Hive Minds are OP in 2.2

[Kukumarro]

I started a game with a Devouring Swarm in 2.2, it is 2336, I am biologically ascended and researching repetable technologies. I have 865 pops in 20 planets (100 systems, empire size 400), with a monthly pop growth of 8.88 in each planet. My score: 14231. In a parallel game, I have a standard empire in the same year, and my score is less than half. I didn't even go to war against anybody, so the only bonus I have effectively used from being a Devouring Swarm is the 50% influence discount in starbases. This is completely broken.

I can think of several reasons why this happened:

• The pop growth for hive minds is naturally high. While a normal empire starts with +3, a hive mind starts with +4.5. However it can go up waaay higher, as the available bonuses to pop growth are bigger and cheaper than for normal empires (drone campaign 500 food empirewide, promote planetary growth 1000 food per planet).
• Pops are cheaper to maintain, as they require 0 consumer goods. Standard empires have to dedicate a considerable chunk of their economy to consumer goods. Instead, I just dedicate all the extra pops to science.
• Menial drones are as productive as workers from a standard empire. While they don't benefit from hapiness bonus, this bonus becomes so small in comparison to all other bonuses (like tech) that there is practically no difference.
• Complex drones are actually more productive than specialists from a standard empire. Researchers give +3 research for -2 consumer goods, brain drones give +4 research for -6 minerals (equivalent to 3 cg). You have 50% more minerals as hive mind, so you can easily afford those minerals and get +33% research from the same job, and you will actually have more brain drones than others have researchers. Synapse drones give a bit more society research for the same input costs than culture workers.
• Complex drones demote to Menial drones instantly. This makes balancing the economy completely trivial.

So in short, hive minds have way more pops than standard empires (i would say 100% more, rather than 50%), which are cheaper to maintain and actually more productive, therefore much more cost-effective. The lack of trade does not make up for all these benefits at all, just having +50% energy workers makes up for that alone.

All this made me snowball like crazy. I can actually play a better tall-style game than non-gestalts, while the penalties to tech and unity in a wide style do not keep up with my increased production at all. I recommend big nerfs to the productivity of complex drones and much bigger penalties to wide playstyles.

 

[Osgiliath]

Sounds really fun, I gonna try this my next run.

 

[Kukumarro]

Sounds really fun, I gonna try this my next run.

Oh, fun I had indeed.

 

[Siri]

I would argue it's a devouring swarm problem, not a Hive Mind problem. Devouring Swarm is definitely incredibly strong right now, for multiple reasons.
The influence cost reduction is a reason why, but I think the influence cost reduction was stronger in 2.1 than it is in 2.2. I think the real culprit is the combination of cheaper ships, and more durable ships. Because it is more costly to create a navy now the boost to their efficiency is much more useful than it used to be when everyone could just crap out endless ships ad nauseam.

Not having to use consumer goods is helpful too, even if that means you don't get any trade value (and by extension, commercial pacts). Hive Minds do have it a bit harder to maintain energy as a result but it's definitely a net gain here. Your research calculations are incorrect, however. The base conversion is 2 consumer goods to 4 research. The conversion for consumer goods is incorrect as well, as the base conversion is 1 cg per 1 mineral, unless you're trying to give the pop cost for the conversion a mineral value?

Having drones demote immediately is nice, but ultimately it's rarely more than a safety net for if you make a mistake. the demotion will almost never matter in a regular empire unless you construct new buildings too early.

Their pop growth is also not stronger than regular empires, unless those empires don't use migration treaties or robots. I actually have a screenshot of my pop growth at 2336 (lol the coincidence) from my very first game I played, and I get a +9.32 a month on a slow breeder pop. Building robots is another +2 per month as well, if that is something you do. And this is without bio ascension, so no clone vats. The fact that they don't have the planetary decision for food is actually a negative for them, because you should be comparing drone campaign to Healthcare campaign (1000 energy base I believe?), not the planetary decision, since you can have both on at the same time, whereas hive minds can't.

I don't actually think Devouring Swarm is better in 2.2 than Driven Assimilator was before 2.2 though. Does it need nerfs? I'm not convinced, honestly. I always felt like genocidal gameplay was too weak unless you played against low difficulty AI.

 

[SirL]

And here I am playing with machines and selling food for credits because that's economically more reasonable. Ironic

 

[Devanor]

Complex drones are actually more productive than specialists from a standard empire. Researchers give +3 research for -2 consumer goods, brain drones give +4 research for -6 minerals (equivalent to 3 cg).

