Districts/Buildings jobs and housing

[permeakra]

As of now we have a wild assortment of districts (basic resource generators, mostly residential of at least three different sorts, resource transforming of various kind) with different availability, some providing housing and jobs, some providing only jobs and few providing only housing. We also have a wild assortment of buildings providing jobs and/or housing. Finally, we have vairous modifiers to housing usage coming from traditions, civics, species traits and species rights. (I don't recall any coming from tech though, except through genemodding)

All this together forms a complex mess with several abuses that probably were not intended (like use of fortresses as housing buildings on habitats. WTF?) and makes AI struggle with proper layout of planets. Actually, people also struggle with it (see for example any ongoing debate on usability of clerks)

So, while the idea of housing, jobs and districts is definitely good and I'm all for it, the particular implementation isn't.

Now, I definitely like districts. They are a major improvement over the old tile system. But some remains of the tile system are still here in form of buildings. I would love to either get rid of it, or at least limit their interaction in terms of jobs and housing to avoid abuse. A possible option would be to move most of generation/transformation/spending of resources and most remaining housing from buildings to districts, so most buildings provided a planet-wide modifier and maybe a couple or so of powerful jobs and little else.

What do you think?

UPD.
I see some disagrees, but no reason is given. Would you care to give a reason? Because if you don't see a problem it is one, but if you disagree on how I want to handle the problem it is another.

 

[AlphaAsh]

with several abuses that probably were not intended (like use of fortresses as housing buildings on habitats. WTF?)

Cherry picking this because... why are 'militarised habitats' an unintended abuse? Seems to me that parking a militarised habitat on a choke point with an FTL Inhibitor is a bloody good tactic, and entirely intentional.

 

[permeakra]

Cherry picking this because... why are 'militarised habitats' an unintended abuse?

They are not. Using fortresses to generate housing however is.

Citadels and Fotresses are clearly meant to be reliant on planetary infrastructure, generating sprawl, since they have less housing than amount of pops needed to open next building slot. But with packing livestock or domestic slaves and few -housing modifiers you can bypass the need for housing from districts and pack fortresses on habitats with no districts. Or resort worlds with no districts.

 

[AlphaAsh]

I admit that militarised Resort Worlds is a stretch, but I'm not seeing the issue with the buildings themselves providing housing. Citadels and Fortresses aren't clearly meant to be reliant on planetary infrastructure - they provide their own housing, ie infrastructure, much like a military base does.

US military bases here in the UK are highly self-sufficient communities, even providing amenities like bowling, and malls, ffs. So, I can't agree with your assumption here.

 

[permeakra]

I admit that militarised Resort Worlds is a stretch, but I'm not seeing the issue with the buildings themselves providing housing.

There isn't one until you can stack enough modifiers to abuse the system. With current system you can pack enough pops in some buildings to open 1 and sometimes 2 next building slots, bypassing sprawl from residential districts. I doubt it was intended. OK, it clearly was intended for gestalts with their stick of insane packing of pops, but I don't think it was intended for regular empires.

 

[y1kdcb5au9rqw]

The problem is not the districts or buildings - it is how they are unlocked. Especially the livestock/servant exploit is quite bad.

Personally I think that only full citizenship pops should count 1:1 for building unlock - residents maybe .75 and slaves .25. Servants and livestock should not count at all.

Would also help balance slavers vs. non-slavers as slavery is way too powerful in the current build.

 

[Greenslade]

As of now we have a wild assortment of districts (basic resource generators, mostly residential of at least three different sorts, resource transforming of various kind) with different availability, some providing housing and jobs, some providing only jobs and few providing only housing. We also have a wild assortment of buildings providing jobs and/or housing. Finally, we have vairous modifiers to housing usage coming from traditions, civics, species traits and species rights. (I don't recall any coming from tech though, except through genemodding)

All this together forms a complex mess with several abuses that probably were not intended (like use of fortresses as housing buildings on habitats. WTF?) and makes AI struggle with proper layout of planets. Actually, people also struggle with it (see for example any ongoing debate on usability of clerks)

So, while the idea of housing, jobs and districts is definitely good and I'm all for it, the particular implementation isn't.

Now, I definitely like districts. They are a major improvement over the old tile system. But some remains of the tile system are still here in form of buildings. I would love to either get rid of it, or at least limit their interaction in terms of jobs and housing to avoid abuse. A possible option would be to move most of generation/transformation/spending of resources and most remaining housing from buildings to districts, so most buildings provided a planet-wide modifier and maybe a couple or so of powerful jobs and little else.

What do you think?

Part of the limitation is "4 district types per planet/habitat."

If we could get round that, I would like to see (as I've said elsewhere) a functional split with Districts providing Jobs/Housing and Buildings being modifiers to improve districts.

So for eg you would build a "research" district which provided some researcher jobs, but you could build modifier buildings that improved jobs per district and output per job.

This is a more intuitive breakdown in my opinion and would enable more "at a glance" information about what each planet etc is doing.

 

[permeakra]

Part of the limitation is "4 district types per planet/habitat."

Um.
I think such restriction should be lifted.

 

[Greenslade]

Yeah I was commenting in general. Sorry. I'm agreeing with you.