Talk:Population

From Stellaris Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Assessment

Outliner top.png
B - This article is considered a B-class article on the wiki quality scale

Added clarification for several speculations. Does every removed speculation need a specific citation? For the xenophilia/phobia modifiers Ive found across the entire Blorg playlist that 1. it doesnt scale with the amount of aliens and 2. it affects everyone, regardless of position on said planet. Does that require a specific citation or is the current state acceptable?

I also removed the positive modifier from Policies. I couldnt find a single positive happiness modifier, yet an abundance of negative modifiers, leading me to believe that POPs are merely content with Policies they approve of. Aditionally, POPs appear to have stronger/lesser feelings about certain Policies. In the Blorg video no. 6, @30:05 when Wiz hovers over a reptilian POP it has several -5% and -2% modifiers. I havent seen this behaviour anywhere else. – Sithril (talk) 01:51, 7 April 2016 (CEST)

POP vs pop[edit]

The game uses "pop" in several locations, but I don't recall it ever capitalising each letter to "POP".

Can we please decide on which is the proper and intended way to refer to them?

--IphStich (talk) 07:35, 13 May 2016 (CEST)

The game does not ever capitalise it so I think we should stick with "pop". --Naschnasch (talk) 20:21, 14 May 2018 (CEST)
Nvm I just re-checked and it seems the game uses "Pop" every time.--Naschnasch (talk) 02:05, 15 May 2018 (CEST)

Droids and Ethics[edit]

Discovered today that Droids can have Ethics. They dont start with them but are subject to divergence. Edited. Also doublechecked, they do not suffer unhapiness so they are unique from both robot and synth. Celem (talk) 23:34, 15 May 2016 (CEST)

Ethics divergence and xenophobes[edit]

Can anyone back that aliens diverge to xenophiles instead of xenophobe? I cannot find any reference to this inside the code and my testing has them diverting to xenophobe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zakzak (Talk) 00:53, 4 July 2016‎ (CEST)

Upgrading Robots[edit]

So my previous edit was reverted, but the short version is this: A month after you finish researching Droids, a randomly selected 25 of your Galaxy's Robot pops "upgrade" to Droids, not sure about Robot pops that were in the middle of being built/grown. Forgot to check when the rest of my Robots were upgraded, I'm gonna guess that they get upgraded a month after they finished getting built/grown. There is one exception to Robots being upgraded, and that is when the player gets confused and frustrated, and Purges the Robots the day Droids is done researching, essentially sending them to the junkyard, which prevents them from being upgraded. Since I'm going to bed, someone else who's read/follows the style guide put the edit in properly. Apologies for any misunderstandings and inconvenience.--BarGamer (talk) 12:11, 7 July 2016 (CEST)

I'll explain the revert of the edit. There was a lot of aggression in the tone and the excessive use of capitals didn't fit the style. The comment you've placed here is much more suited to the wiki. Have you confirmed that this is the case and not a bug? If so then putting this content on the wiki is worth doing. The style guide for future reference is here. Dauth (talk) 16:27, 7 July 2016 (CEST)
If what is a bug? I mean, it makes sense that if you're sending something to the junkyard, you wouldn't bother upgrading it, but that there's a month delay before your Robots become Droids, with no indication that such is the case, in contradiction to all the other Research options, such as say, Gene-Tweaking a species to have a better trait/get rid of a bad trait. At least there, there's a progress bar. Robots have no such progress bar, and the 25 Robots that are upgraded are NOT exclusively from your Empire, it's from the whole Galaxy. It's pretty backwards, IMHO. I'm also missing a lot of information about Robots that are in the middle of being built, and when do they get upgraded: A month after they're built, or on the first day of the next month? So... Yeah, if someone would like to test these things? Whoever does it first gets to edit the article! I would, but I'm busy IRL. --BarGamer (talk) 10:03, 8 July 2016 (CEST)
A lot of the game processing happens on the first of the month (try moving a pop in/out of a happiness producing building). I've not spent any time playing with droids so don't know what will happen. Are we certain about the 25? What happens to other robots, this is stuff we'd really like to have on the wiki. Dauth (talk) 11:10, 8 July 2016 (CEST)

Ethics divergence rate[edit]

I've found the rate at which ethics divergence occurs. Does anyone have any objections, or should I go ahead and add it? -GC13 (talk) 21:47, 21 September 2016 (CEST)

If the numbers are backed up in the game then go ahead. Its probably one of the more difficult concepts in the game to understand so having it well documented will help. Dauth (talk) 10:18, 22 September 2016 (CEST)
Alright, I added it in. I did a text on positive ethics divergence first though, to confirm that it's also divided by ten first. It used to display the correct number, but alas the game isn't very clear about the odds now. -GC13 (talk) 16:43, 22 September 2016 (CEST)

Growth[edit]

In the section on population points per month, I found the following unclear:

The maximum extra growth per month amounts to 2 growth per month (for a maximum total of 3). When calculating this value, it is always counted with having 10 as minimum amount.

What is always counted as having 10 as [the] minimum amount? (I'm new to the game--I would edit it myself if I understood)

I think it means that growth per month varries between 0.10 and 2.00. Or at least it did in 1.5. I have yet to look how Multiple Species growth works in 1.6. Or how exactly the growth bonus is calculated. In an case it is a LOT more growth now then in 1.5. The rule that Minign stations are kind no longer holds as true as it did. --The Founder (talk) 23:35, 10 May 2017 (CEST)

Time to gather new Growth Data for 1.6: Tzynn Empire, 8 pops 1 in growth.

  • 5.2 Food Surpluss: +26% Growth
  • 7.6 Food Surpluss: +38% Growth
  • 1.6 Suprluss: +8% Growth

The percentage shown will only update during the Monthly Update. Wich means we have to include growing pops in all listings, as they might stop/start growing just during that Update. Anybody else got some more Data? --The Founder (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2017 (CEST)

At least for 1.6 and 5.2 I see a clear Linear Pattern. 3.25 times the Food Surpluss, 3.25 times the Growth increase. 7.6 is also still Linear, at 4.75 increase over 1.6 Food.
If I divide 7.6 by 8 pops, it is 0.95 growth percentage/food Surpluss. By 9 it is 0,84 growthpercentage/food surpluss
I am wating for the 9th pop to finish/the 10th to start. Then I have more values, I think --The Founder (talk) 13:08, 12 May 2017 (CEST)
Pop Growth Progress appears to be: (1+1*Growth Bonus from Food)*All other Perentile Bonuses. The Growth is rounded to the 2nd Digit after comma. i.e.:
  • +26% Growth from Food
  • +15% from Rapid Breeders
  • 1.44 total growth
  • According to Formula it would have been 1.449, but the 9 does not seem to be carried over between Months (checked over 3 months).
--The Founder (talk) 13:16, 12 May 2017 (CEST)


Extra Data:
9 Pops, 1 Growing: 4.2 Food Surpluss: +21%.
That is 2.625 what 1.6 rbings over 8 Pops+1 Growing. So apparently the bonus is now based entirely on Food Surpluss, rather then Food Surpluss/Pops.
In another Playthrough I have 129 Surpluss for 61% Growth. 80,625 times the Food, but only 7,625 times the Growth (compared to 1.6/8%). While Pop count does not appear to mater, there seems to be a level of decreased Return. Propably beyond 10 or so.
I could also check my "Pop Gorwth/Month Formula" it could be that percentages are multiplied in sequence.
  • +61% Food
  • +10% Frontier Clinic
  • +25% Hive Minded
  • +10% Genome Mapping
  • +10% a new Life
  • 2.48 displayed growth.
  • By sequential Multiplication it would be 2.6786375.
  • If the Percentages are added together first (+116%), it would be only 2,16
  • If you apply Food first, then sum up all the others it would be 1.61 Base+Food, +55% from other bonuses = 2.4955. Close but still not quite it.
--The Founder (talk) 13:35, 12 May 2017 (CEST)

