So ... Dyson Spheres

[MGoods]

Seriously? Are you sure of that? Could You post a source of that information?

Sure, did a quick forum search and found this:

“And we have the Fanatic Purifiers,” says Anward, “which are kind of special. It’s you basically deciding that your species is the only one that’s allowed to exist. If you pick this one, you will disable all diplomacy in the game. The only thing you can do is declare war, declare rivalry and send insults. It also disables a lot of special interactions between things like independent space stations, where normally you would be able to call them up and say, ‘Hey, let’s trade’. You will only be able to call them up to yell insults over the communicator.” - Martin Anward aka Wiz.

Source: https://www.pcgamesn.com/stellaris/stellaris-utopia-expansion-free-banks-update

 

[The Founder]

The worst energy mining station, available from the gamestart has more than 4 times the mineral efficiency of a super-lategame structure that takes decades to build and eats 3 ascension slots.

Megastructures are there for tall gameplay.
Wide plays have much more important perks to pick. Much less more important stuff to invest resources and technology into.

So when you do build a dyson sphere, you literally HAVE no more mining stations to build. If anything the Dyson Sphere unlocks a new mining stations slot (around the star) you could not have used before that.
It serves it's purpose of aiding tall gameplay* (without making it able to meet wide on a 1v1 basis) perfectly.
We got to that conclusion back when the numbers were not final already.

*Both by giving it bonuses. And by giving you something to play around with and invest resources as tall empire.

 

[Alblaka]

Trade Enclaves are your friend. Also, why not instead build Ring Worlds? They take a bit longer to build, but are vastly cheaper coming in at a mere 110k minerals. 2 segments fully devoted to energy should handily out-produce a Dyson Sphere at the fraction of the cost (and it becomes absurd once repeatable techs come into play).

Yes, you just successfully provided another argument to the already decided discussion about Merchant Enclaves being a completely broken system, because they, in theory, allow you to establish an empire not producing any energy at all. I've stopped using the trade option for that reason, it's an exploit to me. (Therefore, I don't even consider them anymore when discussing these kinds of things, but I suppose I should have pointed that out, given not everyone holds the same oppinion of exploiting bad design choices.)

Ring Worlds are a valid argument though, except:

• You can only build them around stars that have 4 (habitable?) planets. Albeit I'll admit that, given the number of Dyson spheres you will realistically build in the timeframe of a game, it could be possible to build the same number of Ringworlds instead.
• You need an additional Perk to get access to Ringworlds? Kinda makes them a tech-upgrade over Dyson Spheres.
  
• To produce power with Ringworlds, you need pops. Pops increase tech and Unity costs. Arguably, you should be able to outproduce the increase in cost by dedicated setup for the first few Ringworlds, making this a possibly +-0 point.
• Ringworlds, as you mentioned, take longer, not just in construction, but in settling pops and constructing buildings, too.

Overall, I would say there are very reasonable scenarios to prefer either over the other and therefore I don't think we can say 'x is numerically better' until we've actually seen the effects in-game.

 

[The Founder]

Yes, you just successfully provided another argument to the already decided discussion about Merchant Enclaves being a completely broken system, because they, in theory, allow you to establish an empire not producing any energy at all. I've stopped using the trade option for that reason, it's an exploit to me. (Therefore, I don't even consider them anymore when discussing these kinds of things, but I suppose I should have pointed that out, given not everyone holds the same oppinion of exploiting bad design choices.)

Trade Enclaves transfer 2:1.
And energy buildings are already more productive then any other production building.

A T4 mine produces 5 Minerals at -2.5 Energy.
A T4 Power Planet produces 6 at -0 Energy. So a whopping 8.5 energy net gain vs the Mine 5 income.
With 1.5 the Capitol also Produces energy.
Trading for energy is stupidly ineffective with the Trade Enclave.

We went over that math back in the "Worried about Technological Ascension Path". Where someone had the worries that the switch from food to energy would be bad (that was before it was confirmed that farms would jsut convert).

 

[RolandRahn]

Sorry if this has already been answered elsewhere/is a stupid question:

Dyson Spheres cool down the system where they are build.
So, a Dyson sphere in a system with colonized planets is probably a no-no.

But what about a Dyson Sphere in a system with habitats?
Would that work?

Imagine 6+ habitats and one Dyson Sphere in the same system....
Or a combination Dyson Spheres/Science Nexus/Habitats in the same system. Couldn't that be more effective than a ringworld?

 

[Kayden_II]

The Advantages of a Mining-Station are, that You can build It at the Start of the Game + You have to spend 90 Minerals as One-Time-Costs + You have to wait 1 Month until It functions, but the Dis-Advantage is, that You get a small Amount of EC(s): 1-4 EC(s) per Month ...
The Advantage of the Dyson-Sphere is, that You get a big Amount of EC(s): 400 EC(s) per Month, but the Dis-Advantages are, that You have to wait until You've researched It + You have to spend 210.000 Minerals as One-Time-Costs + You have to wait 720 Months (60 Years) until It functions ...

The actual Thing is, that I don't think, that You get your Amortization for your Dyson-Sphere soon enough.

 

[klingonadmiral]

Megastructures are there for tall gameplay.
Wide plays have much more important perks to pick. Much less more important stuff to invest resources and technology into.

Still, why not build a ring world instead of a dyson sphere?

To produce power with Ringworlds, you need pops. Pops increase tech and Unity costs. Arguably, you should be able to outproduce the increase in cost by dedicated setup for the first few Ringworlds, making this a possibly +-0 point.

The thing is though, pop research speed modifier stops mattering by the time megastructures realistically roll around. The 35% increased research speed by a full ringworld segment might sound scary, but the bonuses work additive. You should run a research modifier well into at least the 1500-2000% range before you get megastructures (in fact "tall" empires should run at a higher modifier because their habitats are rather small). A +140% research time increase from a fully populated ringworld really loses its teeth when the malus goes from 3000% to 3140%.

You need an additional Perk to get access to Ringworlds? Kinda makes them a tech-upgrade over Dyson Spheres.

Not really. If you have Voidborn, and re at your 4th perk, both choices (Ring of Life or whatever for Ringworlds, Galactic Wonders for the other megastructures). And from the final numbers the Research Hub also doesn't really look that enticing (+50 research for all types) - not bad but also not in the "omg pelase give" tier. I don't know if Galactic Wonders if even worthy to be picked at all.

But what about a Dyson Sphere in a system with habitats?
Would that work?

Possible. But a Ringworld is cheaper for tech costs and unity, plus can produce minerals if you need them.

a combination Dyson Spheres/Science Nexus/Habitats in the same system. Couldn't that be more effective than a ringworld?

Not possible. Only one Megastructure per system (and only 1 Sentry Array at all), plus you can not build multiple megastructures (excluding habitats) simultaneously.

 

[TempusxX]

because maybe someone doesn't care about the ring world and wants dyson sphere because they can, I for one would choose a dyson sphere over a ring world just because I could and a reason doesn't need to be given for someone to build anyone of these megastructures other than that they can

 

[The Founder]

But what about a Dyson Sphere in a system with habitats?
Would that work?

You can build habitats at and around a Black Hole. You will not be able to build the habitat solar collectors then, but that is about it. See no reason that would not also work with D-Spheres.

Still, why not build a ring world instead of a dyson sphere?

Ringworlds need a system with enough Planets to use for Raw Material - and a sun of course.
D-Spheres need any Sun. That is it.
Also they are both seperate Ascension Perks (Ring of Life vs Galactic Wonders),

 

[Alblaka]

The thing is though, pop research speed modifier stops mattering by the time megastructures realistically roll around. The 35% increased research speed by a full ringworld segment might sound scary, but the bonuses work additive. You should run a research modifier well into at least the 1500-2000% range before you get megastructures (in fact "tall" empires should run at a higher modifier because their habitats are rather small). A +140% research time increase from a fully populated ringworld really loses its teeth when the malus goes from 3000% to 3140%.

I'm just pointing out that building Ringworlds full of energy will reduce research speed, whereas Dyson Spheres won't. Sure, it's not a significant amount, but it could be contextually relevant to your ingame situation.

Not really. If you have Voidborn, and re at your 4th perk, both choices (Ring of Life or whatever for Ringworlds, Galactic Wonders for the other megastructures).

Ah, I thought Ringworlds required the Megastructure perk as pre-requirement. Got that confused with Voidborn. Nevermind that part then.

Glad you seem to (not dis)agree with me on the remaining points tho.

Trade Enclaves transfer 2:1.
And energy buildings are already more productive then any other production building.

A T4 mine produces 5 Minerals at -2.5 Energy.
A T4 Power Planet produces 6 at -0 Energy. So a whopping 8.5 energy net gain vs the Mine 5 income.
With 1.5 the Capitol also Produces energy.
Trading for energy is stupidly ineffective with the Trade Enclave.

We went over that math back in the "Worried about Technological Ascension Path". Where someone had the worries that the switch from food to energy would be bad (that was before it was confirmed that farms would jsut convert).

I don't see how the efficiency of the transfer is a relevant point?
It doesn't change the fact that you

• need minerals en mass' to upgrade planets and build your fleet
• then again don't need minerals over longer periods of time
• can freely funnel the large mineral production surplus you don't need into sending a fleet around that is larger then what your empire is supposed to be fielding via infinite trading by merchant enclaves

Yes, on the paper one tile of planet can generate more energy then minerals.
But in the context of the actual game we're discussing, mineral inflates much harder then energy, empirically evident from gameplay (and confirmed and addressed by the devs in form of the introduction of consumer goods), and therefore, at a late-game point, trading minerals 2:1 for energy in infinite dimensions is an inherently broken mechanic.

And, ironically, this difference between 'math' and 'context' is the reason OP keeps claiming that Dyson Spheres must be underpowered, because Mining Stations produce more energy per mineral invested.

 

[The Founder]

then again don't need minerals over longer periods of time

Consumer goods. Fleet Maintenance. Rebuilding ships. Especially with the way doomstacks work, the resources to quickly rebuild a lost fleet is a survival trait for any tall empire.
Building things like Dyson Sphers, Habitats, Ringworlds and the like.

All of those need minerals and not to few. If you have build every habitat, every ringworld and every dyson sphere down to the last building on them - then you have a lot of Consumer Goods being needed as a result.

Using the enclave to transfer one Basic Resource into another is plain ineffective.
The conversion rate of 2:1 means that even with the difference between Energy and Mineral Production efficiency, the building is better then trading the other resource for it.
Everybody that ever used the 2:1 port in Settlers of Cataan can tell you it is not going to be cost effective. Might be usefull for a strategic need, but that is it.

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

The worst energy mining station, available from the gamestart has more than 4 times the mineral efficiency of a super-lategame structure that takes decades to build and eats 3 ascension slots.

That requires 16 lvl 25 planets which only have energy factories on them (excluding upgrades). If you don't build mining, food or unity buildings you can then match a Dyson spheres mineral efficiency.

 

[CharlieFox]

I assume that if ring worlds work like existing ringworlds, they cannot be destroyed but can be conquered.But can a hostile fleet destroy a Dyson sphere?

If a Dyson sphere is vulnerable to fleets I would say that makes it a more risky investment than Ring Worlds.

 

[AndragonLea]

Final numbers are final.

What you need to build a Dyson Sphere (before bonuses):

210,000 minerals
60 years.

If you get the Master Builders Ascension Perk they get reduced to:

157,500 minerals
40 years

For the return of:

400 monthly energy

So, in the best case, you pay 393.75 minerals per energy/month.

For reference, the worst Energy Mining Station you can build costs 90 Minerals for 1 energy/month.

The worst energy mining station, available from the gamestart has more than 4 times the mineral efficiency of a super-lategame structure that takes decades to build and eats 3 ascension slots.

And no, leaving the Dyson Sphere at a lower completion level won't make it better, because the Construction Site and the first stage don't produce any energy and are literally nothing but a mineral and time-sink (and costs energy to maintain). Why would you ever want to build such an awful thing? Use the minerals to get yourself a warfleet and use the mineral surplus to get energy credits from the trader until you have pummeled enough of the galaxy into submission so that you can run a fleet that stands unchallenged.

Two points:

1. Mining stations need to be at least somewhat cost to benefit efficient because they are one of few early game opportunities to build an economy. They need to be cheap because you just can't realistically afford much else when you start out the game - you have no access to traders and lack the technology or pops to use the more efficient planet bound power plants immediately.

2. While more efficient, mining stations are also a very finite resource. Once you built all the ones available to you, you will not be able to procure more no matter how many minerals you throw at the problem. If you can't expand, you sooner or later run out of opportunities to build any type of mining station - if you STILL cannot expand, you're basically boned because you lack the resources to build a fleet that would allow you to take more territory to gain the resources to build a fleet big enough to etc. tt.

This is where the perks come in. They give you the choice to expend some of your flexible potential for an opportunity to build more resource income in territory that is already for all intents and purposes fully utilized or exhausted.

A dyson sphere, on the other hand, allows for a late-game solution that gives you the opportunity to build more energy income in a system that was otherwise already fully utilized. You pay a steep price to create a new source of income where before there was nothing.

Kinda like habitats in that way, where you pay a steep mineral price to create more pop slots in your empire when you can't otherwise colonise.

It's not supposed to be super effective or the best solution regardless of your situation, otherwise it wouldn't be a choice for an ascension perk but a mandatory pick.

 

[The Founder]

I assume that if ring worlds work like existing ringworlds, they cannot be destroyed but can be conquered.But can a hostile fleet destroy a Dyson sphere?

If a Dyson sphere is vulnerable to fleets I would say that makes it a more risky investment than Ring Worlds.

Dyson Spheress work like Mining Stations, including be caputre with border movements.

 

[Carl_Bar]

Yeah but how much living area does it have on the inside, i'd assume it would eclipse even a ringworld in that?

 

[klingonadmiral]

That requires 16 lvl 25 planets which only have energy factories on them (excluding upgrades). If you don't build mining, food or unity buildings you can then match a Dyson spheres mineral efficiency.

Huh?

A Lvl 4 Powerplant produces 6 Energy. A T2 Powerhub produces 6 energy and gives +20% energy. Planetary Capital produces energy (don't know how much yet) and gices 4 tiles +2 adjacency bonus.

Thus on a size 25 world fully devoted to energy you got:

4 tiles producing 8 energy (32)
20 tiles producing 6 energy (120)
a global 20% energy modifier

152 * 1.2 = 182.4 without the capital, with the capital you are probably at about 190 or so.

However, +20% is the lower bound. Cosmic Ray Catalysis (Space Amoeba Observation) is another 5%, the Wraith gives 10%, several anomaly events can eek up some more small modifiers, Corporate Dominion Civic gives +10%, Synths get like a 20% bonus. Repeatables will eventually come into play. Galactic Stock Exchange is also a thing. You'll reap heaps and heaps of credits from a properly set-up energy planet. 2 large of thoe worlds will comfortably out-produce a Dyson Sphere.

 

[AndragonLea]

Huh?

A Lvl 4 Powerplant produces 6 Energy. A T2 Powerhub produces 6 energy and gives +20% energy. Planetary Capital produces energy (don't know how much yet) and gices 4 tiles +2 adjacency bonus.

Thus on a size 25 world fully devoted to energy you got:

4 tiles producing 8 energy (32)
20 tiles producing 6 energy (120)
a global 20% energy modifier

152 * 1.2 = 182.4 without the capital, with the capital you are probably at about 190 or so.

