Alpha Centauri 2 - New Faction Concepts Inspired by Beyond Earth

[Trenacker]

The list of factions is variable. Really, I want to provide players with some good options. The direction in which they take those factions within the boundaries of their ideologies and objectives is open for discussion.

My rough game plan is as follows:

1. Recruit players to fill >7 factions.

2. Provide each player with an electronic portfolio describing their faction, including the situation immediately prior to Planetfall.

3. Invite players to establish objectives and issue orders to their respective factions in anticipation of Planetfall. Each player will receive some combination of specific and random items reflecting their success at accessing (and seizing or holding) Unity stores.

4. Present players with a Situation Report on Planetfall. Issue a portfolio update providing information on a seasonal budget, order of battle, and other relevant aspects of settlement, including specific gameplay objectives that the player may choose to pursue.

Naturally, I'd love help with all of this.

As an aside, my sense of Santiago's faction was that it considered itself more "free" than most others. Again, that's based on my read of Santiago's folks as survivalists first, a militia second. It seems that, canonically speaking, they were exactly the reverse.

[BlaneckW]

As an aside, my sense of Santiago's faction was that it considered itself more "free" than most others.

They sleep in mass bunker rooms.  I doubt you could even come up with how they would consider themselves freer.  Deidre's faction is an open democracy centered on agronomy; Morgan's is the definition of "free-market capitalism".  Lal's is based on the U.N. charter.  Even Miriam's faction could be considered freer.

[Buster's Uncle]

People in a fundamentally monotheist religion like Christianity talked themselves into believing in the Trinity.  It's entirely possible.



The following proves nothing - it's the leaderquote I wrote for an alt. Spartans faction for a GotM- but it pretty well encapsulates my take.

#BLURB
The Colonel expected us to follow the Chain of Command.  We will
do so, and with the knowledge that within that structural discipline we
are the freest people in the world. 

Spartans, we will show the world that discipline, and we will teach the
murderous and hypocritical Peacekeepers a lesson they and the world
will never forget about the true power of a truly free people.
^
^        -- Lt. Colonel Sosimo Fernán,
^           address to the troops

[Trenacker]

From Santiago's point of view, and presumably that of her followers, no man can by definition be free who cannot defend his prerogatives to the death. The Spartans take what they please, from whom they please, when they please. The other factions merely worship false gods; the Spartans invest, by choice, in the essential work of staving off Planet to ensure the survival of their species.

It depends, of course, on how one defines freedom -- that is, the ability to shape your own fate, or the immediate freedom to be a layabout if one so chooses.

[BlaneckW]

People in a fundamentally monotheist religion like Christianity talked themselves into believing in the Trinity.  It's entirely possible.

The trinity works just fine if you're a pantheist.  The Hindus manage it.

[Buster's Uncle]

The Christians manage it.  Also, participating in war while worshipping the Prince of Peace, even waging war in His name.  That didn't get left behind in the Middle Ages, either.  The human capacity to pervert anything -and blithely live with it- is nearly infinite.

[BlaneckW]

It depends, of course, on how one defines freedom -- that is, the ability to shape your own fate, or the immediate freedom to be a layabout if one so chooses.

I wouldn't make the argument for the freedom to layabout.  Neither does one does call disciplined or free a people who hold a meeting in a boardroom and then afterword resolve disputes with a knife fight.

How do you define the resolving of disputes through duels?  How, also, do you define militarism that is present even where it is not necessary?  I define it as denying the very discipline which is espoused.  The disciplined do not need pervasive military dictatorship, nor do they solve disputes with duels.  A military dictatorship means the requirement of a military officer present in all areas - the opposite of either a disciplined or well-trained unit.

If you spoke to Yang in a military aire in a meeting regarding civil matters, he would simply note that there must be something wrong with you.  Militarism in civil matters may be termed hostility.  This may be explained in terms of regarding as infantile one's subordinates for not adhering to codes which have no productive value with regard the task at hand - assuming one even has a productive task at hand, having decided to pursue militarism without regard for it's value at the moment.

Asking for permission to see one's children while off-duty isn't freedom or discipline - it's definitely something, but it isn't one of those things.

[Trenacker]

The point is to say that from the perspective of the Spartans, they are the only free people on Planet. This was the reason that I brought up conscription. At Planetfall, Santiago's followers are virtually all partisans of her ideology, or at least amenable to it.

Since Santiago's followers believe that the only alternative to strict martial discipline and training is the literal extinction of the human species, I'd say that their choice to "enlist," as it were, makes perfect sense.

Remember that militiamen who embrace martial organization in our own society often consider themselves "most-free" because they believe that they are among the few engaged in "right thinking."

Also consider that the Spartans seem a heck of a lot like the Clans of Battletech. The knife fights are usually perpetrated by subordinates seeking to demonstrate their superiority over a higher-ranking officer. It is meritocracy taken to extremes.

What is a "military air?" Do you mean with condescension? You seem to be building a strawman.

Again, the only ones for whom "discipline is freedom" must make sense are the Spartans themselves.

[BlaneckW]

Remember that militiamen who embrace martial organization in our own society often consider themselves "most-free" because they believe that they are among the few engaged in "right thinking."

They are relatively free, no one tells them that they can't see their children at the end of the day.

[Trenacker]

Can I get a rough count of the folks interested in participating in the simulation, if any? I'm more than happy to keep up the conversation either way, but I'm hoping for a good "take" of players, too. I have no problem hosting the game here. These forums are some of the most-functional I've yet seen.

It occurs to me that what the factions of the original game did was sort of explore some of the tensions of the 1990s, post-Cold War era: industrialism versus conservation; democracy versus authoritarianism; fundamentalism versus empiricism. I suppose that I want to do the same.

Controversial issues to explore include: transhumanism writ large, artificial intelligence, genetic engineering, cybernetics, the Responsibility to Protect, state partition (do we add an ethnic component to each faction?), use of weapons of mass destruction, "push button warfare," media pervasiveness, and the ability to democracy to overcome populism.

Then there are the "frontier" issues: usufruct versus exclusive rights; "settled" versus urgent justice; the ethics of strength; & etc.

I'm definitely open to others.

[BlaneckW]

Trenahacker, you should test your factions in AI simulations first.

[Buster's Uncle]

Not a terrible idea.  At Firaxis, they playtested SMAC by weighing down the Enter key.

[BlaneckW]

Not a terrible idea.  At Firaxis, they playtested SMAC by weighing down the Enter key.

The game can be tested with the scenario editor.

[Buster's Uncle]

No dirty "facts' messing up my roll I'm on!

[Trenacker]

I appreciate the suggestion that I ought to test the factions for balance, but I'm not seeking to build a mod.

The "simulation" to which I refer is pen-and-paper, for lack of a better phrase, and will be played out like a tabletop wargame, only in narrative form. I've linked to some examples previously.

I'm less concerned about numerical balance than about designing compelling factions. While I don't aim to achieve complete parity -- I think games involving equitable starts are both unrealistic and less fun because there is inherent dynamism in imbalances of power -- I don't require algorithmic help to maintain fairness in this case.