The pop mechanism is quite terrible in 3.0

[Lykus Cerebros]

No, it's actually the opposite
Mining asteroids and researchers are more valuable than ever. Free income without involving any pops.

I guess he is referring to the housing capacity making having highly developed planets less desirable since popw grwoth will be slowed. Also habitats got nerfed so can't hold that many pops anmore.

The buff to mining stationsfeel really nice and mnuch more realistic.

 

[monkeypunch87]

Ring World is the one truly take utter domination. In 2.81, Ring World takes charge of technology, Ecumenopolis takes charge of alloy and consumer goods, and normal planets takes charge of engergy and minerals. Now, Ring World takes charge of almost everything, technology, consumer goods, alloys, foods.

Well, if you consider the size, I would think it is fair. But maybe to cheap to establish a functional ring world.

 

[npc1054657282]

There's the other meme. Every new expansion people complain that you can't play tall anymore. As if previously you could.
Tall was not viable in 2.8 or 2.5 or 2.2 or 2.1 or 2.0 or 1.9 or 1.6 or 1.0




Ring World costs more alloys than ecumenopolis costs minerals, and you are limited in how many mega structures you can build at any given time.
It also takes 58.3 years to build a single full ring world, 38.8 if you have architectural revolution (which also lets you build 2 at a time, the opportunity cost is that you're then delaying building a dyson sphere or strategic coordination center or science nexus). To me the fact that a ring world is very awesome is not a problem. This is in fact good news because now gestalts have that one nice thing.

All in all I see this as an absolute win.

Well, about Ring World, the true important resource consume is influence, because other resources have touch the resource cap at that point. except Dyson spere and matter depressor, other megastructures are not that practical. Well in 2.81 it is, but in 3.0 maybe you're right.

 

[Willy Waggler]

It's funny, people have been clamoring for total empire pop count affecting growth for over a year. Now that it's here people are angry. LMAO this forum is a gift that keeps on giving

Yes. Posted in dev diary how stupid this mechanic is, and farmed a lot red X.

 

[Bergest]

There's the other meme. Every new expansion people complain that you can't play tall anymore. As if previously you could.
Tall was not viable in 2.8 or 2.5 or 2.2 or 2.1 or 2.0 or 1.9 or 1.6 or 1.0

What are you talking about? The only reasonable definition of playing tall in Stellaris is to only grab the systems you can get at the start and then spend the majority of the game developing those through planets, habitats and megastructures and until now that was a perfectly viable, powerful and fun way to play the game.

 

[ruzen]

I HAVENT DONE THE MATH

But I checked out my saves and started a fast new one for the last hour, been trying to figure out is it really that important.
The short answer is YES it is quite important but this doesn't mean that this is a bad thing.

First of all, there are few thought processes we need to alter with the 3.0

It's ok to leave building slots open during the early game.
For a quiet while players had to build something new as soon as they reached a certain pop count. Now the pop count doesn't really matter for buildings, at least in the mid-late game. During the early game, yes, it is frustrating to see so many jobs open; that doesn't mean it's going to stay that long.

Research is still the king!
Having dedicated research planets are quite influential (as before) but since every pop is more valuable than before, you would definitely want to improve to the better buildings ASAP

POP specialization is further buffed
Before...The quantity of the pop was important; that was the way to build. Now, you can always build the infrastructure way ahead at the same time creating unique species or robots is now quite important. There is no tolerance for the "trash population" anymore. But having several types of species with the desired traits are quite powerful now. It's a neglectable penalty (-10% specific species) when selecting the desired pop type; quality is more important now.

Machines are quite OP now
It seems to me they don't get affected by this max population cap. Which is quite a buff and means they could always steady population production.




Having said all of that, to me, this newly introduced population race isn't that of a big deal.
You can still get quite buffs to your growth value even though the required number is always increasing. The race favors the growth value if you focus on your research.
The migration bonuses are way more beneficial now, not to mention they give more bonuses for what they take away from you ( the balance of emigration/immigration favors immigration)

Slavers, and such... who plays with lots of population need to go and actually conquer because they won't gain pop steadily and slaves also, so it forces them to go for a hunt and balances them a bid.

Overall I would like to see some maths regarding the immigration balance of things but I really don't see a "huge" issue here. Maybe they could slightly balance the ratio just to please the players.

 

[Derp Throat]

I get what they wanted to achieve, but this mechanic is just bad in every concievable way and I'm baffled that Paradox playtested this and came to the conclusion, that this would be a good addition to the game.

Bold of you to assume Paradox playtest.

 

[npc1054657282]

I HAVENT DONE THE MATH

But I checked out my saves and started a fast new one for the last hour, been trying to figure out is it really that important.
The short answer is YES it is quite important but this doesn't mean that this is a bad thing.

First of all, there are few thought processes we need to alter with the 3.0

It's ok to leave building slots open during the early game.
For a quiet while players had to build something new as soon as they reached a certain pop count. Now the pop count doesn't really matter for buildings, at least in the mid-late game. During the early game, yes, it is frustrating to see so many jobs open; that doesn't mean it's going to stay that long.

Research is still the king!
Having dedicated research planets are quite influential (as before) but since every pop is more valuable than before, you would definitely want to improve to the better buildings ASAP

POP specialization is further buffed
Before...The quantity of the pop was important; that was the way to build. Now, you can always build the infrastructure way ahead at the same time creating unique species or robots is now quite important. There is no tolerance for the "trash population" anymore. But having several types of species with the desired traits are quite powerful now. It's a neglectable penalty (-10% specific species) when selecting the desired pop type; quality is more important now.

Machines are quite OP now
It seems to me they don't get affected by this max population cap. Which is quite a buff and means they could always steady population production.




Having said all of that, to me, this newly introduced population race isn't that of a big deal.
You can still get quite buffs to your growth value even though the required number is always increasing. The race favors the growth value if you focus on your research.
The migration bonuses are way more beneficial now, not to mention they give more bonuses for what they take away from you ( the balance of emigration/immigration favors immigration)

Slavers, and such... who plays with lots of population need to go and actually conquer because they won't gain pop steadily and slaves also, so it forces them to go for a hunt and balances them a bid.

Overall I would like to see some maths regarding the immigration balance of things but I really don't see a "huge" issue here. Maybe they could slightly balance the ratio just to please the players.

If ignore the conquest, low pop is not that bad.
You miss some point. In fact robot assembly will be also infulenced by empire pop, you will produce robots very, very slow in the late game.
And another point is that you underestimate the power of conquest. The pop grab from conquest product a lot much much more than low number of high quality pop.

 

[monkeypunch87]

What are you talking about? The only reasonable definition of playing tall in Stellaris is to only grab the systems you can get at the start and then spend the majority of the game developing those through planets, habitats and megastructures and until now that was a perfectly viable, powerful and fun way to play the game.

Hm, you could also grow with Federations. Then, you don't even need to build habitats and megastructures (for POPs), since they make the game kind of wide.

 

[Verx90]

i'm not in the opinion that the system is "TERRIBLE" .

but i'd like to make you notice that this is a STRONG nerf to determinet exterminators (partialy, they can still conquer other machines empires) , devouring swarms and fanatic purifier .

it is not in itself bad to nerf them .

but while other empires can conquer and use pops directly from other empires ( even while increasing theyr pop price esponentialy) those that use purge will lose all those pops, and with it theyr economy capacity . meaning that while normal empires can increase theyr pops count (faster) by conquering other empires , total war empires will be forced to grow theyr own pops for the whole game .

 

[Mastikator]

What are you talking about? The only reasonable definition of playing tall in Stellaris is to only grab the systems you can get at the start and then spend the majority of the game developing those through planets, habitats and megastructures and until now that was a perfectly viable, powerful and fun way to play the game.

