So this is exactly what Xenophilia would be. Right now the only capitol-linked, or species-specific bonus applied within your empire is the happiness boost form the capitol. Xenophillia just gives that same bonus to everyone. That is literally what it does. Now if there are any other capitol-holding species-wide bonuses that get applied, then they should also be spread to all the species in your empire by Xenophillia (unless there is a really good gem-mechanics reason not-to). This would even include things that might be given by policy cards or other civics.Krikkitone wrote:I was talking about Choosing None as an imperial species. (essentially all species are equal) ...I was just mentioning that "None=Imperial species" wouldn't work with Xenocide (equally exterminate all species in your empire)
The non-xenophillia options are specifically not egalitarian/equal. Your either treating other species as tools (Xeno-engineering), resources (Xeno-subjugation) or obstacles to be eliminated (Xenocide). The capitol-holding species should keep whatever benefits holding the capitol gives, because they are the "ruling species" of the society in question in all other cases. Xenophillia is the one that changes that. Mechanically Free Orion does not support mixed-population planets, so wherever you put your capitol is going to put it in the hands (or tentacles) of a particular species. Now deciding on your inter-species relations will determine what that really mean. So if you want everyone to be on equal footing, you pick Xenophillia. If you want them to squeeze resources out of other species, you pick Xeno-subjugation. If you want to have everyone specialize them for specific functions you choose Xeno-engineering. If you want them to eliminate everyone else you pick Xenocide.
Huh? I think there might be a part of the policy/government discussion I ma not privy to, because I'm lost again.Krikkitone wrote:It also wouldn't work with species at capital=Imperial species (unless perhaps it was a policy card)
Ideally yes, however if we are going to make the government in any way "modular" like this, to allow for a mix-and-match approach here, changing already used civics should be a major undertaking. I also wouldn't see it necessary to implement this model. In fact part of the idea is that you wouldn't necessarily even need or want to "switch" you government as you could more directly and incrementally control what benefits and policy slots you acquired. It also solves the problem of say needing to switch to a "better" government, and whatever drawbacks changing a government entails, whenever new ones become available. IE: each Civic gives you a policy card and an additional benefit, and you can choose those according to how you are progressing. Now I do have ideas about how things like the number of what kinds of policy slots already have would effect the cost of implementing a particular civic, so that you're at least discouraged form getting say 6 economic policy slots and no open policy slots. Otherwise you should be free to build whatever kind of government you like, and suits your particular playstyle or however you are roleplaying your game.Krikkitone wrote:You should have the option to change the civics with an influence cost though (more expensive and longer than switching cards).
These are also meant to be overriding top-level, structure-effecting long-term social policies of your civilization. So lower-level (and thus unseen to the player) government might work different. Also, they represent a widely accepted social ideology across your society, so they shouldn't be very "changeable". Instituting them as a civic represents your civilization fully realizing whatever that particular ideal represents and successfully implementing it. I am specifically suggesting something different from the Civilization model of switching out your government every so-often.