I would just like to point out that this is wrong.

Mineral to Consumer Goods is a 1:1 ratio, not 1:2, so a 6 mineral cost is not equal to 3 cg, so they're actually more than twice as costly, for a mere 33% bonus.

(at least it is in the beta version)

 

[Kukumarro]

I would argue it's a devouring swarm problem, not a Hive Mind problem. Devouring Swarm is definitely incredibly strong right now, for multiple reasons.

I didn't go to war with anyone. Effectively, the influence discount is the only bonus I used.

Your research calculations are incorrect, however. The base conversion is 2 consumer goods to 4 research.

That is true, I just checked it in the game files. In the wiki it is listed as 3 instead of 4 for some reason.

The conversion for consumer goods is incorrect as well, as the base conversion is 1 cg per 1 mineral, unless you're trying to give the pop cost for the conversion a mineral value?.

This is my calculation: a miner creates 4 minerals from nothing, therefore I can value the monthly work of a pop as 4 minerals (convertible 1:1 to energy as a technician produces 4 energy). An artisan turns 6 minerals to 6 consumer goods, so the value of each consumer good is that mineral + 1/6 of the artisan's time, so 4/6 minerals. That makes one consumer good the cost of 1.66 minerals. When I made the calculation before, I wrongly thought that the artisan turned 4 minerals to 4 cg, so my calculation gave 1cg = 2 minerals. Note that I ignored the energy costs of the mining discrict and the civilian manufactories, or any output bonuses from tech/happiness/stability, but I trust you follow my logic here.

Unless you have an automatic factory that turns minerals into cg with no need of workers (like a FE), you should definitely take into account that the labor of the pop has a value. If you don't, then the value of any resource should be 0 as you can make minerals/food/energy from thin air, just through labor which you value as 0.

Now that I realize the value of each cg is 1.66 rather than 2, which is the standard market value, I think I can make profit by selling cg in the market above that price.

 

[Kukumarro]

I would just like to point out that this is wrong.

Mineral to Consumer Goods is a 1:1 ratio, not 1:2, so a 6 mineral cost is not equal to 3 cg, so they're actually more than twice as costly, for a mere 33% bonus.

(at least it is in the beta version)

I would buy you consumer goods for minerals in a 1:1 ratio at any time you want. Even 1:1.5.

 

[Siri]

I didn't go to war with anyone. Effectively, the influence discount is the only bonus I used.

Well, then I just disagree with you. The influence reduction by itself is not worth the loss of diplomacy. As for the other factors, they are nice, but not at all worthy of being considered overpowered.

This is my calculation: a miner creates 4 minerals from nothing, therefore I can value the monthly work of a pop as 4 minerals (convertible 1:1 to energy as a technician produces 4 energy). An artisan turns 6 minerals to 6 consumer goods, so the value of each consumer good is that mineral + 1/6 of the artisan's time, so 4/6 minerals. That makes one consumer good the cost of 1.66 minerals. When I made the calculation before, I wrongly thought that the artisan turned 4 minerals to 4 cg, so my calculation gave 1cg = 2 minerals. Note that I ignored the energy costs of the mining discrict and the civilian manufactories, or any output bonuses from tech/happiness/stability, but I trust you follow my logic here.

Unless you have an automatic factory that turns minerals into cg with no need of workers (like a FE), you should definitely take into account that the labor of the pop produces increased value. If you don't, then the value of any resource should be 0 as you can make minerals/food/energy from thin air, just through labor which value is 0.

Now that I realize the value of each cg is 1.66 rather than 2, which is the standard market value, I think I can make profit by selling cg in the market above that price.

I did put the question there because it would make more sense if you were calculating that, but your conclusion is still inaccurate.
Let's say you want to produce 24 science, both hive minds and regular empires would have to use 6 researchers to accomplish this.
In this process the regular empire consumes 12 cg, at a production cost of 12 minerals to achieve this.
The hive mind instead consumes minerals directly, and to maintain 6 researchers, they need to consume 36 minerals.
This is a difference of 24 minerals to achieve the same research output.
To produce the 12 cg the regular empire uses, they need 2 artisans, and 3 miners to supply the artisans with minerals.
To supply the brain drones with minerals you hive mind to has to put 9 drones on mining. That's 4 more pops required for the cycle.
As you stated this does not include the real deep analysis of building upkeep, and pop upkeep aside from the materials required for the production (food, cg, amenities). It's not at all as one-sided as you would make it seem, however. The real value lies in the building slots they save, as well as having an easier time shifting around production since minerals can directly be used to fuel alloy production instead if one wants, while cg can't. The raw mineral cost increase that hive minds have to deal with as a cost for not using consumer goods is significant.

