Could we have some details? What year? How many pops? That sort of thing.
Stellaris 2.2, Thomas Malthus and Thanos
- Thread starter Agamemnic
- 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.
Could we have some details? What year? How many pops? That sort of thing.
The colony should grow the fastest when it’s new. 50% bonus not malus. As a planet gets close to its housing max it should take longer to grow.
When a planet is “full” it should stop producing pops and instead produce immigration.
If there are no planets to immigrant to then new factions should spawn based on ethics.
1: Wants immigrant treaty
2: Wants new colony settled
3: Wants new colony conquered
4: Wants xenos expelled
5: Wants xeno purged
6: Wants habitat settled
7: Wants ring world settled
8: Wants robots disassembled
When a planet is “full” it should stop producing pops and instead produce immigration.
If there are no planets to immigrant to then new factions should spawn based on ethics.
1: Wants immigrant treaty
2: Wants new colony settled
3: Wants new colony conquered
4: Wants xenos expelled
5: Wants xeno purged
6: Wants habitat settled
7: Wants ring world settled
8: Wants robots disassembled
.png){kind=avatar}
This thread got a lot of posts that are yikes.
Personally I quite like the semi-inevitable overpopulation in Stellaris though. Your biggest, most productive, planets will become hives of scum and villainy. Extremely sci-fi stuff. It also encourages growth and conquest into new avenues. Conquer planets, build habitats, megastructures, genocide.
Personally I quite like the semi-inevitable overpopulation in Stellaris though. Your biggest, most productive, planets will become hives of scum and villainy. Extremely sci-fi stuff. It also encourages growth and conquest into new avenues. Conquer planets, build habitats, megastructures, genocide.
Certainly fun. But for this to be the playthrough for EVERY empire type (as is the case now) is a disappointing direction for a game like this. Playing a tall stable empire that doesn't devolve into a dystopian sci-fi trope should be an option.
My bad. My Utopian abundance empire is actually stable now in terms of unemployment. But still cant stop pop growth so consumer goods and food shortage became inevitable...and using an edict to stop pop growth pretty much collapses the entire empire.
OK, makes sense. But since pop growth caps, you shouldn't actually run out of food or CGs unless you build too much housing, right?
(This is theorycrafting for me; all my games have finished before the last of my terraformed worlds are anything close to fully developed.)
(This is theorycrafting for me; all my games have finished before the last of my terraformed worlds are anything close to fully developed.)
.png){kind=avatar}
Hasn’t there been a number of alternatives already mentioned?
Edicts to stop growth
Cutting back on housing so that the growth cap kicks in
Share the burden so that it’s not a dystopian society
Continuously expand and build habitats so that there are places to relocate pops to
I agree though that having even more options is always good.
Just tried this now. -20 stability malus. Overall 9% hit on output (from maximum stability before). More of a workaround than a natural solution
- Edict impact is a game-ender for non-gestalt (+25% upkeep & amenities) and only slows down growth by 75%
- Housing cutback is more of a workaround as above
- Share the burden restricted to fanatic egalitarian
- Habitats and ring worlds are no longer self sustaining as in pre-2.2 (no minerals)...so expansion only introduces you to a new problem of consumer goods shortage
Anyway, I've whined enough. My Stellaris wish in 2019 will simply be an option to allow for self-sustaining empires minus this unrealistic Maltusian collapse. No funky workarounds; just planets that can grow to a stable and self-sustaining state. It makes the game better by allowing the player to 'finish planets' and move on to the more grand strategy themes instead of the endless micro and anxiety of finding new planets and resources.
edit: funnily enough, pre-2.2 had a better pop growth model that [somewhat] mimicked real life; pop growth starts high then slows down to 0 at the end.
Last edited:
9% penalty on maxed production plus everything the unemployed are giving from UA? I don't see the issue. "Natural solution" is a feeling, not an argument.
The biggest problem with lack of housing throttle is pops can decide to start declining as soon as you get to -1 housing, while other pops continue to grow. This combines with the weird pop growth mechanics (though they seem to have become slightly less insane) to lead to species randomly deciding to cull themselves from the universe for unknown reasons. What would make more sense if if pops would start declining from crowing is to have pop growth stop, and how much overcrowding is tolerable depend on social policies.
I don’t see how restricting housing is a “work around”, or how any of the other options are not satisfactory. If you want a stable and self sustaining economy, build one. If you don’t want the infrastructure and consequences of having that stability, then change your expectations
I agree it would be nice to have more options on how economies can be strucured, but it’s not accurate to say that there aren’t already options.
I agree it would be nice to have more options on how economies can be strucured, but it’s not accurate to say that there aren’t already options.
Agree to disagee then. I'm sure the devs can and will do better in time. No need to damper my expectations. In the meantime found a few good mods to fix my issues