Morgan vendetta for Green economy

[Commy]

I've done interesting tests on this (multiple adversions, multiple idealogies)...the more complex ones I don't remember the results of, but, when dealing with the factions in the game...

If you are doing the default setting (frontier, survival, simple...), no faction will get mad at you specifically for your SE choices...

If you are doing the idealogy of a faction, the faction is more likely to be friendly (doing free market to please Morgan, democracy to please Lal...)

If you are doing an SE choice that is not the idealogy of that faction, the faction is more likely to be hostile (doing green annoys Morgan, doing wealth annoys Zak...)

If you are doing the adversion of a faction, TECHNICALLY, it doesn't affect your relationship...however, since most idealogies and adversions for factions are in the same category (Lal likes Demo, hates police state; Morgan hates planned), it doesn't really matter...this can be proven (as said above) between Zak and Miriam...doing Fundy has no effect on Zak (but doing Wealth or Power does)...

Adversion only means what SE choice that faction can't make, it has no role in diplomacy...so doing planned is not going to make Morgan more mad than doing green, even though planned is his adversion...

[cal_01]

Commy: I've ran my own tests, and from what I can tell, both Morgan and Deidre get fairly upset if you run their adversions (ie. Planned or Free Market respectively).

[cal_01]

Ok, I found Vel's SMAX FAQ on gamefaqs, and it actually has a pretty nice description on a faction's reactions.

http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/game/198636.html

[Verrucosus]

Hm, now I'm really confused. If you read Vel's comments about Miriam (and some of the Crossfire factions) in the "Getting Ready for the Bad Guys" section, you'd think that aversion is a factor in diplomacy.

Vel observes that the standard matrix of social preferences was set up to favour conflict. Has anyone played with randomized faction agendas? I was often tempted to do so, but somehow I never did, maybe because it diminishes the role-playing aspect. When you use this setting, is it possible for several factions to have the same agenda? If that were the case, maybe we would see some games with AI factions less crippled by early warfare.

[Commy]

Originally posted by cal_01
Commy: I've ran my own tests, and from what I can tell, both Morgan and Deidre get fairly upset if you run their adversions (ie. Planned or Free Market respectively).

This is only because their adversions happen (by chance) to be in the same SE category...

Morgan does not like those doing planned or green because they aren't free market...he won't like you do his adversion (planned), but only because it is in the same SE category as free market (if you're doing planned, you won't like you, because you are NOT doing free market)...

If you run Morgan's or Deirdre's adversions, they will get mad at you, but not because you are doing their adversions, rather, because you aren't doing their idealogy...

This can be proven in two tests...if you run Fundy, Zakharov could care less, even though it is technically his adversion...he only cares when you are doing a value other than knowledge (complains about wealth and power...)

The other test is with the Pirates...the idealogy of the Pirates, while not well known, is Power...if you do wealth or knowledge, the Pirates will get irritated...however, note they don't have an adversion...an adversion is not what triggers conflict, it is by not aligning yourself with a factions idealogies that does...

[cal_01]

Originally posted by Commy


This is only because their adversions happen (by chance) to be in the same SE category...

Morgan does not like those doing planned or green because they aren't free market...he won't like you do his adversion (planned), but only because it is in the same SE category as free market (if you're doing planned, you won't like you, because you are NOT doing free market)...

If you run Morgan's or Deirdre's adversions, they will get mad at you, but not because you are doing their adversions, rather, because you aren't doing their idealogy...

This can be proven in two tests...if you run Fundy, Zakharov could care less, even though it is technically his adversion...he only cares when you are doing a value other than knowledge (complains about wealth and power...)

The other test is with the Pirates...the idealogy of the Pirates, while not well known, is Power...if you do wealth or knowledge, the Pirates will get irritated...however, note they don't have an adversion...an adversion is not what triggers conflict, it is by not aligning yourself with a factions idealogies that does...

Ahh, I see what you're getting at. Sorry, I misread your post before.

But yeah, I think that's more of a limitation of the SMAC/X faction settings more than anything else.

[Xian]

Originally posted by Verrucosus

Vel observes that the standard matrix of social preferences was set up to favour conflict. Has anyone played with randomized faction agendas? I was often tempted to do so, but somehow I never did, maybe because it diminishes the role-playing aspect. When you use this setting, is it possible for several factions to have the same agenda? If that were the case, maybe we would see some games with AI factions less crippled by early warfare.

