Dyson spheres or energy habitats?

[Secret Master]

As I take my first tentative steps into megastructures, I have been thinking about when and where to use them. I am not entirely clear on why someone would build a Dyson sphere in terms of minerals spent versus energy gained.

Habitats, while they suck at food and minerals, aren't too bad at generating energy. A habitat is basically a 12 tile planet with no energy on its tiles with a special 10 energy building. This beats a Power Plant IV on a regular planet (but planets often have tiles with energy on them to boost output, plus they have energy grids for a big boost). This means I can get 116 energy per habitat (assumes 1 habitat administration building that only produces 6 energy instead of 10). The habitat only costs 5000 minerals (less with the appropriate tech discount). It does require 12 POPs to run (either biological or synthetic) which entails its own maintenance costs. They also cost 100 influence (less with the tech discount), plus another 30 to colonize. A habitat takes five years or so to build. It will take some additional time to actually colonize.

A Dyson sphere costs 10,000 just to set up the site, and another 40,000 per tier (five of them) (costs are lower once you have the tech). The build site takes five years to build, and until you complete the first upgrade, it costs you 5 energy a month. The first upgrade tier doesn't produce energy. The second upgrade tier produces 100. That's 25 years and 90,000 minerals later. I haven't finished all the upgrades to my first Dyson sphere, but the tooltip tells me that a completed Dyson sphere produces 400 energy a month.

That seems a big meager to me.

It looks like there is never a reason to build a Dyson sphere until you have built habitats at every single possible location and filled them with POPs and energy buildings. Only then would it make sense to build a Dyson sphere in some leftover system that won't even support a habitat.

Am I missing something? Are Dyson spheres a better choice for empires short on food? Or am I misreading the tooltips? Or is that the way we should play it. Start a Dyson sphere in some worthless system that won't support habitats, then continue to build habitats while the Dyson sphere completes over the next few decades?

EDIT: I forgot one cost of Dyson spheres.

There is a diplomatic cost. I had some empire whine about me blotting out their favorite star. I didn't care, but maybe you federation builders might.

 

[Cattlehunter]

Dyson spheres could be better if they came early enough to pay-off the long-term investment. They also have the bonus that they generate energy without inflating your research or unity requirements with pops.

Sadly, the spheres come so late that none of those concerns matter to you anymore anyway. Which honestly holds true for all the megastructures except maybe habitats, which can be built moderately early.

 

[legionof1]

The sphere is rather weak compared to habitats in the long term. That said 650 influence takes some time to acquire. Even super specializing in influence gain you can only reasonable expect ~10 per month. Then subtract outposts and treaties, ect. So something like 8 years for the influence speced empire. Double or triple that for non specialized empires.

Seems sorta balanced for time investment. However habitats are detrimental to research costs being equivalent to a 12 size planet. So 5 size 12 planets research penalty vs none. But do you really have much left in the tech tree by this point?

Note that i am assuming 5 habitats to account for the overhead of pop upkeep needs with no pop bonus of anykind. Populations with energy bonus will dramatically outperform a sphere.

 

[The Founder]

All the Galactic Wonders have in common that they give you something, without adding any more planets or pops to your Empire. Wich would increase Research and Unitiy costs. Not to mention the lack of Miromanagement in building up the tiles (even if already low with Habitats).

For the few systems you can place them, Ring Worlds rate higher the D-Spheres if you got them (or plan on getting them).

Otherwise it depends on the number of placeable Habitats:
Only 1-3? Might be better to palce a D-Sphere, Nexus and a few Science/Unity habitats instead of Energy Habitats.

 

[Secret Master]

Note that i am assuming 5 habitats to account for the overhead of pop upkeep needs with no pop bonus of anykind. Populations with energy bonus will dramatically outperform a sphere.

That's what I was thinking.

My hive mind just engineered all the drones on the habitats for energy production. I was getting tons from them.

