Overpopulation?

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.

Moderator: Oberlus

Message
Author
miu
Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 2:33 am
Location: Finland/Helsinki

about asteroid-fields and gas giants.

#16 Post by miu »

Without taking part to discussion of game mechanics; asteroid fields and gas giants need be colonizable and counted in every aspect as planets as there are races planned with those ranked as ideal place. The availability of orbitals in asteroid fields can be explained as there certainly would be cities/areas of high concentration of infrastructure and population, and orbitals are defending them.

.Miu
Difference between a man and a gentleman is that a man does what he wants, a gentleman does what he should. - Albert Camus

User avatar
Krikkitone
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1559
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm

#17 Post by Krikkitone »

asteroid fields and gas giants need be colonizable and counted in every aspect as planets as there are races planned with those ranked as ideal place
There are? Asteroid Belts and Gas Giants didn't seem to be on the EP terraforming wheel.

PowerCrazy
Creative Contributor
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:35 am
Location: Texas

#18 Post by PowerCrazy »

I was confused as well. In Moo3 (which this is not) there were races who preferred Gas Giants. But in FO Gas Giants and other phenomenon are not even to be considered, for quite sometime.
Aquitaine is my Hero.... ;)

miu
Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 2:33 am
Location: Finland/Helsinki

#19 Post by miu »

PowerCrazy wrote:I was confused as well. In Moo3 (which this is not) there were races who preferred Gas Giants. But in FO Gas Giants and other phenomenon are not even to be considered, for quite sometime.
I aknowledge that they arent written in, but I would appreciate somekind of explanation why not. Having them colonisable, and as ideal atmosphere for certain races adds to fun value of the game, and I cant see any game-play points why they shouldt be in. In realism-view, yes that sounds strange but not impossible, but we arent making ultra-realistic game anyway. In my view that was one of the best things in moo3, and not having them available is vain step backward. There may be some unbalancing issues that I'm unavare of, but for now, I cant see any major reasons why their colonisation should be restricted.

miu
Difference between a man and a gentleman is that a man does what he wants, a gentleman does what he should. - Albert Camus

krum
Creative Contributor
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 12:58 pm
Location: Bulgaria

#20 Post by krum »

IIRC there will be colonisable asteroid fields and gas giants, but of course they wouldn't be a part of the EP wheel.

Impaler
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1060
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
Location: Tucson, Arizona USA

#21 Post by Impaler »

The wheel has been pased as a design goal but they have also desided to use a table based aproatch for planetary habitablity so this is ware the Gas Giants and asteroids will go, the values will be such that a wheel is formed but the other types will exist along side that wheel.
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Overpopulation?

#22 Post by Oberlus »

Resurrecting this thread for hopefully good reasons.


Overpopulation is a nice reason to explain expansion through the universe, really nice for immersion.

Compared to "no overpopulation", it implies less stability but greater population so greater production (industry, research, and maybe influence).

Overpopulated planets could give bonuses to colonization (people willing to leave that overcrowded hole), in the form of cheaper colony parts (people willing to tighten the belt).


A very simple idea of overpopulation could be implemented with a policy (with proper fluff about overcrowded living habitats, destruction of natural habitat to produce more food and build more housing, and whatever), that would give a TargetPopulation bonus (good +3, adequate +2, poor +1), a TargetHappiness malus, and maybe some bonus to colonization as suggested (but we already have a Colonization policy that does that). I think we don't have a policy increasing TargetPopulation so that part at least is interesting.
Another policy could reduce (not remove) the stability malus from overpopulation (and have the previous policy as a prerequisite).

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Overpopulation?

#23 Post by LienRag »

Oberlus wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 3:35 pm Overpopulation is a nice reason to explain expansion through the universe, really nice for immersion.

Definitely agreed and concurred and approved.

But I'm not sure that having an "Overpopulation Policy" is the right way to do it.
I think it would be better to have Overpopulation happen, and then having different Policies to manage it.
Like "Birth Control" (more stability, maybe a little slower population growth on not-full planets, no transfer of population from full planets to non-full planets)
"Soylent Green" (less happiness, more production, no transfer of population)
"Mobility" (population from crowded planet would move to planets still below maximum, probably at a Production Point cost; if that's not possible stability drops slightly)
"Federation of Free Settlers" (crowded planets would spawn small settler groups who would try to colonize everything in the vicinity, with more or less success - the new settled planets could eventually take their independence from the Empire under some conditions)

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Overpopulation?

#24 Post by Oberlus »

LienRag wrote: Wed Oct 21, 2020 11:05 pm I think it would be better to have Overpopulation happen, and then having different Policies to manage it.
That is mostly the same:
A) Overpopulation not happening by default, policy makes it happen.
B) Overpopulation happening by default, policy makes it go away.

Add to that some other policies that either introduce different types of overpopulation (A) or remove it in different, incomplete ways (B).

Remember, here "overpopulation" means exactly "bonus to target population and maybe something colonization related, malus to influence/stability/whatever".


Half your suggested policies seems to me too complex and messing with several game mechanics at once.

Post Reply