Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Second, the game is predicated on a ~44,000 per capita, so if a country has a lower per capita income it tends to rise easily, but if you have an income above 44,000 per capita it tends to fall or at least not rise.
The GDP effects of global warming are percentage-based, while the Economy priority gives a flat bonus to GDP per capita, so rich nations have difficulty keeping their GDP per capita steady. That's generally fine though, it needs to fall quite a lot for it to have much of an effect on their IPs.
GDPpC is only ever affected by:
1) Completing economy priority.
2) Ecological damage. (Global warming.)
3) Leaving/joining federations and coups.
4) Nukes and region damage from wars and bombardments.
5) Various one-shot events (e.g. sanctions event).
In OPs case what he observes is simply result of global warming.
As a side note, there is no reason to push GDPpC past $48750. Why? Because past that it does not have effect of nations research output. And since IPs are cubic root of GDP there isn't much point in ramping up GDP for that either.