so about that "zero cost" aquatic trait...

[Less2]

I feel like Aquatic should be half a point (or the range should be expanded so that it can be 1 point and cost half as much as the current 1 point traits).

I can see how devs would be wary of making a potential buff free, but it's ultimately pretty minimal and can really slow down the early game.

 

[GloatingSwine]

I feel like Aquatic should be half a point (or the range should be expanded so that it can be 1 point and cost half as much as the current 1 point traits).

I can see how devs would be wary of making a potential buff free, but it's ultimately pretty minimal and can really slow down the early game.

I dunno, the game apparently thinks that +5% to worker output (and some army damage but who really builds for army damage) is worth 3 points and +20% to habitability is worth 4, so what is +10% to worker outout and +20% to habitability on your primary planet class that you're guaranteed two of worth?

It's pretty hard to trigger the downsides of Aquatic unless you're determined to settle a 20% habitability world (because they trigger on non-wet not non-ocean) before you get terraforming (the early game one), and very easy to get the upsides of it.

 

[Less2]

I dunno, the game apparently thinks that +5% to worker output (and some army damage but who really builds for army damage) is worth 3 points and +20% to habitability is worth 4, so what is +10% to worker outout and +20% to habitability on your primary planet class that you're guaranteed two of worth?

It's pretty hard to trigger the downsides of Aquatic unless you're determined to settle a 20% habitability world (because they trigger on non-wet not non-ocean) before you get terraforming (the early game one), and very easy to get the upsides of it.

I'd say that's another example of how the current quantization of trait points affects things too harshly. Strong has to be minimum 1 trait point, and Very Strong has to be more than 2 because otherwise anyone who would take strong would always just take very strong. It's also the case that base resource bonuses have always been bad since all the +xx% resource techs have been added and the traits have never been discounted to reflect the fact that they are weaker now. On current trait point scale Strong should be 0.5, Very Strong 1.5, and other base resource bonus traits 1

As for Extremely Adaptive, it has its place for races like Fanatic Purifiers that have to put their race on every planet they conquer and don't have time to get terraforming or gene editing.

20% habitability worlds are still very good to settle immediately early game as non-aquatic races. Depending on your luck it may make up half your initial colonies.

 

[Mealya]

At the point we are... I think we should put all "race" traits to 0 cost but have a special slot for that and more possibilities (and some default options also). Because it is a bit of a shame putting two things the same level that are not.

Aquatic cost 1 point... Yeah. Like Natural Engineers but is it the same logic/theme ?

 

[Nebbie Zebbie]

I'd say that's another example of how the current quantization of trait points affects things too harshly. Strong has to be minimum 1 trait point, and Very Strong has to be more than 2 because otherwise anyone who would take strong would always just take very strong. It's also the case that base resource bonuses have always been bad since all the +xx% resource techs have been added and the traits have never been discounted to reflect the fact that they are weaker now. On current trait point scale Strong should be 0.5, Very Strong 1.5, and other base resource bonus traits 1

As for Extremely Adaptive, it has its place for races like Fanatic Purifiers that have to put their race on every planet they conquer and don't have time to get terraforming or gene editing.

20% habitability worlds are still very good to settle immediately early game as non-aquatic races. Depending on your luck it may make up half your initial colonies.

I don't agree on the reasoning behind Very Strong being 3, there are definitely cases where I'd pick Strong but not Very Strong, because of being able to spend that extra point on something like Natural Engineers.
For trait point balance, I'd start with making Very Strong 2 so it actually gets use, and go on from there:

• Rapid Breeders should be 3, and Slow Breeders -3. This alone would start to stretch out point cost to where more things are competitive.
• Conformists should be 1 point, and Deviants -30% governing ethics attraction. Much more competition if the former is actually used, and the latter actually a problem.
• Venerable should only be 2 points, following the logic that leader lifespan has diminishing returns (Fleeting to normal is 10 for 1, but normal to Enduring is 20 for 1).
• Phototrophic should have half the energy cost waived on worlds that aren't Habitats or Ecumenopoli.
• Radiotrophic should only be 1 point.

As for Aquatic going to 0 points again, it would need a downside you start with, and what springs to mind is that -10% energy from jobs (issues with underwater power) might do it; this would encourage using the Anglers civic (or other means of getting trade value) for energy, and be more than counteracted by Ingenious.