With the post-2.2 economy in which pop numbers are much larger and the economy is almost entirely based on pop job outputs it becomes a little silly that the time it takes for a new pop to grow on a planet with 60 pops is in the same ballpark as on one with 3, all else being equal. It made more sense then for pop growth to work as it does when a planet could only have as many pops as its size, and a large factor in choosing which planet to settle was the space deposits it added to your borders. I think OP is onto something, & this is a relic of the old tile system. stack a ring or an ecu, and maybe even fortify in a true one system challenge with habitats and all that. but instead, stacking holotheatres is a massive waste no matter what civic you pick, except for servitors who are perfect and good and wanna protecc the squishiesĪnyways, if i could just spend the unity produced by all these holotheatres on upgrading my planets and outspending the bigger empires in unity on that, i should be able to catch up populationwise eventually. so if i design an entire species entirely around pop growth (and the utopian roleplay that dovetails nicely with pleasure seekers if you stick to UA haha) then i should be rewarded with the ability to beat the pop growth of empires with more planets than me and the cost is massive consumer goods costs. like a rogue servitor stacking an entire planet full of biotrophies and foundries, the strategy is crazy but logical and works and it's good that it works cause it's fun. that's what makes the diversity in this game so wild. you are not rewarded for leaning fully into whatever civic you're picking, even overdoing it a bit should be like "you maniac" when other players look at it, but be viable. i tried making my utopian abundant society a holo theatre utopia with leisure districts and it's just a consumer goods sink in reality. i used to always run a tech league, but i'm kind of obliged to run a trade league in the current build with my roleplay.Īnyways, at base i wouldn't be this driven to go to war early if i could invest, and reinvest, in pop growth for tall in ways that don't feel like an awful waste. i guess i have to run a fanatic egalitarian trade league to offset the consumer goods, when my utopia would probably automate that and be halfway to rogue servitorhood by now if my ai didn't have utopian abundance and citizen rights too. but i kinda wish i could just be the judgemental utopians on the sidelines most of the game, i don't want to ethically level the galaxy immediately and launch a utopian fanatic egalitarian xenophile federation in 2040.īut i feel like i have no choice now. it would be an epic victory to impose my ethics on the galaxy right as it seemed they were winning.īut i get that the game wants you to star your wars in 2030 now, and i'm gonna see how i'm gonna make a utopian abundant society that can do that (it's hard to carry consumer goods and alloy costs at the same time and be decadent enough in both to run UA and early wars). this is when my liberation wars should happen, when everyone thinks the game is almost over. The pop changes weren't only for performance, and did actually help tall play a little even if the implementation hobbled peaceful play and as a result it was a lateral move in balance because tall is usually trying to play peaceful or at least most of the game till they're a jack in the box BOSS level empire popping out at the last second: "where the frack did they come from?". I disable the pop growth changes (at least the ones that can be reversed) when playing an empire type that can't effectively take advantage of the pop growth through conquest strategies. ![]() I'm sure all those aliens have the same societal pressures that exist on earth including our exact forms of economy or value of shiny things which would result in the same types of growth curves (that only exist for a portion of earth's population btw). However, they decided to justify the changes behind some story about trying to make pop growth "more realistic" in a space game with aliens and FTL. ![]() I know I would have been perfectly happy to hear that as they did add a slider to disable the functionality for those not impacted by it. I think it would have been fine for them to simply say they need to limit the number of pops to improve stability temporarily while they work on a more complex and complete solution. They nuked pop growth from orbit because the performance issues related to number of pops was too big to take on at the time but a lot of people were really unhappy with the current performance. Click to expand.Sadly it's actually far simpler than that.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |