially produce citizens Brave New World style or a more Soviet style, then imagine what the militant spiritualists could get up to!

Just, it assumes everyone wants to listen to that inherent need to excel.  What happens to those who don't?

When you've got such a system in place you can literally force them to learn stuff and have fun. Otherwise I guess there's always just keeping them complacent and drugged out of their minds. Stellaris currently has pacifying drugs you can administer in aerosol forms via special resource industry but it'd be neater to see an expansion on that stuff

Since this is Alpha Centauri, do they receive stimulants until they have sufficient drive- or die?
I'd understand.  But by putting one's potential above their desires, it actually just puts the many over the individual.

The happy life is thought to be one of excellence; now an excellent life requires exertion, and does not consist in amusement. If Eudaimonia, or happiness, is activity in accordance with excellence, it is reasonable that it should be in accordance with the highest excellence; and this will be that of the best thing in us.
Aristotle (Alpha Centauri quote for Eudaimonia)

I suppose it depends on who's doing the eudaimonia. Yang would force you to be happy and reach your full potential same way he forces people to give up their selfishness to embrace the collective good whilst Morgan would incentivize you with objectivism and market incentives and Lal would just cover everything in bureaucracy and education. Stimulants may or may not be a component of this, though I suppose individuals who reject the virtual paradise would, after some extreme withdrawal, either die or become some sort of outsider. From there they'll be able to do whatever outside the system. The Buddha's a useful example I think, starting off in his own virtual paradise, growing discomforted, becoming an ascetic before finding a middle path

[Rolan7]

I usually went cybernetic, for obvious benefits in any direction.  But eudaimonia is a beautiful concept also.  Really.

Eudaimonia + Clinical Immortality + Human Genome project
Winning combination
I like to think it accurately represents just how much of a technological, financial and industrial powerhouse a human faction could become with citizens living for hundreds of years in a society orientated around self-actualization and happiness.

Like the game suggests, it's the life I would choose.  If I could choose the way I feel fulfilled.  A life fulfilled by work appears inherently more satisfying than one fulfilled by the various vices we've created.  Women Vixens wine and song.
And there is a glorious pleasure found in hard work which I hope to achieve again, someday.  Something that no amount of sordid dalliance is replacing.  Oh, I long for my lost job!
But I had an exceptional job, and am now a bohemian on a budget.  If the two feel almost equal, what does that say?

Which all is all merely speculation  Personal.  Obviously the eudaimonia is better for society.  But any society must make the case to their citizens for such philanthropism.  AKA, collectivism.

Cloning vats + Planetary transit system + Thought control + power + fundamentalist + Miriam always has a special place in my heart though, turns her faction from a backwards mess into a late game monstrosity engulfing the entire map in a sea of believers. Which I think adds to my argument for cloning vats in Stellaris producing pops; if materialists and individualists can industrially produce citizens Brave New World style or a more Soviet style, then imagine what the militant spiritualists could get up to!

It truly is an amazing game, isn't it?  Even, maybe especially, while steamrolling.  Though much like CK2, all the real difficulty is frontloaded.
Miriam being relatively weak lategame, but strong early game - and that's what matters.  Unless you convince the others to let you be (fairly manageable with AIs).

Faction is surprisingly important in lategame too, but less "Will I win".  More "How will I win" (or lose).

Just, it assumes everyone wants to listen to that inherent need to excel.  What happens to those who don't?

When you've got such a system in place you can literally force them to learn stuff and have fun. Otherwise I guess there's always just keeping them complacent and drugged out of their minds. Stellaris currently has pacifying drugs you can administer in aerosol forms via special resource industry but it'd be neater to see an expansion on that stuff

Since this is Alpha Centauri, do they receive stimulants until they have sufficient drive- or die?
I'd understand.  But by putting one's potential above their desires, it actually just puts the many over the individual.

That's what I mean by stimulants.  Drugs to force people to perform.
Not necessarily wrong, particularly if they're willing.  It's just that the purpose is to glorify the state.
With the right drugs, that might even optimize the individual's happiness.  But that happiness is only an aside - the state, production, comes first in Eudaimonia.

