Buffed Gaia worlds

[Archael90]

For now, gaia worlds are extremally weak, not only much weaker compared to other ascension worlds in the same line (hive and machine worlds) but also weaker to any other special worlds (ecumenopolis, ringworlds), and takin Hydrocentric ascension perk is much better than taking world shaper, which is weird.
Gaia worlds needs drastic buff to be worth of ascension perk.
I have few ideas here:
1. Increase gaia world max dristics by fixed amount, or make them all being 25 size worlds.
2. Buff world shaper perk on its own, like allowing players to choose some special features of terraformed planets.
3. Remove basic resource districts limits on planets terraformed by world shaper or on gaia worlds.
4. Add special, rare resource extracting jobs in exchage for one miner in mining districts on gaia worlds

 

[Sutopia]

All they need to do is remove the 50% pop growth rate from Ecumenoplis and give it to Gaia.

 

[Bloodbat]

All they need to do is remove the 50% pop growth rate from Ecumenoplis and give it to Gaia.

Ecumenopolis should probably be the opposite, incredibly urban planets should be a population sink.

 

[HFY]

All they need to do is remove the 50% pop growth rate from Ecumenoplis and give it to Gaia.

Now this is an interesting idea.

Might give Life Seeded an uncomfortable start, but that can be fixed in a few different ways, and after the start it would mean a significant boost.

Not sure what to do about the Gaia Seeder civic though. Might make Gaia Worlds too cheap / easy?

Ecumenopolis should probably be the opposite, incredibly urban planets should be a population sink.

All of my yes!

 

[Ferrus Animus]

Not sure what to do about the Gaia Seeder civic though. Might make Gaia Worlds too cheap / easy?

You still need to get the gasses to start the transformation process and it costs permanently one civic slot.

 

[Rodmar18]

Ecumenopolis should probably be the opposite, incredibly urban planets should be a population sink.

Ecumenopolis or Relic Worlds? Or both?

 

[Sutopia]

Ecumenopolis should probably be the opposite, incredibly urban planets should be a population sink.

It is already a pop sink providing larger than usual districts and larger than usual housings. Am I mis-interpreting something?

Don’t quote me on this but I believe urban area population mainly come from immigration instead of local birth. The immigration part is already accounted for, but the 50% pop growth feels out of place for me.

 

[HFY]

It is already a pop sink providing larger than usual districts and larger than usual housings. Am I mis-interpreting something?

A "sink" is a thing that consumes, as opposed to a "source".

Breeder Worlds would be a pop source, and then as a counter-balance there could be pop sinks which don't produce pops.

 

[Sutopia]

A "sink" is a thing that consumes, as opposed to a "source".

Breeder Worlds would be a pop source, and then as a counter-balance there could be pop sinks which don't produce pops.

So negative pop growth modifier? That could be interesting. I’ve found myself always picking arcology project because it’s just Op.

 

[drawar]

The problem with the Gaia planets is that they are supposed to be special, but they are totally banal and common, and it is very easy to have plenty of them today.
The Ecumenopolis and Ring World are also “easy” to have, but their districts come at a cost in strategic resources.

One could, for example, imagine special districts.

Elysium :
- 1 Exotic gase
+ 10 Housing
+ 2 Entertainer
+ 1 Artisans

Garden of Eden :
- 1 Volatile Mote
+5 Housings
+3 Farmers of Abundance (+3 food, +3 energy, +2 mineral)

Sanctuary :
- 1 Rare Crystal
+ 5 Housings
+ 3 Culture Workers

Philosophical pool :
- 1 Zro
+ 5 Housing
+ 3 Alchemists (+1 Exotic gase, +1 Volatile Mote, +1 Rare Crystal)

Spire of ascent :
- 1 Dark Matter
+ 5 Housings
+ 3 Monks (+1 Zro)

The Gaia planets would not have districts/jobs to produce alloys.

Gaia bonus :
100% Habitability
+10% Biological pop happiness
+10% Lithoid pop happiness
+10% Resources from jobs
+1 unity per pop
+ 0.1 Monthly Organic Pop Assembly per pop

Planets Gaia creates new pops by assembly among the species populating the planet.

 

[HFY]

So negative pop growth modifier? That could be interesting. I’ve found myself always picking arcology project because it’s just Op.

Yeah they're probably too good right now, and their growth +% isn't as necessary as it was before auto-migration made breeder worlds viable.