 

[Foxador]

All the mega structures other than habitats come wayyyyyyy to late to be useful. I rather just make a few habitats for pure science and energy than make the other stuff. I owned 50% of a large galaxy by the time I could even make a ringworld since you need pretty much max tech to make it plus the rare random tech to even pick it while habitats only need battleships.

400 energy is also super low for the extreme amount of materials and time you spend to make just a single mega structure

 

[-Marauder-]

The production for both Dyson Sphere and Tech Hub is rather on the low end overall. It's only made worse by you only being able to build one at a time despite being able to afford more.

 

[krios41]

I build my first dyson sphere when i didn't even own a quarter of the map. Undocking my fleet resulted in a staggering -79 energy while keeping it docked i had more then 100.
During any given war i was forced to keep my fleet docked and i could only field for 4-8 months before risking bankruptcy. When built that dyson sphere all my energy problems where gon and could even double my fleet.

And now you're telling me the dyson sphere is not worth it?
I r confuse.

The Science nexus comes too late, i was already into repeatables before i even could afford to build one.

Rinworlds? haven't built them yet.

Sentry array? going to build that now.

Habbitats? good-ish. i don't like them because they're not 18 tiles big. I have this habbit(at) of only colonizing 18+ tile planets :3


Overal? i Think they're good, except for the science nexus wich is only usefull when you haven't reached repeatables yet. It sucks massivly that you cna only build/upgrade ONE megastructure at once, making having master builers ascenion perk an absolute must. and having that ascenion perk doesn't even allow you to build/upgrade one extra

 

[-Marauder-]

You not using habitats explains why you have problems with energy though. Habitats come with 10 energy buildings and 3/3/3 research ones. With thrifty, the stock exchange and the 5% from amoebas that easily means 15~ energy per tile. I.e a single habitat can produce about 175~ energy (administration produces less).

The main reason to not colonize smaller planets is the "malus" for research and such. Which was changed some time ago. However, any 10 tile world would "break even" in terms of pops/planet cost for the production they offer. Which leaves you with "not colonizing because they add to core systems", except habitats can and should primarily be build in systems with several planets to improve their value even further.

And yes, if two to three habitats. That cost only 1.5000 crystals, can be build at the same time, far earlier and faster can draw even with a dyson sphere or even beat it. Then there is a problem. Not with the habitats mind you. They are in a good spot compared to proper planets given their limitations. But with the dyson sphere. Similar to the science nexus, while the numbers look fairly big they aren't at the point where one can build it and do not hold up when compared to other options.

 

[Erei]

By the time you unlock the Dyson sphere, then build it, you would have habitats all over the galaxy, and taken 2-4 fallen empires and their unique building for an amazing amount of energy.
With little luck, you'll have the sphere when you have nothing else to do but watch a full galaxy that belongs to you.

 

[The Founder]

Overal? i Think they're good, except for the science nexus wich is only usefull when you haven't reached repeatables yet. It sucks massivly that you cna only build/upgrade ONE megastructure at once, making having master builers ascenion perk an absolute must. and having that ascenion perk doesn't even allow you to build/upgrade one extra

I recently looked into the weighting for Mega Engineering (tech you need for Circle of Life and Galactic Wonders). Here it is:

tech_mega_engineering = {
    area = engineering
    cost = @tier4cost1
    tier = 4
    category = { voidcraft }
    ai_update_type = all
    prerequisites = { "tech_space_defense_station_3" "tech_spaceport_6" "tech_zero_point_power" }
    weight = @tier4weight1
    is_rare = yes
    
    modifier = {
        max_minerals = 20000
        planet_building_build_speed_mult = 0.5
    }
    
