Traditional vs. Vanguard



maybe?

That sounds like a good idea. "Stasis" might still carry some negative connotations to many people, though. What about "stability"?

New idea: how about we change BOTH sides to "Stasis" and "Progress"? That's super broad and covers the meat of what both sides are entirely about - "keeping things the way they are" versus "progressing our society by any means".

I have to agree that "religious" does not necessarily mean "against progress." Some of the greatest natural scientists in history were deeply religious, or at least deeply faithful.



However, I don't think it's Amplitude's goal to present any of these ideologies as bring negative. Given that the political system is supposed to unlock new laws, and all the laws we could see in the early gameplay footage, it might be more about highlighting the strong aspects of a government focused on one aspect of their culture.

A government focused on science as a value might indeed progress scientifically more quickly than others, but perhaps the "religious" government might lead to greater happiness among its people by paying attention to their morals.

"Traditionalist" could work as a term as well, though, and would indeed be less likely to rub anybody the wrong way (except for some conservative politicians, maybe). Perhaps another term would be even more appropriate, but unfortunately that's really hard to judge without even a general idea of what this "ideology" is supposed to be about.



Long story short: Devs, more info please.





P.S. I just realized, "polar opposites" might refer to gameplay only, as in "You can not have both these ideologies in your senate at once, for balance reasons." Some clarification on that would be nice, too.

Romeo wrote:
For what it's worth, I assume when it says religious, it means that in an extremist sense. The kind of religious where something like science would be frowned upon. On top of that, they need not be polar opposites in the game, just two different ideologies. As in, your people have a space two hours each day: Do you want them praying, or creating? Not saying either has a negative connotation there! =)

"We divide the potential political ideology into 6 ideologies, each opposed to one another."



Uh, YES, they are polar opposites. Saying that the "Religious" and "Scientists" sides of the spectrum aren't opposed when they exist in the same wheel as "Militarists" and "Pacifists" (two obviously opposed mindsets) is... nonsensical. Plus, you can't argue that only extremists exist in the political spectrum.



On the other hand, "Traditionalists" cover a broad subject matter that doesn't denigrate religious people. It could be religious reasons, sure, but what about hard-line conservatives, people who like the current state of affairs, those reliant on older ways that won't be supported anymore (to use an example, people who still favour Windows XP in the age of Windows 7, 8, and 10). All applicable reason without having everyone roll their eyes at the entire religious community for stifling their scientific advancement.

For what it's worth, I assume when it says religious, it means that in an extremist sense. The kind of religious where something like science would be frowned upon. On top of that, they need not be polar opposites in the game, just two different ideologies. As in, your people have a space two hours each day: Do you want them praying, or creating? Not saying either has a negative connotation there! =)

I also agree that there should be some faction-based differences(Both visual as KnightofPhoenix suggested for the Vaulters, and also at least some gameplay changes maybe to represent different factions different political systems), but otherwise this looks really interesting.

I approve of this GDD :P. Good work amplitude!



It has interesting ideas and keeps it simplified. The politic concept also reminds me of Star Ruler II in some accept that everyone has a government type, but you guys took it to the next level with it being an evolving process through the game.

Oh, absolutely, I'm just saying I could see this go either way and it could make sense... I'm not as well-read in sci-fi as I'd like to be but I'm sure there is plenty of precedent!

Both full emancipation and total control and power lategame sounds cool!

I would think that the opposite could be true too: your population emancipating itself somewhat as you progress along the path to enlightenment/domination/whatever your chosen victory condition is, and being more and more aware of their importance in the cosmic ballet.

I really like this idea! I hope that there are late-game technologies that let you have much more direct control over it though. When a player gets to late-game in a 4X, they should have an immense sense of power and control over their world. I want to feel like I've gone from an early game situation of being somewhat at the whim of their population, to a situation where I am supreme overlord and can implement any ideology or policy I want.

Hiyouren wrote:
Also, I'm a little concerned- No, I'm freakin' terrified of this part:



Does this mean that Custom Factions will not be a thing in ES2?

I absolutely love creating abstract races to dive into game with - one of my favourites being a race using the Harmony appearance (Amoeba Affinity) and possessing Eternal War and Blockade Breakers. Being a 100% trade nation that has no concept of a nation, nor a government body - simply trading with individuals. Worked rather well - I'd like to try and recreate that in ES2 if at all possible.



I would hate to see Custom Factions disappear...

I agree... and I would almost go as far as saying I simply would not be interested in ES2 without the ability to create custom factions...

That created such a beautiful dynamic in ES1, that could be exploited in so many different ways and really catered to every playstyle you could want.

