Allow us to resettle pops in some instances

[Arizal]

I get that "liberal" nations shouldn't move their pops everywhere, but it seems strange that I cannot do "humanitarian" jobs to resettle pops I sadly and mistakenly settled on the wrong planet.

So, when a pop is on a planet for which its base happiness is less than 60%, the option to put them back where they belong should be available whatever your ethos is.

 

[X3KJ]

First of all:
There should be a marker on pops that wish to leave the planet to somewhere else.
This should be usefull for everyone, because currently there is only a "migrates" marker when they actually do migrate in a few months.

Secondly:
It should be possible to move pops even without planet administration. It should just cost more (transports have to be made elsewhere and flown back and forth -> minerals and credit cost).

To address the OP issue:
Liberals should be allowed to move pops off a planet if they wish to leave. However, they should not be allowed to determine where they want them to go - that should be free will of the pop/ AI.

However, to prevent exploits:
If the unhappiness results from the players action (e.g. terraforming a populated planet, starvation, etc), they should still be unhappy after they moved elsewhere, for beeing (basically) forced to leave due to poor government actions.

 

[Arizal]

First of all:
There should be a marker on pops that wish to leave the planet to somewhere else.
This should be usefull for everyone, because currently there is only a "migrates" marker when they actually do migrate in a few months.

In fact, unhappy pops should tend to try to improve their happiness and try to go elsewhere. Especially if their unhappiness stems from the very type of planet they are on. Only if there are no other places where they could go should they stay there.

Secondly:
It should be possible to move pops even without planet administration. It should just cost more (transports have to be made elsewhere and flown back and forth -> minerals and credit cost).

Agreed. I didn't try that since the only thing I played has been religious liberal xenophiles, but it seems reasonnable enough to be able to displace pops without an administration. After all, someone put them here.

To address the OP issue:
Liberals should be allowed to move pops off a planet if they wish to leave. However, they should not be allowed to determine where they want them to go - that should be free will of the pop/ AI.

However, to prevent exploits:
If the unhappiness results from the players action (e.g. terraforming a populated planet, starvation, etc), they should still be unhappy after they moved elsewhere, for beeing (basically) forced to leave due to poor government actions.

I understand the intention, but it might be difficult to code. Starvation wouldn't come into account, because I said it would apply only if the "base" happiness is less than 60%, which basically means living on a planet which isn't either your first nor your second choice.

In my opinion, if you are crazy enough to terraform a planet in order to displace its inhabitants, it already costed quite a lot of ressources to do so and such costs are punitive enough to discourage most players to do that.[/QUOTE]

 

[dreese55]

Well best ive done to resettle is genetic modifiers to change planet type, but that doesnt always help and can be expensive in bio research.

 

[Arizal]

Well best ive done to resettle is genetic modifiers to change planet type, but that doesnt always help and can be expensive in bio research.

I tried that, but it didn't worked. I wanted to transform a continental planet into an arid, tundra or desertic one. Eventually, my pops found the solution themselves, by becoming "super-pops" liking continental. I have only left some lizards disliking being into an arid planet (they were oceanic), assuming I didn't make any more mistakes.

 

[X3KJ]

I understand the intention, but it might be difficult to code. Starvation wouldn't come into account, because I said it would apply only if the "base" happiness is less than 60%, which basically means living on a planet which isn't either your first nor your second choice.

Oh, so you mean habitability basically. Yes that should work.

it already costed quite a lot of ressources to do so and such costs are punitive enough to discourage most players to do that.

those credits are nothing in mid/late game. Almost my entire empire is arctic by now. It would be an easy way to force people to move and get around the influence cost of moving an entire population from somewhere.

 

[Arizal]

those credits are nothing in mid/late game. Almost my entire empire is arctic by now. It would be an easy way to force people to move and get around the influence cost of moving an entire population from somewhere.

Would it really be that bad? I can see it as a decision someone can make. (edit) Maybe it could be more expensive for a liberal to terraform a planet with pops who live well in it (except if terraforming it would improve the planet for said pops)

Maybe you could add a very long modifier on the happiness of the population affected negatively by the changes, saying : "you ruined my previous world", which would be even worse if it was their homeworld.

 

[Ventessel]

Interesting idea, I would be curious to see the mechanical breakdown of what determines when a pop will migrate (and if their current planet is limiting their happiness, does that factor in?)