If you go ocean paradise are Baol and Gaia worlds worthless?

[GloatingSwine]

Yeah, I think in general with Aquatics you probably want an Ecumenopolis more than Gaia worlds, so if you don't get a Relic World it's Arcology Project over World Shaper, because you're already close to Gaia standard on primary extraction worlds.

 

[Deshiba]

Yeah, I think in general with Aquatics you probably want an Ecumenopolis more than Gaia worlds, so if you don't get a Relic World it's Arcology Project over World Shaper, because you're already close to Gaia standard on primary extraction worlds.

The context of OP was that they rolled the baol, in that case you could forgo world shaper and arcology project.
In the remaining 80% of the RNG, arcology is most likely the way to go.

 

[Losttruppen]

it would be handy to to turn tomb worlds,

I believe the Baol "terraforming" will destroy tomb world specific resources and not replace them. Ironically this makes Grunur Prime a terrible planet to "terraform" as all the bonus mineral districts are destroyed.

 

[Millbot]

Sounds like a bug to me, I'm pretty sure the devs fixed an aspect of terraforming in the past because it got really annoying that it would erase certain planetary features for no good reason. I'd have to look to see what Grunur has. I'd suggest if it is doing this, you report in the bug forum.

I'd also argue that unless your in dire need or minerals or it's a ton of mineral districts (again, don't have access to the information for Grunur). The bug or no, it might not even matter because large worlds tend to be better suited as industrial and specialist worlds. The more industrial districts you can stack on a world, the more specialist you have benefit from the alloy foundries or civilian industries. Also have ministry of production, but the devs really should cut that because it's redundant and make it more likely that you can't get enough research labs on a specialist world to justify a research institute).

Thing is there is a cap on how much you can boost specialist output, where we have infinite techs for boosting mineral production.

 

[Tech Noir Synth]

Honestly, Aquatic trait should work on Gaia World's, that's the definition of Gaia

That would make them comparable or even better than Ecumenopolis for Worker jobs, since Ecumenopolis boosts ressource output for all ressources by 20% but obviously doesn't offer worker jobs. However Ecus are much more expensive to get, 20k minerals plus all the minerals and time spend on building districts. Essentially everyone would be playing Aquatics with Gaia worlds and a few Ecus.

Also, the same would have to work for Hive worlds to make it balanced and give Hiveminds the same options. Otherwise Gaia worlds would be better than Hive worlds when combined with Aquatic.

I don't think this would be a good change though. Because as a result you are adding an option for even more job output which will result in everyone having to pick the Aquatic trait and go for it to compete. And the more Aquatic empires you have in the game, the less of a penalty for non-wet worlds, because there will be less non-wet worlds. So in the end everyone will be an Aquatic species.

I think the way it works currently is the correct solution.

 

[Ryika]

The trade off now is if you care more about housing on a planet, or if you want the extra production boost to industry.

No, that trade-off does not exist. As I explained in the post that you quoted...

housing could apply, yet it has a manual exception for ideal planets coded into the trait.

...there is no housing penalty for aquatic species on Gaia worlds.

As it stands now, Gaia is pretty much universally superior, because neither of the downsides of non-wet worlds apply, and the benefits of a Gaia World just outshine the benefits over time. The only situation where wet worlds have a slight edge is if you have taken the ascension perk and ONLY have aquatic pops on your world, and ONLY have minerals/food/energy jobs, and even then it's only +5% minerals/food/energy vs +10% to everything else, and +10% happiness (and +2 Planet Capacity per free District, but that's not that meaningful most of the time). And of course, terraforming to Gaia is an investment, and not a particularly cheap one, but in any empire with non-aquatics mixed in the bonuses will quickly return your investment unless it's a very small planet.

So the reality is, you already want to terraform to Gaia in almost every situation, and it just doesn't feel all that good, because you're partially exchanging bonuses instead of gaining them. It feels like you're giving up a large part of your trait, but it's probably still the right decision. And that is not good design in my opinion, it just doesn't feel satisfying.

I said I want the bonuses to apply to Gaia, but I'm open for the opposite, too - but if the goal is to discourage gaia terraforming and preserving ocean worlds, then you have to make terraforming into Gaia something that has some actual downsides attached to it. Right now, aside from the initial investment, that's just not the case.

/edit: Actually, I missed that you're probably talking about the -10% Housing Usage for Ocean Worlds, not the +30% penalty. I don't think that makes much of a difference though, since 10% housing are barely anything. The difference of 40% would actually impact planet capacity a bit, but even that would probably not be a big deal compared to what you gain from a Gaia world if you're not in the perfect all-aquatics hyper-specialized resource world scenario.

 

[Ffc]

That would make them comparable or even better than Ecumenopolis for Worker jobs, since Ecumenopolis boosts ressource output for all ressources by 20% but obviously doesn't offer worker jobs. However Ecus are much more expensive to get, 20k minerals plus all the minerals and time spend on building districts. Essentially everyone would be playing Aquatics with Gaia worlds and a few Ecus.

Also, the same would have to work for Hive worlds to make it balanced and give Hiveminds the same options. Otherwise Gaia worlds would be better than Hive worlds when combined with Aquatic.

I don't think this would be a good change though. Because as a result you are adding an option for even more job output which will result in everyone having to pick the Aquatic trait and go for it to compete. And the more Aquatic empires you have in the game, the less of a penalty for non-wet worlds, because there will be less non-wet worlds. So in the end everyone will be an Aquatic species.

I think the way it works currently is the correct solution.

You're right, I thought more something like "Gaia should be considered wet" so you don't have the malus of the traits