Machine Empires are still a flop.

[szmik]

Think about them as maintenance crew. While automated factory might work on its own most of the time, someonething needs to replace broken part once in a while.

they could be represented with maintenance buildings and ammenities e.g. lack of diminishes production

 

[powerofvoid]

I've seen this mentioned a couple times now, but I'm not really sure how it works to the advantage of the longer supply chain. Near as I can tell, midstream production bonuses only help to offset the fact that you have to deal with a midstream product in the first place; modifiers in the midstream don't directly increase production at the end of the chain, and the indirect benefit just approaches (but does not reach) the effect of being able to skip the midstream entirely.

Unless I'm missing something, which I probably am since I haven't actually done a serious attempt with a regular empire yet.

Midstream goods reduce the number of workers you need, but increase the number of specialists you need. It is unclear when this is actually good. I guess if you're choked on mineral deposits?

EDIT: wait, I just checked the wiki. The problem is the actually numbers. 2 consumer goods gets replaced by *six* minerals for researchers.

 

[01d55]

I've seen this mentioned a couple times now, but I'm not really sure how it works to the advantage of the longer supply chain. Near as I can tell, midstream production bonuses only help to offset the fact that you have to deal with a midstream product in the first place; modifiers in the midstream don't directly increase production at the end of the chain, and the indirect benefit just approaches (but does not reach) the effect of being able to skip the midstream entirely.

Unless I'm missing something, which I probably am since I haven't actually done a serious attempt with a regular empire yet.

What you're missing is the implicit assumption that the practical constraint on production is the first input, i.e. minerals from mineral districts & mining stations. Midstream production bonuses allow more total output when pops allocated to mineral production are constrained.

If one assumes instead the constraining factor is population, then midstream production bonus would have to exceed 100%, so that workers on intermediate products more than replace an equal number of miners, in order to become an advantage. This is possible, but it takes stacking nearly every available bonus.

As it happens, machine empires can eventually remove the limit on pops allocated to mining through machine worlds.

 

[powerofvoid]

I checked the wiki.

The problem is that three GI researchers require the output of three +50% miners but three mob researchers require only the output of one +50% miner and one +0% artisan.

 

[Jiav]

The thread is "machine empires are still a flop". So I assumed people were considering nerfs that would fit once machine empires are given any sort of buff.
Without any nerf after they are given something to make them interesting then some of the proposed ideas could swing far too far in the other direction e.g. giving them ecumenopolis tier districts at the start of the game, better pop traits, better districts, higher output from buildings and reduced resources required... if you did all those things machine empires would be massively OP. Unless you also added a nerf at the same time. But what nerf would make sense in that situation?

Currently they are in a dire need of buffs. Most forum users are beyond silly when it comes to balance.

First you have to make them viable compared to organics and hives, this should be the goal, not to totally overhaul the playstyle by implementing silly mechanics which PDX cannot balance anyway.

People should rather ask the question how does machines have to be buffed in order to become viable and competitive. Organics and hives are just suprerior in every way atm.

 

[Bearjuden]

I think the fix (or one of/part of the fix) for Machine Empires has very little to do with Machine Empires, actually. The reason they have illogically low growth is to balance it with organic empires' low growth. But the thing is, organic empires have illogically low growth as well, and it's not nearly impacted enough by the conditions of the planet around them. So give them different population models. Robotic empires should grow at a constant rate that is by default faster than organic empires. But organic empires with high available housing and jobs should grow much quicker than robotics empires (which have few tools to expand faster outside of upgrading robotics labs, which should be very expensive and also should consumes lots more minerals in creating pops). This creates a dynamic similar to how machine empires behave politically anyway, where gestalt type empires don't gain the bonus of politics (lack of influence) but don't have to worry about it either; in this case it's that they don't have to worry about building lots of housing and jobs ahead of time but in exchange their growth is fairly constant (since the factories are only so large). The end condition should be similar but robots will get there more linearly while organics will follow the more conventional S shaped population curve.

