Climate Restoration & the tech rebalance (2024)

Climate restoration is a key tech for gestalts, enabling Hive & Machine Worlds, as well as Gaia worlds for certain builds. And it lets you terraform barren planets like mars.

Because of tech scaling changes, climate restoration now comes substantially later than it used to.

A lot of things have changed in stellaris balance wise over the last few years, but the gap between timing (it comes late) and usefulness (small bonus) feels a bit off here.

The Three world types are actually ascension perks locked by having 2 perks + climate restoration. It is unlikely you’ll have the tech anywhere near when you get your 4th ascension slot after taking whichever ascension tree.

While I recognize that machine and hive worlds are nothing to sneeze at, they pale in comparison to arcologies, which have much more power and require only a tier 3 tech (and with relic worlds you can easily bypass the requirement to build out districts.) Most people think world shaper isn’t even worth taking.

Should anything be done here? We could always make ClimResto a tier 4 tech, or have the APs grant the tech option.

Personally, I feel like hive and machine worlds are both too weak and too strong for what they are, being mere terraforming options that require just 2 APs as a prerequisite in theory. Uncapped districts and a housing bonus, on top of +10% output and perfect habitability, is actually really good and puts Gaia worlds to shame. But you’re still putting down 10k energy and 10 years of terraforming time for something that you’re getting much closer to Megaengineering than to Arcologies or your ascension path. And they don’t always ‘feel’ like the ‘ultimate planet type’ they originally represented.

(I do think hive worlds are extremely strong planets because of the combination of 3 jobs per resource district and hive districts having double housing & jobs, but half of that is inherent to all hive mind planets.)

Hansatron said:

Climate restoration is a key tech for gestalts, enabling Hive & Machine Worlds, as well as Gaia worlds for certain builds. And it lets you terraform barren planets like mars.

Because of tech scaling changes, climate restoration now comes substantially later than it used to...

Should anything be done here? We could always make ClimResto a tier 4 tech, or have the APs grant the tech option...

Click to expand...

Isn't Climate Restoration already tier 4?

FWIW, in my current machine empire game under 3.11, playing fairly casually I'm at like 2290 with my sixth tier 3 society tech in progress, Terrestrial Sculpting and Ecological Adaptation complete, and one or two nodes left to fill in my third tradition (took Synthetic Age as my third perk). So I think there's a good chance I'll be able to draw Climate Restoration with about the right timing to do Machine Worlds as my fourth perk without the slot sitting open for too long, especially if I just mill low-tier society techs after I finish this tier 3. I think the last time I played machines in 3.8, I got Climate Restoration in the 2280s (and had my fourth perk slot sitting open a long time for it).

Whether it's worth it this late, idk, but 3.11 has also gotten me to shift the mid- and endgame dates back, so at least they'll have more time to pay off.

Honestly trying to draw Climate Restoration has felt painful for gestalts since the three research field leads got removed; before I could at least get a New Worlds specialist and use him to fish it out. I don't really want New Worlds permanently on my science node, and node culling just to get rid of it is rough. I would love to see some other tool besides taking Expansion traditions to get more draw weight for Climate Restoration.

Hansatron said:

But you’re still putting down 10k energy and 10 years of terraforming time for...

Click to expand...

Wiki says 20 years base rather than 10... I always do the terraforming gases edict but that still only knocks it down to like 13. Are there more sources of terraforming speed that I should be using?

jedavis said:

Wiki says 20 years base rather than 10... I always do the terraforming gases edict but that still only knocks it down to like 13. Are there more sources of terraforming speed that I should be using?

Click to expand...

No, I just misremembered about how long it takes in my head. 13-20 years is even worse. The Arcology project only takes 10!

jedavis said:

Isn't Climate Restoration already tier 4?

Click to expand...

It used to be a 32000 base cost tech, so it’s tier 5. (Old scaling was 2*2^n, n being tier.)

It’s just so hard to draw, for what it is; I’ve had games where I draw mega engineering first. Hence the idea of making it a research option with the ascension perks or something.

Hansatron said:

No, I just misremembered about how long it takes in my head. 13-20 years is even worse. The Arcology project only takes 10!

It used to be a 32000 base cost tech, so it’s tier 5. (Old scaling was 2*2^n, n being tier.)

It’s just so hard to draw, for what it is; I’ve had games where I draw mega engineering first. Hence the idea of making it a research option with the ascension perks or something.

Click to expand...

It definitely isn't tier 5 now, and hasn't been for a while. The 3.5.3 tech tree on github has it as tier 4, the wiki has it at tier 4, and I just looked in 00_soc_tech.txt and that also has it at tier 4.

But yeah, for a tier 4 and for what it does (which is pretty situational unless you're using it for a perk), it sure is hard to draw it... An alternative conclusion of "arcology project / ecus are so much better!" is that maybe ecus should get pushed back...

I kinda wonder to what extent this is actually a function of the structure and contents of the Society research tree. There's massive fan-out from Genome Mapping (sometimes not possible to get tier 2 without researching this?), New Worlds Protocol (blockers, largely unavoidable), Colonial Centralization (hard to do without), and Archaeostudies, and then most of the rest of the "tree" is pretty linear. So it's hard to limit the pool of techs you're drawing from (vs like, not researching Fusion Missiles or Blue Lasers). Society also doesn't really have much in the way of stand-out tier 4 techs that people often beeline for - many of them are situational or restricted by ethics (Tracking Implants, Capacity Boosters), ascension paths (Thought Enforcement) or plain RNG (Morphogenetic Field Mastery) and the rest are just small numerical boosts, vs qualitatively-different techs that get beelined for all the time like Battleships, Zero-Point Power as a prereq for Megastructures, Neutronium Armor, Whirlwind Missiles, Gateway Activation, Synthetic Personality Matrix. Maybe the problem is actually that the underlying structure of Society research is just a pain to beeline over, and it never gets noticed because nobody beelines for tier 4 Society techs except Climate Restoration or Precog Interfaces.

If you feel that it’s critical to your plans you can take Adaptability and use it’s agenda that gives you 25% researched of the terraforming line

In fact, between letting you beeline through terraforming tech (faster more useful planets) and the new finisher it’s actually quite decent and not subtefuge-level trash tier anymore

Hansatron said:

No, I just misremembered about how long it takes in my head. 13-20 years is even worse. The Arcology project only takes 10!

Click to expand...

Probably because you can build on a colonized planet being terraformed without impacting the time. Arcology project takes up the planet build queue.

Sian said:

If you feel that it’s critical to your plans you can take Adaptability and use it’s agenda that gives you 25% researched of the terraforming line

In fact, between letting you beeline through terraforming tech (faster more useful planets) and the new finisher it’s actually quite decent and not subtefuge-level trash tier anymore

Click to expand...

The machine version is still trash but a hive can and probably should take it

From what I understood from the Q&A, the devs said that they were interested in revising both Hiveworlds and Machine worlds, so perhaps they will be buffed in the future (hopefully). Still, I am sad that we heard nothing about Gaia worlds. They live in a weird limbo of "special planets that are weaker than ecumenopolis" without a niche of their own.

I think that a very good compromise would be for Planet Shaper to guarantee terraforming tech options. Additionally, perhaps machine worlds could get some kind of unique unity district ("central processing unit" or whatever) so they can excel at something that most machine empires are weak at, while Gaia worlds might have their own tall niche (increased psionic output? increased ascension output? organic pop growth boost?). Whatever helps them to set them apart from an "ecumenopolis lite".

It would make sense for machine/hive/Gaia worlds to be available with the tier 3 Ecological Adaptation tech, since they are a kind of "consolation prize" for empires that can't get Ecumenopolis (although not really as they serve different economic roles). Also, maybe do something to fix the habitability issues for Driven Assimilator cyborgs on Machine Worlds. (If you need cybernetic ascension and/or Resource Consolidation to get to 100% habitability, so be it, but I feel like DAs should have a "perfect world" option that isn't Gaia.) You can't put machine/hive worlds any earlier than Ecological Adaptation though, since you need that to terraform planets you have already colonized, and really the first targets for conversion to machine/hive worlds should be your core colonies. Also, the very first terraforming happens at tier 2, so just in terms of the progression of the game, it makes sense that making special worlds is a tier 3+ thing.

There's still a niche for the Climate Restoration tech in and of itself though, where it makes sense to keep it at tier 4: you need it to fix Tomb Worlds, and I think it would also make sense to require it for planets that are completely uninhabitable in their natural state (i.e. Terraforming candidates). No build is reliant on being able to turn either of these kinds of planets into something better, and building a biosphere on a barren planet sounds like advanced tech to me.

Sian said:

If you feel that it’s critical to your plans you can take Adaptability and use it’s agenda that gives you 25% researched of the terraforming line

Click to expand...

I kinda hate the idea that one has to take "+10% habitability" as an item to get "all gaia or hive worlds" which don't need that item.

Adaptability used to be focused on making the most of the worlds you found, not about turning those worlds into something else entirely.

Hansatron said:

Should anything be done here? We could always make ClimResto a tier 4 tech, or have the APs grant the tech option.

Click to expand...

Hive Worlds, Machine Worlds and World Shaper could all be changed to require Terrestrial Sculpting (basic terraforming) instead of Climate Restoration, since most of the worlds you'd target with these perks are going to be the standard habitable types anyway. There's no real reason why you'd need the tech to create more habitable planets in order to benefit from these perks.

HFY said:

I kinda hate the idea that one has to take "+10% habitability" as an item to get "all gaia or hive worlds" which don't need that item.

Adaptability used to be focused on making the most of the worlds you found, not about turning those worlds into something else entirely.

Click to expand...

Does that mean that you refuse taking exploration since you eventually won’t gain anything from +1pop from colonizing?

Sure we could probably argee that there need to be a way to use surplus habitability (beyond chemical baths) but that doesn’t mean the whole tree is trash

Sian said:

Does that mean that you refuse taking exploration since you eventually won’t gain anything from +1pop from colonizing?

