So today I learned something that just confuses me from a design perspective: colonies require 5 amenities more than the pops that live there need.
With credit to @Dragatus, who demonstrates that you can still learn basic things from niche tool tips never found in the wiki, colonies apparently have a 5 amenity requirement, separate from the pop amenity economy. As pops are the only consumer of amenities outside of this that I'm tracking, this means that functionally your first pop on any colony requires 6 amenities before you go to your normal amenity upkeep considerations. (Cue click-baity title).
This confuses me, since the nearly every colony in the game has 5 or more pop-free amenities anyway- from the capital building, the one building you can't get rid of. You could literally just reduce the capital amenity production by 5, and get rid of the base 5 amenity requirement, and be the same net amenities for happiness considerations without a stealth tax.
Now, in fairness there is exactly 1 capital context where a colony building produces less than 5 amenities- Habitat Tier 1s produce 3- but gestalt T1 habitat colonies produce and additional +3 amenities (6) and non-gestalt empires always have the first ruler pop job that also provide +3 amenities base from the ruler job. Literally all the -5 base amenity requirement does is ensure you start at net 1 amenity (or less if repugnant). If you got rid of this, normal non-gestalts would have a 2 amenity advantage for all of 9 pops before the tier 2 colony upgrade, which everyone is going to do for the habitat building slot.
Like, what is the purpose of both giving and removing 5 amenities?
Is it to make starting colonies require an immediate amenity job?
No, because starting colonies start with more than 5 amenities. Reassembled Ship Shelters start with +7, and gets a downgrade at the 10 point pop. Gestalts just start at +8 amenities. All the starts have an amenity-providing job, be it colonist or maintenance drone.
Is it to make an amenity building a first-construct for the building slot instead of pop-assembly?
No, because Colony Designation- available for the first 4 pops- is +10 amenities, and a pop-assembly build would just sit at just the assembly jobs and relocate pops from the bad worlds to better.
Does it change when you need to build an amenity building as a normal empire?
No, not really. You still need to build an amenity building if you don't want to rely on useless colonists.
Does it change the value of amenity production boosts or reduction requirements?
No, not really. The only early-game boost is 5%, which is so negligable compared to habitability it doesn't matter until the point where pops are the majority of amenity needs anyway. And you'd need about 50 pops for a 10% amenity reduction to equal 5 amenities to make up for the flat cost (if we're assuming 100% habitability- and if we're not, habitability matters far more).
So What/What's the Issue?
Besides just plain confusing me, a 5 amenity difference substantially throws off the otherwise seemingly intended math of when gene clinics are viable in lieu of holotheaters.
If there wasn't a 5 amenity stealth-tax, early-game amenity reduction strategies (Residency/Slavery) would make holotheaters and gene clinics pretty equivalent in pop-efficiency terms for reaching the key 25 pop benchmark. At 80% habitability, 25 citizens are 30 amenities; 25 residents are 22.5. Take off 6 for the politicians, and 24 amenities or 16.5 amenities.
If you have a pop-free 5 amenities from the capital, this is 19 and 11.5- a ratio where 2 entertainers or 2 healthcare workers become pretty much equivalent. The healthcare worker habitability buff takes off about 1 amenity required at the 25 pop stage, and has the habitability and growth gains, while the entertainers offer workers-first (but slower) and the unity point, supporting more forward-leaning resource rushes in lieu of blooming on the back end. The difference isn't the number of amenity job pops required (2), but where in the employment order they are, and how this affects the employment order.
This is a fair and reasonable early-game trade, or would be if gene clinics weren't locked behind a low-priority tech. It even gives luxury housing a relevant niche as providing the amenities to cover the marginal gap for the last few pops to the 25 pop range.
BUT with a 5 amenity stealth tax, which negates the capital benefit, you're back at 24 or 16.5 amenity production jobs required.
This puts the luxury housing bias in the other direction- now holotheaters will always be preferable as a 2-pop solution to the problem, with a luxury house providing that last 5 for the full citizen route, while gene clinics will never be a pop-sufficient on a growth side, and at best can use luxury housing to compensate on the resident route. Since most non-slaver empire don't bother with residency due to the pop happiness and faction unity implications, this is a significant loss of opportunity space.
After a colony upgrades to 25 pops, gene clinics might replace a holotheater for a citizen build on a breeder world build- net 3 pop-free amenities from the capital after 5-tax, 9 amenities from politicians, and 10 from 2 medical workers + 5 from luxury housing the holo theater used = 27, with +1.35 from the 5% amenity tech. 28 amenities is almost enough for breeder world levels.
But breeder worlds are well into the mid-game, by and large, not only after you've started snowballing (at which point pop-growth ceases to be a major benefit), but also well, well after a tier 2 tech should be beneficial in its own gameplay era.
///
So What Could Be Done?
Is there any reason to keep the stealth tax if it just complicates balance analysis?
If the goal is for +7/8 starting colonies to really have +2/3 starting amenities, just... making the colonies produce that much. It's no change to the current system, except that the information is clearer.
