Well that is what the colony ship is supposed to represent. Forcing people to resettle aswell seems like it would be a bit too much micro.
- 1
Stellaris Dev Diary #192 : Perfectly Balanced, As All Things Should Be...
- Thread starter Eladrin
- Start date
-
Crusader Kings III Available Now!
The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
Considering the local environment, better to send the serpent, can uplift later
.- 11
- 1
Oh wow, this would actually be the perfect implementation!
And then if the orbited planet is destroyed with a Collossus, the districts could be automatically converted to Mining (World-Cracking) or Research (Shielding).
Last edited:
- 2
You can't ignore the effect of birth control. Knowing kids will almost certainly surviva and having birth control are the biggest factors in decreased family size. There are countries that provide a lot of assistance in costs for raising kids, but the effect isn't very large.
- 1
IMHO, logistic curve tackles with growth "vertically" on planet level, increased growth points tackles with growth "horizontally" on empire level. Both are necessary to tune the pace of growth and reduce the inflation in number of POPs into mid/late game.
- 2
The game has hydroponic farms, so I don't really know why they don't have agricultural districts already if you have that tech.
Nor did I: "improvements in accidental construction limit the number of unexpected creations " is birth control.
My thinking was about gathering the biomatter and important resources that are found in soil from the planet as a major source of feedstock for your food. Plus it helps that farming habitats are a real concept. But the idea that your farmers would be worked harder on a farming habitat to provide food for the rest of the Empire is interesting.
Within the game though, I was thinking that because of the changes with building slots, hydroponic farms might be too restricted. Now, this might not be the case, since you have industrial and research districts being default or based on deposits, so that takes some of the pressure off. But it seems you'll usually be limited to about half a dozen building slots. How many of those will have to be farms? It does help that the processing center will add jobs, so that could be enough. I just think this is something that could be looked at, not necessarily implemented.
- 1
Yeah. Familiar with those. Hilarious. Take away the imperative/need to strive for survival, and all the rats just became fat lazy slobs sitting on their couch waiting to die. No interest in procreation.
Yes. Exactly. A species that has stopped expanding, starts to stagnate. Hence fallen empires.
If you think of pops as a 'percentage' if the population (its representative rather than physical) then it takes more effort to significantly grow the population as a whole.
One way to think of it is that a significant fraction of humanities 20th century population explosion was due to increased access to medical care and improvements in medical technology. Basically, people lived longer, weren't dying like flies, but births were still high.
Now we are seemingly approaching a cap where increased life expectancy is flattening out, so the death rate is 'increasing' again, and the difference between rate of deaths and rate of births is approaching zero or even going into the negative. In other words, it's not just birth rates that have fluctuated, its death rates as well.
So while birth rates are stabilizing at somewhere around 1.9 to 2.1 per female, this is becoming only enough to stabilise the total population, not grow it.
Nah. Food is a limiting factor only for populations under threat of starvation. But when access to food is infinite, it ceases to be a factor. At some point the reasoning becomes 'do I want kids?' Rather than ' will I be able to feed them?'
- 5
- 1
Economic conditions are definitely relevant to birth rates. See this chart tracking Irish birth rates from 1950 to 2020. While there is a clear downward secular trend, the birth rate in 1973 was higher than it was in 1950, and the birth rate in 2008 was higher than it was in 1994. The chart shows that periods of high unemployment like the 1950s, the 1980s, and the Great Recession, depress birth rates, and there appears to be a lag between improvement in employment rates and birth rate.
Ireland Birth Rate 1950-2020
Chart and table of the Ireland birth rate from 1950 to 2020. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.
www.macrotrends.net
Edit: it may be of interest to note that the sale of contraceptives and the publication of information about the use of artificial contraceptives were only legalised in Ireland in 1979.
Last edited:
- 1
I like the idea of increasing throughput (I'd like it as its own modifier if possible).
But have you considered making this upgrade:
+10/20/30% Base Output and Base Upkeep from Jobs?
So that the effect is multiplicative rather than additive. Otherwise it's considerably worse the more stacking modifiers you have which is probably not the intention. It may say +10% but your research output will only increase by a very tiny percentage once you factor in the +a bazillion% from all other sources, and if you were to have -90% upkeep before applying this modifier then the +10% would effectively be +100% current upkeep costs. So it hurts coming and going (smaller benefit than the player expects, harsher penalty than expected).
Also do these modifiers apply to other job outputs? It would be annoying if Naval capacity/amenities/trade value were mostly unaffected but Soldier/Entertainer/Merchant jobs still had increased upkeep.
- 8
Yes, of course horrible economic conditions have a negative effect. But beyond a certain point, better economic conditions aren't going to increase the number of kids. It's even hard to maintain the population level without immigration.Economic conditions are definitely relevant to birth rates. See this chart tracking Irish birth rates from 1950 to 2020. While there is a clear downward secular trend, the birth rate in 1973 was higher than it was in 1950, and the birth rate in 2008 was higher than it was in 1994. The chart shows that periods of high unemployment like the 1950s, the 1980s, and the Great Recession, depress birth rates, and there appears to be a lag between improvement in employment rates and birth rate.
Ireland Birth Rate 1950-2020
Chart and table of the Ireland birth rate from 1950 to 2020. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.
well, that is a problem of the pops prioritys, kids or career? A thing where a more cooperative kind of State will have better growth than a more competitive... if the personal career isn't much impacting the quality of life, its much more likely that the pops do theyr thing and grow kids than it is in our, capitalistic states atm...so maybe a megacorp should have less kids growing than a shared burden egalitarian... but that to implement is way too much if you want it that realistic
I've already pointed out that there are many countries that provide a lot of assistance. It doesn't change things that much.
Then we have very different definitions of a lazy mechanic.
And what exactly is wrong with following a gamey tactic in a game?
A thought occurred to me currently synth and machine empires get additional districts from building energy grids and mineral purification plants. This number is then doubled when those buildings are upgraded. I've noticed it's not uncommon for megacorps and normal empires to run into an issue where a sizeable chunk of their worlds are district poor. The industrial districts will help here, since it seems clear that they'll work like city districts, you can max out all districts as those. Anyways, would it be possible to have it so that the first building for energy grids, mineral purification plants & food processing facilities gave +2 districts for what they produce for megacorps and normal empires. This would give them a bit more flexibility on specializing rural worlds and leave them a little less at the mercy of RNG. I'd be fine if the upgrades didn't net them additional districts, since I don't want to take away everything unique about synth and machine empires.
I'm leaving out hive minds because hive worlds solve the issue and they should be going for that perk.
I'm leaving out hive minds because hive worlds solve the issue and they should be going for that perk.
For people worried about this having already stacked tons of +job production or -job upkeep, I don't think this is an issue. What this is effectively is a flat bonus to your amount of pops which don't gain any bonuses or malus. And considering that every job is a net increase of resources this is always worth it.
What I'm actually concerned about is the fact that +resources from jobs doesn't effect every resource: trade value and amenities ignore it for some reason. Admittedly it is a very minor worry, as both clerks and merchants have no upkeep, and entertainers using a few extra CG is easily offset by the bonus they give, but still.
- 1
.png){kind=avatar}
Sure thing, as long as:
- Slaves get to be automatically resettled the way free pops are.
- The algorithm is changed so unemployed pops aren't being enslaved unless you use domestic servitude, which frankly nobody should be doing. Basing the algorithm on the worst slavery type, in the process outright screwing everyone else over seems questionable to begin with. But now slaves won't be resettled and some people want to add an influence cost to them being resettled to boot.
Sure thing, as long as they adjust the requirement and production output/costs. If they don't we might look at some really messy hotfixes. Let's remain hopeful.
I doubt it. Machine Gestalts still lack leader traits, both Machine and Hiveminds are locked out from a lot of events, Ecumenopoli, etc.
The problem is that every additional bonus becomes "less" of a bonus. Because they all act additive rather than multiplicative. Now having all of these multiplicative would lead to an absurd inflation in terms of resource generation. But the reverse also holds true. Species traits become less relevant and impactful as you gain additional bonuses. To the point that the advertised "15%" in effect is oftentimes closer to 5% or below as it does not scale with other bonuses.
One solution might be to make species traits exclusively multiplicative with other bonuses. As they actually have a "cost" in terms of very limited trait points to keep them relevant and desirable.
As for the new technologies. The issue some people seem to have is that the increase is worth much less than the game makes it seem. While the increase to upkeep is fairly static. Let's take minerals as an example.
100% Base Mineral Production.
60% from the mining chain.
25% from the Mineral Purification hub.
This is a 185% increase compared to the base production. If we add another 30% from the final new tech. It ends up being only an overall 21,5% increase to productivity but a 30% increase to upkeep. Now the value might lie in this technology increasing specialist output/science output(?) but the more modifiers you have active the less beneficial it becomes at large.
Further, these technologies scale negatively with themselves in terms of efficiency. Each of them making the subsequent one slightly worse. And for base resources i.e minerals/energy they get worse with every repeatable. They might still be worth it for end product output ala Science, Alloys, etc. But they, funnily enough, increase inefficiency.
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
STOP! COOKIE TIME