Click to expand...

No, that +1 pop will always be +1 per colony settled. Pops are king and having more pops is never terrible. And I'm going to be creating new colonies into the late game (Habitats, Ring Worlds) so it's not like there's a timer which makes it worthless.

In contrast, the +10% habitability means nothing on gaia or hive worlds, especially not the ones I create directly from barren rocks. It's not a small stacking benefit which stays relevant forever. It's just an anti-synergistic mechanic which becomes obsolete.

Sian said:

Sure we could probably argee that there need to be a way to use surplus habitability (beyond chemical baths) but that doesn’t mean the whole tree is trash

Click to expand...

Yeah the whole Adaptability tree is trash for other reasons.

This is one point of

anti-synergy.

I don't know why terraforming is treated so poorly in this game. It is such a sci-fi trope but in Stellaris it's better if you just ignore it and sign a migration treaty instead. If I had my way, every terraforming related tech would be at least 1 level lower. Might make a good mod.

As for the OP, it's very frustrating if this tech is going to take even longer than it used to. I may just stop playing the life seeded origin altogether.
The funny thing is, I'm currently playing my first 3.11 game and want to test out the new resort world to see how it is. BUT when I do an earth start, Proxima Centauri is always my resort world....and I'm well into the mid game with no sign of the tech needed to terraform it so that I can create the resort world.....so I keep waiting and hoping. I can't choose another planet, I have to have Proxima Beach.

CocoCincinnati said:

As for the OP, it's very frustrating if this tech is going to take even longer than it used to. I may just stop playing the life seeded origin altogether

Click to expand...

I don’t mind the tech rebalance, in fact I am glad for it. But condensing the tech tree into one century had masked a lot of other balance issues.

With the announcement of machine age - big hype - I am concerned it’s going to be real hard to put the genie back in the bottle when players realize how current machine empires are greatly held back by being gestalt. Individualist machines need some kind of restraint to prevent them from just invalidating content like Lithoids, habitability builds, terraforming, leader lifespan, and so on.

Right now, World Shaper doesn't make much sense as it comes far too late.

However, the Idyllic Bloom civic has gotten a lot stronger in this patch.

If you combine it with void hive to give you a chance for early gas from space deposits you can start producing Gaia's very early on.

After you start getting the bloom trait on your hive pops

When you factor in the final building, the bloom trait and the Gaia world you get the following bonuses.

25% resource output,
15% pop growth
50% on the budding trait
-15% amenities
-15% housing

if you run an Idyllic Bloom, Void Hive, Progenitor Hive, there is some rng on getting a gas deposit.

CocoCincinnati said:

I don't know why terraforming is treated so poorly in this game. It is such a sci-fi trope but in Stellaris it's better if you just ignore it and sign a migration treaty instead. If I had my way, every terraforming related tech would be at least 1 level lower. Might make a good mod.

As for the OP, it's very frustrating if this tech is going to take even longer than it used to. I may just stop playing the life seeded origin altogether.
The funny thing is, I'm currently playing my first 3.11 game and want to test out the new resort world to see how it is. BUT when I do an earth start, Proxima Centauri is always my resort world....and I'm well into the mid game with no sign of the tech needed to terraform it so that I can create the resort world.....so I keep waiting and hoping. I can't choose another planet, I have to have Proxima Beach.

Click to expand...

Honestly, I have been baffled by Terraforming at all since forever, and bar the specific cases for Gestalts and Hives themselves or Nanite Worlds for others, there has almost always been a better way around planets habitability if you had the option which I'd reckon most do like you said. Beyond just that though, something about the time scale of the game and time/cost to complete and then actually get to using rubbed me wrong way back when. I didn't like having to pay and wait for better, and the only times I do terraform are the Terminal Egress nanite worlds, cause that's the only way to really use them if you get them.

Oh yeah, about this particular thing though - I have not minded the change facing off against AI Gestalts cause those Machine Worlds are effing annoying junk only good for holding every single purged pop. Total poison pills. So yeah, perhaps y'all should get them earlier even if I'd hate it.

tacotuesday145 said:

The entire concept of machine and hive worlds should just removed along with Gaia worlds. Just replace all 3 with the planetary specializations already existing, Eg: Ocean-Continental-Desert.

Click to expand...

That’s a little harsh. I don’t think there are many gestalt players who dislike hive and machine worlds - they were simply added a long time ago (1.8 for machine worlds) so they slotted them into the terraforming system instead of doing something else.

Machine worlds are arguably closer to arcologies in that they are built, not terraformed. The notion that the atmosphere has largely been replaced with industrial pollution (according to the tooltip in game) is quite thematic.

tacotuesday145 said:

Engineering to the point you can build a dyson sphere should invalidate any issue with terraforming any type of world.

Click to expand...

This is more of an argument for prerequisites than anything. The terraforming techs represent the know-how to actually terraform. Come to think of it, it is weird that ring world segments don’t require climate restoration, because that’s exactly what you’re doing.