Empire Sprawl , Should I Be Caring About This? :: Stellaris 綜合討論

Maybe your like

登入商店首頁探索佇列願望清單點數商店新聞統計資料社群首頁討論區工作坊市集實況直播關於客服變更語言取得 Steam 行動應用程式檢視電腦版網頁

商店首頁探索佇列願望清單點數商店新聞統計資料社群首頁討論區工作坊市集實況直播關於客服中心安裝 Steam 登入 | 語言簡體中文日本語（日文） 한국어（韓文） ไทย（泰文） Български（保加利亞文） Čeština（捷克文） Dansk（丹麥文） Deutsch（德文） English（英文） Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙） Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲） Ελληνικά（希臘文） Français（法文） Italiano（義大利文） Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語） Magyar（匈牙利文） Nederlands（荷蘭文） Norsk（挪威文） Polski（波蘭文） Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙） Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西） Română（羅馬尼亞文） Русский（俄文） Suomi（芬蘭文） Svenska（瑞典文） Türkçe（土耳其文） tiếng Việt（越南文） Українська（烏克蘭文）回報翻譯問題商店頁面

Stellaris 全部討論區螢幕擷圖藝術作品實況直播影片工作坊新聞指南評論全部討論區螢幕擷圖藝術作品實況直播影片工作坊新聞指南評論

Stellaris

商店頁面檢視統計資料: 全球成就 Stellaris > 綜合討論 > 主題細節

billy 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:20 Empire sprawl , should i be caring about this? I'm a noob . Playing my first game . My administrative capacity is 50 , my sprawl is now 53 . Should i keep claiming systems? I'm not seeing a number anywhere telling me the negatives if its giving me any. The AI i just met his empire looks slightly bigger than mine but hard to tell as he hates i have the audacity to live in the same universe as him. I started with the +20 to administration so i assume my size is decent . Also , how big a fleet do i need roughly? (2237 is the date , fairly near the start), no idea what to expect from the AI's fleet. I will have a starbase helping me from his only route to me. Says his fleet is superior . I could afford to build a fair few more ships but dont want to build too many. 最後修改者：billy; 2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:22 < > 目前顯示第 1-12 則留言，共 12 則

Nightmyre 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:25 Short answer - no. You shouldn't care about empire sprawl.The benefits of "sprawling" your empire far outweigh the costs.It's only there to give a chance to empires that want to play tall.As for fleet size, a lot depends on what difficulty you're on. You usually only want to build fleet size up in preparation for war, though, since the upkeep costs will hurt you otherwise. #1

Lady Crimson (RIP) 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:35 Basically you want to reduce its cost when you can, but overall don't worry about it.For example when you convert a planet into a city planet, you want to replace some of the resident districts with commercial or alloy ones right away, and remove a bunch of the excess districts if you have the housing and jobs to take it.A.I. fleets can vary quite a lot.. generally 1k can keep you safe for the first 25 years, you really don't even need a fleet unless you're expecting to be attacked.. or plan on attacking.A good rule of thumb is just make sure you remain 'equivalent' with any A.I. you suspect might start a war. (or to make them inferior in fleet if you want to start a war). 最後修改者：Lady Crimson (RIP); 2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:37 #2

billy 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:46 ok , thanksIs there somewhere in game to see the negative effects of sprawl?i have another question.... Is there anywhere i can see what trade is actually doing for me? i have 4 planets and 4 starbases with trade hub , they have trade routes and it says 12 trade , what is 12 trade? lol , whats it actually doing for me? giving me energy or something? #3

Nightmyre 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:48 You can see the negative effects by hovering over the empire sprawl number.The 12 trade value converts based on your settings. By default it converts into energy at 1:1. #4

billy 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:50

引用自 Nightmyre：You can see the negative effects by hovering over the empire sprawl number.The 12 trade value converts based on your settings. By default it converts into energy at 1:1.

thanks , yea i notice it now , i guess i didn't see it before because there were no negative effects , they are obvious now on there. I do really like this games UI #5

Doctor3D 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 2:03 Generally doesn't matter - though if you get really big, really fast before you can unlock various techs to help counter and utilize the benefits of size to its full potential- it can slow your tech growth quite a bit. On my current playthrough i'm paying 833% overhead over base for tech due to my extreme sprawl and i'm quite a bit behind most other races tech-wise. I just now got research station tech and once I start building those on some dedicated planets i'll catch back up rather quickly though. 最後修改者：Doctor3D; 2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 2:03 #6

