Additionally, the math is a tad more complicated, there is a 5 Amenities base usage regardless of planet size, so you always pay that, and some traits and techs significantly decrease your Amenity usage. Before that it simply doesn't make sense to use high amenities because you don't have enough base production. Sure if your play style is such that each planet is maxed at one thing I understand how that would be more efficient but if you want an overall bonus to all of your jobs on a planet, dumping excess drones into Maintenance jobs might not be a bad idea once your world is highly populated. Your districts are maxed, your buildings are maxed, so dumping them into Maintenance jobs is to me efficient, because it gives an overall bonus to EVERY job, the building is much cheaper to buy and operate, instead of adding another Alloy Foundry and only getting extra Alloys or only getting extra Research or what have you. What I am trying to convey is how realistic it is to have 20 amenities on a 10 pop planet like what are your districts and buildings in this situation? Do you see what I'm saying? While when your planet gets to 100 pops you need to dump pops in jobs or resettle. The tradeoff of outlawing robots is nothing to compare. The psionic ascension is also very powerful. They can easily reach 90+ happiness without even thinking. With the current meta, the spiritualists is the best ethics in my mind. If it is consistently "less stable", then what's the point?Ħ. The hive mind are supposed to be the most stable, organized mind. I personally disagree with the idea of a fixed 50% happiness for the hive mind. The base stability is 50% and amenity gives a max of 20%. Therefore you can never get high stability like the organics. The problem of the hive mind (and machines) is that happiness is fixed at 50%. Stability is also decided by the average happiness of all the pops. More amenities than that are just wasted.Ĥ. Amenity only yields a maximum of 20% stability (you need about 50 amenities if I remember correctly). The equation is roughly like: (% of stability-40)/2 = % of buff. 100% stability gives a 30% buff to all the output. Amenity doesn't modify the output, it is the stability that actually matters.Ģ. Why put another 5% of the population on amenities to only get a tiny increase in efficiency from stability? Where is the break even point? If I steal Fen Habbanis (since I can't make an ecumenpolis myself), is there a population point where it makes sense to run tons of amenities to increase stability? It looks to me like increasing stability via maintenance drone jobs as a hive mind is a losing battle in terms of efficiency. And that's on a planet with perfect habitability. And even on my capital, I might have 20-25 POPs working maintenance just to keep the planet at decent stability. But every drone on amenities via the maintenance job is one less drone doing actual work. On a planet like that, there might be value in increasing stability through amenities. The problem is when a planet has a population of, say, 100 and lots of buildings. I keep only a few drones on amenities (just enough to keep me at 0) and let the rest of the drones do more important jobs. Now, I do fine with less developed planets. I've been doing well with hive minds, but there is one aspect to running a hive mind that baffles me: amenities and stability.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |