Sector governer

[ТАРГОВИЦ ЛЮБОВЬЮ]

I don't understand how the new system works. Before, you had one governor per sector, and he controlled all the planets in that sector. Now I can choose a governor for each planet, even if I already have a governor in that sector and it is displayed on the planet, but the ability to choose another one is still there.

One governor can control all the planets in a sector? Or does he only control the main planet, and all the other planets only have some of the bonuses applied to them?

I could not find this information in the patchnotes...

[Terijian]

i *think* a governer will apply all special bonus to the planet they are on, but to the rest of the sector just the bonus that come with their level

[MUPS]

I found it strange too.
what is the purpose to have 2 governors (sector & planet) since there is a tiny leadercap' if we don't choose the leader tradition to increase it.

[ТАРГОВИЦ ЛЮБОВЬЮ]

Originally posted by Terijian:

i *think* a governer will apply all special bonus to the planet they are on, but to the rest of the sector just the bonus that come with their level

If this is true, then I don't understand the reasons for this decision at all...
Why make it so that the maximum benefit from the planets in the sector can be obtained only if each planet has its own governor, but at the same time limiting the number of leaders, which you can fully use?
Thanks for the answer anyway!

[MrMarvulus]

Originally posted by Terijian:

i *think* a governer will apply all special bonus to the planet they are on, but to the rest of the sector just the bonus that come with their level

This is true.

The "planet with the Governor" gets the traits from the Governor. The other planets in the sector get bonuses. You can see the values when you mouse over the "level icon", just above the Governor picture in the planet view.

Be aware, the trait "ship build speed/-cost" on a Governor is used in the planets system
(It's AMAZING ) EDIT: Also just learned, Governor traits on a habitat are system wide. Imaging multiple habitats in a system with their own Governors.

Originally posted by ТАРГОВИЦ ЛЮБОВЬЮ:

I don't understand how the new system works. Before, you had one governor per sector, and he controlled all the planets in that sector. Now I can choose a governor for each planet, even if I already have a governor in that sector and it is displayed on the planet, but the ability to choose another one is still there.

One governor can control all the planets in a sector? Or does he only control the main planet, and all the other planets only have some of the bonuses applied to them?

I could not find this information in the patchnotes...

It's simple and I like it:
Leader traits are either Council traits (multi-target, or empire wide) and traits (single target)

[Duder]

One thing I don't like about this is Governors. I think they should still apply their traits to every planet in the sector.
Not to mention they seemed to have done away with many of the traits.
I love the leader cap however, slows down the AI from expanding and can be bypassed easily to a point.

[Demonking]

Originally posted by Duder:

One thing I don't like about this is Governors. I think they should still apply their traits to every planet in the sector.
Not to mention they seemed to have done away with many of the traits.
I love the leader cap however, slows down the AI from expanding and can be bypassed easily to a point.

i think they did it the way they have to reduce the power of wide empires, which already steam roll a lot of things based on economy alone. This change directly benefits tall empires as they can afford to staff every planet with a specialized governor late game. Where as wide empires have a hard time staffing anything more than their capitals, leading to them feeling more difficult to optimize.

[Scr(A)tch]

Originally posted by Demonking:

Originally posted by Duder:

One thing I don't like about this is Governors. I think they should still apply their traits to every planet in the sector.
Not to mention they seemed to have done away with many of the traits.
I love the leader cap however, slows down the AI from expanding and can be bypassed easily to a point.

i think they did it the way they have to reduce the power of wide empires, which already steam roll a lot of things based on economy alone. This change directly benefits tall empires as they can afford to staff every planet with a specialized governor late game. Where as wide empires have a hard time staffing anything more than their capitals, leading to them feeling more difficult to optimize.

If that's the intent, it's pretty circumvoluted as all they have to do is removing or at least reducing the planet base pop growth.

[rafael.ramus]

Originally posted by Demonking:

Originally posted by Duder:

One thing I don't like about this is Governors. I think they should still apply their traits to every planet in the sector.
Not to mention they seemed to have done away with many of the traits.
I love the leader cap however, slows down the AI from expanding and can be bypassed easily to a point.

i think they did it the way they have to reduce the power of wide empires, which already steam roll a lot of things based on economy alone. This change directly benefits tall empires as they can afford to staff every planet with a specialized governor late game. Where as wide empires have a hard time staffing anything more than their capitals, leading to them feeling more difficult to optimize.

Nonsense.

How is a tall empire that has X planets and is able to staff all X planets better than a wide empire that has X+Y planets but is only able to staff all X planets? It isn't. If nothing else, a Wide empire will be able to choose from a bigger pool of planets - as long as a Wide empire is able to keep all other planets self-sufficient (that is, not in need of the main planets that are staffed) then wide is still favored in relation to tall.

Even the claim that it's harder to explore to wide in the early game is not that well funded, since you can still staff a bunch of Level 1 Scientists to explore and survey for a couple of years, then dump til cap is satisfied and then start doing archeology, etc.

Besides, most people that are complaining play against the AI, in which Tall vs Wide is pretty much irrelevant (since you only have the AI to beat and you could do it with a single planet - hence single planet challenge - already before this update).

The problem with this update is that it made it difficult for people to play in a way that used to satisfy them - that is, it's not that I CAN'T win a battle without an Admiral in every fleet, it's that I WANT to have an Admiral in every fleet. Same goes to Governors: it's not that I NEED a Gov that helps me to specialize a sector, it's that I WANT a Gov that helps me to specialize a sector.

Lastly, the logic behind the exp. debuff is... not smart (trying to be kind). So I have to decide between having just a few Leaders that can gain experience or having a bunch that cannot learn even if you merge them with a computer? So much for roleplaying!

[VoiD]

Originally posted by ТАРГОВИЦ ЛЮБОВЬЮ:

Originally posted by Terijian:

i *think* a governer will apply all special bonus to the planet they are on, but to the rest of the sector just the bonus that come with their level

If this is true, then I don't understand the reasons for this decision at all...
Why make it so that the maximum benefit from the planets in the sector can be obtained only if each planet has its own governor, but at the same time limiting the number of leaders, which you can fully use?
Thanks for the answer anyway!

The current governor bonuses are nothing like the previous governor bonuses, you can have planets producing over 2x of a specific thing by stacking certain modifiers, the slimy authoritarian legendary paragon is a good example of this.

Overall governors and sectors are much, much stronger than before, as previously it was just a single bonus applied evenly to a large sector, say, +research, but not every planet in that sector is good enough to be a research powerhouse, most planets probably don't even really do any research at all, so, for the most part, those modifiers were wasted, and only the levels did something anyway.

This time you can pick one very good planet, like an ecumenopolis, to be a sector capital, and then get a governor in there to give it 5+ relevant bonuses creating some crazy results.

And, if you happen to have 2+ exceptional planets within the same sector, you'll still have the option of creating 2+ perfect governors for each one of them.

[Scr(A)tch]

Originally posted by rafael.ramus:

Originally posted by Demonking:

i think they did it the way they have to reduce the power of wide empires, which already steam roll a lot of things based on economy alone. This change directly benefits tall empires as they can afford to staff every planet with a specialized governor late game. Where as wide empires have a hard time staffing anything more than their capitals, leading to them feeling more difficult to optimize.

Nonsense.

How is a tall empire that has X planets and is able to staff all X planets better than a wide empire that has X+Y planets but is only able to staff all X planets? It isn't. If nothing else, a Wide empire will be able to choose from a bigger pool of planets - as long as a Wide empire is able to keep all other planets self-sufficient (that is, not in need of the main planets that are staffed) then wide is still favored in relation to tall.

Even the claim that it's harder to explore to wide in the early game is not that well funded, since you can still staff a bunch of Level 1 Scientists to explore and survey for a couple of years, then dump til cap is satisfied and then start doing archeology, etc.

Besides, most people that are complaining play against the AI, in which Tall vs Wide is pretty much irrelevant (since you only have the AI to beat and you could do it with a single planet - hence single planet challenge - already before this update).

The problem with this update is that it made it difficult for people to play in a way that used to satisfy them - that is, it's not that I CAN'T win a battle without an Admiral in every fleet, it's that I WANT to have an Admiral in every fleet. Same goes to Governors: it's not that I NEED a Gov that helps me to specialize a sector, it's that I WANT a Gov that helps me to specialize a sector.

Lastly, the logic behind the exp. debuff is... not smart (trying to be kind). So I have to decide between having just a few Leaders that can gain experience or having a bunch that cannot learn even if you merge them with a computer? So much for roleplaying!

This. Having empty positions is a pain and breaks all immersion.

It doesn't take a demigod to lead a fleet, only a decently capable officer which shouldn't be a scarcity.

[Demonking]

Originally posted by rafael.ramus:

Nonsense.

How is a tall empire that has X planets and is able to staff all X planets better than a wide empire that has X+Y planets but is only able to staff all X planets? It isn't. If nothing else, a Wide empire will be able to choose from a bigger pool of planets - as long as a Wide empire is able to keep all other planets self-sufficient (that is, not in need of the main planets that are staffed) then wide is still favored in relation to tall.

My actual statement of being stuck using governors for capitals is because sector capitals are the only planets you can staff with governors and have their level bonus transmitted to the other planets in the sector. Meaning you gain more from their level than their passives as a wide empire. Where as tall empires who maybe only have 2 sectors, can easily staff all their most important planets with powerful governors who have unique treats suited to maximizing them. The fact there is more planets to pick from for the wide empire is the disadvantage in a way because the reduction to crime and increase to stability by itself is too much of an advantage to ignore. You can specialize your sector capitals, sure, but the potentially +35% bonuses or whatever else insane passives a high level governor gives you are restrained to those single worlds. You simply can't afford to continue to staff your core sector planets with those governors unless you want to nuke your unity and exp, regardless of how much more well developed they are than the planets they're being moved to.

From an rp perspective though those governors are probably pretty happy, that's kind a huge promotion to go from commanding 1 planet to being trusted with 8. Probably a huge pay check increase too. Personally I just wish governors had 'sector' traits that worked like council traits. Except you know, they're just things like a sector wide increase to fire power for ships within your turf or increased soldier jobs on each planet. Would be good for tall empires since I could imagine those stacking with local planet governors and for wide empires they'd be a must grab.

[rafael.ramus]

Originally posted by Demonking:

Originally posted by rafael.ramus:

Nonsense.

How is a tall empire that has X planets and is able to staff all X planets better than a wide empire that has X+Y planets but is only able to staff all X planets? It isn't. If nothing else, a Wide empire will be able to choose from a bigger pool of planets - as long as a Wide empire is able to keep all other planets self-sufficient (that is, not in need of the main planets that are staffed) then wide is still favored in relation to tall.

My actual statement of being stuck using governors for capitals is because sector capitals are the only planets you can staff with governors and have their level bonus transmitted to the other planets in the sector. Meaning you gain more from their level than their passives as a wide empire. Where as tall empires who maybe only have 2 sectors, can easily staff all their most important planets with powerful governors who have unique treats suited to maximizing them. The fact there is more planets to pick from for the wide empire is the disadvantage in a way because the reduction to crime and increase to stability by itself is too much of an advantage to ignore. You can specialize your sector capitals, sure, but the potentially +35% bonuses or whatever else insane passives a high level governor gives you are restrained to those single worlds. You simply can't afford to continue to staff your core sector planets with those governors unless you want to nuke your unity and exp, regardless of how much more well developed they are than the planets they're being moved to.

Wide is still waaaaay better than Tall, what you just said makes no sense, and I'm still to see a match that proves your point.

We definitely disagree. There is no relation between the Leader Cap and playing Tall or Wide.

If I want to min-max I can have the exactly 2 gov sectors your tall empire has, use the same amount of Govs you use in your tall empire to my most important planets (heck, I can even set those planets as Sector Capitals if that's advantageous) and leave all other planets to be B tier (and they will level up, contribute to the economy and all).

Your argument sounds to me like this:

Tall Empire = 2 Gov Sectors + 2 Planet Govs + 2 self sufficient Planets with no Govs

is better than:

Wide Empire = 2 Gov Sectors + 2 Planet Govs + 25 self sufficient Planets with no Govs.

Note also that all those planets still get bonuses from your council et all.

So, to sum things up: No way, my friend.
If the intent was to nerf Wide, they FAILED big time!

[rafael.ramus]

Originally posted by Riddiculus:

Be aware, the trait "ship build speed/-cost" on a Governor is used in the planets system
(It's AMAZING :praisesun:) EDIT: Also just learned, Governor traits on a habitat are system wide. Imaging multiple habitats in a system with their own Governors.

Wait, what?

That. is. ridiculous.

Some way to make habitats yet more valuable...

[Scr(A)tch]

Originally posted by rafael.ramus:

Originally posted by Demonking:

My actual statement of being stuck using governors for capitals is because sector capitals are the only planets you can staff with governors and have their level bonus transmitted to the other planets in the sector. Meaning you gain more from their level than their passives as a wide empire. Where as tall empires who maybe only have 2 sectors, can easily staff all their most important planets with powerful governors who have unique treats suited to maximizing them. The fact there is more planets to pick from for the wide empire is the disadvantage in a way because the reduction to crime and increase to stability by itself is too much of an advantage to ignore. You can specialize your sector capitals, sure, but the potentially +35% bonuses or whatever else insane passives a high level governor gives you are restrained to those single worlds. You simply can't afford to continue to staff your core sector planets with those governors unless you want to nuke your unity and exp, regardless of how much more well developed they are than the planets they're being moved to.

Wide is still waaaaay better than Tall, what you just said makes no sense, and I'm still to see a match that proves your point.

We definitely disagree. There is no relation between the Leader Cap and playing Tall or Wide.

If I want to min-max I can have the exactly 2 gov sectors your tall empire has, use the same amount of Govs you use in your tall empire to my most important planets (heck, I can even set those planets as Sector Capitals if that's advantageous) and leave all other planets to be B tier (and they will level up, contribute to the economy and all).

Your argument sounds to me like this:

Tall Empire = 2 Gov Sectors + 2 Planet Govs + 2 self sufficient Planets with no Govs

is better than:

Wide Empire = 2 Gov Sectors + 2 Planet Govs + 25 self sufficient Planets with no Govs.

Note also that all those planets still get bonuses from your council et all.

So, to sum things up: No way, my friend.
If the intent was to nerf Wide, they FAILED big time!

The thing is there is no value in going tall, as the pop growth empty planets produce largely outweight their small extra empire sprawl.

Hell you can even use empty planets as hatcheries to fill their core ones, so playing tall actually involves going wide first.