The increase from pop modifiers to output also scales better when you have an extra step in the production because you get to add multipliers an additional time. Honestly, I couldn't tell you which is better in the end because it's so many small costs to consider that it turns into a kind of mathematical minutia that I don't enjoy, but I can safely say that if hive minds are ahead in this area, it's not to the extent that you are trying to convince people of.

 

[bobucles]

Influence? I have so much influence as devouring swarm I don't know what to do with it. Expansion is slower in 2.2, there's no diplomacy to suck down purple mana, and war claims are free. So I have a mountain of influence that I just dunk into campaigns.

 

[happyscrub]

I made I post about it but people didn't think so. That's fine. I love my new Devouring Swarm.

 

[Kukumarro]

Let's say you want to produce 24 science, both hive minds and regular empires would have to use 6 researchers to accomplish this.
In this process the regular empire consumes 12 cg, at a production cost of 12 minerals to achieve this.
The hive mind instead consumes minerals directly, and to maintain 6 researchers, they need to consume 36 minerals.
This is a difference of 24 minerals to achieve the same research output.
To produce the 12 cg the regular empire uses, they need 2 artisans, and 3 miners to supply the artisans with minerals.
To supply the brain drones with minerals you hive mind to has to put 9 drones on mining. That's 4 more pops required for the cycle.
As you stated this does not include the real deep analysis of building upkeep, and pop upkeep aside from the materials required for the production (food, cg, amenities). It's not at all as one-sided as you would make it seem, however. The real value lies in the building slots they save, as well as having an easier time shifting around production since minerals can directly be used to fuel alloy production instead if one wants, while cg can't. The raw mineral cost increase that hive minds have to deal with as a cost for not using consumer goods is significant..

My conclusion is not that inaccurate. If 1CG = 1.66M as I concluded, then 12CG = 20M, the output of 5 miners. That matches with your calculation of 2 artisans + 3 miners = 5 jobs.
Actually, if you take into account that the civilian factory needs 4 energy, then it is 12 minerals + 4 energy + 2 pop labor (equivalent to 4 minerals/energy each) that produce the 12 CG. That makes the 12CG = 24M rather than 20M, so a ratio of 1:2.

The hive minds are less efficient with research, less than I thought in my original comment when I thought 1CG = 2M. I admit that. They need 13 pops for that cycle instead of 9. Those 9 normal empire pops need 3 technicians for the energy of the buildings, and 4 farmers to produce the needed food, a total of 16 pops. Those 13 hive mind pops need 2 technicians for the energy of the buildings, and 5 farmers to produce the needed food, a total of 20 pops. If I also take into account that each district needs 1 energy, and that you also need to produce consumer goods for the pops of the normal empire, I would have to make another correction, but of lesser order. In any case, the proportion of needed pops for the cycle is gonna be more similar to 20:16 than 13:9. If we say a hive mind will end up with 3 pops for each 2 pops of a normal empire, I see this quite advantageous for the hive mind.

 

[Hypnocritical]

I personally think the mechanic to just take over immediately when you conquer is the part that is unbalanced about the mechanic. The other empires are limited by influence as they must claim to keep it after the war. The devouring swarm mechanic and the similar one for the machine intelligence empire types is where the problem begins in my opinion... its just blob and go.. once it gets an edge it really just snowballs badly... Yes it might be behind on tech as its influence percentage will be smaller compared to the empire size. Other races get it with the planet cracking weapons, that is true but that is also at the very end of the game. I have games where by 100 years into the game i am making quit simply because i own 50+ of the galaxy and what is left poses no challenge. Takes at least 3x longer with the other empire breakdowns, even fast pop growth ones designed to blob and go quickly. Even vessels can be be limiting compared to the devouring swarm version.

 

[Siri]

My conclusion is not that inaccurate. If 1CG = 1.66M as I concluded, then 12CG = 20M, the output of 5 miners. That matches with your calculation of 2 artisans + 3 miners = 5 jobs.
Actually, if you take into account that the civilian factory needs 4 energy, then it is 12 minerals + 4 energy + 2 pop labor (equivalent to 4 minerals/energy each) that produce the 12 CG. That makes the 12CG = 24M rather than 20M, so a ratio of 1:2.