Adjust their maintenance however you guys like, I'm not an expert on that. But as far as growth goes, the problem isn't anything to do with the machines. It actually lies in what they're being balanced against. If the devs properly model organic pops, with migration separate from natural growth and tracking each species independently and improving bonuses to both from underemployment and available housing, then you can rectify the slow growth of machine empires.

(Sidebar: +1 to the people who say that robots should take up less housing)

 

[admiral-krause]

My 2 cents:

Decrease housing usage (they are a machine matrix, no individuals so more like droids than synthetic individuals).
And add advanced machine traits like -33% robot upkeep, +5% menial drone output (machine robust), +20% leader XP, +10% complex drone output (machine erudite), +25% army damage, -50% army build time (machine exclusive) and maybe one other similiar to fertile.


Played 2 games as machine Empire in 2.2 (DE and Assim.) and currently RogueServitor. Assimilator was the easiest because of Biopos for extra growth and the ability to assimilate whole worlds for integration into the empire. DE and Rogue Servitor have problems with early expansion, they just stagnate until you get enough pops to get it going. And oh god the energy downs.

EDIT: How about: Encourage Planetary Growth - Cost: 1000 minerals

 

[Arcvalons]

My suggestions are as follows:

• Bring back Servitor Morale.
• As previously mentioned, less housing usage. Machine Drones don't need luxury apartments, they just need boxes.
  
• Have resource districts produce the same amount of Machine Drone jobs that they do Hive Drone jobs.
• More technologies that reduce Robot build time, and more buildings that add Replicator jobs. I think a fully developed Machine Empire should be able to produce more Machine pops than a fully developed Organic empire should be able to produce Organic pops.
  
• Add trade for Machine Empires, just name it something else, like Processing Nodes or something.

 

[admiral-krause]

^^^^ How about a decision: Create Assembly World: Removes Cap for Machine Assembly Plants on this planet.

 

[Melkor Bauglir]

I'm not even sure lowering the housing needs would help that much: Gestalt Empires are awefull at providing amenities / maintenance and also suck at crime-fighting. Both aren't large problems on lightly populated worlds (since then replicators are comparatively strong and the capital pushes you into the positive for both resources), but they become very visible at around 100 pops - this is the point where you have to sacrifice 2-3 building slots for maintenance and another 1-2 for Sentinel Posts.
And since both Nexus Districts as well as Maintenance Depots provide both housing and amenities you basically don't get one without the other. My point is, there isn't much reason in giving MIs tons of free housing if actually using the housing means going into the red for amenities - which you can't fix without ALSO increasing your housing at which point you have only really prolonged the problem.

Furthermore, as much as I want machines to be stronger and potentially also more unique (as in, not just having the HM advantages and downsides), I don't think arguing from a realism point of view is of much use - clearly, Stellaris is not that realistic and in reality any GC would probably just run over every regular empire. Logically, they would have absurd growth rates, insane efficiency, no internal problems and since Stellaris' GCs clearly are able to produce somewhat self-aware beings (Leader drones) they could also do a constant, yet controlled, wargaming secession against themselves and thus also you creativity and unconventional solutions, i.e. literally the only advantage regular empires would have. Balance wise GCs (and especially MIs, since they don't even have any biological restrictions) should be completely overpowered. And I definitely don't think that this should (and will ever) be the goal - outside of mods.
I do, however, think, that MIs need a buff and since efficiency just sounds like a very fitting focus for an unemotional superintelligence, actually doing the things that were planned for MIs in the DevDiary might be a very good start. Furthermore, machines just need some equivalents for features of biological empires - they are lacking out on so much stuff others have it's not even fun (LG ascension perks / paths, advanced traits, numerous edicts and decisions as well as certain events and anomalies).

 

[Uskayaw]

Automated Districts are a good idea but always conserving the pops, otherwise a ME will be a sci-fi Simcity.

Implying focused gameplay is something bad.
Fanatic purifiers don't have diplomacy, and they are all-time favorite.