Your Preferred Habitable Worlds Setting?

[Arcane Teuton]

I'm struggling choosing between .50 and .75. 1.00 seems to be way too much. Before I liked playing at .50 and .75, but now that planet designations actually matter, I'm not so sure anymore. I like having a fairly big empire, but not the widest of wide empires. And I don't really enjoy keeping track of any more than 20 planets at a time.

[HappySack]

I used to leave it on the default settings but realised I could turn it to .75 so I could play on a large galaxy but I always set guaranteed worlds to none since I think that's cheap and uninteresting.

Edit: might as well update this post since it got bumped

[Råb!d]

I tend to use .75 for most games. I've never had anywhere near 20 planets to manage so far. Sounds like a nightmare!

[Dialtone]

0.25x and I still end up with 25 - 100 planets before a game's over, but I suppose I build most of them. I wish there was 0.05x & 0.10x settings. Having less planets to start with would mean less built due to exponential growth. Also building habitats and rings worlds is way too cheap.

[Terijian]

.75 - 1.5 is what I play. usually just the base 1.
I dont feel the need to colonize suboptimal planets so I rarely go past 5-15 planets. folks say im handicapping myself by not getting the extra growth but then i beat those folks in mp so idk lol

[Sero]

So far I left it at 1.00 and 2 guaranteed habitable worlds but this inspired me.
Next time I will try to reduce the number of planets to actually reach the endgame.

Originally posted by Terijian:

.75 - 1.5 is what I play. usually just the base 1.
I dont feel the need to colonize suboptimal planets so I rarely go past 5-15 planets. folks say im handicapping myself by not getting the extra growth but then i beat those folks in mp so idk lol

Low hab planets eat a lot more resources untill they become self sufficient or even contribute anything compared to optimal planets.
I also only colonize green planets until I get to terraform every bad planet.

[Flex0r75]

Or you can just wait until you can change the habitability preference with species templates, create one for all lower habitability planets you have settled, press apply and sort by planet type to make everyone have max habitability everywhere for the rest of the game.

[pete3great]

.25. There are people who use mods to turn it down further, and I don't blame them. The reason I don't is because I never play with mods.

[Arcane Teuton]

The only real issue I have with 0.50, is not only the new planet designations which are actually useful which incentivizes you to have multiple specialized planets... But the even bigger issue is I recently played a game where I befriended a megacorp to get their juicy branch offices, but I noticed that despite being a medium sized empire, no planets had spawned in their area except for their 2 habitables. They were in the top 5 biggest empires out of 17 in a huge galaxy.

I like the idea of planets being much more valuable and not just a dime a dozen, and as I said before I don't like micro managing 20+ planets (though having 4 habitats that are just research stations isn't too bad to micromanage I guess.)
I like to play relatively tall, but I like to expand a lot and grab a good chunk of space at the beginning of the game. It's not really my intention to conquer half the galaxy because that is way too much micromanagement. I'd much rather vassalize or subjugate.

I think my main issue is just, 1.00 is too much, ,75 is a bit too much, 0.50 might be good but the way they spawn the planets just doesn't feel right and some empires can get really gimped by luck-based factors. .75 is like, still more than enough but gives some lenience, but 0.50 paves way to some bad RNG.

[Rabob]

Originally posted by Terijian:

.75 - 1.5 is what I play. usually just the base 1.
I dont feel the need to colonize suboptimal planets so I rarely go past 5-15 planets. folks say im handicapping myself by not getting the extra growth but then i beat those folks in mp so idk lol

It also depends a lot on galaxy size and how many empires you spawn. 0.25 with 2 empires on largest galaxy map will be very different compared to lowest galaxy size with 1 habitable, max empires or something.

Originally posted by ✠ Tarnil Corvax:

The only real issue I have with 0.50, is not only the new planet designations which are actually useful which incentivizes you to have multiple specialized planets... But the even bigger issue is I recently played a game where I befriended a megacorp to get their juicy branch offices, but I noticed that despite being a medium sized empire, no planets had spawned in their area except for their 2 habitables. They were in the top 5 biggest empires out of 17 in a huge galaxy.

I like the idea of planets being much more valuable and not just a dime a dozen, and as I said before I don't like micro managing 20+ planets (though having 4 habitats that are just research stations isn't too bad to micromanage I guess.)
I like to play relatively tall, but I like to expand a lot and grab a good chunk of space at the beginning of the game. It's not really my intention to conquer half the galaxy because that is way too much micromanagement. I'd much rather vassalize or subjugate.

I think my main issue is just, 1.00 is too much, ,75 is a bit too much, 0.50 might be good but the way they spawn the planets just doesn't feel right and some empires can get really gimped by luck-based factors. .75 is like, still more than enough but gives some lenience, but 0.50 paves way to some bad RNG.

I think part of the problem is the unique systems which have like 3 planets in them. If you spawn near one of those, that's a huge boost as well early on. Since they are unique, other empires won't get something similar.

Personally, largest galaxy size and 0.25 hab planets, gives me plenty to work with and it forces you more to expand outside of your borders if you want more.

[Arcane Teuton]

Originally posted by Rabob:

Originally posted by Terijian:

.75 - 1.5 is what I play. usually just the base 1.
I dont feel the need to colonize suboptimal planets so I rarely go past 5-15 planets. folks say im handicapping myself by not getting the extra growth but then i beat those folks in mp so idk lol

It also depends a lot on galaxy size and how many empires you spawn. 0.25 with 2 empires on largest galaxy map will be very different compared to lowest galaxy size with 1 habitable, max empires or something.

Originally posted by ✠ Tarnil Corvax:

The only real issue I have with 0.50, is not only the new planet designations which are actually useful which incentivizes you to have multiple specialized planets... But the even bigger issue is I recently played a game where I befriended a megacorp to get their juicy branch offices, but I noticed that despite being a medium sized empire, no planets had spawned in their area except for their 2 habitables. They were in the top 5 biggest empires out of 17 in a huge galaxy.

I like the idea of planets being much more valuable and not just a dime a dozen, and as I said before I don't like micro managing 20+ planets (though having 4 habitats that are just research stations isn't too bad to micromanage I guess.)
I like to play relatively tall, but I like to expand a lot and grab a good chunk of space at the beginning of the game. It's not really my intention to conquer half the galaxy because that is way too much micromanagement. I'd much rather vassalize or subjugate.

I think my main issue is just, 1.00 is too much, ,75 is a bit too much, 0.50 might be good but the way they spawn the planets just doesn't feel right and some empires can get really gimped by luck-based factors. .75 is like, still more than enough but gives some lenience, but 0.50 paves way to some bad RNG.

I think part of the problem is the unique systems which have like 3 planets in them. If you spawn near one of those, that's a huge boost as well early on. Since they are unique, other empires won't get something similar.

Personally, largest galaxy size and 0.25 hab planets, gives me plenty to work with and it forces you more to expand outside of your borders if you want more.

And how many AI?

[Rabob]

Originally posted by ✠ Tarnil Corvax:

Originally posted by Rabob:

And how many AI?

Maxed out apart from Marauders and fallen empires. I like my galaxy to be alive with a lot of empires. Sadly there is not an option to determine what kind of empires spawn. I often have way too many megacorps spawning and same for hive minds/exterminator kinds.

[17]

I am fairly new but max out the planets. I enjoy the idea of running a massive empire. But it is an administrative monster. It is hell trying to conquer people too.

[James Bondage]

0.25x. There's still an insane amount of planets, even more once you account for events and terraforming, and then you add habitats on top of it. Playing on anything higher on a galaxy larger than 1-200 stars is just asking for a mountain of endgame lag and way too much micromanagement.

[Malaficus Shaikan]

0.25

My reasoning is:
1: Habbitable worlds shoud be super rare resources worth fighting over.
2: Huge map means too many worlds for population to lag(granted you get the same with the habbitate spam but ai dont spame those)

[Arcane Teuton]

Originally posted by Imperial Guardsman:

0.25x. There's still an insane amount of planets, even more once you account for events and terraforming, and then you add habitats on top of it. Playing on anything higher on a galaxy larger than 1-200 stars is just asking for a mountain of endgame lag and way too much micromanagement.

I don't really play offensively (at the moment, I might decide to later) so I usually only use what I gain from initial expansion or claims during defensive wars.
But it's not about me actually. I do really well at initial expansion. I am more concerned about the AI. There was one empire that I befriended because they were a close-by megacorp and megacorps are good at supplying trade value.

They were in the top 5 biggest empires out of like 17.

They only had 3 planets in total, and they consisted purely of their guaranteed habitables.
This was when I used 0.5 habitable planets. I had like, 14 planets in total. I was also in the top 5, but I was just a little less than twice as big as them.

Maybe I just got really unlucky that my ally got so unlucky, I don't know.