SMAC/X and affinities

[Othniel]

 Deidre would of course agree with this implicitly, but it no longer needs to be her sole domain. I'm arguing that Harmony is far more inclusive than the environmentalism of Alpha Centauri. The alien domestication quest has the Harmonite keeping the aliens as pets, while the Supremest keeps them as beasts of burden. What would our leaders choose I wonder? Maybe I can find the scripts of the affinity quests and see where people would have each leader answering...

Let me ask you all this, since affinity is clearly tied to technology, which techs in SMAC/X would be associated with each of the affinities while keeping in mind a counterpoint in Beyond Earth?

EDIT; Also since we are arguing practice, I've included the bonuses that each affinity gets below.

(click to show/hide)

Purity: you uphold traditional human values, and strive to remake the new world in Earth's image, concentrating on terraforming and military force to pacify the hostile environment.
Level 1: Aliens will not attack tiles with Explorer Units
Level 3: +20% Strength and Ranged Strength when attacking or defending against Aliens
Level 6: +2 Orbital Coverage in all Cities
Level 8: 4 Floatstone resources for free
Level 11: Dirty Bomb Operation can be performed by Covert Agents
Level 13: Exodus Gate can be constructed for Promised Land Victory Quest

Harmony: you seek to adapt to the new world and its alien ecosystem, to the extent of genetically altering your people. You will eventually be able to use alien units in your armies or even design new alien organisms.
Level 1: Alien aggression level returns to neutral twice as quickly
Level 3: Units take 5 HP less damage from Miasma
Level 6: Units heal 5 HP in Miasma
Level 8: 4 Xenomass resources for free
Level 11: Call Worm Strike Operation can be performed by Covert Agents
Level 13: Mind Flower can be constructed for Transcendence Victory Quest

Supremacy: you seek to use machines and cyborg interfaces to dominate the new world (and the old one), developing virtual consciousness and employing robot troops.
Level 1: Explorer Units can build an additional Expedition
Level 3: Roads and Magrails do not cost any Energy to maintain
Level 6: Orbital Coverage on and next to every tile with Firaxite
Level 8: 4 Firaxite resources for free
Level 11: Sabotage Operation can be performed by Covert Agents
Level 13: Emancipation Gate can be constructed for Emancipation Victory Quest
Affinities are not mutually exclusive; you can gain levels in all three, and you can gain level bene

[BlaneckW]

The alien domestication quest has the Harmonite keeping the aliens as pets, while the Supremest keeps them as beasts of burden. What would our leaders choose I wonder?

Dogs been both, chickens and cows just don't make as good pets.  Realisticly, they would be both.

Let me ask you all this, since affinity is clearly tied to technology, which techs in SMAC/X would be associated with each of the affinities while keeping in mind a counterpoint in Beyond Earth?

They wouldn't, it's cacamine.  Ultimately a glass dome is just an easier to implement, lower-level technological solution, not an ideological commitment.  The faction that doesn't implement safety-tested genetic modification is just amish and goes into the waste-basket of history.  It would take an amish majority to prevent it's implementation.  In the book, Yang has focused on implementing thoroughly the low tech he possesses, to make himself a fortress and political system he believes he will be safe in, but he still wants to obtain the genetic modification technology.  He even considers it vital.

[Yitzi]

Because SMAC and affinities are both ideal-focused.

That's merely how it's presented.  The reality of the factions is their gameplay.  Otherwise one uses the term "in the lore or "in the book."

No, the core reality of the factions is their ideology; the gameplay reflects that.

An ideal alone is unmanifest.

But it still exists, and once manifested is relevant.

If anything, ignorance is a bigger definer of action than ideals.  One goes through years of training to become a [poopy] western pharmacist who prescribes harmful statins; one wishes to be a doctor, the reality is, one is pill-pusher unless one puts in significant effort to be otherwise.  You are arguing literally that reality is not reality, imagination is reality.

No, I am arguing that the imagination of real people is a very important part of reality.

It is the very end of the process, if you get there.  If you are a doctor one percent of the time, then generally speaking, you are not a doctor.  Usually one takes it as a life-long profession.  Then one is a doctor.  But this takes real effort, and not merely an ideal.  If one puts in the effort and carries out the work without the ideal, even blindly, then one still becomes and is a doctor.

