Aquatics civic/origin/trait needs a bit of re-balancing IMO

[retheu]

Hey guys, I've been playing around a bit with the aquatics and even though i enjoy the flavor the civic, trait and origins add i must say i'm a slightly disappointed by the balancing/limits.

I understand that not everything in the game should me ''meta'', some choices are obviously better then others and that's completely fine. I do however feel like that options (be it civics, origins, etc.) should be somewhat compelling. In the case of some of the newly added content i find myself less compelled to choose them, here's why.


Anglers

I like the concept here, it adds flavor to the agriculture districts which is nice, but the civic is simple not worth it if we look at the numbers. The amount of resources gained from the anglers combined with the pearl divers doesn't keep up with the upkeep/efficiency of the pops compared to regular artisans (or better yet artificers) and farmers. Farmers provide in general about 6 food whilst anglers provide a nice 8 food and 2 trade value. artisans provide about 6 consumer goods at the cost of 6 minerals, whilst pearl divers provide 3 consumer goods and 2 trade value at the cost of 2 food and 2 minerals. Lets say we build 2 districts in 2 different situations.

Situation A (default): 1 food district and 1 artisan district - resources gained: 12 food, 12 consumer goods - upkeep: 6 minerals.

Situation B (anglers): 2 angler districts - resources gained: 16 food, 6 consumer goods, 8 trade value - upkeep: 4 minerals, 4 food.

If we now calculate the worth of the resources in energy credits the comparison is made quite clear. The values (as dictated by the Stellaris wiki) tell us that basic resources (food, minerals) are worth 1 energy, whilst consumer goods are worth 2 energy, 1 trade value will be 1 energy in this example. This means that the net gain from situation A (default) is 30 energy, for situation B (angler) the net gain is 28 energy. Now this doesn't make any sense to me simply because from a numbers perspective we can argue that not taking anglers is economically more profitable than taking the civic (this comparison becomes even worse when compared against something like artificers).


Here Be Dragons

I absolutely love this origin, i think its one of (if not) the most unique origins in the game. That being said, even though the balancing here is somewhat decent, the limits on dragons are slightly disappointing in my opinion. But before we start lets again compare, this time between the dragons and my endgame battleships

The cost of a dragon is 500 gas, 500 crystals and 100 living metal, in total this is worth 12k energy. With no repeatable techs unlocked the military power of the dragon is 6.8k. The cost of an endgame battleship is approximately 1700 alloys, 11 gas and 4 crystals, rounded up this is 7k in energy (my battleships run 3x armor, 3x shields, X weaponslot and 4 neutron launchers). with no repeatable techs unlocked the military power of these battleships is somewhere around 2.7k. this means that the dragons are roughly 1.7 times more expensive than battleships but are also roughly 2.5 times more powerful in terms of ''raw'' military power. Although the military power of the dragons might be slightly inflated compared to the battleships due to weapon modifiers (+/- dmg against hull/armor/shields where the dragons have mostly -20% dmg against shields) i think its fair to say they are at least twice as strong as battleships and are twice as cheap compared to said battleships in terms of energy cost. That being said, battleships still offer quite the versatility because battleships can be refitted/designed against specific defenses (hull/armor/shields).

Even though the dragons are somewhat stronger than battleships in terms of ''raw'' power, what bothers me is that they are not that much stronger compared to the battleships whilst the dragons have quite restricting limits on them such as maximum capacity (10 dragons at max) and versatility (cannot be modified). Besides this point it takes quite the amount of effort and time to actually unlock them, and in order to make the dragons access to living metal is required.

In my opinion these dragons should either be less restricted (for example higher building limit/design-able) or be quite a lot stronger than the endgame battleships (maybe comparable to the actual leviathans or the mother dragon). Now i could understand that the latter option (stronger dragons) could impose balancing issues, so in order to counter this the dragons could for example gradually grow in power (just like our favorite amoeba Bubbles).
The reason for ''buffing'' the Here be dragons origin is based on MY assumption that these dragons should feel like something actually special instead of just 2 battleships stacked together with a nice skin on top of it.


Aquatic species trait

The aquatic species trait offers a fun and somewhat specialized play style in my opinion. Its quite balanced with the positive effects on ocean worlds and gives the player the incentive to colonize and make use of them. I really like the idea that this goes hand in hand with the new deluge colossus weapon where we can instantly make new ocean worlds. Even though my experience with the trait has been quite positive i do feel like a slight tweak in terms of balance might be in order. The cost of the trait currently is 1 trait point and 1 trait pick (where in the previous version it was 0), i think the cost should either be 1 trait OR 1 pick a bit comparable to the lithoid/necroid trait (which are free but just like the aquatic trait also have a positive and a negative effect). Some of you might think i'm nitpicking here (which is quite fair), but since the trait is locked (cannot be removed) in both the Ocean paradise origin and the anglers civic the cost of the trait becomes a bit too much for what it offers.


Thanks for reading this (long) post. My intention was to give a bit of constructive criticism, and i truly hope this point comes across. I think the Stellaris team has done an amazing job and i am grateful to be able to play this amazing game!

Please keep in mind these are simply my opinions, i'm not expecting any changes and you are completely free to agree/disagree. I am very curious as to what the rest of the community thinks of the new content.

[Lula O Honesto]

Tiasmoon님이 먼저 게시:

Initial thoughts:

-No version of Anglers available for hiveminds, the empire type that actually uses food a lot.
-Aquatic being 1 point, 1 pick despite its good benefits requiring an origin, ascension perk or specific civics.
-30 size planet origin with Gaia-ish modifiers that doesnt remove preference (aka: a better life-seeded), in a game version where size only matters up to a certain, much lower extend.
-Trade Value and Consumer Goods.. why does every recent addition seem to have these? If Angler didnt exist on including those, it would be a much better Civic.. and also make more sense.
-Angler description says it gives the trait, but it actually requires it, rather then giving it for free.
-With Angler requiring Aquatic, which requires an Oceanic preference.. a lot of origins cant pick the Civic. This also means that for mechanical reasons its a Locked Civic.. which further limits the Civic. I can see this Civic as being a good middle of the game pick, except with it being locked thats not possible.

Half Phased님이 먼저 게시:

Anglers is definitely the most wacky civic open to regular empires currently. By building a megacorp for trade value maximization, its possible to start the game with 110 trade value on your homeworld, and if you take the mercantile tradition tree you can be making 40+ unity a month by 2205.

I got to 221 trade value on my homeworld by 2217, making 60 unity a month. Burn through the tradition trees and get a trade federation set up. You’ll be set for energy credits, consumer goods and unity. It’s ridiculous just how high you can push trade value at the start of the game. And should the game give you ocean, continental or tropical worlds nearby, its going to be interesting.

How much of that is down to the other parts of the build? I'm guessing most of it.

Hive mind don't use trade value and consummer goods

[Tempest Fox3]

Half Phased님이 먼저 게시:

Anglers is definitely the most wacky civic open to regular empires currently. By building a megacorp for trade value maximization, its possible to start the game with 110 trade value on your homeworld, and if you take the mercantile tradition tree you can be making 40+ unity a month by 2205.

I got to 221 trade value on my homeworld by 2217, making 60 unity a month. Burn through the tradition trees and get a trade federation set up. You’ll be set for energy credits, consumer goods and unity. It’s ridiculous just how high you can push trade value at the start of the game. And should the game give you ocean, continental or tropical worlds nearby, its going to be interesting.

Megacorps aren't the best trade producers these days. Stack merchant jobs as a Non-megacorp with the civic and mercantile unity tree and you'll make far more.

[Tiasmoon]

Marl Karx님이 먼저 게시:

Hive mind don't use trade value and consummer goods

They didnt have to design the jobs to provide those, either. It still puzzles me why seemingly every new change added recently adds consumer goods or trade value in some way.

[Half Phased]

Tempest Fox3님이 먼저 게시:

Half Phased님이 먼저 게시:

Anglers is definitely the most wacky civic open to regular empires currently. By building a megacorp for trade value maximization, its possible to start the game with 110 trade value on your homeworld, and if you take the mercantile tradition tree you can be making 40+ unity a month by 2205.

I got to 221 trade value on my homeworld by 2217, making 60 unity a month. Burn through the tradition trees and get a trade federation set up. You’ll be set for energy credits, consumer goods and unity. It’s ridiculous just how high you can push trade value at the start of the game. And should the game give you ocean, continental or tropical worlds nearby, its going to be interesting.

Megacorps aren't the best trade producers these days. Stack merchant jobs as a Non-megacorp with the civic and mercantile unity tree and you'll make far more.

A mega Corp will be behind by 1/2 merchant job per planet. Or 6/12 trade value per planet (executives give 6 we’re taking that out of the merchants income). Which isn’t that much, actually. Bare in mind, megacorps can take the mercantile tree as well, and get all the merchant jobs.

Matching the lost 6/12 trade value per planet maybe a stretch, but not an insurmountable one.

[retheu]

Ramonkey님이 먼저 게시:

In situation A the mineral upkeep is 12, not 6. Because you have 2 artisan jobs with 6 upkeep each. This puts the net profit in A at 24 instead of 30

Thanks for pointing this out Ramonkey, you are absolutely right! i apologize for the oversight on my part. Considering the fact that the net gain from anglers would be +4 energy compared to default this makes my argument invalid.

Heimdall313님이 먼저 게시:

Comparing dragon to endgame battleship is moot considering an endgame battleship is not going to stop or deter a 20 corvette rush.
6.8k is absolutely going to stop anything dumb enough to rush you, and could be used against things like Amoeba roamers to secure a choke point if that dragon is movable.

You make a fair point Heimdall, there are obviously situations where the dragons outshine endgame battleships. I do however still feel like they need some form of a change to be more compelling.

Half Phased님이 먼저 게시:

Anglers is definitely the most wacky civic open to regular empires currently. By building a megacorp for trade value maximization, its possible to start the game with 110 trade value on your homeworld, and if you take the mercantile tradition tree you can be making 40+ unity a month by 2205.

I got to 221 trade value on my homeworld by 2217, making 60 unity a month. Burn through the tradition trees and get a trade federation set up. You’ll be set for energy credits, consumer goods and unity. It’s ridiculous just how high you can push trade value at the start of the game. And should the game give you ocean, continental or tropical worlds nearby, its going to be interesting.

Now this is a great idea! i hadn't considered stacking bonuses with megacorp in mind, i would assume this would make anglers a lot stronger.

Tiasmoon님이 먼저 게시:

Initial thoughts:

-No version of Anglers available for hiveminds, the empire type that actually uses food a lot.
-Aquatic being 1 point, 1 pick despite its good benefits requiring an origin, ascension perk or specific civics.
-30 size planet origin with Gaia-ish modifiers that doesnt remove preference (aka: a better life-seeded), in a game version where size only matters up to a certain, much lower extend.
-Trade Value and Consumer Goods.. why does every recent addition seem to have these? If Angler didnt exist on including those, it would be a much better Civic.. and also make more sense.
-Angler description says it gives the trait, but it actually requires it, rather then giving it for free.
-With Angler requiring Aquatic, which requires an Oceanic preference.. a lot of origins cant pick the Civic. This also means that for mechanical reasons its a Locked Civic.. which further limits the Civic. I can see this Civic as being a good middle of the game pick, except with it being locked thats not possible.

Half Phased님이 먼저 게시:

Anglers is definitely the most wacky civic open to regular empires currently. By building a megacorp for trade value maximization, its possible to start the game with 110 trade value on your homeworld, and if you take the mercantile tradition tree you can be making 40+ unity a month by 2205.

I got to 221 trade value on my homeworld by 2217, making 60 unity a month. Burn through the tradition trees and get a trade federation set up. You’ll be set for energy credits, consumer goods and unity. It’s ridiculous just how high you can push trade value at the start of the game. And should the game give you ocean, continental or tropical worlds nearby, its going to be interesting.

How much of that is down to the other parts of the build? I'm guessing most of it.

I like your initial thoughts Tiasmoon, you make some very valid points. Thanks for sharing them!

As for everyone else thank you very much for the feedback/comments/idea's, i have quite some options to consider which i really like.