If I go to the Nanite ascension, is there any reason why I should not convert a planet into a nanite world? Are they strictly better than regular worlds right now?
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
they're like machine worlds in that they have uncapped the bottom three districts and those can be specialized to whatever, so they're useful as research worlds. they don't actually give much nanite income though, and they significantly reduce basic resource income, so i would not convert any world you're actually getting anything out of other than research. also, any world with a special modifier on the blocker screen, since the nanites will eat that.
Nanite worlds are missing some designations. The big one is research: you can't reduce researcher upkeep on a nanite world (which is very important, with the nanite research strategy of stacking +80 base output in exchange for an absurd amount of base nanite upkeep).
- 1
- 1
right, i forgot that nanite worlds can't actually be designated research worlds. which leaves me at a loss as to what they are FOR. as they are at the moment, there's really no reason to eat a world and make it a nanite world. the tiny amount of nanites it produces is not worth what you give up in actual potential production. even the smallest world can be made a research world, a unity world, a trade world, an energy world, or a fortress world, and you'd get much more out of it that way. then get your nanites from space deposits instead.
Nanite worlds, like machine worlds and ecus, give more jobs per district.
They're the discount, high tempo version of machine worlds: they give you resources instead of costing them, in exchange for giving no % output bonus. You can have as many worlds as you want being subsumed by nanites, whereas terraforming to machine will cost you 10k each (and take 20 years).
It's most useful for conquerors, but that's true of the entire nanite ascension: it directly scales from system count (starbase cap), it reduces empire size from colony spam, and the majority of its power (until this patch) was tied up in it's ships, rather than direct economic benefits.
Last edited:
- 1
it does not give you an output bonus, but it DOES give you a MASSIVE output MALUS. that's the thing you're not addressing. regardless of whether you're playing tall or wide, it is still better to use that world normally as far as I can tell rather than take a malus to output on energy, food, minerals. actually, i don't remember now, but didn't they make it so it can't even do energy anymore?
You do still get access to the Forge designation, which has no penalties, so the main cost of Nanite Worlds for research is that you don't get the Tech World designation. (That, and you can't easily tell what each world is producing because your entire empire is nothing but forges.)
The key to using Nanite Worlds is the Optimization Building. At 600 jobs per district and with the Nanite Edicts, Optimization Buildings have very strong output, with very low sprawl. (Just be aware that districts cost 1000 minerals, so build as many mineral/energy districts as possible while subsuming, for big savings once the situation completes.
The key to using Nanite Worlds is the Optimization Building. At 600 jobs per district and with the Nanite Edicts, Optimization Buildings have very strong output, with very low sprawl. (Just be aware that districts cost 1000 minerals, so build as many mineral/energy districts as possible while subsuming, for big savings once the situation completes.
- 2
- 1
Nanite worlds have no inherent penalty to output.
They get 4 designations: 3 standard machine world designations (generic output, and two industrial specializations), and then one that increases nanite production from miners (by 40%) at the cost of mineral production (-20%).
They're just larger worlds with restricted designations.
The best way to use them, now, is automation. And for automation, the increased jobs per district are incredibly important.
- 1
Got it, thanks for the explanation.
So, if I understand it correctly, the principle is:
1) Don't convert worlds with blocker-tier modifiers (that are shown in the blocker list) that you are planning to use, but planet-tier modifiers are OK.
2) Don't convert the worlds where you plan to rely on planetary designations (especially if you plan to ascend them) - like the research planets, where efficiency of research per nanite upkeep is more important that the amount of researcher jobs.
3) Convert everything else, use automation buildings, and don't use the nanite production designation unless you really need this extra amount of nanites.
Am I correct, or do I miss something?
Also, an unrelated question - what is the easiest path for a Machine Intelligence (not individualistic machines, which can use Parliamentary System) to get nanite ascension ASAP? I know of Genesis Architects, but they will give you useless pops when uplifted - because they can't survive on nanite worlds. What else can I use?