As I said before, professions are different than the topics explored in SMAC and by affinities.

BE supremacy is technological.

So are BE harmony and BE purity.

Profession and affinity are two very different things.

So you say.

[/quote]

And everything we know about affinity supports it.

You guys are all forgetting one factor here that makes a literal world of difference. The character of Planet is not present in BE, and the nature of the wildlife are not as hostile as they are in Alpha Centauri. The wildlife in Beyond Earth shows intelligence, but they aren't of psychic level. This opens up wider opportunities for adaption to the three affinities. The leaders would be presented with different avenues of adaptation here.  took to cybernetics to give her an advantage against mind worms, but she may domesticate a wolf-beetle as a hunting dog this time around.  Harmony on Beyond Earth is different from the Green of  . Its more about alien integration then it is about alien preservation. Its more about living as part of the world than minimizing your impact on it.

Very true.

Another way of looking at the affinities may help; Supremacy believes the answer to humanity lies in human ingenuity, Harmony believes that the answer lies in Human Adaptation, and Purity believes the answer lies in Human Resilence. From a supremacy perspective it sees itself looking to the future for answers while Harmony looks to the present and Purity looks to the Past.

Good alternate approach.  In which case, we'd probably get:

Supremacy:       
Harmony:     
Purity:         

Genetics are only one aspect of science.

So are robotics/cybernetics.  So are the miscellaneous things that contribute to Purity (though that actually has quite a bit of genetics).

Let me ask you all this, since affinity is clearly tied to technology, which techs in SMAC/X would be associated with each of the affinities while keeping in mind a counterpoint in Beyond Earth?

They wouldn't, it's cacamine.  Ultimately a glass dome is just an easier to implement, lower-level technological solution, not an ideological commitment.  The faction that doesn't implement safety-tested genetic modification is just amish and goes into the waste-basket of history.  It would take an amish majority to prevent it's implementation.  In the book, Yang has focused on implementing thoroughly the low tech he possesses, to make himself a fortress and political system he believes he will be safe in, but he still wants to obtain the genetic modification technology.  He even considers it vital.

So basically, you're denying the basic assumption behind the affinities.  In which case, I have to ask: What are you doing in this thread?

[BlaneckW]

No, the core reality of the factions is their ideology; the gameplay reflects that.

Ideology without a practical element is only present in the diplomacy.  Otherwise the factions are most well expressed in their gameplay.

But it still exists, and once manifested is relevant.

An idea only exists in your head.

No, I am arguing that the imagination of real people is a very important part of reality.

It's a part of their head.

As I said before, professions are different than the topics explored in SMAC and by affinities.

It was an example.  You're being very childish.  If anything professions can much more exactly "manifest" ideas than ideology.  But is the same process, provided that the ideology has any practical element and is not the mere distant utopianism you seem to prefer.  An ideology without practical elements is a dead utopia.  An ideology that favours practical elements is more similar to a manual, and thus has likely been practised.

And everything we know about affinity supports it.

So you say.

So basically, you're denying the basic assumption behind the affinities.  In which case, I have to ask: What are you doing in this thread?

Representing reality.

[Yitzi]

No, the core reality of the factions is their ideology; the gameplay reflects that.

Ideology without a practical element is only present in the diplomacy.  Otherwise the factions are most well expressed in their gameplay.

No; it's the ideology as expressed by the quotations, stories, and to some extent the gameplay, that gives SMAC its unique character.

An idea only exists in your head.

And is my head not part of reality?

It's a part of their head.

Until it is spread, which it generally will be; the fact that it will be spread makes it important even before it is.

It was an example.

Can you provide an example that is a good analogy and supports your point?  I think not.

If anything professions can much more exactly "manifest" ideas than ideology.

So they can; in a sense, they automatically do.  But that is irrelevant, as we are discussing ideologies.

But is the same process, provided that the ideology has any practical element and is not the mere distant utopianism you seem to prefer.  An ideology without practical elements is a dead utopia.  An ideology that favours practical elements is more similar to a manual, and thus has likely been practised.

And an ideology that favors elements that are not yet practical, but will be?

So you say.

Please, provide anything from BE (or SMAC, for that matter) that supports your position on these matters.

So basically, you're denying the basic assumption behind the affinities.  In which case, I have to ask: What are you doing in this thread?