Paragon 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 2:43 I had a good comment on this from another topic a while ago, just found it:Admin cap is the previous planet count penalty reworked; the larger an empire you have the harder it is to keep cohesive and modern. The penalty is to balance out the increased capacity of a larger empire to soft counter snowballing, and ensures that tall empires have a chance.The important thing to note is it is a SOFT CAP. You can easily exceed it and function, and in fact large empires must and normally do this. It is part of the large empire playstyle.The cap mostly benefits small and tall nations, and slows down the previously insane early game territory rush. This is a very good thing; now there will still be places to peacefully expand past the first 50 years of the game and you won't always be on the losing side because you did not expand fast enough.If you want to play tall, keeping within or near your admin cap will incur no penalties to unity and research, allowing your nation to keep ahead of the game. You can slowly expand as your tech does, and exceed the cap slightly for minimal penalties. The cap does however take into account districts, so you have to balance planetary and space development.If you want a star spanning empire and the resources to boot, you'll simply have to deal with the fact that a large empire is difficult to keep unified, efficient, and cutting edge. You will notice the penalties are mostly to unity and research; NOTHING to resources of any kind. This means as a large empire you will have a decisive advantage in basic and strategic resources, not to mention a larger fleet, higher population, empire size, etc.This basically pits the small, advanced empire against the large, powerhouse empire and gives them both a chance to succeed. If you do not like this, you can modify it in common/defines/00_defines by changing the following:EMPIRE_SIZE_BASE = 30 # Base cap EMPIRE_SIZE_FROM_DISTRICTS = 0.5 # Per district EMPIRE_SIZE_FROM_SYSTEMS = 1 # Per system EMPIRE_SIZE_FROM_COLONIES = 4 # Per planet EMPIRE_SIZE_FROM_BRANCH_OFFICES = 2 # Per branch office EMPIRE_SIZE_FROM_POPS = 0 # Per pop Listed is my personal settings for a 1000 star game. District and system impact are halved, while planet impact is doubled. 最後修改者：Paragon; 2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 2:44 #7

northernwater 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 2:54 Most everyone will tell you to ignore it. I never do because I like to micromanage my empire. Play a game and ignore it and you can decide whether you like playing like that. Ignoring it forces you to play a rush growth game to overcome the penalties. I don't always like playing like that. #8

northernwater 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 3:05

引用自 Paragon： You will notice the penalties are mostly to unity and research; NOTHING to resources of any kind. This means as a large empire you will have a decisive advantage in basic and strategic resources, not to mention a larger fleet, higher population, empire size, etc.

Research, Unity, Campaigns and Leader costs. The cost on the latter two can be very large. A tall empire can gain early access to matter decompressors to offset mineral income significantly.But as in all PDX games large empires always trump everything. Taking from your neighbors denies them a resource since it's a zero sum game. #9

billy 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 4:21 thanks for all the info everyone.I have 4 good planets near each other colonized , dont see anymore anywhere near me , lots of red coloured planets scattered around, Do you end up being able to colonize these planets without the big penalties? some advanced terraforming or something. They dont seem worth it at the moment. #10

Faur 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 5:14 Losse money #11

Minoris 檢視個人檔案檢視文章擁有 Stellaris

2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 5:42 As was said by others before, you can quite safely go over admin capacity without much consequences. However, keeping an admin cap as high as possible can be worth it, particularly if you're heavily invested in the tech game. Using Materialist ethos, the "Efficient Bureaucracy" civic as well as the "Imperial Prerogative" ascension perk can make you insanely above AIs tech levels, as they all combine to keep your research as high as possible with little to no consequences to expansion, meaning even more research. Even if the AI's fleet is superior in number, if he's fielding only level 1 weapons and armors/shields, he'll have to MASSIVELY ounumber you if your own fleet is equipped specifically to counter his with lvl 3 weapons and defenses. Never underestimate the tech game is what I'm saying.As for "red" planets, you have a few options:1) Some may be worth colonizing despite the penalties from a low habitability score, mainly large planets (size 20+) with bonuses.2) Get immigration treaties with species that like this kind of planet and use them to colonize it. Look if their ethos and species traits won't cause problems later though, if you want to do that.3) Terraform when you have the tech. This can become very costly if you have lots of planets to terraform, though.4) Just ignore them. Smaller (size 14 and lower, I'd say) planets with low habitability scores probably aren't worth wasting your time on. Only worry about them if you really need more planets later in the game or you want them for whatever RP reason. 最後修改者：Minoris; 2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 5:43 #12 < > 目前顯示第 1-12 則留言，共 12 則每頁顯示： 1530 50 Stellaris > 綜合討論 > 主題細節張貼日期： 2019 年 5 月 3 日下午 1:20回覆： 12