[2.2.4] Why do people say that Hive Minds are strongest/were strongest?

[StormyStrife]

Allow me to detail what my problem lies with.

When I look at what is the most viable in the game, I primarily look at how efficient every available tool to me, is. The part that I don't get is... Hive Minds are the top-dog for viability? How?

Hive Minds, for example, are very inefficient with Amenity generation, which is a crying shame. With Charismatic and mid-game tech, you require 4-5 maintenance depots to support a planet with around 90-100 pops.

Normal Empires can do that with at most 4 holo theaters, but then you upgrade them and so you only need 2 of them, 4 is massive overkill, and the Hyper entertainment forums are only on non-capital worlds. On a Capital world, you can support even more pops on just those 2 buildings.

Not to also mention Hive Minds have Synapse drones which, suck up 2 more food income each on top of the 1 food they each already take for just being alive, as well as 1 energy income. Normals have 0 jobs which require food.

I can see Hive Minds becoming better after you say, build an Art Installation, and get some traditions, but... Hive Minds never outpace normal civs for raw amenity generation. It never happens. Sure you can get more Maintenance Drone jobs, but Normals will always generate more than 3x more Amenities per job.

There IS Commercial Zones for amenity generation, but that's not why you build Commercial Zones. you build it for Trade Value, otherwise, you'd just build Holo Theaters if you just wanted Amenities only.

Lastly, the 16 Consumer Goods upkeep for 2 Hyper entertainment Forums are pretty much nothing by the time you need that many, even if you have like 40 heavily populated planets.

It's for the above reason that I don't get why A. Hive Minds were ever regarded as better than Normal civs outside of "I just like it more" and B. Why Paradox nerfed Amenity generation with them at all.

I have an easier time setting up a powerful economy with a Normal with no economic traits or civics than with a Gestalt with ANY combination of traits and civics and most of my playtime is with Machine Empires.

But I am probably missing something, so what do people often regard Hive Minds as superior in 2.2.4, or even before 2.2.3?

Because it can't be growth speed, that just makes Amenity problems appear sooner and with way larger obviousness (which also Normals can match with either a combo of Planetary Growth Encouragement and a Cyto-Revitalization Center, or a Cyto, and a Cloning Vat).

I haven't played Hive Minds much, so I am most likely missing something. What am I missing if so?

 

[Dustman]

1) Hives got insane growth from day one;
2) Their buildings do not require intermediates, so CG aren't produced for further consumption by jobs and pops, saving energy, pop jobs and building slots;
3) Hive capital building appears on day one when colony is created;
4) Streamlined edicts, mostly food-based.

What you said is true, but just count Syncronicity (aka Harmony) in and it's not as bad, with 5 maintenance jobs per building from the day it´s built.

 

[ComradeIan]

I'm doing a hive mind run through now and I love it. 3 quick reasons why:

1. No trade means no pirates, so I don't have to waste slots on hanger bays or putting starbases along trade routes.
2. No consumer goods - frees up worlds i'd've otherwise have specialised for them and allows me to focus elsewhere.
3. The biggy for me - hive worlds. No district limits - instead of being stuck with the limits, I can focus my planets on what I need without having to fill in with city districts after limits hit.

They've got their drawbacks, sure, but this has been the easiest post Le Guin game i've had. Perhaps because it removes some of the complexity of the new economy system...

Edit: I forgot my favourite part - you can stop planetary growth, so no more resettlement whack a mole.

 

[Dustman]

Yeah, and very nice tradition gain due to advanced capitals right after colonization.

 

[RoverStorm]

1. So how about +50% Pop Growth from day one?
2. Rural districts (generator, mining, and farming) giving +1 respective jobs, an increase of +50% district efficiency.
3. Districts/buildings providing more housing than any other empires in the game. (Except Organic Paradise's, friggin Rogue Servitor cheaters)
4. Capital buildings start new colonies at technically level 2 and the first upgrade turns it technically to level 4.
5. Unemployed pops uniquely produce 1 mineral from nothing other than normal upkeep, meaning they're still productive while waiting for a job.
6. It should be noted that point 1 and 3 means they can have the largest populations of planets. This becomes extra important with the prosperity finisher: 1 (unity) job every 20 pops.
7. They use food-a resource normally stockpiled and sold to the market-for many things, such as campaigns, synapse jobs, and colony ships. Usually this is an advantage.
8. -50% outpost influence cost for devouring swarms is.....busted?

And of course they have the shared benefits between all gestalts:
No factions, meaning stable influence
No happiness/revolts
Best reduced war exhaustion gain
No f***ing pirates. You lose out on trade for free consumer goods, BUT....
No consumer goods! No seriously, no downsides! (ignore the mineral cost of science jobs)
Hive Worlds (yes these are unique, but they're almost identical to machine worlds. Unlike machine worlds, according to the wiki synthetic asc. empires can't use them)

To finish, even a Paradox staff have stated they believe them to be a little OP:

Well, this is a personal opinion and not necessarily shared by the design team, but I find them OP, so...