The happy life is thought to be one of excellence; now an excellent life requires exertion, and does not consist in amusement. If Eudaimonia, or happiness, is activity in accordance with excellence, it is reasonable that it should be in accordance with the highest excellence; and this will be that of the best thing in us.
Aristotle (Alpha Centauri quote for Eudaimonia)

I suppose it depends on who's doing the eudaimonia. Yang would force you to be happy and reach your full potential same way he forces people to give up their selfishness to embrace the collective good whilst Morgan would incentivize you with objectivism and market incentives and Lal would just cover everything in bureaucracy and education. Stimulants may or may not be a component of this, though I suppose individuals who reject the virtual paradise would, after some extreme withdrawal, either die or become some sort of outsider. From there they'll be able to do whatever outside the system. The Buddha's a useful example I think, starting off in his own virtual paradise, growing discomforted, becoming an ascetic before finding a middle path

Heh, that's why the Hive is so terrifying.  Yang's not wrong.  He gets painted as the bad guy in the short stories, and by Lal, and honestly it would be unspeakably horrifying to live there...  When the state failed, and correction was needed.
But he isn't evil.  He's state over all.

[Flying Dice]

The real trick is in identifying what sort of work brings you true satisfaction and then gaining the ability to apply yourself to it as much as you wish.

That's why the simple pleasures are vastly more common: they're relatively easy to obtain.

For my part I could live with ethical hedonism-or limited hedonism, if you prefer, in which the pursuit of pleasure is leashed by social obligation to other persons: if what you want to do would cause meaningful harm to another, don't do it. Otherwise go for it. The Roman hedonists were fucked up because they (broadly speaking) lacked the awareness that pleasures are more satisfying when not overindulged in. It's a truism that too much of anything is bad for good gorram reason, after all.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The point that I typically see made is that Yang and the Hive are basically a hypocrisy trap. Lots of people like the idea of transcendence, but what faction is most like that and most philosophically compatible with it? That's right, the Hive.

From his quotes, Yang seems to be what happens when you allow a Taoist philosopher to be infected with utilitarian pragmatism. Such as in that one where he encourages people to rebel against him for the sake of their own self-enlightenment.

[Loud Whispers]

Like the game suggests, it's the life I would choose.  If I could choose the way I feel fulfilled.  A life fulfilled by work appears inherently more satisfying than one fulfilled by the various vices we've created.

Complete concurrence; I have not met anyone who was pleased merely with pleasant experiences, whilst I have met many, myself included, who have found true contentedness in creating goals and achieving them. There is something peculiar about modern man, that when people have breaks and holidays, their recreation is itself a simulation of work. Seamanship, gardening, amateur craftsmanship, amateur athletics, outdoorsmanship, the humanities and so on. That path seems to satisfy a great deal many people, and is useful in that they do not necessarily have end points, no "final goals," only the limit of imagination and limits of reality. I suppose then eudaimonia does its best to remove those limits, though with some pressure or structure to avoid people becoming neets.

Obviously the eudaimonia is better for society.  But any society must make the case to their citizens for such philanthropism.  AKA, collectivism.

I dunno, eudaimonia is awesome for the individual man but cybernetic and thought control both bring mankind to a new phase in evolution; one that is peaked when mankind fuses with planet (really, I always thought of the ending as a fusion of eudaimonia, cybernetic and thought control). Everyone is functionally immortal, can choose to become one with the planetmind or live as an individual, everyone is a transcended being of some sort and technology is a facilitator of this whole process of fusion. Pretty optimistic really, also showcases how hybridizing the separate paths can create neat and diverse stuff. A psionic supergenemod cyborg should be well within the realm of possibility, and it's fun as all hell

It truly is an amazing game, isn't it?  Even, maybe especially, while steamrolling.  Though much like CK2, all the real difficulty is frontloaded.
Miriam being relatively weak lategame, but strong early game - and that's what matters.  Unless you convince the others to let you be (fairly manageable with AIs).

