You don't need to run those edicts to run a good economy at all. I'm not sure what you're doing wrong, but it's something.
2.2 Economy works only with economy edicts
- Thread starter stenver
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Uh, influence is so precious I prefer not to use it something that I can get from basic districts expect in the cases of emergency. To be honest, seems to me your friend was just better player. Where did you spend all that influence he was spending on those edicts?
.png){kind=avatar}
There's a legitimate issue behind the OP's point though.
Having edicts that allow direct conversion of influence -> currency allows you to accurately place a value upon influence.
That in turn allows the various influence oriented techs, ethics, civics, traditions & ascension perks to be ranked against those that offer direct economic advantage.
I haven't run the numbers, but it certainly feels like influence gain/cost reduction is more valuable than almost all economic boons.
Having edicts that allow direct conversion of influence -> currency allows you to accurately place a value upon influence.
That in turn allows the various influence oriented techs, ethics, civics, traditions & ascension perks to be ranked against those that offer direct economic advantage.
I haven't run the numbers, but it certainly feels like influence gain/cost reduction is more valuable than almost all economic boons.
I didn't. I have an excellent economy in my current game. Tons of minerals (I think around +300), tons of alloys (+200). This is in early-mid 2300s. I rarely use the market (pretty much now only when I get impatient or when my food reaches capacity) and I have not once used the extra production edicts.
It took me a few games to get efficient in the new system. I wish people would spend more time trying to figure out on their own how to work the new system instead of immediately assuming it's broken and complain on the forums about it. That's not to say it doesn't have some rough edges and bugs that need fixing. But it's not fundamentally broken.
*shrugs* Influence has always been the most important resource. (Maybe less so in the late game when you can declare TW and everything's claimed.) If you couldn't convert influence into economic power with edicts, you could still convert it into economic power by using it to capture more systems.
There's absolutely nothing excellent about that. Edicts are superb. Ignore them at your peril.
Cool, but your empire is three or four times as large as mine, and I have some empty mining district and other slots that will fill in over time. I'm in the process of expanding my forges, and I'll still running good numbers, big enough to build the fleets I need as a pacifist (total 80k right now).
Last edited:
That doesn't actually look all that good for 2239. Only using 81 fleet cap is abysmal for that point in the game - your economy should be able to support a fleet that can wipe out all marauders at that point. Especially for how many pops you have that's rather unimpressive. You should have probably double the alloy income and about 4 times the standing fleet if you want to claim a good economy for that year.
Thank you! It's all about the margins. Expansion, research, fleets/expansion (alloys) are all built on the margins. A 10-20% increase in total productivity, when net income is only 10-20% of total, is doubling how much you can build on that excess capacity.
I'm not sure I agree with the OP that they're "mandatory." You can survive just fine without them. But, apparently, playing worse than your friend is unacceptable.
I don't see the problem. Territories vary with the resources they have.
I don't see why you find it so incomprehensible for two different empires controlled by two different people to work out exactly the same. He made decisions that improved his empire even while in a disadvantageous position.
Doesn't mean the same decisions should improve your empire the same way it did his.
Do your empires even have the same ethos? Same species traits?
Also IIRC, you get influence gain by having rivals. So he exploited that and use production edicts and was rewarded for it.
I don't see why you find it so incomprehensible for two different empires controlled by two different people to work out exactly the same. He made decisions that improved his empire even while in a disadvantageous position.
Doesn't mean the same decisions should improve your empire the same way it did his.
Do your empires even have the same ethos? Same species traits?
Also IIRC, you get influence gain by having rivals. So he exploited that and use production edicts and was rewarded for it.
So, to be clear: You intentionally disabled all clerk jobs? Everywhere and always?
What is your argument for that?
What planet type you and your friend set? So far for all my 3 playthrough I have excessive food productions. I just keep selling it and give it to my neighbors for better relations. All my planet settings are wet, Continental, Ocean, Tropical. Having terraforming etch at early game actually boost my economy a lot.
Also I didn't use edict until later because I mostly get my minerals from stations. I like to secure my territory first and go tall later.
Also I didn't use edict until later because I mostly get my minerals from stations. I like to secure my territory first and go tall later.
you said your stability was 50? gets some amenities and raise that stability. Also use consumer benefits from trade so trade value converts into minerals (consumer goods) and energy.
This is my current run. I'm not playing a slaver. Fanatic Egalitarian Materialist with Shared Burdens and Mechanist. The idea was more of an RP run than an attempt to min/max, but I think it's really a pretty strong build. I haven't been using the influence edicts, I used my influence to expand early on and more recently to build a network of gateways and some megastructures. Coordination Centre is great and I'm about to get my second one by repairing the ruined one that was adjacent to the Xenophobe FE (which has been removed from the map around 2360).
Anyway- this is a little further into the game than your run, but that's the nature of ironman, I can't go back in time to look at my economy from 2330. This screenshot is before I invaded the FE worlds so I'm not getting all the resources from their OP buildings. I have a first stage Dyson Sphere, a finished Coordination Centre, and I've repaired two sections of Cybrex Alpha but the colonies haven't even got to size 10 yet. This economy is fueled by planets. I have one Ecumenopolis, but since I can't resettle it's nowhere near full. I have maybe 7 or 8 alloy districts. My planets are a mixture of Forge Worlds, Tech Worlds, an Industry World (don't need that many CGs with SB and using Consumer Benefits). I also have a bunch of rural worlds. Most of my planets have 85+ stability. My third civic was Byzantine Bureaucracy. My civics all synergise nicely as well as being strong in their own right. Mechanist means that most of worker jobs are done by robots thereby avoiding a major downside of Shared Burdens which is workers taking 0.4 CGs. My rulers only cost 0.4 CGs just like everyone else which makes BB especially good with the extra administrators it gives you. I generate enough Unity to keep 4 Unity Edicts up, but I'm not actually using the mineral one, because I simply don't need them. I'll probably use it later on once I can really pump my alloy production. Unity says 1k, but it's actually about 1900 here. I should clear well over a million fleet power before 2400. I've got a Titan in each BB fleet mostly because huge space ships are cool.
