Load out? I think balancing has something to do with it, but I think it is more about their weakness overall.



We just passed 20,000 G2G points on the Petition! Also, the signature has been updated with a link to the petition

I have to concur the Sowers are underpowered. The idea behind their affinity is great, but the execution, when combined with their reduced 60 points to spend, is just too low.

I don't play with them, but... ¡Sowers must be saved!

Rhisthel wrote:
I don't play with them, but... ¡Sowers must be saved!

Exactly there is a reason why ppl dont play them or at least play them often...



Thanks for you support!



@KingJohnVI



exactly and we wanna that the idea and the lore will be executed better.



I dont think a just a slightly Race trait point increase to 65 Race Trait points will solve this problem (indeed i see that thing as obligatory)

neither just a slightly increase of the Industrie to food conversion...



But iam absolutely sure that till the time we go very officialy with our petition to the devs we got some kind of concensus and a good imagination what has to be done.

LordBayushi wrote:
As was already hinted at, the game is balanced to be food intensive in the early game. Industry buildings are fewer in number and effect, and higher in expense. Further, Sowers' native homeworld, tundra, gives crappy money returns, so the first few turns of the game they are fighting bankruptcy on top of the food issues. As I already mentioned once, the only hope for the Sowers in the early game is to head strait for desert terraforming, and invest in a universal wasteland. This seems very contrary to the theme of the Sowers, as they are supposed to be 'paradise engineers' for the Endless.



When you make the consideration that, by the late game, most players have all cost effective buildings on their key systems, food and industry alike, and the fact that this will be especially true of a race with the 'Builders' trait, then, in the end, the Affinity is just a handicap, not really an advantage at all. At best, it allows you to focus your colonies on industry as they get started, ignoring food buildings until later. At worst, it is a FIDS penalty, taking up the same slot as such goodies as, say, better science for low taxes AND cheaper colony ships... That is the root of the problem.



To save the Sowers at the root, alter the Affinity. Add an ability to ignore Approval penalties from each planet up to a certain limit (say -10 or -15), so that they can really get some traction out of the Tolerant trait, and so that they can do what they seem that they are meant to do, which is colonize every system they see, spread to each planet, and improve their industry, slowly, methodically, and mercilessly. Something will still have to be done to encourage them to be interested in Tier 1 systems to fall in line with fluff (if you are into that kind of thing), because this solution still doesn't solve the 'terraforming to wasteland' strategy, but at least it would be a start in the right direction.

I have to say, this is a really good idea. It'd be small enough not to make them ridiculous, yet substantial enough to really give them incentive to use their Tolerant trait.

Stealth_Hawk wrote:

Great work, my friend! Together, we can save the sowers!



Sowers are really sick and need to be improved!



Pr1celess: 1360 g2g

Wait a second - what the hell, they have basically an "affinity" that provides a malus, not a bonus! So hell yes, they are screwed. Instead of that malus, they need something like 60% industry added to food, or a ton of other things, such as for example an industry bonus like +1 per population, or something powerful like that. Instead of builders, make their affinity +30% to industry. That way it adds to their food.

PANCZASU aka Pancake here, joining the fight

Guess what my next video's title is going to be ^_^ Hint: it starts with an S, end with an S, and has 3 words in total.

"Workable" Sowers build:



Main gripes:



1.) Tolerant is crap for anyone but cravers (and even THEy look at it and ask: soo.. we spent 40 points... for the ability to colonize crappy planets that will ruin approval.... dude you on crack or sumthing?! i'd rather buff up my ships/buildcost whatever) so CAN it from the build.



2.) Food production will suck, growth will be slower - no remedy to that.



3.) Money: Nop pop, no money, basically. Pick up mearchants (+1 dust per pop) and at least +10 dust on system. The benefit is an easier early game and wodnerfull endgame with loads and loads of money to buy more ships and upgrade your existing ships easily. Also bribe the FCK out of AI's and people.



4.) you need builders 3. Seriously.



Everything else as you see fit and can squeeze it in.

I recommend combat related boons because more tonnage and better stats will never leave you and always be active right of the bat.









Well, WORKABLE. That means "yeah we kinda manged to ship around an inherently screwed up design".



Buff sowers - by giving them earlier acces to terraforming techs and ressources (that is their schtick after all) and seriously go back and look int othe whole affinity thing which makes ZERO EFFING SENSE.



