• BashfulBob [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Idk, it kinda reminds me of the neoliberals pissing and shitting themselves because socialist policies were OP in Victoria 3. “Game Balance” doesn’t mean some strategies won’t be fundamentally better than others.

      What I think this guy misses is that there are already tools for countering broad social dissatisfaction with your policies in Stellaris. Just crank up that consumer economy, invest a bunch of resources in entertainment and other distraction economics, and you can do all the genocide you want without real consequence. You just don’t get to ignore the outrage “for free”. You have to pacify your population just like IRL.

      • mamotromico@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        56 minutes ago

        Tbf on release it was piss easy to play as some kind of socialist government because there was no immediate backlash of world powers declaring war on you (as it tends to happens in history) or at least sanctioning one way or another :’)

      • lil_tank [any, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        12 hours ago

        You just don’t get to ignore the outrage “for free”. You have to pacify your population just like IRL.

        Yeah that’s basically what I meant. Game balance isn’t necessarily about making every single option equally viable it’s often about having at least some trade-offs so that there aren’t just one very obvious way to crush everything