However, +20% is the lower bound. Cosmic Ray Catalysis (Space Amoeba Observation) is another 5%, the Wraith gives 10%, several anomaly events can eek up some more small modifiers, Corporate Dominion Civic gives +10%, Synths get like a 20% bonus. Repeatables will eventually come into play. Galactic Stock Exchange is also a thing. You'll reap heaps and heaps of credits from a properly set-up energy planet. 2 large of thoe worlds will comfortably out-produce a Dyson Sphere.

Which is why he said "if you don't build food, unity or mineral buildings". Which you will need to. Even if you don't build them on the planet, you'll need the infrastructure and mineral income from SOMEWHERE.

You tend to ignore all the other costs associated with a planet, though. The planet won't work if you don't have food from SOMEWHERE to support the population. You need to get the population there first (350 minerals + energy upkeep of the colony ship and colony setup), you need to clear all the tile blockers (time requirement, mineral requirement, research requirement), you need to upgrade the HQ to support your tier 4 power plants (requiring minerals, research, time for pops to grow), you need to research tier 4 power plants (research and minerals for that and the prior upgrade levels) and the T2 powerhub (more minerals and research + time).

Many of the other options you point out also have requirements for getting them. You either have to sacrifice some other potential advantage (for civics), conduct research into a tree and expend resources (for researching and deploying synths) or find and research beings (for the amoebas).

You can't just point out the massive cost and wait time for a dyson sphere and then compare it to a fully researched, settled, developed and upgraded planet without taking all those costs into account as well.

 

[Alblaka]

Using the enclave to transfer one Basic Resource into another is plain ineffective.
The conversion rate of 2:1 means that even with the difference between Energy and Mineral Production efficiency, the building is better then trading the other resource for it.
Everybody that ever used the 2:1 port in Settlers of Cataan can tell you it is not going to be cost effective. Might be usefull for a strategic need, but that is it.

Well, I'll refuse to accept that claim on the basis that I had sufficient games

1. with access to a MerchantEnclave
2. without access to a MerchantEnclave

and can therefore, for me, empirically verify that having access to one makes lategame blobbing absurdly easy due to infinite access to Energy with no need to pre-emptively waste mineral production (in form of tiles used) on energy instead.

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

Huh?

A Lvl 4 Powerplant produces 6 Energy. A T2 Powerhub produces 6 energy and gives +20% energy. Planetary Capital produces energy (don't know how much yet) and gices 4 tiles +2 adjacency bonus.

Thus on a size 25 world fully devoted to energy you got:

4 tiles producing 8 energy (32)
20 tiles producing 6 energy (120)
a global 20% energy modifier

152 * 1.2 = 182.4 without the capital, with the capital you are probably at about 190 or so.

However, +20% is the lower bound. Cosmic Ray Catalysis (Space Amoeba Observation) is another 5%, the Wraith gives 10%, several anomaly events can eek up some more small modifiers, Corporate Dominion Civic gives +10%, Synths get like a 20% bonus. Repeatables will eventually come into play. Galactic Stock Exchange is also a thing. You'll reap heaps and heaps of credits from a properly set-up energy planet. 2 large of thoe worlds will comfortably out-produce a Dyson Sphere.

1. Your initial argument was based on the lowest energy output, hence why I said (without upgrades)

2. In your example you're failing to account for the mineral cost of buying and upgrading your energy buildings. When you tally up each of those building costs up, plus your power grid you're looking at a mineral cost of 11150 (excluding building cost reductions etc). Never mind influence and mineral costs for building a colony ship and colonising a planet. This is also again as the previous poster mentions without any other building types.

3. With point 2 in mind and factoring in your math you'd need two lvl 25 planets with nothing but energy on, at a cost of double 11150 (22300) to match a Dyson spheres output. Bare in mind it will take time to research each energy building upgrade, time to build them. Time for pops to grow and staff them.

Basically, it's pretty well balanced.