What if habitability mattered? Maybe a ceiling to pop resource production modifier and happiness equal to min(100, Hab.*2), so organics wouldn't benefit from planets below 50% habitability as much as they do now?
Last edited:
It actually matters. Authoritarians and slavers have better time with it, but it still can hit you hard. It doesn't hit you so much in basic production as in CG use and building slots.What if habitability mattered?
food districts arguably have better performance than energy districts
It was absolutely OP in the dev clash, and it would still be OP in the game. I think they need to reimagine the ME economy on a far wider scale than just pop growth (though that's obviously an important part of it). There's also the issue with energy gain from districts, the lack of trading value, bioreactor being utter shit, mineral cost of pop growth for 0 added value, etc, etc.
Normal organics require amenities, free organics eat consumer goods, and slaves produce increased crime. The effects are hugely increased in bad habitability. The impact in resource consumption is hard to estimate, but it exists and thus, "arguable", since it depends on habitability for organics. Pretty sure that for 0% habitability machine bots are superior and I think on ~50% habitability they are even more or less.There's nothing arguable about it, farmers have a base production of 6 food compared to 4 energy from technicians. Even if you never bother with food processing plants, you're still up in efficiency.
i don't know if anyone else has noticed it but in my only game of playing robots this patch the ai decided it was better to build a conquered civs robots then my own super upgraded all points spent robots. Because yes i want robots that are complete garbage instead of working ones.
Let me give you news: dev clash is not worth to be taken serious as they rp there and most of the devs were shitty players. no offense
Nope.
Say, you have a world min/en/food 7/7/7 of 16. ME build 7/7/0 , Min Proc. Plant and Energy Grid
Organics want 5/5/5, Min.Proc.Plant, Energy Grid AND Food Proc Fac.
Net loss of 1 building slot, not zero sum.
Of course, once machine/hive worlds come in, situation becomes more balanced between gestalts, and they gain significant advantage against organics in this.
Gestalts also make much better use of habitats. Long run they can easily outgrow normal organics.
Normal organics require amenities, free organics eat consumer goods, and slaves produce increased crime. The effects are hugely increased in bad habitability. The impact in resource consumption is hard to estimate, but it exists and thus, "arguable", since it depends on habitability for organics. Pretty sure that for 0% habitability machine bots are superior and I think on ~50% habitability they are even more or less.
free organics eat consumer goods, and slaves produce increased crime.
Nope.
Say, you have a world min/en/food 7/7/7 of 16. ME build 7/7/0 , Min Proc. Plant and Energy Grid
Organics want 5/5/5, Min.Proc.Plant, Energy Grid AND Food Proc Fac.
Net loss of 1 building slot, not zero sum.
Of course, once machine/hive worlds come in, situation becomes more balanced between gestalts, and they gain significant advantage against organics in this.
Gestalts also make much better use of habitats. Long run they can easily outgrow normal organics.
*rolling eyes* You are not expected too. It is net production (i.e. excess of resource output over maintenance) that matters.But currently you will never beat an organic empire in pop growth, you simply lack the tools for this.
You can't take one part of upkeep and ignore the other.That's cool but we were specifically discussing energy vs food upkeep so I'm not sure why you're moving the goalposts.
You'd think a machine could be constructed faster than it takes to grow a human and make him part of the workforce.
The point is, ME has so different economy than normal organics, that comparison by per-pop productivity is not possible. You need to compare an entire production chain. And, since ME have shorter production chain and less of types of upkeep and ignore habitability, things do not look so grim for them as some people are saying.