They ruin food which they should not need just to convert industrial power back into food? That is shizo.



How about this: Sowers require no food and growthrate is scaled to the systems induatrial output? (no actually this is boring)



Or they have their own conversion that transforms industrial produckt into new sowers, because they kinda have to build more units? Instead of dust conversion, have a sower conversion.





And do the same for the other robot species.



These things do not copulate.

You also do not commonly grease up gears with olive oil.







Again i repeat:

Here is something actually in line with sowers (and automatons btw) being FREAKING MACHINES:



Machines get ZERO pop growth. Nada. Niente. Because machines do not copulate and have children. Machines ar BUILD, preferably in some sort of factory.



so add a new covnersion:

Turn industry into more sowers.

So it will be a concious choice of the player when to grow pop and when to do other things with the industrial output.

Bonus: Colony ships do not depopulate the system as the sowers needed are build alongside the ship. (logic)









Change the affinity to this:



20% of food production is converted into dust and science. Why? Because many advances in science are based around to copy the hell out of biologic processes an improve upon them. And you can sell drugs or something for dust.

From a lore perspective, the Sowers suffering heavy approval penalties for being on a world they want to terraform anyway doesn't make a lot of sense. It's what they were built to do!



So it seems like it's an easy case to make that the race should include a reduction in approval penalties from different planet types. Making use of Tolerant would be easier if they had some actual tolerance for the conditions.

I like the sowers and feel that they are severely underpowered. People say they have a great end game, but what is the point in a great endgame when it isn't possible to live that long?

What great endgame.



UE will outperform the sowers in terms of raw production AND Money AND will Live to the endgame in the first place.

The tolerant trait is not very usefull. For 20 points u get at the beginning at least 3 techs for colonization. i think this flaw should be a part of the affinity. -50% is in the beginning too heavy.

The sowers need saving, heck a lot of factions kinda need saving. It's about time for a rebalance patch!

In my last two single player games, one "Normal" and one "Hard," the Sowers had the following traits.

• By the time I had "containment fields," they still didn't have "pev-scaled accelerators" (including in hard. I occasionally give them a worthless low-level tech if I want something like the few dust they have or open boarders. Suckers.)
• By turn 60, they have at most 5 colonized systems. (Not colonies)
• They are usually bankrupt.
• In the normal game, they were wiped out by a small pirate fleet.
  
  

You disappoint me, Virtual Endless.



Thankfully, a surprising amount of factions actually ARE competitive in SP: United Empire, Sophons, Amoeba, etc.

I agree, the sowers are slightly underpowered. Their affinity is ok, but Tolerant trait is way too expensive (30 points, seriously?). My suggestion is to reduce the cost of Tolerant 2/2 and replace Slow travelers with something less crippling.



Builders 3/3 (24 points)

Xenobotany (4)

Dust recyclers 1/2 (5)

Metallic waters (4)

Optimistic 1/2 (15)

Tolerant 2/2 (20)

Space cadets 2/3 (-10)

Micromanagers 1/2 (-5)



57/60

LordReynolds wrote:
"Workable" Sowers build:



20% of food production is converted into dust and science. Why? Because many advances in science are based around to copy the hell out of biologic processes an improve upon them. And you can sell drugs or something for dust.

That's like trading cocaine for a different grade of cocaine considering dust is like spice, gold, yellow stuff... just an addiction; there's even different strains of dust from what the lore seems to dictate. But... i like your thinking...

Vicarious wrote:




I agree, the sowers are slightly underpowered. Their affinity is ok, but Tolerant trait is way too expensive (30 points, seriously?). My suggestion is to reduce the cost of Tolerant 2/2 and replace Slow travelers with something less crippling.



Builders 3/3 (24 points)

Xenobotany (4)

Dust recyclers 1/2 (5)

Metallic waters (4)

Optimistic 1/2 (15)

Tolerant 2/2 (20)

Space cadets 2/3 (-10)

Micromanagers 1/2 (-5)



57/60

I cannot understand how Sowers and the Amobs only have 60 points... some factions go over their points limit when you try to edit them. Its sad really, the Sowers have poor science and poor growth in general which is crippling.

Only early on, we have to think about the entire game here not just the beginning.



And considering that we already have a science faction we really shouldn't worry about the sowers penalty, instead we should focus more on their ability to produce more industry.