I modded meritocracy to give +20% ruler strata output and I'm enjoying it. Makes for an interesting shift in playstyle to try and maximize ruler pops.
Best and Worst Traits, Civics, Ethics in 2.2 (and subsequent patches)?
- Thread starter DDRussian
- 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.
I modded meritocracy to give +20% ruler strata output and I'm enjoying it. Makes for an interesting shift in playstyle to try and maximize ruler pops.
I played a game with Agrarian Idyll back when it first came out and didn't require fanatic pacifist, and despite the change to fanatic pacifist completely destroying that empire's design I was entirely fine with it because holy crap I never unlocked traditions so fast.
In 2.2 it seems a lot more interesting, but still quite good.
Yet you still get the Science Nexus at the point in time when you're pretty much done with techs since by the time you can actually make the thing you've already researched about everything there is. It really only helps with repeatable techs
Fertile+communal+byzantine administration = -30% housing needs aka you can fit 42% more pops in a single planet (10÷0.7=14.2)
This means a 300 housing ecumenopolis could house 428.6 pops
This means a 300 housing ecumenopolis could house 428.6 pops
Can confirm that is very powerful, specially if you increase divesity
I don't know. I've got 46 different species (ignoring subspecies) in my empire (for some reason certain half-breeds are considered their own proper species), by the time I've gene-modded them all there will be new halfbreeds that will need to be genemodded again ... I've repeatables to research, you know. And considering that my planets are absolute melting pots (Earth remains the last bastion of Neo-Humanity ... where it provides a whole 33% of all pops), I don't think I can actually abuse Gene Modding to it's fullest like for example slavers can. I can create super-Miners, sure, but they'll be only a tiny fraction of my entire populace. A species with population controls can instead very precisely grow it's pops, if you have 8 miner jobs on a planet you'll grow 8 miner-species pops.
The problem is: Ecumenopoleis do it better. They'll provide even more living space than a ring world segments (28 Residential Arcologies @ 15 housing vs 50 city districts @ 7 housing), their districts are essentially super-charged buildings, they get a massive growth bonus AND they are way, way cheaper. BY taking over Trade, Alloys, CG and Unity generation, they'll allow your other planets to be respecced into something else. Though considering the amount of resources a Ecumenopolis devours on a monthly bases, most will of course by rural worlds. And if you want energy, why not built a Dyson Sphere instead?
And finally, for the price of a ringworld (55k Alloys), you can field like 50 battleships or so. Go beat up the Ancient Caretakers with those (you really really don't want them to go berserks nowadays when crisis fleets are 35k and their fleets are 80k) and get a couple of cheap ringworlds with op buildings on them.
I agree one on one ecumenopolises mop the floor with ringworld sections thanks to their amazingly powerful arcology districts. So what if you can build 50 residential districts on a ringworld when you can't build enough buildings to actually occupy them. I do find it funny that a size 10 planet and a size 50 ringworld can support the same number of buildings for sure, but ringworld specific districts, better optimized ones, would make more sense.
The thing here is - it is rather hard for me to estimate a "vanilla" Ringworld. I play with Agrarian Idyll, so my Ringworlds always end up with something among the lines of 41 Generators + 10 Farms, which leads to a total population of ~220 with my usual housing reducting traditions & traits - and that is actually more than enough to fill all jobs and buildings. So these Ringworlds have lower population density, but that ultimately just means that I need to invest less refined resources to maintain them. I suppose it's their sustainability that makes them very appealing to me.
...and in the end that lower pop count doesn't really matter, since I can always build more Ringworlds. Even the higher admin cap isn't really important. Given that the social tech tree doesn't have any super relevant late game techs, I can just go all the way to Administrative Efficiency XX+ by year 200.
I suppose if I have the time during my christmas vacation, I'll do some theorycrafting and do the math to see if it is really the Ringworlds that carry my empires, or if it is just the amazing Agrarian Idyll & its synergy.
Let's be fair in that regard: There is no need to finish all 4 segments immediately. Once you get your first one, you'll have 20-30 years to fill it up, in the meantime you can build 12 other Mega Structures - like the Decompressor, the Dyson Sphere or the Science Nexus.
...but let's stay on topic, I'd rather not derail this thread any further with even more Ringworld discussion.
Does this also apply (in reverse) to Non-Adaptive? i.e. do the habitability system changes make it an easy +2 trait points, or does the habitability decrease actually cause problems?
Non-Adaptive means +10% consumer goods and +10% food consumption on planets, which is bad. But on slaves who don't get consumer goods, it's great! So basically combo that with syncretic and it's an easy +2 points.
It may look like easy points, but don't forget that it results in more upkeep for the pops, which may snowball quite impressively. I had quite some tough time in recent games where I performed worse than my initial 2.2 game despite having more knowledge about how stuff works.