The hive minds are less efficient with research, less than I thought in my original comment when I thought 1CG = 2M. I admit that. They need 13 pops for that cycle instead of 9. Those 9 normal empire pops need 3 technicians for the energy of the buildings, and 4 farmers to produce the needed food, a total of 16 pops. Those 13 hive mind pops need 2 technicians for the energy of the buildings, and 5 farmers to produce the needed food, a total of 20 pops. If I also take into account that each district needs 1 energy, and that you also need to produce consumer goods for the pops of the normal empire, I would have to make another correction, but of lesser order. In any case, the proportion of needed pops for the cycle is gonna be more similar to 20:16 than 13:9. If we say a hive mind will end up with 3 pops for each 2 pops of a normal empire, I see this quite advantageous for the hive mind.

I feel it disregarded enough factors that calling it inaccurate wasn't unfair because it was trying to convey that something was a lot more favourable than it is in practice by highlighting benefits while not shining enough of a light on the drawbacks. There are a million things you can dig into that affect the end result, as I said, and while you can do so to determines who has an edge I think having to do so to show that something is a bit better than something else means it can probably not be called overpowered, just strong. Even at this point there are a lot of things missing from the comparison, such as the additional multiplicative factor I mentioned. The fact that hive minds can't engage in commercial pacts is another, or even generate trade value. They are, for instance, also terrible at generating amenities by comparison even before you start throwing special population types into the mix that non-hives can use. Their crime suppression is less efficient.

 

[amocpower]

The pop growth for hive minds is naturally high.

You can get very easy with "Regular Empires" very high pop growrate. Here is an expample from my last game as "Corporate", a Growrate over 8 in month.

My last game was a normal Hivemind. It was not weaker or stronger, i think notting is OP or Broken. Every style give you enough tools to play, ofcourse its not perfect balanced, Paradox must work for fine turning, but its not etremly unblanced.

 

[Kaleth]

I wont argue to much about things being OP until i've tried hive minds more. but on the population growth, i'm not sure if the arguments for regular empire growth is completely valid. you all factor in the immigration, but unless i'm mistaken, all that immigration growth is an emigration loss on other planets, so for total population growth in your empire, immigration should balance up to 0.

 

[happyscrub]

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...wth-is-going-to-need-to-be-looked-at.1137026/

What I said in that thread.

1. Turn on food policy for growth, and production policy for more food and minerals
2. Send out science ship to find new planet. When you find it, survey your way to it from home.
3. save up minerals to buy food district first so you can buy ship. (don't even spend it on building space resource stations until you get your district).
4.. Build a colony ship way before you even can colonize with it so you can land on new planet as soon as possible
5. Soon as you land you get have 1 extra pop + twice as fast growth.
6. Manage your income to produce another colony ship.
7. Search for another planet
8. Do the same thing and now you have 2 extra pops + 3 times growth.
Extra credit - While you doing all that, if you can spare extra pop to any new planets, send some to get it to 5 to make a spawning pool.

You explode in growth in the early game and can snowball with it.

 

[Retry]

I wont argue to much about things being OP until i've tried hive minds more. but on the population growth, i'm not sure if the arguments for regular empire growth is completely valid. you all factor in the immigration, but unless i'm mistaken, all that immigration growth is an emigration loss on other planets, so for total population growth in your empire, immigration should balance up to 0.

You're mistaken. As it works currently, immigration essentially spawns pops directly from the void.

 

[Nin6]

@Kukumarro I can agree that Hive minds, regular and swarm are over performing.

I've made posts with numbers and facts before, only to have the majority feedback saying disagree. Even though most of what you are saying is very agreeable.

 

[TehJumpingJawa]

You can very easy get with "Regular Empires" very high pop growrate. Here is an expample from my last game as "Corporate", a Growrate over 8 in month.

My last game was a normal Hivemind. It was not weaker or stronger, i think notting is OP or Broken. Every style give you enough tools to play, ofcourse its not perfect balanced, Paradox must work for fine turning, but its not etremly unblanced.

178 years in?!?!?!

DS has 6+ growth rate within the 1st 10 years, with no need for tech!
Moreover their new colonies don't suffer the 50% growth penalty at <10 size.
While this can obviously be avoided by shipping colonists in, there's a significant energy cost attached.

You're mistaken. As it works currently, immigration essentially spawns pops directly from the void.

No it doesn't.

Your colonies pushing, will lose growth; your colonies pulling will gain growth.
The net pop growth (excluding the effect of immigration modifiers[Corvée System/Nomadic] & foreign migration treaties) is zero.