 

[ArmChairAttila]

Growth, growing, replication, reproduction...............

 

[Less2]

They certainly aren't the strongest. But they were very obviously powerful and most importantly simple and hard to screw up while everyone was getting used to the new economy.

If we have a spectrum from 0 to 100 representing the most underpowered to the most overpowered, Hives lie around 60-80. I'd put well-optimized Driven Assimilators and normal empire slavery/robot builds a full tier above any hive.

 

[Madzai]

They were quite strong before amenities nerf. Mostly because of raw production. growth and not being affected by a lot of 2.2 bugs, simply because they lack the bugged mechanic.

 

[ShockMeSane]

The correct answer is population growth speed. Normal empires and Machines have terrible growth until pop 10. Hives have insane growth from day 1. Back in the olden days of Stellaris, population growth wasn't all that powerful because the largest world could support 25 pops. Now that there isn't really an upper limit (around 100 pops it starts getting more difficult to efficiently add more population to that particular planet, but you just resettle them to other worlds anyways), population is far more crucial to success.

But even typing this makes me hate how much Stellaris feels like "population resettlement simulator" to try and manage this. There needs to be a planetary decision to automatically resettle new pops. It isn't super fun having to constantly do it, but turning off population growth is a terrible strategic decision. The correct decision is to always resettle a pop once a planet maxes.

Decisions that are correct 100% of the time are also boring game design decisions. Because it isn't a decision, you either do it or you lose to a player who does.

 

[RoverStorm]

But even typing this makes me hate how much Stellaris feels like "population resettlement simulator" to try and manage this. There needs to be a planetary decision to automatically resettle new pops. It isn't super fun having to constantly do it, but turning off population growth is a terrible strategic decision. The correct decision is to always resettle a pop once a planet maxes.

Endless Space 2 I think just introduced a faction that can only grow pops on it's home world, but they can choose any "planet" (don't ask for details) for their pops to appear on once grown.

I don't think this would be too much of a mechanic to ask for. It can still cost exactly as much as it would to instantly resettle the pop, which it would deduct automatically.

 

[Azmodael]

The correct answer is population growth speed. Normal empires and Machines have terrible growth until pop 10. Hives have insane growth from day 1. Back in the olden days of Stellaris, population growth wasn't all that powerful because the largest world could support 25 pops. Now that there isn't really an upper limit (around 100 pops it starts getting more difficult to efficiently add more population to that particular planet, but you just resettle them to other worlds anyways), population is far more crucial to success.

But even typing this makes me hate how much Stellaris feels like "population resettlement simulator" to try and manage this. There needs to be a planetary decision to automatically resettle new pops. It isn't super fun having to constantly do it, but turning off population growth is a terrible strategic decision. The correct decision is to always resettle a pop once a planet maxes.

Decisions that are correct 100% of the time are also boring game design decisions. Because it isn't a decision, you either do it or you lose to a player who does.

You will find what you are looking for in this mod.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1617534169

 

[Magdaki]

You will find what you are looking for in this mod.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1617534169

That looks great. I do not enjoy the resettlement (unintended) mini-game. Thanks for linking that.

 

[Tech Noir Synth]

I think many people believed they were overpowered because we quickly realized pop growth is #1 stat and they are quite good at this (but not the best).

I am very happy with how they play now, they are fun and easy to manage but with normal empires you will still be able to produce a stronger empire, but they also require more management.

Because of how easy they are to manage, on average the player will make fewer mistakes playing a Hivemind vs playing a regular empire.
This is true for most players. There are few bad players, a lot of average players and few very good players. For the bad and many average players, they will likely do better as a Hivemind than as a regular empire and feel like the Hiveminds are simply stronger. The very good players who know how to min/max any empire will still be able to produce a stronger empire with a non-Hivemind.

It also comes down to the fact that pre Le guin hiveminds were simply underwhelming compared to normal empires and this gap has closed a lot. I don't think they need nerfs. Its perfectly fine to have an empire type thats easier to manage.

In fact the best rush builds do not utilize hiveminds or devouring swarm but instead Fanatic purifiers, distinguished admiarility, supremacy tradition rush and can kill you within 7 years thanks to stacking fire rate.

 

[Dustman]

Fanatic Purifiers are definitely better at stacking fire rates, but Despoilers with F. Militarist ethics aren't far behind and can effectively enslave captured pops, snowballing much faster due to better economy. Add Post-Apocalyptic (not the best pick long term tho') and you can get any non-Gestalt world almost w/o penalty. I'd bet on two-three homeworlds F. Militarist empire winning over two-three homeworlds FP, mainly to more numerous fleets.

My main problem with Hive minds is their lack of efficient pop assimilation until mid-game. Vassalization or Swarming is an option, but abusing foreign economies is far superior imo.