Why do the franchise's veterans love Alpha Centauri ?

[Lord Tirian]

I see it differently, Supremacy is all about technological power. The power of a remote drone strike. The power of asymmetric warfare. The power of material. Power through wealth, not true personal power. You're no longer the warrior, you're just pushing the buttons to turn the true warriors on. Not about the ace pilot or the master strategist, but about the master programmer and the strategy AI developer.

Harmony fits because it's about personal power and guerilla warfare.

Purity fits because it's also about seeking human perfection, discipline and order. Something about Santiago makes me think that she will always put more faith into a true Spartan than an AI.

 

[beetle]

Supremacy is about melding with the technology, not just pushing buttons. It fits with Sparta. But two other factions (Hive, University) have better claim to it. Purity fits okay, but three other factions (Peacekeepers, Morgan, Believers) have better claims and Sparta is irreconcilable with one of those. That just leaves Harmony, which also fits okay, and otherwise has only one faction aligned with it.

This discussion has clarified for me how I might play things. Thanks!

 

[Lord Tirian]

That's why I like the affinities (and the SMAC leaders) a lot: they're varied enough to not just be caricatures but to be two-dimensional and have different interpretations.

You could probably make a good case for a "secondary" affinity for most SMAC leaders, too, in which they dabble. For example, I could easily see University liking Harmony, simply for the mad monsters or Morgan liking the economic advantages of Supremacy's machine body (just not for himself).

 

[poom3619]

Who knows, I think I can see Spartan to fit in any of the affinity, and I think affinity isn't something that make all of its member the same goal. Morganite can get fat on their floating palace before Spartan storm it, I guess.

and Supremacy, like other affinities, can be interpreted in many way. I imagine Spartan's version would be like putting a commander control hundreds of war droid with cerebral synchronization.

 

[Caseyboy97]

I'm not a veteran, I only started playing around Beyond the Sword was released, maybe later. But I discovered Alpha Centauri and i love it so much, its one of the greatest games I've ever played. The graphics may be dated, but the story is brilliant, as a fan of Asimov and Stanely and I greatly enjoyed the game.

It was the quotes that got me, especially Zakharov's, the game attempted to speak to the human condition, and tackled touch philosophical questions, "What does it mean to be human? How does technology affect our lives? Is Science, Philosophy, and Religion all the same thing at their cores?"

 

[beetle]

I think affinity isn't something that make all of its member the same goal.

The affinities have been presented as the main driver for love/hate diplomatic relations, so if you are going to draw any kind of parallel to SMAC (which, admittedly, is something of a pointless thought experiment), you really have to keep the relevant bits of the SE matrix in mind.

From what we know, two factions both pursing Purity could end up with very different virtues and explore different parts of the tech web. But still there would be strong tendency for them to be game-long trading partners and allies, even though they are still competing.

I am hoping that shared affinities prevents psychotic late-game DoW-despite-DoF behavior all the Civ5 personalities exhibit. I enjoyed the SMAC faction personalities quite a bit. I find the Civ5 personalities kind of boring because they all have the same narrow range of behavior, feel quite similar to each other despite all the animations, and are all predictably treacherous.

Speaking of affinities, I am a little disappointed that there does not seem to be more of a rock/paper/scissor dynamic going. Or am I missing something?

 

[Algeroth]

Supremacy is about melding with the technology, not just pushing buttons. It fits with Sparta. But two other factions (Hive, University) have better claim to it.

It fits badly with Spartans. Technology can make humanity more independent on its environment and make them more powerfull, but it makes each human more dependent on the technology and the complex social systems it requires. That's Yang's theme (And Morgan's too, kinda), but for me its antithesis of Spartans.

The affinities have been presented as the main driver for love/hate diplomatic relations, so if you are going to draw any kind of parallel to SMAC (which, admittedly, is something of a pointless thought experiment), you really have to keep the relevant bits of the SE matrix in mind.

Nah, the equivalents of social engineering are now more or less virtues.

Speaking of affinities, I am a little disappointed that there does not seem to be more of a rock/paper/scissor dynamic going. Or am I missing something?

Yes. That it would be terrible, terrible idea from the perspective of gamedesign.

Imagine that you picked your affinities based on your starting position and the most profitable strategic decisions that you could. But your neighbor was in somewhat different position, picked affinity that is arbitrarly scissor to your paper and now you are just punished for your good gameplay. That's bad.

 

[beetle]

I disagree, and think supremacy fits Sparta quite well.

Nah, the equivalents of social engineering are now more or less virtues.

Yes, but do different virtue choices create tension with factions taking other trees? I don’t think so.

That it would be terrible, terrible idea from the perspective of gamedesign.

Civ 3/4 had the nice triangle where horsemen were stronger than swordsmen, swordsmen were stronger than spearmen, and spearmen were stronger than horsemen. It is good game design, but a little contrived.

 

[GeoModder]

Yes, but do different virtue choices create tension with factions taking other trees? I don’t think so.

How many tension modifiers do you want in a game? In SMACX interfactionial tension was linked to Social Engineering, and appearantly in Civ:BE it will be linked with Affinities. Do you need even more modifiers to increase 'hostilities' between the colonies in that game?

 

[beetle]

One main one is good, and I think the affinities serve that role well. Yes, the SMAC interfactional tension was linked to Social Engineering, and apparently in CivBE it we be linked to the affinities. Which is why, as far as the thought experiment goes of picking affinities for the SMAC factions, one can’t end up with Santiago in the same affinity as Morgan.

 

[beetle]

I wanted to expand on this because I find the discussion interesting.

It fits badly with Spartans. Technology can make humanity more independent on its environment and make them more powerfull, but it makes each human more dependent on the technology and the complex social systems it requires. That's Yang's theme (And Morgan's too, kinda), but for me its antithesis of Spartans.

I can see your point about the appeal of Supremacy for Morgan, he would fit into Necromancer universe quite well (prolly as a major villain). Supremacy also offer immortality, so that’s gotta be appealing to him!

I think my perspective on Supremacy and Purity are quite different than yours, and maybe most folks, so it’s more than possible that I got it wrong. My initial impression of the Purity affinity was that it was mal-adaptive. Fighting circumstances instead of embracing the situation. Changing Planet instead of doing what we can to change ourselves. That is not a warrior code. Adapting is a warrior ethic. Both Supremacy and Harmony are about adapting the colonists, they just take different paths for their approach. It is not really accurate to characterize Supremists as dependent on the technology because they are the technology! Sure, I can see Santiago fighting and hating the Borg. But what if she initiated them? I can easily imaging Sparta becoming the Borg!

 

[Algeroth]

I think my perspective on Supremacy and Purity are quite different than yours, and maybe most folks, so it’s more than possible that I got it wrong. My initial impression of the Purity affinity was that it was mal-adaptive. Fighting circumstances instead of embracing the situation. Changing Planet instead of doing what we can to change ourselves. That is not a warrior code. Adapting is a warrior ethic. Both Supremacy and Harmony are about adapting the colonists, they just take different paths for their approach. It is not really accurate to characterize Supremists as dependent on the technology because they are the technology! Sure, I can see Santiago fighting and hating the Borg. But what if she initiated them? I can easily imaging Sparta becoming the Borg!

Well, Purity could say that the Supermacy and Harmony are maladaptive, that they want to change humanity, instead of doing in what the humanity is best and what helped us to rise to stars - offensive adaptation changing our environment through tools and social organization.

I think that isn't right describing Spartans (even if their name suggest otherwise) as warriors. They are described by the game as the Survivalists - and being warrior is just a part of it. And yeah, they could become the borg, but i find it unlikely given that I tend to see their ethos as independence through militarization.

This aside, I think that is wrong to describe Miriam as having affinity to Purity - Miriam is affinity-agnostic, being skeptical of all technological improvement -and Purity and Harmony depends on technologies too. And I can easily imagine that she would have more problems with some Purity projects - like weeding out the unwanted parts from human genefond, than with splicing ability to breathe Planet atmosphere to everyone in new generation, for example. (Nut yeah, she would hated this too.)

 

[reddishrecue]

I was wondering why people didn't mention final frontier as much. That was a mod in bts.

 

[beetle]

Well, Purity could say that the Supermacy and Harmony are maladaptive

Right, from the perspective of any one affinity, the other two are misguided to the point of being criminal. From an objective perspective though, supremacy and harmony are logical approaches. Purity is understandable, but it’s reactionary.

I think that isn't right describing Spartans (even if their name suggest otherwise) as warriors. They are described by the game as the Survivalists - and being warrior is just a part of it. And yeah, they could become the borg, but i find it unlikely given that I tend to see their ethos as independence through militarization.

Yes, survivalism was the main theme, which is why I would argue they are most affinity agnostic. But you mention militarization, and that seems to fit best with Supremacy.

This aside, I think that is wrong to describe Miriam as having affinity to Purity - Miriam is affinity-agnostic, being skeptical of all technological improvement.

I respectfully disagree on these two points. Yes, Miriam’s was skeptical of technology, but would have been more okay with the idea of turning Planet more Earth-like, and less okay with augmenting humans. Miriam would also be okay with the Purity unique victory, but not that of Supremacy or Harmony.

- and Purity and Harmony depends on technologies too.

Yes, all affinities are highly dependent on technology. The SMAC factions were also highly dependent on technology, which of course makes Miriam a hypocrite. Miriam’s attitude towards technology was maladaptive, which again reminds me of Purity.

And I can easily imagine that she would have more problems with some Purity projects - like weeding out the unwanted parts from human genefond, than with splicing ability to breathe Planet atmosphere to everyone in new generation, for example.

Where are those two projects described? I agree that the first one sounds more like Purity than the second one.

I was wondering why people didn't mention final frontier as much. That was a mod in bts.

It was neat, but not really a story. Nothing that inspired passion.

 

[reddishrecue]

I was inspired by final frontier. .. it takes place in the future and it has people losing communication with the earth.

 

[s0nny80y]

IMHO, Civ 4's Final Frontier by Jon Shafer is golden.