Is stratified economy too strong?

[Currywurst44]

While desinging my empires I noticed that I tend to choose authoritarian ethics for nearly every empire that isnt egalitarian. Aside from the nice flat influence boost I think this is mostly because of the ability to use stratified economy.
What do you think? Is stratified economy too much of a must have?

 

[fodazd]

Stratified economy is really, *really* good, yes. I would say that it's the best general purpose living standard, and in combination with the +0.5 influence, it makes authoritarian one of the strongest ethics.

...However, I don't think the best response to that is to nerf stratified economy, but to buff other ethics. My personal opinion:
-> Pacifist: +5 stability and +10 admin cap is much, *much* too weak for all the restrictions and the really annoying faction.
-> Militarist: The bonuses are ok, but other than that it only gives me the weakest war doctrine in the game... Can I maybe have a little more than that for an ethics point?
-> Egalitarian: If the faction didn't freak out about robots and unemployed utopian abundance pops got at least a few positive modifiers to their yields (Intelligent? Stability?), this could be much stronger.
-> Xenophile: This could potentially be really good, but right now it's held back by the pop growth system and the federation mechanics.

...If these other ethics got a bit of a buff, I think stratified economy would feel much more balanced.

 

[Xaelyn]

Its not as strong as it seems since the political power differences don't actually do anything due to the hard caps in place, in fact stability with stratified tends to be worse than without it. The consumer goods saving is pretty powerful, but flat out slavery is miles better because it saves you even more consumer goods and a large chunk of housing and amenties, and boosts production to boot.

 

[fodazd]

Yes, the political power calculation currently doesn't work as advertised, and slaves are better than stratified workers. However:
-> The only two ethics that allow slavery are xenophobe and authoritarian, and while xenophobe is also really strong, it comes with some problems that not all builds want to deal with... Which means authoritarian is still a really good ethic.
-> Sometimes you don't get enough slaves for all your worker jobs, in which case you can fill them with stratified workers. Ruler-pops still get +5 Happiness either way.

 

[Wolfgang I]

I think academic privilege can be ok if you have lots of slaves on another living standard for the worker jobs and use another species as specialists on your non-research worlds. It requires a lot of micro though.

I agree that pacifist seems rather weak now. It got two good civics with agrarian idyll and inward perfection but thats it.
A return of the old pop output bonus or bigger stability bonus could help.

 

[Novacat]

Pacifist really got a nerf over the patches, as +10 admin cap is nowhere near as good as +5 core systems cap used to be, and Inward Perfection can no longer be switched out of once you no longer need the unity. Though, the most annoying thing about Pacifism is that Liberation Wars does not let you get a CB on fallen empires. Also kind of wished Inward Perfection did not cut off all diplomatic interaction with other empires.

My personal suggestions:

- Let Liberation war policy at least let you get claims on fallen empires, since they cannot be targeted by liberation CB.
- Create an Inward Perfection lite, half the bonuses, but also opens more diplomatic interaction. Also still gets the adaptive tradition swap, because 90% of the reason why I still go inward perfection is the excellent adaptive tradition.
- Buff up the admin cap bonuses. +20 for pacifist and +40 for fanatic pacifist would be a good start

 

[Kryndude]

and while xenophobe is also really strong, it comes with some problems that not all builds want to deal with

Could you explain that in detail please? I'd like to enhance my understanding of one of my favorite ethics.

 

[fodazd]

Could you explain that in detail please? I'd like to enhance my understanding of one of my favorite ethics.

The main downside of xenophobe is the opinion penalty with everyone else. This isn't a problem if you're going to conquer them anyway, but for a non-criminal megacorp that wants commercial pacts or a materialist empire that wants research agreements (usually just for the faction), this is a problem. It also prevents your science ships from exploring distant parts of the galaxy during the midgame, because everyone will have closed borders with you, which also means you get less anomalies. Yes, you can use subspace navigation to get around that, but it is much slower than just having open borders by default.

 

[Kryndude]

which also means you get less anomalies

I thought you get anomalies only when you're the first one to survey something? And that only the one who discoverd the anomaly can investigate it too.

