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
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
I gave a single sector four planets. A couple centuries later, the sector's main planet was still incomplete. The sector had plenty of resources, but for some reason refused to do anything with said resources.
I reccomend using mods to increase the planet cap and only giving planets to a sector that are fully developed.
Is that true?
That sounds like SO much fun after you hit 30 or more planets. But to each their own I suppose.
1. Build priorities. There are some priorities built into sectors that stop them from doing certain things until conditions are fulfilled. (Afaik one post reported that sectors will not build certain things until they upgrade the colony HQ to a certain level - while they wait for pops, they're idle)
2. Energy upkeep. All of the sectors upkeep comes from energy credits it produces (to prevent players from being run into a defecit by sector buildings). On the highest taxation level, many planets produce less energy credits than they consume, due to the fact that all the buildings take full upkeep but only 25 % of the energy credits produced are available for the sector to use for upkeep.
This means that sometimes the sector will stall out because it has no free pop/tile for more energy credits and has reached a treshold beyond which it will not spend on buildings that cost upkeep. Check how much it has coming in each month.
If possible, add a planet that produces energy credits and nothing else to pump up the energy credits or lower the taxation and see if that makes a difference.
3. Sectors have a hard limit on how many build orders they can give in a month (presumably to encourage using more than 1 mega sector). I've seen a post claiming that it was limited to 5 orders a game month. In a sector with 10 or more planets that means that they'll build only 1 building/do one upgrade per two months, which is vastly below what 10 planets may be able to support due to mineral and energy credit income.
As there are many, many things that constitute such an order (star ports, modules, buildings, upgrades, ships, military stations) and many of them have higher or lower priorities, you may simply not have monitored the right thing in the right month to see it do something.
4. Bugs. They are definitely present and can cause problems.
THANKFULLY the 1.5 patch on the 6th of april will include a little list of planned buildings and actions for your sectors. You will be able to see what your sector is doing so you no longer have to guess if full minerals mean that it is idling or if it is waiting for some condition to be filled before it acts.
This is a good step in the right direction because I believe that many of the issues with sectors stem from players not knowing what it is doing or being confused about what is going wrong - if the sector has too little income to build for example, you could add a few systems with orbital mines that produce credits, or remove a planet and switch some buildings on it to energy plants, or settle a nearby planet and make it energy focussed before adding it, etc. tt.
But that only works if you know what is holding your sector back. At the moment you're often reduced to shaking your sector to see if something falls out that gives you a clue about what is bugging it. -.-
Asfar as I know you only tax a sectors surplus, not his production. So a sector with 100 C income and 90 maintenance will give you 7.5 credits a month and not 75 @ 75% tax
That may well be due to military stations/mining stations and star ports, however.
Nonetheless, the main point is still valid: the sector may not produce enough energy credits to afford further buildings or projects that would consume them. ^^
I usually colonize planets, develop them, then hand them off to a sector when they're fully developed. Taking away the sector's redevelopment privileges is a good idea too, otherwise the sector can mess with your configuration and will usually be worse for it.
When exactly do you start building planets for sector. I mean should I start thinking about my sector before I reach my core world limit (because the first planet I colonize usually I intend to keep them as my core world you see. Another question should be what happen if I colonize over the limit ? And if I need to think ahead that means I should probably send my ship to colonize area far from my capital world, but I will pay the price in influence. I am right?
I concur. Tax comes off sector surplus.
@NixBoxDone
apart from what you mentioned, also because of badly balanced priorities imho:
SECTOR_BUILDING_MAINT_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.40, -- Fraction of maintenance budget going to buildings
SECTOR_STATION_MAINT_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.40,-- Fraction of maintenance budget going to spaceports and stations
SECTOR_ARMY_MAINT_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.10, -- Fraction of maintenance budget going to spaceports and stations
SECTOR_ROBOT_MAINT_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.10, -- AI will spend this fraction of their budget on robots (transfered to buildings if they don't use robots)
sometimes if you directly include planets that have too many robot pops or insist (funny?) on upgrading spaceports, the sector goes stupidly into a loop trying to balance its budget and if it can't balance it stops building because it can't find a route that will balance the maintenance.
By default sectors will attempt to spend their income (for a balanced sector) :
SECTOR_STATION_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.30, -- Fraction of budget going to stations
SECTOR_BUILDING_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.40, -- Fraction of budget going to buildings
SECTOR_SPACEPORT_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.10,-- Fraction of budget going to spaceports
SECTOR_ARMY_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.05, -- Fraction of budget going to armies
SECTOR_ROBOT_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.15, -- AI will spend this fraction of their stored minerals on robots (transfered to buildings if they don't use robots)
Now here comes the instability as station maintenance and building maintenance are of equal importance however increased spending on stations actually deters the sector from building new buildings or upgrading and favours spending on mining stations. But by comparison the building slots should be more numerous as the human player favours bigger planets to take advantage of the extra space.
if you were to change the budget to :
SECTOR_STATION_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.20-0.25
SECTOR_BUILDING_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.50
and maintenances to :
SECTOR_BUILDING_MAINT_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.45
SECTOR_STATION_MAINT_BUDGET_FRACTION = 0.40
it would already make the sector more efficient as spending and maintenance would favour building thus increasing available expenditure and maintenance threshold. (the sector becomes more efficient just because it gets to build more)
The catch here is that the same numbers are valid for the AI empires ... But the AI empires do not favour bigger planets but use habitability as a priority and would first pick whatever is green to them whereas a human player would easily choose to colonise an big orange planet with plentyful tiles and resources against a smaller green one. (so as also to take less penalty in tech research)...
So in some cases abundance of resources would mean nothing to a sector as it could be unable to find a route of building que that would allow it to balance its maintenance levels.
(sorry for the wall of text, the above would make more sense in a spreadsheet)
Adding a planet to a sector creates a +10% penalty in ethics divergence. As such, until you have the technology to adequately mitigate that, it's best to place a planet into a sector that's closer to your world.
Plus, your core worlds are closer to your capital, meaning they were colonized earlier, meaning they're more likely to be developed when you're ready to start assigning planets to a sector. If you want a planet under a sector to be used to the best of its capacity, it's better to do that yourself and assign it to a sector when there's nothing more you can do.
If you colonize over the limit, your energy/mineral income is significantly reduced according to how many planets you're above the limit. You also pay a price in happiness, and influence too if I remember correctly.
I wouldn't recommend colonizing further away from your homeworld, though. I've seen empires who did this, and ended up having no access to several worlds, because another empire colonized between them and their new colonies. If there's any issue that requires you to send ships over to your world, you're entirely at the mercy of the empire who's blocking you.