I've included the design of my BBs in the screenshot.
Anyway- this is a little further into the game than your run, but that's the nature of ironman, I can't go back in time to look at my economy from 2330. This screenshot is before I invaded the FE worlds so I'm not getting all the resources from their OP buildings. I have a first stage Dyson Sphere, a finished Coordination Centre, and I've repaired two sections of Cybrex Alpha but the colonies haven't even got to size 10 yet. This economy is fueled by planets. I have one Ecumenopolis, but since I can't resettle it's nowhere near full. I have maybe 7 or 8 alloy districts. My planets are a mixture of Forge Worlds, Tech Worlds, an Industry World (don't need that many CGs with SB and using Consumer Benefits). I also have a bunch of rural worlds. Most of my planets have 85+ stability. My third civic was Byzantine Bureaucracy. My civics all synergise nicely as well as being strong in their own right. Mechanist means that most of worker jobs are done by robots thereby avoiding a major downside of Shared Burdens which is workers taking 0.4 CGs. My rulers only cost 0.4 CGs just like everyone else which makes BB especially good with the extra administrators it gives you. I generate enough Unity to keep 4 Unity Edicts up, but I'm not actually using the mineral one, because I simply don't need them. I'll probably use it later on once I can really pump my alloy production. Unity says 1k, but it's actually about 1900 here. I should clear well over a million fleet power before 2400. I've got a Titan in each BB fleet mostly because huge space ships are cool.
I've included the design of my BBs in the screenshot.
The short answer: You do not NEED the edicts.
Longer version: I do not really get the adamant obsession with an economy being in the positives constantly. It won't until later in the game. Frequent building might lead to frequent Job shuffling which might lead to yet again frequent income fluctuations.
That's what the market is for and why I wait until I do have two or more pops without jobs. If you balance all your economy all the time you slow down your growth. It's not like having negative income in one or two resources for a year or two (or even ten years) kills you - IF you got enough stuff to sell.
Just my advice: Build on demand. Fokus on districts first. Don't fill up every building slot asap. Drop the old patterns and behaviors regarding resources und growth. That's it.
Edicts are nice to get you out of the deepest...guano but they are certainly not mandatory.
Longer version: I do not really get the adamant obsession with an economy being in the positives constantly. It won't until later in the game. Frequent building might lead to frequent Job shuffling which might lead to yet again frequent income fluctuations.
That's what the market is for and why I wait until I do have two or more pops without jobs. If you balance all your economy all the time you slow down your growth. It's not like having negative income in one or two resources for a year or two (or even ten years) kills you - IF you got enough stuff to sell.
Just my advice: Build on demand. Fokus on districts first. Don't fill up every building slot asap. Drop the old patterns and behaviors regarding resources und growth. That's it.
Edicts are nice to get you out of the deepest...guano but they are certainly not mandatory.
In my current game I just finished with the Khan. My economy was in good shape before, but I was a little behind in fleets (due to mostly peaceful neighbors and playing inward perfection with f. pacifist), so the Khan hit me pretty hard. I survived the onslaught, but he took three colonies before he died of space fever. I burned through all my resources to try to keep him at bay and be the end my economy was in bad shape, so I used these edits to help me get back on my feet. Now things are humming along again and I don't need their boost anymore. This feels like a good spot for these edicts; something like the Marshall plan after WWII.
The post also implies intentionally suppressing clerks, so my provisional diagnosis is that they shot their own foot by undervaluing trade & amenities, which would drive higher than normal technician employment and impose generally inferior productivity for all pops.
I think this plays into the general undervaluing of marginal bonuses. Let's say for the sake of argument that in the early game each pop is capable of producing about 1.2x of what they and their workplace cost in maintenance. If you can run 85-90 stab on a planet that 1.2 might become say 1.45 which means that your 'profit' has more than doubled. This is also why those edicts can be a huge boon early on, but the cost in slower expansion is very punishing. If you can manage to get the boost from high stability instead, though, you can build up that profit margin of resources that can then be reinvested in the economy while also expanding at a steady rate.
Shared Burdens with Mechanist is a good way to get started. You get +5 happiness to all strata from SB, +5 stab from SB, 3 more pops than a normal empire from Mechanist plus robots are cheap in upkeep in terms of housing and amenities. Try to build starbases in populated systems for the deep space black site. You get two starting factions which are easy to keep happy which grants both more happiness and more influence. Turn on nutritional plenitude - you can easily afford it with robots making up a good portion of your pops. That's more happiness and growth.
Maximise those margins, maximise growth, go for those techs that give you 20% more stuff from jobs. Sell any rare resources you can get your hands on. Grow lots of food and sell that too while keeping the encourage growth up on key planets. By getting as much growth as you can and looking for all the ways to maximise those profit margins, it all sort of multiplies and before too long your economy just sort of explodes. The system takes a lot more learning than before, and it's pretty deep (though still very rough around the edges).