It turned out that all these modifiers tend to stack into some really harsh numbers. You get +10% food upkeep because pop growth is cool, another 10% from "free points" of being nonadaptive, then another from settling planet of not your biome and then you are wondering why there is barely any advance despite implementing this super cool build.
I will not call them free points.
Slaver guilds is essentially 10% extra worker production from start. Not sure why people consider that garbage...
The lower political power for slaves also negates the decreased happiness. So that both non-slaver builds and slaver builds end up at around the same level of stability; including the resource bonus (~4% on homeworld).
I find that Merchant guilds is great for both conquest and resettlement builds; You get slightly less amenities (3) and unity (1) than admins, but in turn it let's you produce energy and consumer goods (through trade policy) from the capital.
On the other hand, I think Byzantine Bureaucracy and even Aristocratic Elite have it beat in the end.
BB reduces amenities usage, and let's you build a building that - at base - gives about 16 extra amenities. I find that usually takes care of the amenities problem on conquered (AI) worlds.
AE on the other hand let's you add flat stability, which counteracts the happiness penalty you get from newly conquered worlds. Noble Estates are also unlimited, and a great way to keep slave worlds over 50% stability.
Also you can switch out of IP by picking psionic ascension, then have your chosen one appointed as god-emperor. As long as you don't have imperial authority already...
So, pre-2.1 the game was two years old. As of 2.2 it's a few weeks.
I wouldn't trust a guide on best and worst picks. Just check the forum, you can find a topic on how eucuemnopolis are not strong enough and another on how they are too strong. Machine worlds are apparently completely OP but also not powerful enough. There are a few trends emerging but it's clearly too soon to say.
I wouldn't trust a guide on best and worst picks. Just check the forum, you can find a topic on how eucuemnopolis are not strong enough and another on how they are too strong. Machine worlds are apparently completely OP but also not powerful enough. There are a few trends emerging but it's clearly too soon to say.
Because it always enslaves 40% regardless of the avilable jobs. It's a huge hassle and it doesn't work with xenos at the moment unless that was fixed.
since they changed repungent to be -2 points, and you don't have 20% habitability limit anymore, you can make really powerful species by going nonadaptive+repungent for -4 points a d 3 picks left
example nonadaptive,repugnent,industrious,ingenuine,thrifty for 15% bonuses to trade, minerals and energy. or you can make venerable,quick learners,talented for leaders that live 160+ years and can get to ridiculous levels by midgame.
example nonadaptive,repugnent,industrious,ingenuine,thrifty for 15% bonuses to trade, minerals and energy. or you can make venerable,quick learners,talented for leaders that live 160+ years and can get to ridiculous levels by midgame.
Right now World Shaper is the worst ascension perk, but that's only because Gaia terraforming is bugged.
Still, stay away from it until it gets fixed.
Still, stay away from it until it gets fixed.
You can interact if you do not constrain yourself by RP reasons.
Just stop being Pacifist: you lose all the features of the civic, the good ones and the bad ones as well.
Then you can go to offensive wars and the like. You can even ask others to become your subjects.
You just lose one Civic slot. Not a big deal.
Use Inward Perfection to be strong, then manipulate factions, lose Pacifist and conquer everyone if you want.
Couple of question/comment.
Seeing a lot of people praising merchant guild, in the game I tried it merchant didn't produce unity which made the whole thing not that great, was that just a freak bug or am I missing something?
Barbaric despoiler/inward perfection, I'd say there biggest advantage is replacing the crappy diplomacy tradition with the much more powerful adaptability tree. The only things that stings is losing the -10% market fee, but in exchange you get -10% housing, +10% habitability, 1 free building, and a planet decision to get a new feature on all your planet (ie more district). That's huge!
Haven't made it that far yet, but if it's still possible to use the psionic chosen one to change your government away from your starting choice to authoritarian government then inward perfection is probably the strongest ethic (assuming the extra building stick around once you switch out of inward perfection).
I also really hope they're going to change teh way pop growth is handle, sooner rather than later, which would change the usefulness of a couple of trait/ethic.
Seeing a lot of people praising merchant guild, in the game I tried it merchant didn't produce unity which made the whole thing not that great, was that just a freak bug or am I missing something?
Barbaric despoiler/inward perfection, I'd say there biggest advantage is replacing the crappy diplomacy tradition with the much more powerful adaptability tree. The only things that stings is losing the -10% market fee, but in exchange you get -10% housing, +10% habitability, 1 free building, and a planet decision to get a new feature on all your planet (ie more district). That's huge!
Haven't made it that far yet, but if it's still possible to use the psionic chosen one to change your government away from your starting choice to authoritarian government then inward perfection is probably the strongest ethic (assuming the extra building stick around once you switch out of inward perfection).
I also really hope they're going to change teh way pop growth is handle, sooner rather than later, which would change the usefulness of a couple of trait/ethic.
I feel like Efficient Bureaucracy should have a scaling bonus, rather than a flat bump, something like 20 cap + 1 per 10 sys score (so it grows as you play)