NICE

[Chasm]

We can now choose what planetary population type to transport out as opposed to the previous default of highest population. An excellent upgrade. Thank you very much. Would it be possible to ship out fractional population also, for say, scavenger removal?

[bjg]

Speaking of that update - do I need to switch to dev to get it soon (a day or two)?

[sven]

We can now choose what planetary population type to transport out as opposed to the previous default of highest population. An excellent upgrade. Thank you very much. Would it be possible to ship out fractional population also, for say, scavenger removal?

You're actually on the 'dev' build -- this feature isn't quite done yet The frames / click behaviors still have some bugs.

[sven]

Speaking of that update - do I need to switch to dev to get it soon (a day or two)?

The multi-pop move feature should migrate to 'stable' before the end of the day. (Along with various smaller ship design fixes we've been discussing.)

[sven]

Would it be possible to ship out fractional population also, for say, scavenger removal?

Maybe. There's some strange edge cases that come up if we start letting players move around very small units of population. For example, if you have 1,000,100 phidi on a planet, and want to spread the phidi to all your worlds, you'll probably end up with a pop of 100 phidi somewhere (.0001 units of population).

Very small population numbers are confusing, from a player's perspective, because while an Island world with 2,000,000 humans and 100 phidi technically has a very high population cap, it will take forever for those 100 phidi to expand into a sizable population.

Perhaps letting you transport < 1 pop's if there are at least, say, 250,000 of them is a reasonable compromise?

[bjg]

It sounds like Chasm just wanted to genocide Scavengers.
I personally against allowing to move/leave less than a "million". Just wait till they grow.

[Chasm]

Minor bug with this system, if you have mixed populations in a system you cannot shift across to a sister world. To clarify, Altair 1 has a mixed phidi/human pop (3/2), I cannot shift pop to planet Altair 2 (0/1) even tho there is cap available on Altair 2. Using an in system transport works normally.

[Arioch]

Eventually, the ability to move a population may depend on its having a minimum morale. So Scavengers and Gaiads will probably be unmovable, and you'll need to deal with them in other ways.

[Chasm]

250k or more would work wonderfully, thank you. Especially when we get a morale system and need to tailor our planetary populations...

[mute]

Eventually, the ability to move a population may depend on its having a minimum morale. So Scavengers and Gaiads will probably be unmovable, and you'll need to deal with them in other ways.

Drive them through star-gates in front of my Mechs? Apply nerve staples to their neocortex? Wood chippers? Please tell me there will be some really abhorrent choices available. Better still - some of those choices could increase morale for other populations.

[sven]

Drive them through star-gates in front of my Mechs? Apply nerve staples to their neocortex? Wood chippers? Please tell me there will be some really abhorrent choices available. Better still - some of those choices could increase morale for other populations.

We're still not sure exactly how the Gremak's various population sharing specials are going to work, but, whatever rules we come up with, they probably won't be warm and cuddly

A system where you can "use up" conquered population to get short-term boosts to your own production might be workable. (I'm imagining something roughly like the Zuul slaving rules from SOTS, or the population based "rush build" mechanic from Civ 4.)

[Arioch]

Slaves have to be transportable to be useful, so slavery will have to be a different state than "unhappy" or "in revolt", in which colonists probably can't be transported. All that's still to be worked out, but there are lots of fun options.

Scavengers and Gaiads are meant to be a pain the ass. If you can just push a button and get rid of them, that defeats the purpose.

Also, eradicating a native population living in the wastelands or the wilds is probably not as easy as it sounds.

[mute]

Slaves have to be transportable to be useful, so slavery will have to be a different state than "unhappy" or "in revolt", in which colonists probably can't be transported. All that's still to be worked out, but there are lots of fun options.

Glad to hear it! As an off and on hive player I always enjoyed nerve stapling my drones when they got out of line.

Scavengers and Gaiads are meant to be a pain the ass. If you can just push a button and get rid of them, that defeats the purpose.

Also, eradicating a native population living in the wastelands or the wilds is probably not as easy as it sounds.

To be consistent that would depend upon tech level, at some point you can just engineer a virus to be rid of them. This has been proposed and tested with both mosquitoes https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... ?full=true and in mice https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn311-killer-mousepox-virus-raises-bioterror-fears/ as a way to solve problems with little risk. Given alien biology, it should be even lower risk.

I'll admit from a game play 'challenge' perspective it is perhaps not as satisfying. Nor as satisfying as feeding them one by one into a woodchipper or certain other options...

[bjg]

Don't think a genocide should be taken lightly. This doesn't seem like "that" type of game.

[mute]

Don't think a genocide should be taken lightly. This doesn't seem like "that" type of game.

I agree that SIS strikes me as a game that would not, certainly from a fluff standpoint and perhaps from an effect standpoint, take genocide 'lightly'. However, and I may be mistaking your meaning, it does not follow that SIS won't incorporate other genocidal mechanics than it already has. The argument I advance is that, should the designers decide to add new options, the new options ought to be entertaining.