With credit to @Dragatus, who demonstrates that you can still learn basic things from niche tool tips never found in the wiki, colonies apparently have a 5 amenity requirement, separate from the pop amenity economy. As pops are the only consumer of amenities outside of this that I'm tracking, this means that functionally your first pop on any colony requires 6 amenities before you go to your normal amenity upkeep considerations. (Cue click-baity title).
This confuses me, since the nearly every colony in the game has 5 or more pop-free amenities anyway- from the capital building, the one building you can't get rid of. You could literally just reduce the capital amenity production by 5, and get rid of the base 5 amenity requirement, and be the same net amenities for happiness considerations without a stealth tax.
Now, in fairness there is exactly 1 capital context where a colony building produces less than 5 amenities- Habitat Tier 1s produce 3- but gestalt T1 habitat colonies produce and additional +3 amenities (6) and non-gestalt empires always have the first ruler pop job that also provide +3 amenities base from the ruler job. Literally all the -5 base amenity requirement does is ensure you start at net 1 amenity (or less if repugnant). If you got rid of this, normal non-gestalts would have a 2 amenity advantage for all of 9 pops before the tier 2 colony upgrade, which everyone is going to do for the habitat building slot.
Like, what is the purpose of both giving and removing 5 amenities?
Is it to make starting colonies require an immediate amenity job?
No, because starting colonies start with more than 5 amenities. Reassembled Ship Shelters start with +7, and gets a downgrade at the 10 point pop. Gestalts just start at +8 amenities. All the starts have an amenity-providing job, be it colonist or maintenance drone.
Is it to make an amenity building a first-construct for the building slot instead of pop-assembly?
No, because Colony Designation- available for the first 4 pops- is +10 amenities, and a pop-assembly build would just sit at just the assembly jobs and relocate pops from the bad worlds to better.
Does it change when you need to build an amenity building as a normal empire?
No, not really. You still need to build an amenity building if you don't want to rely on useless colonists.
Does it change the value of amenity production boosts or reduction requirements?
No, not really. The only early-game boost is 5%, which is so negligable compared to habitability it doesn't matter until the point where pops are the majority of amenity needs anyway. And you'd need about 50 pops for a 10% amenity reduction to equal 5 amenities to make up for the flat cost (if we're assuming 100% habitability- and if we're not, habitability matters far more).
So What/What's the Issue?
Besides just plain confusing me, a 5 amenity difference substantially throws off the otherwise seemingly intended math of when gene clinics are viable in lieu of holotheaters.
If there wasn't a 5 amenity stealth-tax, early-game amenity reduction strategies (Residency/Slavery) would make holotheaters and gene clinics pretty equivalent in pop-efficiency terms for reaching the key 25 pop benchmark. At 80% habitability, 25 citizens are 30 amenities; 25 residents are 22.5. Take off 6 for the politicians, and 24 amenities or 16.5 amenities.
If you have a pop-free 5 amenities from the capital, this is 19 and 11.5- a ratio where 2 entertainers or 2 healthcare workers become pretty much equivalent. The healthcare worker habitability buff takes off about 1 amenity required at the 25 pop stage, and has the habitability and growth gains, while the entertainers offer workers-first (but slower) and the unity point, supporting more forward-leaning resource rushes in lieu of blooming on the back end. The difference isn't the number of amenity job pops required (2), but where in the employment order they are, and how this affects the employment order.
This is a fair and reasonable early-game trade, or would be if gene clinics weren't locked behind a low-priority tech. It even gives luxury housing a relevant niche as providing the amenities to cover the marginal gap for the last few pops to the 25 pop range.
BUT with a 5 amenity stealth tax, which negates the capital benefit, you're back at 24 or 16.5 amenity production jobs required.
This puts the luxury housing bias in the other direction- now holotheaters will always be preferable as a 2-pop solution to the problem, with a luxury house providing that last 5 for the full citizen route, while gene clinics will never be a pop-sufficient on a growth side, and at best can use luxury housing to compensate on the resident route. Since most non-slaver empire don't bother with residency due to the pop happiness and faction unity implications, this is a significant loss of opportunity space.
After a colony upgrades to 25 pops, gene clinics might replace a holotheater for a citizen build on a breeder world build- net 3 pop-free amenities from the capital after 5-tax, 9 amenities from politicians, and 10 from 2 medical workers + 5 from luxury housing the holo theater used = 27, with +1.35 from the 5% amenity tech. 28 amenities is almost enough for breeder world levels.
But breeder worlds are well into the mid-game, by and large, not only after you've started snowballing (at which point pop-growth ceases to be a major benefit), but also well, well after a tier 2 tech should be beneficial in its own gameplay era.
///
So What Could Be Done?
Is there any reason to keep the stealth tax if it just complicates balance analysis?
If the goal is for +7/8 starting colonies to really have +2/3 starting amenities, just... making the colonies produce that much. It's no change to the current system, except that the information is clearer.
Last edited:
- 5
- 1