 

[Ferrus Animus]

Gaia Worlds were special originally, but they've kinda been neglected.
And other special world types have kinda taken over the niche.

Gaia Worlds provide endless habitability, +10% job production, +10% biological happiness and (hidden) better features aka a couple mroe resource districts.

For Gestalts Hive/Machine Worlds are simply better, because they provide the 10% production and the habitabilty (aka all the applicable upsides) and combine that with unlimited resource destricts (better than the features), an extra repolicator/spawning drone and unlock all building slots rioght away (machien worlds also boost housing).
So for gestalts those are simply better.

For normal empires you have the ecomenopolis, which perfectly fills the niche of making a better industrial/administrive world. But because +20% to job output is better than +10% they also make better science and refinery worlds if you want to spend that iunvestment. So ecus are better for all advanced resources.

That leaves gaia two niches in the current system: Resource worlds and cheaper production buff than the alternative for normal empires. (Also It does provide roguie servitors one fo the few happiness boosts for their bio trophies they can get).

And with habitats providing a general 80% habitabiliy place and ecus 100% they are also no longer as central as a spot to allow everyone to live.


So with all that the main question for gaias would be: What is actually their niche? What do we want gaias to do?

Like we can add a slew of generic buffss tot hem like extra growth, production, housing and such to make them better at being a generic good world, but they ahve no particular role right now.
Do wwe want them better resource powerhouses? Great breeder worlds? Good for unity? Research? Do we want to give them some fo the resort world stuff where it is great to have one, or do we want to keep their bonuses local encourigng to get as many as possible and improve the world shaper perk?

In addition with the fluff being "ideal for all kinds of life" do we want to give them a more specialized function?
Like for example we could add the following bonuses:
- unlimited agrarian districts
- +2 base food production from farmers
- the 50% pop growth from ecus
- +50% housing
- +20% additional society research from jobs
- +0.5 unity per pop

 

[evilcat]

I think Gaia worlds could be buffed a little, even with something minor as 10% organic growth, only old fashion way not assembly.

It could be locked behind World Shaper, or just be a perk of gaia in general. If we buff Life Seeder, Galaxy Contender or giving a finger to that Spiritual FE (i settle when i pleased) i am all for it. There is also gaia project civic, and buffing that is good to.

Master of Nature - this ascension could also be beuffed. Giving like +6 districts not just 2. You can get +1 from simple terraforming, so +2 is nothing, not worth a perk.
Also Master of Nature could unlock decission to add planet modifier to make it more interesting.

Consacred Worlds - consacration could grant some scaling resource bonus for the empire, to pay off setup needed to use this perk at all. Right now it is derp One Vision, a lot of work and cost for similar benefit.

 

[Rodmar18]

In your aim at rebalancing Gaia worlds, you have to consider that these planets are rather protected from crippling modifiers, and can get instead some nice positive ones.

 

[Sutopia]

In your aim at rebalancing Gaia worlds, you have to consider that these planets are rather protected from crippling modifiers, and can get instead some nice positive ones.

What does it has to do with modifiers? There are rarely any Gaia world out in the wild and most are converted via some kind of terraforming from a non-gaia world, which doesn’t auto remove all negative modifiers, and cannot remove modifiers not removed by regular terraforming.

 

[Rodmar18]

1. Not everybody chooses that ascension perk.
2. In case you chose the ascension perk, then you are right: you end with a lot of Gaia worlds with no advantage with modifiers, and the removable of some neutral or negative ones. At least you get the Gaia property. Exception are a few cases where you want to keep a (research bonus) modifier that would be removed by terraformation, and it's the same dilemma as when you terraform worlds only to you preferred biosphere.
3. Not considering terraformation, being a genuine Gaia world generally means a large planet, wich in turn increases the odds for 2 positive and decreases the odds for 3 negative/neutral modifiers (Low Gravity, Weak Magnetic Field, Poor Quality Minerals). Moreover, as a Gaia world, there are better odds to draw Lush and Natural Beauty. Those otherwise removable modifiers that will stay are neutral ( e.g. Wild Storms, Hostile Fauna), the only truely negative one being Bleak, whose odds are decreased by Lush. That was my point, even if I didn't mind looking for actual odds in the files.

 

[Sutopia]

1. Not everybody chooses that ascension perk.
2. In case you chose the ascension perk, then you are right: you end with a lot of Gaia worlds with no advantage with modifiers, and the removable of some neutral or negative ones. At least you get the Gaia property. Exception are a few cases where you want to keep a (research bonus) modifier that would be removed by terraformation, and it's the same dilemma as when you terraform worlds only to you preferred biosphere.
3. Not considering terraformation, being a genuine Gaia world generally means a large planet, wich in turn increases the odds for 2 positive and decreases the odds for 3 negative/neutral modifiers (Low Gravity, Weak Magnetic Field, Poor Quality Minerals). Moreover, as a Gaia world, there are better odds to draw Lush and Natural Beauty. Those otherwise removable modifiers that will stay are neutral ( e.g. Wild Storms, Hostile Fauna), the only truely negative one being Bleak, whose odds are decreased by Lush. That was my point, even if I didn't mind looking for actual odds in the files.

The argument is, natural Gaia worlds are rare enough to not be considered in the grand theme of balancing. It’s much easier to find a relic world that provides more of everything than finding a rogue Gaia world. The most reliable one is the one connected via wormhole but again, there’s only one and not necessarily easy to access especially in larger galaxies.

 

[Ferrus Animus]

The argument is, natural Gaia worlds are rare enough to not be considered in the grand theme of balancing. It’s much easier to find a relic world that provides more of everything than finding a rogue Gaia world. The most reliable one is the one connected via wormhole but again, there’s only one and not necessarily easy to access especially in larger galaxies.

These numbers get skewed by the special systems.

Both gaia and relic worlds can spawn by pure RNG, very rarely, but msot you will see will be:
Gaia: Wenkworth, Zanaam, The Veil, Paridayda, The unconnected system, the gaia primitives, the four holy worlds
Relic: C.A.R.E world, The Omnicodex World, the Miniature Galaxy world, The First League home system

Gaias and relic worlds outside of these IME are both very rare, but random gaias are more common, butwe're talking a handful ina 1000 star galaxy added together.

 

[MaximeG80]

The problem with the Gaia planets is that they are supposed to be special, but they are totally banal and common, and it is very easy to have plenty of them today.
The Ecumenopolis and Ring World are also “easy” to have, but their districts come at a cost in strategic resources.

One could, for example, imagine special districts.

Elysium :
- 1 Exotic gase
+ 10 Housing
+ 2 Entertainer
+ 1 Artisans

Garden of Eden :
- 1 Volatile Mote
+5 Housings
+3 Farmers of Abundance (+3 food, +3 energy, +2 mineral)

Sanctuary :
- 1 Rare Crystal
+ 5 Housings
+ 3 Culture Workers

Philosophical pool :
- 1 Zro
+ 5 Housing
+ 3 Alchemists (+1 Exotic gase, +1 Volatile Mote, +1 Rare Crystal)

Spire of ascent :
- 1 Dark Matter
+ 5 Housings
+ 3 Monks (+1 Zro)

The Gaia planets would not have districts/jobs to produce alloys.

Gaia bonus :
100% Habitability
+10% Biological pop happiness
+10% Lithoid pop happiness
+10% Resources from jobs
+1 unity per pop
+ 0.1 Monthly Organic Pop Assembly per pop

Planets Gaia creates new pops by assembly among the species populating the planet.

Why not add a decision to Gaia world, lock behind the Gaia terraforming perk, a bit like restoring ruined ecumenopolis. This way, Gaia world won't be OP early game but be improuve in mid to late game. I don't think making all Gaia in max sise be a good idea but why not giving them a 20% district bonus. A sise 20 will have 4 more district.

 

[Archael90]

Making gaia worlds require ascension perk.
World shaper ascension perk require T4 technology before it can even be taken.
In comparison. ecumenopolis also needs ap, but its req is T3 tech.
Gaia worlds gives very little in return, and nothing very special.
Gaias needs some buff or rework.
Gaia worlds can provide:
- unique districts (resort districts with artificier jobs. Paradise district with more farmers etc.)
- unique mechanics (unlimitted agricultural districts, no urban districts, and all building slots open, etc.)
- special features (rare resource collecting jobs, strategic resource deposites)
- special interactions (additional features if consecrated, special features if making resort world, planet modifer that stay even if planet is encased)
Basically enything that makes it in pair with other ascension perk worlds.