I'd argue that Miriam is nearly worthless early game, and by the midgame she's either in a position to win or is soon to be horribly exterminated by the first faction to gain aerospace tech and chemical weapons
Early game she does no research first 5 years, and until she gets formers she can't use her +2 support to field infinite terraforming units for a gargantuan economy and without probe teams she can't balance out her tech disparity with hostile factions. Probe teams require a tier 2 knowledge tech which takes a lot of time to get to, in that time window she can easily be destroyed by Gaian mindworms or Spartan rovers. Once she's got probe teams though (and before needlejets are out), any time someone fields a superior prototype she can just steal it and reverse engineer/mass produce it. All in all she's a very unbalanced faction, which requires constant activity to remain competitive - quite the opposite of a more balanced faction like Zhakarov who can sit in his bases being a hypernerd

Faction is surprisingly important in lategame too, but less "Will I win".  More "How will I win" (or lose).

Also some factions are more suited to certain late game social engineering. Stellaris could learn much from SMAC, which managed to have more variance with one species than Stellaris has with RNG species. Game mechanics more than game portraits and word soup is important

That's what I mean by stimulants.  Drugs to force people to perform.

I'm not sure if you can drug people into forcing them to perform, though in Stellaris you could certainly keep them happy, docile and increase their performance. With things like neural implants which are implied to limit free will (neural processing centres for slaver empires) it seems like Stellaris can stop people from doing stuff, but outside of hive mind species cannot compel them to do something (beyond usual, crude methods like force, or sophisticated methods of persuasion or psionics).

Not necessarily wrong, particularly if they're willing.  It's just that the purpose is to glorify the state.
With the right drugs, that might even optimize the individual's happiness.  But that happiness is only an aside - the state, production, comes first in Eudaimonia.

I don't think it's particularly right or all that different from genetically modifying people to be loyal, willingness is not something I consider to much regard in questions of morality - if one wills their own destruction, is it to be encouraged for example? That is a question relevant even outside of SMAC and in the modern world now that I think on it. SMAC was a great game for this reason, very relevant to RL - it still kills me that the game came with a recommended reading list.

Heh, that's why the Hive is so terrifying.  Yang's not wrong.  He gets painted as the bad guy in the short stories, and by Lal, and honestly it would be unspeakably horrifying to live there...  When the state failed, and correction was needed.
But he isn't evil.  He's state over all.

Yang isn't state over all, all the factions aren't states (I suppose Lal comes closest for trying to emulate a supranational entity). It's hard to pinpoint exactly what Yang is, he really is his own person, you can compare him to others in fiction or reality but he is just Yang at the end of the day. The funny thing is I don't think it would be horrifying to live under Yang's regime, everyone has mastered their own minds to the point where suffering is no longer a meaningful concept, everyone has meaning in the greater collective, all their material needs are met by the feeding bays and for those who cannot stand the strict regimen, they are nerve stapled or replaced with genejacks that are biologically incapable of rationalizing their existence or registering pain.

I don't think there are bad guys in SMAC, certainly some more immoral than others, but no bad guys - the militiaristic factions like Santiago, Miriam, Yang and Deidre and the more erratic and civic factions like Morgan, Lal and Zhakarov all just have drastically different views of where human civilization and the human species must go. I think this is a natural consequence of having one visionary leader who lives for centuries; such leaders must not just be thinking about what policies to win the next election, no, they're thinking about where to direct human evolution.

The point that I typically see made is that Yang and the Hive are basically a hypocrisy trap. Lots of people like the idea of transcendence, but what faction is most like that and most philosophically compatible with it? That's right, the Hive.

And the gaians

From his quotes, Yang seems to be what happens when you allow a Taoist philosopher to be infected with utilitarian pragmatism. Such as in that one where he encourages people to rebel against him for the sake of their own self-enlightenment.

Where does he encourage people to rebel against him? Seems to be the opposite, right down to the recycling tanks

[Sirus]

Guys, can we get back to talking about this game instead of something from 10+ years ago?