Had exactly the same thought about pauls comment.  Would like to hear Brad's thoughts

I under

I understand, and though I've posted a lot in support of the planetary production wheel, that isn't what I'm talking about here. That just happens to be the context in which the comment was made. In the stream on Friday, Paul basically said that the AI could have governed planets more efficiently than a human could, but you didn't let it do that because it would feel like cheating to the players. If this is true, I was saying that if you can make the AI play the games so well that it feels like cheating, that seems like a better solution for higher difficulty levels than the current solution, which is that the AI is actually cheating.

The AI can do better with the production wheel than a human.

However, no AI, can build up a planet as well as a human.  It is literally the traveling salesmen challenge in a game.

We knew that when we decided to support adjacencies that are implemented in an ordered way but people like being able to cleverly specialize their worlds. My view is that once a player gets that good, you just give the AI bonuses to make up for it at that point since it's literally impossible to make the AI design up a planet as well as the best humans.

It's not exponential.

MULTIPLE OF SIX doesn't mean 'exponential'. If you had 15 population on the same planet, you'd get (15*2)*2.95=88.5, which isn't an exponential of 15 (well, it is, but it's just over 15^1.65, which is not remotely how the number has been arrived at).

Your empire grows exponentially if every time you land a ship you immediately begin building colony ships there - you go 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 etc. You're increase by a power of 2, because you're doubling every time. Hence, exponential growth.

Your colonies don't increase exponentially. The distinct bonuses get multiplied by each other, but nothing ever applies a power to something else. The adjacency bonus is exponential, but only up to 3 - because you can't place 4 factories which all adjacent to each other. 

You're just making yourself look foolish with this one, Marigold.

Arguing about the symptoms does not solve the problem. Since there are multiple threads discussing the economic model/system in GCIII, my hope is that it will get some attention from SD or at least modders - like Naselus or others - with the skill and heart to tackle it.

As you increase your production, the rate at which you can increase your production increases.

This is exponential growth.

Consider: first constructor takes 8 turns. 

Now that your planet is surrounded by an economic starbase, it can now produce the next constructor in 7 turns.  

Now that you've got 2 economic starbases, you can now build the NEXT economic starbase in 6 turns.  

By the time you have 2 economic starbases and TWO factories, you can build the next starbase in HALF THE TIME than originally.  Which in turn will increase your rate of production EVEN MORE so now you can build the NEXT economic productivity improvement EVEN FASTER.

SEE MY POINT????????

While Stardock programmers might be reasonably competent at programming, they appear to be not-that-competent at math.  Otherwise they would not have designed the economy of this game like this.  

Frogboy - I don't mean to sound rude or anything but if you seek feedback you have to listen to it and respond instead of dissing it. I am no expert but it seems to me that a lot of people in the forum are making the point that specialisation is the way to go given the design of the game. But to say that you find the wheel too gamey and therefore is a good enough reason to nerf it sounds a little strange. Its like saying this game is mine to do as I will. Sure. But all your customers have bought into it and I am sure you don't mean to imply that you have no obligation to any of them. I think all that players want is a level of control which they feel is being taken away. So it may be nice if alternatives are presented such as totally customisable governors or whatever. I have been having lots of fun with GC3 and we all want it to be even better.

Edited I just saw the "Running a galactic civilization"n post by Frogboy which elaborates on this point. Ok. I appreciate that most customers don't get beyond normal level and there is an obligation to meet their requirements. Still its the hardcore user who will generate the ideas and designs that will make things better for the rest. Like Formula One cars . So keep that window open.

The major difference between Gal Civ II and III is that in II factories did NOT increase the productivity of a planet.  What factories did instead was they CONVERTED economic productivity from population into other forms like starships.

In contrast, in Gal Civ III factories and starbases directly INCREASE the productivity of a planet, leading to exponential feedback loops.  Building a factory on a planet increases the economic productivity of a planet, thereby increasing the rate at which you can build another factory.  In Gal Civ II you couldn't do this because you'd go bankrupt if your population wasn't large enough to support the production from the factories.