Like how Hydroponic Farms create Farmer jobs. Right now you can't properly have mining and energy planets because there's not enough relevant buildings to fill all slots.
Should there be more buildings that add technician/miner jobs?
- Thread starter Arcvalons
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Minerals are the big showstopper. Personally though rather than more buildings producing minerals I would simply prefer a removal of the limit on the extractor megastructure (and also the Dyson sphere, perhaps limiting it to specific types of stars in the process). A bunch of these would guarantee enough resources for all but the most sprawling empires. And it makes sense that an advanced late-game empire could manage to build and maintain them.
I kind of like the mineral bottleneck re jobs/districts, but a tech that gave mining stations extra minerals would make sense, and I don't think we have that, do we?
I entirely agree with you! I'd think most of them would decrease habitability since mining hurts the environment. Here's some ideas, please critique them:
Mining administration: Upgrade for your capital building on a planet that modifies administrator output to give minerals and the building will give more miner jobs.
Massive Drills: Gives a job that takes lots of energy and produces minerals & a small amount of alloys. 15 energy -> 5 mineral/1 alloy ratio sounds good to me.
Overseer's Perch: For slaver empires. Spawns a defense army and increases slave output, but also decreases slave happiness and planet stability.
Deep Core Drill: Decreases planet habitability and MAYBE pop growth (excess pollution kills people off) to provide a 10% or more increase in mineral production. Maybe even 20%, with the added possible effect of destabilizing the planet, causing some devastation via earthquakes.
Union Towns: Think west Virginia coal mining towns in their prime. increases mining jobs on the planet, adds some housing, but also lowers habitability.
Asteroid Mining Center: adds "asteroid miner" jobs. Very high energy cost, produces lots of minerals and some trade value from the valuables found in asteroids.
I could come up with more if I sat here for awhile. Please add your own thoughts!
Mining administration: Upgrade for your capital building on a planet that modifies administrator output to give minerals and the building will give more miner jobs.
Massive Drills: Gives a job that takes lots of energy and produces minerals & a small amount of alloys. 15 energy -> 5 mineral/1 alloy ratio sounds good to me.
Overseer's Perch: For slaver empires. Spawns a defense army and increases slave output, but also decreases slave happiness and planet stability.
Deep Core Drill: Decreases planet habitability and MAYBE pop growth (excess pollution kills people off) to provide a 10% or more increase in mineral production. Maybe even 20%, with the added possible effect of destabilizing the planet, causing some devastation via earthquakes.
Union Towns: Think west Virginia coal mining towns in their prime. increases mining jobs on the planet, adds some housing, but also lowers habitability.
Asteroid Mining Center: adds "asteroid miner" jobs. Very high energy cost, produces lots of minerals and some trade value from the valuables found in asteroids.
I could come up with more if I sat here for awhile. Please add your own thoughts!
I personally like how your ability to get minerals is constrained by your ability to find places where there are minerals to be mined. It's logical and it sets up worthwhile incentives within the game. It means it feels genuinely rewarding when you find a planet with 16 mineral deposits on it, too.
On the other hand, it leaves you at the mercy of the RNG. Homeworlds are generally pretty good, but someone who finds 2 or 3 planets with great districts has a massive advantage over someone who finds 2 or 3 planets with 6 or so each of e/m/f. Arguably a greater disparity than anything else randomized in the game, except starting in a corner behind a xenophobic fallen empire.
It also sort of defies reasoning that huge asteroid belts and barren worlds can produce 2 minerals, sometimes, while even a single pop on any world can produce 4 minerals on a bad day and 8+ on a good one.
It'd be better with habitable planets at greater default, but then welcome lag on even small galaxies.
And if you're not playing a war-focused empire you can potentially be stuck with 3-4 mediocre planets all game, because habitats can't build resource buildings anymore either.
Yeah. One of the significant advantages of early warring is you get homeworlds which are guaranteed to have tons of pops AND tons of district space.
I get what you're saying, but I enjoy struggling against odds and the RNG. It's logical that not all barren worlds produce usable minerals, or in a way that they're high quality or easily accessible to get them into space, in comparison to some asteroids.
If an empire takes a high yield planet, you'd better either take it off them or trade with them. Or you should've got there first. That's kind of life, although they should have a toggle button on empire generation to create a "tournament" or "balanced" start, if that's what you want.
I thought there were several techs which increase mining station output by 10%.
There are repeatable techs for exactly that. At least 4-5 if memory serves.
There are repeatable techs for exactly that. At least 4-5 if memory serves.
Isn't it the whole point that you can't just build stuff that gives minerals? It's exactly the asymmetry of resources that makes 2.2 planets more interesting than before. Before you could just make any planet mining planet, now minerals are an actual resource you can't just get from nothingness (except through market). Minerals are supposed to be acquired only from planets and some other deposits. Building stuff that generates minerals would make them less important economically.
Besides you can always buy them.
Besides you can always buy them.
I find there's a mineral shortage for a variety of reasons, namely that food needs are quite low between consumption reduction techs and output techs, energy credits come from trade in generous amounts, and things require mineral upkeep as well.
Additionally, ring worlds cannot produce minerals, and matter decompressors require a black hold to build, which are much rarer than a star. I've also generally notices worlds tend to have more energy and agriculture district slots than minerals, but that is most likely just bad luck on my part.
However, the galactic market consistently trends towards high mineral prices, usually around 2-3 credits per mineral when they start at a 1:1 parity.
Additionally, ring worlds cannot produce minerals, and matter decompressors require a black hold to build, which are much rarer than a star. I've also generally notices worlds tend to have more energy and agriculture district slots than minerals, but that is most likely just bad luck on my part.
However, the galactic market consistently trends towards high mineral prices, usually around 2-3 credits per mineral when they start at a 1:1 parity.
Mineral cap is exactly that. Most likely put in place to prevent late game snowballing. Backhole mine is already extremely powerful in late game. It supercharges late game empires. IMO that is enough. No need to add a building that will remove the check on late game snowballing and ruin late game balance.
Buildings? Not really. What we should get is the ability to terraform and settle every planet out there. It can be locked behind Ascension Perk and cost influence to prevent spamming it everywhere, but it should be possible.
The thing is that minerals and energy (as well as food) are supposed to be on parity: you can see this through their megastructures being on the same output level and cost, as well as the initial market value being 1:1, or even the marauder tribute. However, the reality is there's a ton of energy floating around and a lot less minerals (in addition to a surplus of food).