So, if I understand it correctly, the principle is:
1) Don't convert worlds with blocker-tier modifiers (that are shown in the blocker list) that you are planning to use, but planet-tier modifiers are OK.
2) Don't convert the worlds where you plan to rely on planetary designations (especially if you plan to ascend them) - like the research planets, where efficiency of research per nanite upkeep is more important that the amount of researcher jobs.
3) Convert everything else, use automation buildings, and don't use the nanite production designation unless you really need this extra amount of nanites.
Am I correct, or do I miss something?
Also, an unrelated question - what is the easiest path for a Machine Intelligence (not individualistic machines, which can use Parliamentary System) to get nanite ascension ASAP? I know of Genesis Architects, but they will give you useless pops when uplifted - because they can't survive on nanite worlds. What else can I use?
- 1
Genesis Architects is still the go-to.
That they're useless on nanite worlds doesn't matter: they still make unity when stacked on the worlds that you choose not to subsume (or energy, if you later drop the civic).
Last edited:
- 1
I never really played with them, what is the strategy in this case? Is it something like this?
1) Settle a lot of worlds;
2) Rush biological techs for uplifting, building specialized biology worlds;
3) Uplift the species;
4) Resettle them to planets you are not subsuming (for example, the research ones), trying to match the habitability;
5) Subsume the planets;
6) Optionally, change the civic, losing the unity jobs but freeing a slot - you can keep them as generator batteries, or purge into zombies that can do menial labour. Am I right that the blockers that give you +% to unity and sociology will also be lost?
Basically, yes.
Except step 2 may be easier than you think: you get Epigenetic Triggers as a research option, and each planet you colonize gives you 5% progress.
Also: you can abandon/recolonize planets to re-add the preserve after you uplift, though only once (this lets you double dip the unity bonus and keep the society one).
Both the monument and the preserve will then be lost when you subsume the world... but you can recolonize again after to re-add the monument (without getting any unity/influence reward) if you really want it.
90% sure all the re-add-the-monument mechanics are unintended.
Last edited:
- 2
Got it, thanks. And what happens to the monuments and such when I change the civic to something else (like astro-mining for more nanites)?
I could have sworn they became non-functional, but in a test game I just did, I kept all the % bonuses (though the monument lost its 200 Biologist jobs).
- 1
I only get Foundry and Nanotech designations for mine, playing as gestalt machines. Maybe individualists get some other designations? I would love to have a generic output designation for them.
Also be aware of the devastation; nanite subsumption generates more devastation per year than gets repaired, so large worlds can build up to 90%+ devastation, which reduces job output and stability a lot. So I often don't end up subsuming some of my heavily-built-up early-game worlds (load-bearing generator worlds, say), at least until I already have another world filling that niche so I can afford to lose the output for a decade.
- 1
What's the point of forge worlds as a nanite empire?
What are you using your alloys on when you can have 100x your military cap with nanite ships and have no upkeep penalty?
What are you using your alloys on when you can have 100x your military cap with nanite ships and have no upkeep penalty?
It takes a long time (like, 50 to 75 years after finishing the tradition) for the starbase harvester nanite income to ramp up to the point where you can shift to a full-nanite fleet. During that time you still need an alloy fleet. Mixing nanite ships into alloy fleets means you can't capitalize on nanite ships' one strength (going way over cap), because then the upkeep on your alloy fleet gets out of control. So I generally stay on alloy fleets for a very long time and treat my nanite bank as an emergency reserve for rebuilding a fleet in a hurry if my alloy fleet gets wiped by the khan or something (and then I never end up building any nanite ships at all). There's just never a really natural point to transition out of the alloy fleet.
Does this mean I'm playing nanotech badly? idk. Maybe. But with the new job-dense nanite worlds plus optimization buildings (and the awesome +25% alloy output edict), I can make tons of alloys and tons of naval cap with Planetary Defenses for roughly zero pops and very little empire size. The changes to nanotech in 4.0 have made alloy fleets an even better option for nanotech IMO.
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
Individualists get CG and Mixed Industry designations as well.
They're not Nanite Worlds.
- 1