Removing High Pops Growth Modifier?

[MidiusTheSad]

Does anyone know how to remove the "High Pops" growth modifier. I'm trying to do a Voidborn run and because of how small the habitats start off I'm losing nearly half of my population growth to this one modifier (with gene clinics).

[MidiusTheSad]

Messaggio originale di HappySack:

It's in the settings before you make the game, specifically "Growth Required Scaling", set the slider to 0.

If you're going to do that then change "Logistic Growth Ceiling" to 1 to balance it out.

I tried making a new game with "Growth Required Scaling" set to 0 and "Logistic Growth Ceiling" set to 1. To quickly test whether or not the modifier had been removed I used the console command "grow_pops" to add 1 pop to one of my habitats. The carrying capacity was 22 and after adding the pop the population was 11 and the modifier came back. I know that if I just keep the carrying capacity above double the population (aka the population below half the carrying capacity) I won't get the modifier. I can manage this fine with planets but the habitats are just to small at the beginning of the game. Someone else commented about going into the game files then into common and into defines and looking for "LOGISTIC_POP_GROWTH_FLOOR" and changing that from '0.1' to '1' and that worked for me.

[MidiusTheSad]

Messaggio originale di galadon3:

Honestly I still kinda struggle with the idea of empty ghosttowns on the same planet making people having more children... Yes I can see why a lack of living space would hamper it but this system kinda feels like they changed the system so suddenly the auto-gov AIs weird obsession with luxury appartments has a use.

Yeah, maybe if it were higher at 90% or something that would make sense. But needing to have more than 50% of your carrying capacity/housing not filled seems ridiculous.

[ScreamCon]

Messaggio originale di monoanemo81:

Messaggio originale di galadon3:

Honestly I still kinda struggle with the idea of empty ghosttowns on the same planet making people having more children... Yes I can see why a lack of living space would hamper it but this system kinda feels like they changed the system so suddenly the auto-gov AIs weird obsession with luxury appartments has a use.

Yeah, maybe if it were higher at 90% or something that would make sense. But needing to have more than 50% of your carrying capacity/housing not filled seems ridiculous.

The game whether players like it or not has become more bias to efficiency builds. That is builds that maximise per pop yield. Use of + - on jobs along with controlling jobs. Clerk jobs and like are now more detrimental to your play.

[NixBoxDone]

Messaggio originale di ScreamCon:

Messaggio originale di monoanemo81:

Yeah, maybe if it were higher at 90% or something that would make sense. But needing to have more than 50% of your carrying capacity/housing not filled seems ridiculous.

The game whether players like it or not has become more bias to efficiency builds. That is builds that maximise per pop yield. Use of + - on jobs along with controlling jobs. Clerk jobs and like are now more detrimental to your play.

To be fair though, the game has always been about efficiency at the core. The more efficient you know how to be, the more trade-offs you can make for roleplay or fun and still defeat the AI.

It's just that we now have a whole bunch of difficulty options that demand more and more numbers earlier and earlier in the game to win.
If you want to beat higher difficulties, you're kinda pushed into building for efficiency and not fun.

On the flipside though, this could be seen as just another challenge. Maybe the fun could be in finding ways to play that allow you to beat stronger and stronger settings with builds that you know aren't optimized.