The Alien Box decision and 3.0? (2024)

I haven't seen any debates about the RBG decision from the alien box with the new economic system... Which traits are best after 3.0?
Red -5% housing
Blue +10 year leader lifespan and +10% army damage
Green +5% habitability

I would argue all can be useful depending on the game settings. However, since housing now directly affects growth, I think the red potion got a bit of a buff in 3.0.

In my current game (I am only 24 years in) with a habitable planet/4 mod and 1.5x tech and unity cost... all 3 colored solutions can be incredibly useful as it is going to take much longer to get to endgame. Red is useful because I will not have many planets and I can grow and fit more pops and red has the longest lasting benefits. Blue might help to keep my early leaders alive long enough to pop the flesh is weak and synthetically ascend with very strong leaders the entire game. My current leaders have some great traits but this is truly a gamble. And with so few habitable planets and longer gameplay 5% habitability could help increase production and decrease upkeep because I will have no choice but to settle on a couple of marginal planets and terriforming/habitability techs are likely quite a ways off.

I might just have to roll a die to choose...

What do people think? Red, Blue, or Green?

Space Roach said:

Isn't there a diminishing return for excess housing? I think there can be enough city districts to meet that point but I am still not sure what is the perfect amount of excess.

Click to expand...

If your planet is very small, building housing buildings may be helpful (they help in any case because of the amenities they provide). But red is still useless because the calculation doesn't take into account how much housing a pop uses. So things that reduce housing requirements do not factor in.

On their own they are all of negligible effect.

Red - was useful before to optimize housing and allow more pops to fit into limited space. Right now you woll rarely have enough pops for it to be a concern and due to the slowness of growth and the S-curve, you will have surplus housing in most places to optimize. So it got actually a nerf, bccause with the low pop number housing is less of a concern.

Blue - Boring baseline. Both bonuses are negligible and in their effect reduce corresponding replacement needs a tiny bit.

Green - On its own rather useless, but depending on circ*mstances this can be the most noteworthy bonus. Like all the others, its effectiveness is heavily dependent on stacking similar bonuses. But once it opens up new worlds the reduced penalties add up.

Personally I nowadays pick mostly for roleplay value, as none of the bonuses matter in most games, green being the probably "best" one.

Space Roach said:

Isn't there a diminishing return for excess housing? I think there can be enough city districts to meet that point but I am still not sure what is the perfect amount of excess.

Click to expand...

Excess capacity caps at +3 growth. Fundamentally, you want to hit at least 70 capacity to hit +3 growth -- anything less and you can't get there. At 70 growth, you need to stay in the 30 - 40 pop band to hit +3. As capacity grows, you need fewer pop to hit +3 and the band gets wider. For example, at 100 capacity, you hit +3 from 22 - 78 pop counts.

I thought building housing like pleasure domes actually increases the growth of pops in 3.0. So doesn't using less housing result in increased housing and buff growth as well?

So total housing is used in the calculation and not available housing?

DaleDVM said:

I thought building housing like pleasure domes actually increases the growth of pops in 3.0. So doesn't using less housing result in increased housing and buff growth as well?

Click to expand...

See Also

Worst Anomaly Event: Orbital Speed Demon (Alien Box)

Nope, because it's not free housing that produces pops. It's capacity which is basically total housing + a value for undeveloped districts. Lets say you have two identical planets (same size, same districts and buildings built, same planet class) with 100 total housing and 150 total capacity (100 from housing, 50 from undeveloped districts), but different pops:

Planet A has 10 Lilliputian pops. These pops only take 1/10 housing. Thus, there is 99 free housing and a 1: 15 pop: capacity ratio.

Planet B has 10 Brobdingnagian pops. Each one consumes 10 housing. Thus, there is no free housing and a 1: 15 pop: capacity ratio.

Both of these planets will be at exactly the same point on the logistic curve. In practice, all housing bonuses are pretty much useless.

I think we can agree that Red is almost useless with the overabundance of housing.

So I would say the next best thing is probably Green for the habitability, followed by Blue for the lifespan, that is for biological pops.

If you are synth ascending then maybe still housing, because the other two are absolutely worthless there.

Medu Salem said:

I think we can agree that Red is almost useless with the overabundance of housing.

So I would say the next best thing is probably Green for the habitability, followed by Blue for the lifespan, that is for biological pops.

If you are synth ascending then maybe still housing, because the other two are absolutely worthless there.

Click to expand...

Synth removes the housing boost anyways. So you may as well take blue to keep your leaders alive until ascension or green to slightly boost your economy to ascend quicker.

mial42 said:

Synth removes the housing boost anyways. So you may as well take blue to keep your leaders alive until ascension or green to slightly boost your economy to ascend quicker.

Click to expand...

Ah, it gets removed then? Didn't even notice. Or better said I can't remember if I even had the anomaly in a game where I synth ascended, but if then I definitely didn't notice.

But yes, in that case it is also better to go for the habitability or leader stuff.

mial42 said:

Synth removes the housing boost anyways. So you may as well take blue to keep your leaders alive until ascension or green to slightly boost your economy to ascend quicker.

Click to expand...

I used to keep the box until after I ascend and trick out my synths with traits. The box, much like Horizon Signal, applies to synths just fine.

Forblaze said:

I've always taken green. At the very least, it's offsetting the -hab modifiers from the galactic community decisions.

Click to expand...

Just get big enough that nothing you oppose can pass. That's what I do.

Last time I was asked this question, Commander Shepard said good bye to a close friend as he died peacefully next to him....before shooting a ghost kid in the face by giving me the choice....

That being said, 5% Housing....Useful on large worlds, meh on smaller ones and habitats. Its an issue of space.

Habitability is useful for everyone in resource efficiency, given the slower growth later on, it makes pops in general more efficient.

Leader lifespan never hurts so long as you have a tendency to keep good ones.