Representing reality instead of imagination.
[/quote]

Well, this thread is about introducing a system from one imaginary world, designed to express the sorts of things that grow from the imagination even within that world, into another imaginary world...so maybe this is the wrong thread for what you're trying to do.

[BlaneckW]

No; it's the ideology as expressed by the quotations, stories, and to some extent the gameplay, that gives SMAC its unique character.

The former only supplement the latter.  Even fiction, especially good fiction, is written in the context of a reality.  SMAC in particural is very political and based upon political realities, like religion vs. science.

And is my head not part of reality?

In fact, most actions are only reflected upon by the head after they occur.

Can you provide an example that is a good analogy and supports your point?  I think not.

An ideology, for instance, related to taxation, that is intended to deal with a reality, is written as a manual.  Usually, these actually deal with professions.  Your attempt to differentiate the two is absurd.  An ideology either deals in realities or it does not.  The latter are generally irrelevant and are restricted to desert confines where they gradually decay.

And an ideology that favours elements that are not yet practical, but will be?

This is mere idealism.

Please, provide anything from BE (or SMAC, for that matter) that supports your position on these matters.

The fact that affinity deals in gameplay and is not mere lore.

Well, this thread is about introducing a system from one imaginary world.

Systems have reality.

[Yitzi]

The former only supplement the latter.

Perhaps (it is primarily a game after all), but they are a very important supplement, and more important than the gameplay for the topic of this thread.

Even fiction, especially good fiction, is written in the context of a reality.  SMAC in particural is very political and based upon political realities, like religion vs. science.

And are those political realities not essentially ideology by another name?

In fact, most actions are only reflected upon by the head after they occur.

But ideologies are reflected on before they are put into practice.

An ideology, for instance, related to taxation, that is intended to deal with a reality, is written as a manual.

Really?  Please tell me where to find the written-as-a-manual text that explains the "taxes are theft" ideology.

An ideology either deals in realities or it does not.

There are middle grounds (which of course will fall into one side of the divide, but which one depends on exactly how you define "deals in realities").

This is mere idealism.

And despite that, such "mere idealism" can have an important consequence on the world.  Not so "mere" then, is it?

The fact that affinity deals in gameplay and is not mere lore.

That just means that BE, like every other game in the Civ series and most other games period, tries to incorporate the fluff into the gameplay.

Try again.

Well, this thread is about introducing a system from one imaginary world.

Systems have reality.

Only as much reality as the world they're from.

[BlaneckW]

Perhaps (it is primarily a game after all), but they are a very important supplement, and more important than the gameplay for the topic of this thread.

I don't see how.

And are those political realities not essentially ideology by another name?

Political practice is quite a bit more developed than most common mere ideology.  It is more exact.

But ideologies are reflected on before they are put into practice.

The ideological material most people are connected with is disconnected from practice - and thus reality.  But this is to be expected, they are not acting from a position of power.

Really?  Please tell me where to find the written-as-a-manual text that explains the "taxes are theft" ideology.

I was referring to tax administration and practice.

There are middle grounds (which of course will fall into one side of the divide, but which one depends on exactly how you define "deals in realities").

Actions.  Practices.

And despite that, such "mere idealism" can have an important consequence on the world. 

Only when acted upon.  It won't last without development into practical channels.

[Yitzi]

Perhaps (it is primarily a game after all), but they are a very important supplement, and more important than the gameplay for the topic of this thread.

I don't see how.

How they're an important supplement: Because without them, SMAC/X would be a fairly well-designed 4X game, but not the immortal classic that it is.
How they're more relevant to this thread: Because this thread is about fluff features, not about gameplay.

Political practice is quite a bit more developed than most common mere ideology.  It is more exact.

"Religion vs. science" (your example) doesn't seem very developed or exact...

But ideologies are reflected on before they are put into practice.

The ideological material most people are connected with is disconnected from practice - and thus reality.  But this is to be expected, they are not acting from a position of power.

So what?  It's still potentially relevant (as it might spread to people who are in a position of power, or people who subscribe to it might come to positions of power), and is still part of those people, meaning that it is real.

Really?  Please tell me where to find the written-as-a-manual text that explains the "taxes are theft" ideology.