 

[fodazd]

I thought you get anomalies only when you're the first one to survey something? And that only the one who discoverd the anomaly can investigate it too.

I don't think you can only get anomalies if you're the first one to survey something... Or at least it would be really, *really* weird if I was the first one to survey something in the midgame so often? oO

It's true that only the one who discovered the anomaly can investigate it.

 

[Novacat]

I don't think you can only get anomalies if you're the first one to survey something... Or at least it would be really, *really* weird if I was the first one to survey something in the midgame so often? oO

They are correct, but if an empire gets annexed mid-game, I believe that removes any 'survey' ownership they had on planets, so those planets would be able to get anomalies again.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

My pacifist senses are tingling.

[...]
I agree that pacifist seems rather weak now. It got two good civics with agrarian idyll and inward perfection but thats it.
A return of the old pop output bonus or bigger stability bonus could help.

I'd say both Agarian Idyll and Inward Perfection are among the top tier civics, that is nothing to scoff at - and given how important pop growth is in megacorp (and how all other +growth effects have been nerfed in terms of impact or cost), you could argue it is even stronger than before. Also don't forget the amazing Adaptability tree that comes with it.

The stability bonus is somewhat less powerful than the old happiness effect, that is true. However, given that amenities are now a thing, it has gained some versatility by allowing pacifists to ignore amentities to a certain extend during the early game. It's overall a nerf, but I'd still argue it's better - and more flexible - than something like +5% Research Speed from Materialist or +10% unity from Spiritualist.

The number of core systems might look low, but keep in mind you get that bonus when it matters the most - during the early game. Most empires have pathetic science and unity output until year 30+, so delaying the cost increase on early game techs & traditions is a significant boon, even if the overall raw powerlevel is lower than the old +core systems.

However, the biggest change by far is that Pacifists can now actually win games via score without waging wars.

 

[fodazd]

I'd say both Agarian Idyll and Inward Perfection are among the top tier civics, that is nothing to scoff at - and given how important pop growth is in megacorp (and how all other +growth effects have been nerfed in terms of impact or cost), you could argue it is even stronger than before. Also don't forget the amazing Adaptability tree that comes with it.

Agrarian Idyll and Inward Perfection are both really strong, yes. So are a lot of other ethics-locked civics (gospel of the masses, technocracy, mechanists, etc.).

The stability bonus is somewhat less powerful than the old happiness effect, that is true. However, given that amenities are now a thing, it has gained some versatility by allowing pacifists to ignore amentities to a certain extend during the early game. It's overall a nerf, but I'd still argue it's better - and more flexible - than something like +5% Research Speed from Materialist or +10% unity from Spiritualist.

I agree, +5 stability is better than +5% research speed or +10% unity... But +5 stability combined with not getting unrestricted wars or indiscriminate bombardment and getting a really bad faction is worse. Also, materialist and spiritualist give you access to other good things (temples, academic privilege, etc.), but pacifist doesn't really.

 

[Peter Ebbesen]

No.

It is pretty powerful by being good at the thing it is designed for, but the same goes for the other non-standard living standards. And that is how it should be. It is the "cheaper less effective pops" vs "more effective and expensive pops" vs. "default economy pops" tradeoff.

Don't feel restricted to authoritarian with stratified when you don't play egalitarian: You are needlessly limiting yourself.

 

[Secret Master]

The consumer goods saving is pretty powerful, but flat out slavery is miles better because it saves you even more consumer goods and a large chunk of housing and amenties, and boosts production to boot.

One does not preclude the other. And it's worth pointing out that Stratified Economy reduces slave consumer good use to zero (from 0.05x with decent living standards).

I'd say both Agarian Idyll and Inward Perfection are among the top tier civics, that is nothing to scoff at - and given how important pop growth is in megacorp (and how all other +growth effects have been nerfed in terms of impact or cost), you could argue it is even stronger than before. Also don't forget the amazing Adaptability tree that comes with it.

I hate to say it, but you are right about Inward Perfection.

I was a bit miffed that Inward Perfection was turned into a civic that can't be replaced, but now it's so powerful that letting players swap it out would be almost as abusive as when you could convert to Fanatic Purifier after being docile 90% of the game.

