Idea: Pops consume Food like consumer goods

[The Founder]

Okay how about this. Increased living standards increases consumer goods maintanence, food consumption, and happiness. Okay so all of that is true in the real world. After a certain point (High, very high, and utopia levels) the POPs get scaling negative modifiers to food, mineral (and maybe energy) output. If anything higher living standards helps with research as it gives people more time and resources to go studying all these minors things people get grants for now. How's that sound?

From Wiz Twitter and the Lifestream, we know that there is a level beyond Utopian called "Chemical Bliss". Pops are very happy. But also uterrly incapable of producing pracitcally anything, even food. I could see it maybe usefull for a Slaver empire, where the main pops are drugged to produce more unity.

"If you've ever dreamed of keeping your population happy with games, drugs and anime in @StellarisGame, 1.5 has you covered."
https://twitter.com/Martin_Anward/status/824238024745779204

 

[iniudan]

Anyone with even the most trivial grasp of actual economic history knows that this misses the point entirely. Starving people aren't starving because the fatties are eating all of their food, they're starving because the social and economic systems around them are not designed to allocate food to them. Reduced consumption in the U.S. would not feed Africa, it would merely lead to reduced production... because reducing production is more cost-effective than shipping food across the ocean to feed people who can't pay for it.

This is what happens when people read too much technical sci-fi and not enough actual history... or even thoughtful sci-fi. You get too caught up in theories and numbers and ignore the actual systems that govern reality. The earth's theoretical maximum carrying capacity is not an issue right now, man-made economic systems are.

On top of forgetting that human give importance to the look of their food, we produce more food then we can process, just to get enough AAA grade food to sell directly to the public, while the lower quality sell for almost nothing for there is too much of it to be process in a manner where look is of no importance. Food for animal actually lot more effective to growth as there is very little waste, they can eat food, that very efficient to growth, if not simply been there in soil that would be poor for agriculture, that we simply can't process or what would be the waste part of human consumption production. So it is a lot less inefficient then they make it out to be.

 

[The Founder]

Food for animal actually lot more effective to growth as there is very little waste, they can eat food, that very efficient to growth, if not simply been there in soil that would be poor for agriculture, that we simply can't process or what would be the waste part of human consumption production. So it is a lot less inefficient then they make it out to be.

How many human feeding portions worth of Grains will a Cow need, to become "harvestable"?
How many human feeding portions worth of Flesh will it yield then?

Entropy says this can not be a 1:1 translation. Every step adds inefficiency. And here we have to feed them for months, maybe years.

 

[iniudan]

How many human feeding portions worth of Grains will a Cow need, to become "harvestable"?
How many human feeding portions worth of Flesh will it yield then?

Entropy says this can not be a 1:1 translation. Every step adds inefficiency. And here we have to feed them for months, maybe years.

Call me when you are able eat the chaff part of cereals plant, for unlike us, livestock can digest chaff. A good portion of bovine meat production also is just done through grazing in pasture area where the land is less suitable to agriculture. Pig also pretty much eat anything, so they are perfect to take care of all the trash part in high intensity agricultural area that crops are less suited to meat bovine production.

Where I live the meat production mostly come from pig, chicken, old cow and male calf, as our main production are vegetables, fruits, corns, eggs, dairies and maple. Without husbandry we would have very little variety, without importation, as our climate only leave us with 6 months of crops harvest.

 

[Derp]

Okay how about this. Increased living standards increases consumer goods maintanence, food consumption, and happiness. Okay so all of that is true in the real world. After a certain point (High, very high, and utopia levels) the POPs get scaling negative modifiers to food, mineral (and maybe energy) output. If anything higher living standards helps with research as it gives people more time and resources to go studying all these minors things people get grants for now. How's that sound?

Sounds absurd. Why would happier people with better living conditions be less productive? Someone living with utopian standards isn't mining minerals out of the ground with a pick, you know.

 

[Xoatl]

Sounds absurd. Why would happier people with better living conditions be less productive? Someone living with utopian standards isn't mining minerals out of the ground with a pick, you know.

I'm basing it in real life where first world countries spend more time on leisure and take a greater cut of the labour than people living in squalor. There's also a tendency of people being obese, more sedentary, and relying on social programs. When living standards are high you only have 8 hour work days, when its very low you work 20 hrs a day.

From Wiz Twitter and the Lifestream, we know that there is a level beyond Utopian called "Chemical Bliss". Pops are very happy. But also uterrly incapable of producing pracitcally anything, even food. I could see it maybe usefull for a Slaver empire, where the main pops are drugged to produce more unity.

"If you've ever dreamed of keeping your population happy with games, drugs and anime in @StellarisGame, 1.5 has you covered."
https://twitter.com/Martin_Anward/status/824238024745779204

Good to see that's the case, I want to see what the other modifiers are.

 

[The Founder]

I'm basing it in real life where first world countries spend more time on leisure and take a greater cut of the labour than people living in squalor. There's also a tendency of people being obese, more sedentary, and relying on social programs. When living standards are high you only have 8 hour work days, when its very low you work 20 hrs a day.

That might already be figured into the Living Standarts.

Thinking about it:
The people living in Squalor need less consumer goods. So in the end (after thier 'maintenance cost') they produce more net minerals.
Meanwhile Power, Science and possbly Unity is buffed only by happiness. Slavery simply could not buff it.

So high Living standarts reduces your net Mineral Production (that has been stated as one goal of the Slave/Caste mechanic) longterm. While buffing all other producion longterm, via the happiness boost.

 

[Xoatl]

So high Living standarts reduces your net Mineral Production (that has been stated as one goal of the Slave/Caste mechanic) longterm. While buffing all other producion longterm, via the happiness boost.

Bro, that's essentially what I suggested here. What's your problem?

Okay how about this. Increased living standards increases consumer goods maintanence, food consumption, and happiness. Okay so all of that is true in the real world. After a certain point (High, very high, and utopia levels) the POPs get scaling negative modifiers to food, mineral (and maybe energy) output. If anything higher living standards helps with research as it gives people more time and resources to go studying all these minors things people get grants for now. How's that sound?

High Living standards improves happiness but give progressively increased negative modifiers to output to food and minerals (and maybe energy) as a result. If you look at the screenshot of chemical bliss you can see they implemented a more extreme version of my suggestion where even unity and research is hindered by high living standards. Which I disagree with.

 

[The Founder]

Bro, that's essentially what I suggested here. What's your problem?

That this is already implement, just without explicit penalties to minerals. And actually with a boost to energy.

The Living Standarts is a penalty to net minerals already. Just doubling or trippling the cost (by increasing living standart), will result in a net Mineral penalty. No "-5% Mineral" production needed. The mechanics already take care of that.

 

[Xoatl]

The Living Standarts is a penalty to net minerals already. Just doubling or trippling the cost (by increasing living standart), will result in a net Mineral penalty. No "-5% Mineral" production needed. The mechanics already take care of that.

Except if you look at the screenshot -% minerals is also already included in high living standards. Which I agree with. With high living standards you consume more minerals (and it should be for food as well) while less time is allocated to production. From a realism point of view it makes total sense.