I was referring to tax administration and practice.

And yet "taxes are theft" is an ideology that deals with practical matters (taxes), so if you were correct, there would be such a written-as-a-manual text.  There does not appear to be such a text, ergo you are not correct.

There are middle grounds (which of course will fall into one side of the divide, but which one depends on exactly how you define "deals in realities").

Actions.  Practices.

Actions and practices at the time in question, or actions and practices at a future time?
And what does "deals with" mean?  Directly impacts on?  Is affected by?  Places value judgements on?

And despite that, such "mere idealism" can have an important consequence on the world. 

Only when acted upon.  It won't last without development into practical channels.
[/quote]

So?  That still means that ideology that is not yet developed into practical channels, but will be, is relevant.

[BlaneckW]

Perhaps (it is primarily a game after all), but they are a very important supplement, and more important than the gameplay for the topic of this thread.

Fiction doesn't describe the reality of a thing.  Gameplay is a better determination.  A sufficiently developed game can even be called a model.  But even the fiction corresponds with a depiction of Yang as living in a low-tech hovel.

"Religion vs. science" (your example) doesn't seem very developed or exact...

It's in reference to AC, and it's not, it's only manifest in AC's diplomacy.

The ideological material most people are connected with is disconnected from practice - and thus reality.  But this is to be expected, they are not acting from a position of power.

So what?  It's still potentially relevant (as it might spread to people who are in a position of power, or people who subscribe to it might come to positions of power), and is still part of those people, meaning that it is real.

No.  http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/08/12/Study-You-Have-Near-Zero-Impact-on-U-S-Policy
Please stop.  You're being really absurd.  I'm serious.  Even the French don't much influence their government, they tried to elect a socialist and look what they got, the man is constantly warmongering..  I'm not even going to talk about Obama.

And yet "taxes are theft" is an ideology that deals with practical matters (taxes), so if you were correct, there would be such a written-as-a-manual text.

It is not an ideology with reality outside of rich corporations.  As for them, I am sure that they do have such manuals - such as law schools.

So?  That still means that ideology that is not yet developed into practical channels, but will be, is relevant.

Only in your dreams.

[Buster's Uncle]

Blaneck, your manners suck.  I'm too busy and ill to keep being diplomatic about it - this place runs on mutual respect, and you need to step up your game, or I can no longer protect you.

[BlaneckW]

Blaneck, your manners suck.

My manners are probably fine, I just use them selectively.

[Buster's Uncle]

Universally is a much better idea here, I assure you.

[BlaneckW]

Universally is a much better idea here, I assure you.

Believe me, Othniel is an intelligent enough guy, and I wanted to discuss affinities with him, but affinities just don't have enough substance to do so.  Purity is low-tech, and supremacy just represents high-tech.  Him and I get along fine.

[Yitzi]

Perhaps (it is primarily a game after all), but they are a very important supplement, and more important than the gameplay for the topic of this thread.

Fiction doesn't describe the reality of a thing.  Gameplay is a better determination.  A sufficiently developed game can even be called a model.  But even the fiction corresponds with a depiction of Yang as living in a low-tech hovel.

Agreed that Yang is fairly low-tech.  It's your characterization of purity as low-tech and supremacy as high-tech and harmony as +PLANET that's horribly flawed.

It's in reference to AC, and it's not, it's only manifest in AC's diplomacy.

Well, if the very example you're using of a "political reality" that SMAC is based on is an example that is not developed or exact, then that would suggest that one should not be restricted to developed and exact political realities when discussing SMAC.

No.  http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/08/12/Study-You-Have-Near-Zero-Impact-on-U-S-Policy
Please stop.  You're being really absurd.  I'm serious.  Even the French don't much influence their government, they tried to elect a socialist and look what they got, the man is constantly warmongering..  I'm not even going to talk about Obama.

I did not say that every individual has major impact.  I said that an ideology may very well end up in the hands of one of the few people who do.

It is not an ideology with reality outside of rich corporations.

Really?  Then why is it that a large number of voters support low-taxes policies due to such an ideology?  (And while each one of those voters has near-zero impact on U.S. policy, they in aggregate have quite a bit more.)

Only in your dreams.

No, also in the sort of scenarios explored by SMAC and BE.  (And sometimes in reality too, but that's besides the point.)