Apparently a lot of people build habitats around their habitable worlds. What benefit is there to this, rather than building it over a barren world with a resource deposit?
- 1
Why do people build habitats around habitable worlds?
- Thread starter PatriotCreeper
- 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.
1 - Because I'm using a mod which puts habitat-boosting effects on habitable planets.
2 - Because I'm using a mod which gives planets a bonus if there's a hab above it.
But in vanilla? No, of course I don't build habs above planets, I get the same trade value from any barren planet.
2 - Because I'm using a mod which gives planets a bonus if there's a hab above it.
But in vanilla? No, of course I don't build habs above planets, I get the same trade value from any barren planet.
- 4
- 1
- 1
If I play as a machine empire, any habitat is +pop assembly, strategic resources production and energy production. So at the end, when I have finished to build habitats above every deposit planet, I start to spam them everywhere, transitioning my planets to mineral gathering only and using the habitats as an energy source. A single habitat is producing around 450 energy for me.
- 1
None.
I feel like if youve taken the voidborn origin or AP, the new orbital rings should do two things.
- Increase planet size by 4 (allowing 4 districts of any kind) - as the DD said.
- Also allow you to build up to 4 habitat Leisure / Trade / science districts on the ring (instead of 4 "normal" planet districts).
This would require a UI overhaul for the planet screen, which would be nice either way tbh, to present more than the 5 districts we have - though mods have done this fine already...
Last edited:
And exactly this is the reason why one of my top three whishes for stellaris changes is to decouple pop growth and assembly completely from planets/colonies. Make it a fixed value modified by civics, traits and science and in case of assembly one singualar building on your capital, symbolizing all assembly factorys across your empire. A new pop is spawned on the planet with the most free jobs and housing (or if selected on a planet of your choice).
If you conquer/steal some pops the agressor gets a heavy slow down in growth/assembly until the conquered bonus is somwhat equalized and the empire loosing pops a boost for the same time to compensate for the loss.
That would make tall playstyle finally viable and whats more important doesn't encourage you to get as many planets as possible.
- 14
- 4
Trade, Industry and Fortress Habitats don't use the extra district, so it's not necessary.
Is there any benefit over any other no-deposit planet? No, not really other than the fact that it looks cool.
- 1
- 1
Because it looks cool.
Also, if you are not planning to use the resources districts from the resource deposit. (like a habitat that produces trade or rare resources.)
Also, if you are not planning to use the resources districts from the resource deposit. (like a habitat that produces trade or rare resources.)
You always build habitats ontop of rare ressource deposits like motes, chrystals and gas if you can to unlock the special districts on your habitats.
- 3
1. Moving industry off resource production worlds if you can't (or won't) use Ecus.
2. Refinery slots.
3. Fortress habitats.
Of course, you can do these things with uninhabitable empty worlds, but some players abhor any unused space in their territory. And until Overlord comes out there's nothing else you can place there.
2. Refinery slots.
3. Fortress habitats.
Of course, you can do these things with uninhabitable empty worlds, but some players abhor any unused space in their territory. And until Overlord comes out there's nothing else you can place there.
Flavor. To have the trading capital of the Galaxy over the actual capital seems appropriate.
- 2
1) I'm playing Void Dwellers and haven't got to the point yet where my robots can colonize worlds for me since my main species has a preference for Habitats
2) It is a Holy World, if I try to colonize it with that Spiritualist FE still alive, they will get mad at me
3) Boredom
2) It is a Holy World, if I try to colonize it with that Spiritualist FE still alive, they will get mad at me
3) Boredom
I do it to double down on trade in that system, double down on "you'll need to keep landing troops while my fleet is on its way", and just cause it feels right for habitats to orbit inhabited worlds from a roleplay perspective. I'm also usually trying and failing to make tall "work", so the more colonies in the same system, the better.
- 1
Remember during the 3.3 beta when that buggy event chain created a d_minerals_4 deposit on one of your first colonies?
You could build a mining hab over that colony.
Even if the colony itself had no mines, you could extract minerals from space near the colony, then send the minerals down to the alloy forges on the surface.
Made perfect sense.
Before 3.0 I would always build administrative habitats over the capital. I wish administrative habitats would make a comeback with unity districts.
Last edited:
Seems rather natural sometimes from an RP perspective. Perhaps its your capital world so you have a Lagrange station that is purely dedicated to trade or administrating your empire. Perhaps you have a giant gas refinery over your main mining world. From a 'meta' theres no real reason for it, but for immersion there are many reasons.
- 3