 

[AlanC9]

My pacifist senses are tingling.

I'd say both Agarian Idyll and Inward Perfection are among the top tier civics, that is nothing to scoff at - and given how important pop growth is in megacorp (and how all other +growth effects have been nerfed in terms of impact or cost), you could argue it is even stronger than before. Also don't forget the amazing Adaptability tree that comes with it..

But if you're not running those, how is Pacifism these days? I haven't tried it in the current version.

 

[Mastikator]

Stratified economy is really, *really* good, yes. I would say that it's the best general purpose living standard, and in combination with the +0.5 influence, it makes authoritarian one of the strongest ethics.

...However, I don't think the best response to that is to nerf stratified economy, but to buff other ethics. My personal opinion:
-> Pacifist: +5 stability and +10 admin cap is much, *much* too weak for all the restrictions and the really annoying faction.
-> Militarist: The bonuses are ok, but other than that it only gives me the weakest war doctrine in the game... Can I maybe have a little more than that for an ethics point?
-> Egalitarian: If the faction didn't freak out about robots and unemployed utopian abundance pops got at least a few positive modifiers to their yields (Intelligent? Stability?), this could be much stronger.
-> Xenophile: This could potentially be really good, but right now it's held back by the pop growth system and the federation mechanics.

...If these other ethics got a bit of a buff, I think stratified economy would feel much more balanced.

I agree with this assessment and I wonder if Xenphiles shouldn't get a global habitability bonus, having multiple species on all your planets may end up giving you a lower average habitability so xenophiles should just get a straight 10%/20% bonus.

Dunno about pacifists though. When I play as a pacifist I found I was able to protectorate every other empire, but that's no longer an option since population penalty is still calculated the same way. However if it were adjusted for 2.2 then I could see pacifists getting a subject integration speed bonus as a way to compensate for the fact that they can not directly conquer.

 

[Foefaller]

They are correct, but if an empire gets annexed mid-game, I believe that removes any 'survey' ownership they had on planets, so those planets would be able to get anomalies again.

Not quite. IIRC you can get anomalies from any system no matter how many previous empires scanned it, as long as said system is not claimed by anyone (except technically you, but since 2.0 you can't own a system until you survey it, so that's moot.)

Anyway, If an empire is annexed in a way that causes systems they owned to default to unowned by anyone again, then any objects that weren't scanned before by you are now unscanned again, and can be scanned for anomalies.

There are some things though, like Grey, that only trigger for a single empire. I also think there is a soft cap to the # of anomalies you can find in a single game, thanks to other once-per-galaxy anomalies and the fact there are few repeatable anomalies. And that is what leads to the appearance of not being able to scan for anomalies if another empire scans it first, especially on larger galaxies.

 

[Derp]

I agree with this assessment and I wonder if Xenphiles shouldn't get a global habitability bonus, having multiple species on all your planets may end up giving you a lower average habitability so xenophiles should just get a straight 10%/20% bonus.

Dunno about pacifists though. When I play as a pacifist I found I was able to protectorate every other empire, but that's no longer an option since population penalty is still calculated the same way. However if it were adjusted for 2.2 then I could see pacifists getting a subject integration speed bonus as a way to compensate for the fact that they can not directly conquer.

i like the hab bonus idea

as far as pacifists go, i don't like a subject integration bonus. not because the bonus itself would be bad but because i think ethic bonuses should be universally useful and that would be useless for an empire that isn't integrating.

i think pacifist needs something big to compensate for the fact that it restricts or locks out what is still arguably the most important part of the game and the only reliable way to expand past the early game territory rush. something like -10%/-20% to all construction costs (planetary and space) and +25%/+50 speed for the same. it would really cement its position as the peaceful building ethic.

 

[01d55]

It's overall a nerf, but I'd still argue it's better - and more flexible - than something like +5% Research Speed from Materialist or +10% unity from Spiritualist.

The real Materialist bonus is -robot maintenance, which locks materialism into fanatic + synth ascend, and conversely soft locks synth ascension as a Fanatic Materialist move.

Under Academic Privilege, converting all of your pops to reduced maintenance robots is a huge boost, more than makes up for emancipating constructed robots and having to eat energy instead of food.