Considering that total empire population count negatively affects growth that strategy should be slightly less weak and sucky. You and I may have a different standard for what counts as "viable" but as a matter of fact it is no less viable than in 2.8

If you look at the whole picture from a more objective point of view you'll see that Tall is more viable, not less.

 

[fourteenfour]

Okay, so their engine is incapable of handling the population situation. Their "hack" basically favors Assimilator empires or games with subjects though on that latter I am not sure if subjects count against you as I have not read through all the files.

So instead of applying it by empire apply it by galaxy size.

Galaxy size can be used to determine maximum population of that game before it impacts growth rate. Since Huge can have 30 empires and using the numbers in their code the threshold is 6000. Please note, the numbers below are just a suggestion based on size

Going by that logic

• Huge 6000
• Large 4800
• Medium 3600
• Small 2400

So once the galaxy wide population exceeds that number the first reduction to growth of all specie across the galaxy takes place. This means no empire type will have an advantage and the limit is high enough per map type that all empires have significant time to establish themselves. It also can lead to games where the limit is never reached; you know for those empires which like to restore planets to their pristine uninhabited state

 

[Willy Waggler]

Considering that total empire population count negatively affects growth that strategy should be slightly less weak and sucky. You and I may have a different standard for what counts as "viable" but as a matter of fact it is no less viable than in 2.8

If you look at the whole picture from a more objective point of view you'll see that Tall is more viable, not less.

1.Wide gets more stations that are independent of pops
2.More places that grow pops.

 

[StellarXe]

It's true, I live in China area, the Chinese forum of Stellaris also complaint about the pop grow mechanism.

 

[DanielPrates]

Agree, it's ridiculous that pop growth is influenced by total number of pops in empire. And also this pop growth influence the assembling the mechanical pop, which means player should cost few years to build a robot, and cost almost same number of alloy which can build a warship.

I still havent played enough to grasp a feel on how it is working, but indeed if you have 99 planets filled up to capacity and one empty world, the one should have high growth and the others slow/no growth.

Isn't it working like that though?

 

[npc1054657282]

Considering that total empire population count negatively affects growth that strategy should be slightly less weak and sucky. You and I may have a different standard for what counts as "viable" but as a matter of fact it is no less viable than in 2.8

If you look at the whole picture from a more objective point of view you'll see that Tall is more viable, not less.

Maybe you mean "play tall" that 'colonize very few count of planets, and win a game with a lot of mining stations", compared with "colonize a bunch of planets".
From this point, the mining stations is buffed and it is a good thing.
But, now, no matter you colonize a few planets, or colonize every planets…… They're all the way to play with no conquest.
If you try conquest, well, all the non-conquest playing are so productless. The efficient palying is to abandon colonizing planets but put all your mind on defeat other empires to grab pops.

 

[npc1054657282]

I still havent played enough to grasp a feel on how it is working, but indeed if you have 99 planets filled up to capacity and one empty world, the one should have high growth and the others slow/no growth.

Isn't it working like that though?

NO, now if you have a lot of planets and your empire has a lot of pops, the newly colonized empty world has low growth too.

 

[Sir Roderick]

Well, you will find that, you need more growth points to increase a pop,200 points when your empire have 200 pop. In fact every empire pop will increase 0.5 growth point demand, including both natural growth and assembly growth.
The data is described in the scripts:
View attachment 704753

That's helpful but which txt file in which folder it is?

 

[Mastikator]

Maybe you mean "play tall" that 'colonize very few count of planets, and win a game with a lot of mining stations", compared with "colonize a bunch of planets".
From this point, the mining stations is buffed and it is a good thing.
But, now, no matter you colonize a few planets, or colonize every planets…… They're all the way to play with no conquest.
If you try conquest, well, all the non-conquest playing are so productless. The efficient palying is to abandon colonizing planets but put all your mind on defeat other empires to grab pops.

I was responding to his definition of tall. If you disagree with that definition take that up with him, not me.

 

[npc1054657282]

That's helpful but which txt file in which folder it is?

/common/defines/00_defines.txt