    weight_modifier = {
        factor = 0.1
        modifier = {
            factor = 0.25
            NOR = {
                research_leader = {
                    area = engineering
                    has_trait = "leader_trait_expertise_voidcraft"
                }
                research_leader = {
                    area = engineering
                    has_trait = "leader_trait_curator"
                }
            }
        }
        modifier = {
            factor = 2
            has_ascension_perk = ap_master_builders
        }
        modifier = {
            factor = 20
            any_system_within_border = {
                OR = {
                    has_megastructure = spy_orb_1
                    has_megastructure = spy_orb_2
                    has_megastructure = spy_orb_3
                    has_megastructure = spy_orb_4
                    has_megastructure = think_tank_1
                    has_megastructure = think_tank_2
                    has_megastructure = think_tank_3
                    has_megastructure = think_tank_4
                    has_megastructure = dyson_sphere_1
                    has_megastructure = dyson_sphere_2
                    has_megastructure = dyson_sphere_3
                    has_megastructure = dyson_sphere_4
                    has_megastructure = dyson_sphere_5   
                    has_megastructure = ring_world_2_intermediate
                    any_planet = {
                        OR = {
                            is_planet_class = pc_ringworld_habitable
                            is_planet_class = pc_ringworld_habitable_damaged                   
                            is_planet_class = pc_ringworld_seam
                            is_planet_class = pc_ringworld_seam_damaged
                            is_planet_class = pc_ringworld_tech
                            is_planet_class = pc_ringworld_tech_damaged
                        }
                    }                       
                }
            }
        }
        modifier = {
            factor = 0
            NOT = { host_has_dlc = "Utopia" }
        }
    }
    
    ai_weight = {
        factor = 1.25 #important component
        modifier = {
            factor = 1.25
            research_leader = {
                area = engineering
                has_trait = "leader_trait_expertise_voidcraft"
            }
        }
    }
}

Base weight is 1/10 of T4.1
Not having a Voidcraft or Curator leading the science is times 0.25.
Master builder actually increases the weight twofold. So even more incentive to pick it early.
Granted, the real thing is having a Ringworld (even a naturally occuring destroyed one) in your Borders. x20 weight is a lot to consider.

I would asume the whole "only one at a time" rule is there so that wide empires can not outpace tall ones too much. Does not mater if you have 10 times the resources, if you still can only build one at a time.

 

[forfor]

It's worth mentioning that with the low mineral value of habitats, you can actually get more minerals out of hapitats by building energy buildings, and then buying from trade stations, than you can just mining them.

Mathwise:
Assuming you built the unity building, and thus have 10 tiles free.

Mining: 30 minerals per month
Energy: 53 minerals per month (based on 2 to 1 exchange rate)

 

[Secret Master]

And now you're telling me the dyson sphere is not worth it?
I r confuse.

As I said earlier in the thread, the math looks like this:

Habitats, while they suck at food and minerals, aren't too bad at generating energy. A habitat is basically a 12 tile planet with no energy on its tiles with a special 10 energy building. This beats a Power Plant IV on a regular planet (but planets often have tiles with energy on them to boost output, plus they have energy grids for a big boost). This means I can get 116 energy per habitat (assumes 1 habitat administration building that only produces 6 energy instead of 10). The habitat only costs 5000 minerals (less with the appropriate tech discount). It does require 12 POPs to run (either biological or synthetic) which entails its own maintenance costs. They also cost 100 influence (less with the tech discount), plus another 30 to colonize. A habitat takes five years or so to build. It will take some additional time to actually colonize.

A Dyson sphere costs 10,000 just to set up the site, and another 40,000 per tier (five of them) (costs are lower once you have the tech). The build site takes five years to build, and until you complete the first upgrade, it costs you 5 energy a month. The first upgrade tier doesn't produce energy. The second upgrade tier produces 100. That's 25 years and 90,000 minerals later. I haven't finished all the upgrades to my first Dyson sphere, but the tooltip tells me that a completed Dyson sphere produces 400 energy a month.

Habitats raise research costs like a planet, but you can also fill them with labs that will more than compensate for that.

 

[The Founder]

It's worth mentioning that with the low mineral value of habitats, you can actually get more minerals out of hapitats by building energy buildings, and then buying from trade stations, than you can just mining them.

Mathwise:
Assuming you built the unity building, and thus have 10 tiles free.

Mining: 30 minerals per month
Energy: 53 minerals per month (based on 2 to 1 exchange rate)

But that math only works because Habitats are realy poor at mineral and realy good at energy production.
If they were closer to the mineral yield of a 12 tile planet, the math would reveal that exchanging via enclaves is highly ineffective.

It is a nice way to boost mineral income for Galactic Wonders, no doubt. But otherwise not so usefull.

 

[forfor]

My point was that if you're forced to expand via habitats, and you want some of them to produce minerals, you may as well just make energy producers

 

[forfor]

There are also way more energy boosters than mineral, (not counting genetic effects) which further increases the efficiency of energy farming. On top of that there are more easy physics boosters available than engineering, meaning it's slightly easier to get repeatable energy tech than mineral tech (plus maybe it's just me, but physics tiles on planets seem more common than the other 2.)

 

[Te. Kenzo]

The return is very poor... also it frozen the climate in the systems.

 

[faljen_isus]

habitats are good for locking down valuable systems and they pay themselves off for not needing frontier outposts after a decade or two

 

[Diezy]

Habitats are more accessible, but the extra pops would greatly slow research, and consumer goods would be a mess. Like with the Science Nexus, it saves you lots of maintenance. But if goods or research aren't a problem, Habitats are pretty good!

 

[B3ndolf]

the problem with megastructures as i see it is there are too many restrictions on when you can get them and they should get rid of some of those restrictions. if you cant even get the ascension perk until the 3 or later slot why do you also need a tech requirement for the perk?

in my first game i went psionic asap and worked in the megastructure perks around it, i didnt want habitats or ringworlds since i had loads of planets left to colonise and ive had ringworlds before and seen habitats in streams but i wanted to play with the others. i had to wait until i had done 2 or 3 rounds of most of the engineering repeatables before the mega engineering tech showed up and had 2 unused ascension perks for decades. not only was it very frustrating but it also meant by the time i even got to pick the perks i had already beaten the unbidden and a fe and basically was only still playing to get to see those fun things.

then when i finally got them i found i can only build one at a time and since i had started the scanner first that was what i was stuck with, dont get me wrong the scanner was cool especially after the 3rd (i think) upgrade, lets you see everything over a very large area which eventually covers the whole galaxy which is really nifty but by that time in the game almost completely pointless, i never got to see the others cos i finished up the game before i built them.

if they want megastructures to be in any way meaningful parts of the game they need to let them come earlier, maybe even in stages. if the perks didnt require research prereqs but the individual stages of the mega structures did that would work better. the scanner for example could be upgraded 1 level for each level of sensor tech you have and only require the mega engineering tech for the final level. similar things could be done with the dyson sphere linked to energy techs and needing mega engineering for the final stage and the science structure could be linked to research lab tech.

done that way you wouldnt even need to have restrictions like needing 3 other perks selected before you can take a mega structure perk since how far you can go with any of them would be limited by both tech and resources. it would also add to the feeling of undertaking an immense project this way since some of them might actually take 100+ years to build as you have to wait for new tech to upgrade them.

habitats i think are fine as they are, if you see yourself in a situation where space is likely to be limited you can make the decision to rush fortress and battleship tech and get habitats asap and actually build a strategy out of it that will compensate to some degree for a poor start. ring worlds are also kinda fine, they arent really meant to be part of a strategy, they are a big cool thing you can do at the end of the game. the others tho should be more usable much earlier in the game, otherwise whats the point of limiting dyson sphere output to 400 for "balance reasons" if you can only build one after you have won the game already anyway.

either that or they need to find a way to keep the game interesting and challenging and stable for much longer but that is probably a discussion for another thread