Nope, Ive tried it myself setting up factions deliberately so that my choices (either demo/planned/knowledge or green) dont make any one mad but it doenst matter. Actually its almost impossible, the factions are balanced out so that no combination of 7 can possibly make everyone happy with ANY choices. actually its even worse than that, no combination can even spare the human player from ideological motivated war either

Try it, you'll see.

Anyhow, no, the AI remains dumb as ever, and will make a reason up for you to go to war regardless. No matter how happy you make them and even bribe them.

Originally posted by Commy


If you run Morgan's or Deirdre's adversions, they will get mad at you, but not because you are doing their adversions, rather, because you aren't doing their idealogy...

This can be proven in two tests..

you can add to that Domai, whose goal is future society Eudomia. His aversion is green but he doesnt care if you run it.

Furute society choices rarely make a difference because by the end of the game either they hate you they love you. The consciousness for example rarely declares war over Thought control or Eudomia

[cal_01]

Originally posted by Xian

Nope, Ive tried it myself setting up factions deliberately so that my choices (either demo/planned/knowledge or green) dont make any one mad but it doenst matter. Actually its almost impossible, the factions are balanced out so that no combination of 7 can possibly make everyone happy with ANY choices. actually its even worse than that, no combination can even spare the human player from ideological motivated war either

Try it, you'll see.

Anyhow, no, the AI remains dumb as ever, and will make a reason up for you to go to war regardless. No matter how happy you make them and even bribe them.

you can add to that Domai, whose goal is future society Eudomia. His aversion is green but he doesnt care if you run it.

Furute society choices rarely make a difference because by the end of the game either they hate you they love you. The consciousness for example rarely declares war over Thought control or Eudomia

I always find it odd that Domai's aversion is green. If he's like a "commie" or something, then shouldn't he be against Free Market?

[Mark123jansen]

He's a heavy industrialist (only not in it for the money), and with green setting industry isnt looked upon very favourably, therefore he doesnt like it.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Commy
I've done interesting tests on this (multiple adversions, multiple idealogies)

You mean multiple ideologies and aversions for one faction?

[cal_01]

Originally posted by Mark123jansen
He's a heavy industrialist (only not in it for the money), and with green setting industry isnt looked upon very favourably, therefore he doesnt like it.

Yeah, but Green gives penalties in growth, not industry, so that makes no sense in the game either. It'd make more sense if it was -1 Growth -1 Industry, but that's probably too hurting.

[Maniac]

There are already three factions who can't reasonably run FM: the Gaians, the Hive and the Cult. While before SMAX and the Drones, there wasn't any faction with an aversion to green. So they gave that aversion to Domai to create a bit of variety.

Don't look for more after it than that.

[Xian]

Originally posted by Maniac
There are already three factions who can't reasonably run FM: the Gaians, the Hive and the Cult. While before SMAX and the Drones, there wasn't any faction with an aversion to green. So they gave that aversion to Domai to create a bit of variety.

Don't look for more after it than that.

excactly, it was a balance issue not ideology

however, I know plenty of labor leaders who have no problem with *markets* they have a problem with *human beings* allowed to be bauhgt and sold inside them.

Its only in propaganda that you cant be a socialist and a free marketeer. Just like when they freed the slaves people didnt burn all the cotton and decide all plantations are evil

[Illuminatus]

Originally posted by Verrucosus
Has anyone played with randomized faction agendas? I was often tempted to do so, but somehow I never did, maybe because it diminishes the role-playing aspect. When you use this setting, is it possible for several factions to have the same agenda? If that were the case, maybe we would see some games with AI factions less crippled by early warfare.

I've tried it, but it is too bizzare from role-playing aspect. Morgan declaring war on me for not running green? Spartans commending me for running planned economics? Zakharov disliking me for running knowledge instead of power?

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Illuminatus


I've tried it, but it is too bizzare from role-playing aspect. Morgan declaring war on me for not running green? Spartans commending me for running planned economics? Zakharov disliking me for running knowledge instead of power?

It DOES take a new mindset. It can be fun for a laugh but I agree that the role-play aspect goes out the window . . . . UNLESS you come up with new reasons and backstory for the new preferences