Multiplayer games became minefields. "You've met the XYZ empire" - It was simply a new challenge every time.



(Yes some of the traits could have been considered useless... yes some of them were too costly or too cheap for what they provided... but the mayhem was a thing of beauty)...

I like a lot your idea of the Senate, and think it will add lot of fun.

IMO it solves the question: what happened with conquered factions? In previous games it has been approached other ways, like % of population origin in Civ series (don't remember which one) and the % ownership in amplitude's. Now if I understand it correctly this population will affect your entire politics (no just penalties until 100% ownership or original civ is killed).



Iv'e got lots of questions, but most has been done by other players and answered by Metalynx. Just remaining questions:



- How do you choose your government? It's a faction trait, linked to affinity, or can be changed for the player during the game?

- I suspect that some chooses on senate and laws will affect approval, is that correct?, And if it is, will it be on global or local scale?

- If a faction is eliminated and you've got population from this faction, it will remain, or just turn "magically" into yours like other 4X?

- Can some factions have prohibited ideologies (like pacifist for cravers or religious for sophons)? If not, will you be able to choose "Banned ideology: XXX" as a trait when creating custom factions?

- I've seen costs on laws. If understand correctly:

· Enacting a law has a flat cost you pay once and it will remain from a fixed period of turns. After this period, you have to pay again to maintain it?

· During this period laws are free-maintenance, as long as they've got enough support, but if an election the support is lowered, then you'll pay a maintenance each turn or it will be cancelled?



A part from this questions, my support to KnightofPhoenyx idea about immersions. I think you can give us a great surprise only creating new text!

Great questions that give us a chance to flesh out some of details ^^

Teslaflux wrote:
Can´t wait how this is working in the game.

What ideologies have you removed? I´m curious what your intial idea was.

Temporary names but: 'Merchants' and 'Colonizers' were in there. We felt their gameplay would overlap a bit with some of the others and it was hard to find gameplay within those areas that kept on being relevant throughout the entire game.

Ashbery76 wrote:
So they give you some sort of buff law but what about actual politics? Does the Pacifists stop you declaring war,etc..Do factions with the same government have better relations.What about internal issues with going against what the people want.

We are as always a little careful doing very significant changes, but we are trying to link/limit/allow actions on the basis of politics. An example we're trying out currently, is having the Craver's eternal war trait only be active while they are militarists for example.

As for empire relations - that is the idea of the ideological wheel. If two empires share primary politics in the senate they should have an easier time making deals and of course harder with the opposite politics.

Kingsguard wrote:
I find it super weird that every single faction of the game must play with a "Senate"...

Sounds immersion breaking to have my super-autocratic United Empire ruled by a damn Senate ...

L'État, c'est moi !

Otherwise its a really nice and exciting feature but I feel like it should be available to certain factions with the "Senate" trait only.

Senate is the 'gameplay term' for the system that allows which laws you can vote (on the basis of represented politics). However, the last part on the 'Government':

Steph'nie wrote:

• Election process: the government especially affects the elections at different levels, from the available actions to the way the local elections are run. Choosing a government can deeply affect how the different political ideologies will share power in the Senate. Some governments are perfect to favourite a political ideology and build an empire around a unique and powerful ideology, but remove flexibility. Others help the various ideologies to coexist, providing a wider set of laws which are, however, more standard.

explains that government defines how the senate is put into power. For example, you could have a 'autocratic' government which essentially just picks whichever politics they want to win the elections. The tradeoff is less options available, but more control of the laws available. At the same time in a -full- democracy you could imagine that the populations picks the laws for you. These are just examples of what we're trying to do with the government - which will be the final government types, I cannot say just yet.

Hiyouren wrote:
Does this mean that Custom Factions will not be a thing in ES2?

I absolutely love creating abstract races to dive into game with - one of my favourites being a race using the Harmony appearance (Amoeba Affinity) and possessing Eternal War and Blockade Breakers. Being a 100% trade nation that has no concept of a nation, nor a government body - simply trading with individuals. Worked rather well - I'd like to try and recreate that in ES2 if at all possible.



I would hate to see Custom Factions disappear...

Custom factions exist! And we've listened to the feedback from EL and are seperating the population and visuals from the affinity. As for the specifics of your examples, I cannot say

Technocrate wrote:
I like the idea of a galactic senate

But i think it shoul be an achievement or a technology unlockable by those who want diplomatic aproach

I will just point out that this system is not a 'galactic senate'. This is an internal government for each empire. Think of it like a heavily expanded 'empire plan' from EL, but with both more interaction/control, but also limited by choices made throughout the game.

rockmassif wrote:
Are you guys playing Europa Universalis 4 too? Because this feels very similar

Especially senate feels like a basic version of Holy Roman Empire.