Okay, I finally had a decrease. But it was not based on total Food income. Apparently it was based on hitting 11 pops. At taht moment, my 14.2 surpluss only gave +64%. That result ina rate close to 4.5070%/Unit. I will have to look if this stays stable into 12 and 13 pops (at wich point it would be based on some Treshold. Or maybe that works like teh Pop Penalty on Reserach? First Planet and first 10 colonist are free. Afterwards, the cost increases? --The Founder (talk) 15:00, 12 May 2017 (CEST)

In the Month the Pop growth for Nr. 12 completed, surpluss dropped to 13.2 and Growth to +59% for a 4.469 Ratio (with 69 Recursing). But I know the recalculation of hte percentage can be deferred.
The mont after it was +14 Food (added a Slave Processing Plant) for +58%. A ratio of 4.142857 (142857 recursing).
Maybe the recursion can tell us something about the Divisor being used? Or at least where the rounding took place?
--The Founder (talk) 15:33, 12 May 2017 (CEST)
And I found the Numbers in the defines. Aside from teh Minimum of 10, I can not realy parse what they mean:
FOOD_SUSTAINED = 1 # Amount of food each pop require
FOOD_SURPLUS_BASE_GROWTH = 1 # Amount to grow (base)
FOOD_SURPLUS_EXTRA_GROWTH = 0.5 # Extra growth from food surplus (scales to Pops)
FOOD_SURPLUS_EXTRA_GROWTH_MAX = 2 # Max extra growth from food surplus
FOOD_SURPLUS_MIN_POPS = 10 # Always count as having at least this number of Pops when calculating growth relative to pops
STARVATION_YEARS_ESCALATION = 3 # Every this amount of years, starvation grows worse
STARVATION_ESCALATION_MAX = 4 # Starvation effects can't multiply anymore than this
--The Founder (talk) 15:39, 12 May 2017 (CEST)

Image of a pop[edit]

I think an image of a pop should be included with the description. Friends that have started playing the game have complained that even after reading the description it does not become entirely clear to them what a pop is.

Purging times for each type of purging[edit]

I've tried to find info on this on the forums but I've been unable to. Is there anyone who's got this data? I'd like to add it to the table I made for the Purge.png Purge section. --Naschnasch (talk) 02:09, 15 May 2018 (CEST)

I've seen that there's a similar table at the purge type section within the species rights article, though I'm not sure it's up to date since it says that happineness bonus to Pops under the extermination purge type get a -100% happiness penalty yet, as of 2.0, the happiness penalty is of -1000%. If anyone can confirm those purging times are up-to-date I'll add them to the table in this article. --Naschnasch (talk) 11:24, 15 May 2018 (CEST)

Question about losing all of your original species but still having other pops[edit]

Just out of curiosity:

If you lose all members of your original species but there are other kinds of pops in your empire still present (such as xeno pops), do you lose the game or can you go on but with a completely different species in your empire?

38.142.24.194 18:56, 8 November 2018 (CET)

Formula for Stability Bonuses[edit]

Just by doing some interpolation on data gathered from my game, it seems that the resource production modifier for having high stability is equal to half a percentage point for each stability point about fifty. Ie, ProductionBonus=(Stability - 50)*0.005

The coefficients range from 5.1 to 5.5, however the stability score may be subject to floor functions and the resource modifier displayed in-game may be rounded. Can anyone confirm (perhaps by looking at the code) before I add it in?

--Armed Avacado (talk) 18:19, 21 December 2018 (CET)--

It is 0,6% increase in productivity for each 1% of Stability. A 100% Stability planet (So base 50% + 50% Stability from various boni) gets +30% bonus to production.

--X-cessive (talk) 18:26, 21 December 2018 (CET)

Stratum grammar[edit]

Some things about the stratum section irk me, so I'm editing it for grammar. Stratum is the singular, strata is plural. If you are unsure, replace "stratum" with "social class" and "strata" with "social classes" in your head to see if it sounds right. On that note, "stratum" and "[social] class" are synonyms, so "strata classes" is redundant (and sounds weird to boot since it's two plural nouns in a row). Lastly, in cases where either plural or singular would make sense (such as in the section's title) I will use "stratum" since that is the more common term in-game by far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.52.108.40 (talk) 06:18, 13 March 2019‎ (CET)