Of course, why would we not play great games like this!

However, the gameplay involved in the Holy Roman Empire of EU4 is nothing like how gameplay will function in ES2. The Holy Roman Empire mechanic is essentially creating unity between several countries to enact more and more powerful laws for those countries (and especially the emporer). In ES2 the government and senate are internal to a single empire and depending on government type and populations, the player will have more or less control of which laws he can enact - then figure out which laws to enact to provide the best bonuses for the sort of playstyle and victory conditions he is going for.

Very interesting GDD. Few remarks and questions:



- Personally, a system where the factions are blocked in a type of government is not interesting. For me, the lore of a faction exist to fix a start for the player, not to forbid "what if" player's ideas. It's more fun that the factions have a favor type of gameplay than a fixed gameplay. But it's cool be interesting to have differences in the faction base government. In Civilization games, it's logic that the states have the same primitive type of government. But in ES universe, the factions have a more important story to explain the differences.



- I have read that the political ideologies names are temporary. Will it be possible to define / mod the names (and the descriptions ) of political ideologies for a faction in particular? For exemple, the political party "militarist" should be named "Uniformity" in horatio faction and "Solar system's defenders" for United Empire...





- What are the conditions required to change the government? Technologies? Senat support? Resources? ...



- The duration between two senat election is based on the game speed option or other things (type of goverment, laws...)?

KnightofPhoenix wrote:
I too would have preferred completely different political systems and mechanics depending on faction. However, I understand that can be too difficult / resource intensive.



But I do think it is imperative that the universal political system is portrayed differently depending on faction. What I mean by that is that the name of the political institution and the way things are phrased / presented changes. It would be very weird and immersion breaking frankly if as Cravers, we have a "senate" and we vote for "laws." So while the same mechanic can still exist with the Cravers, it would be called and shown as something different. Perhaps their "senate" is a hive queen collective, with each representing a demographic and their share of "votes" represents how many Cravers they have in their respective hive colony.



Horatio could have Emperors each represent a fiefdom or how much influence they have (in the artbook, emperors rank below Horatio Prime as Feudal lords of sorts). The Hissho could have clans, each representing an ideology....etc.



Please don't end up having a "senate" for everyone, with the same terminology and the same presentation, for the sake of immersion and lore. It might be just fluff, but it is important and should be easy to do.

While reading the OP that was exactly my thought. What ES was lacking greatly was lore and this time seems the devs are working more on it, so use of "appropriete" names would be better. I cant stand a craver senate too.

Also i've read about choosing goeverment types. Each faction will use different goverment like Imperium or Democracy or another word for politics?

on that photo. Keep using that amazing art in the game. The more the better.

+1 for knightofphoenix's idea

Hiyouren wrote:
Hrmm... As someone who enjoys the Harmony (Whenever I'm not breeding it up as Horatio Affinity) I'm a little worried - it looks as though they won't be added into ES2. I can't really see them (or a major faction constructed similarly) working well with this democratic view...

I'm wondering if you'll add in a faction trait that makes a faction follow a sort of 'hive mind' or something along those lines - a leisurely escape from the politics side for those who may not enjoy, or become overwhelmed by it.



In ES1, I like exploring all play-styles, and it'd be neat to see how a hive-mind faction would interact with others.



Also, I'm a little concerned- No, I'm freakin' terrified of this part:





Does this mean that Custom Factions will not be a thing in ES2?

I absolutely love creating abstract races to dive into game with - one of my favourites being a race using the Harmony appearance (Amoeba Affinity) and possessing Eternal War and Blockade Breakers. Being a 100% trade nation that has no concept of a nation, nor a government body - simply trading with individuals. Worked rather well - I'd like to try and recreate that in ES2 if at all possible.



I would hate to see Custom Factions disappear...

Custom factions are definitely planned: http://wccftech.com/endless-space-2-interview-romain-de-waubert-de-genlis/



The relevant part:

Will players still have the ability to create custom factions?



Yes, I can’t tell you all the details but for us it’s key, it’s part of your imagination to create your own faction. We want to make sure that everyone can create the faction they want to play. With Endless Legend we have a lot of modding tools that allow you to create any kind of faction in the game, even on the visual stuff.

Are you guys playing Europa Universalis 4 too? Because this feels very similar

Especially senate feels like a basic version of Holy Roman Empire.