My question is, is it worth it to terraform, at least in regards to Science, Industry and Dust (since Food isn't really necessary to focus on I've found that with improvements, most systems do fine)? I've crunched the numbers, and (with Disharmony) here's what it looks like:



Assuming you're using an optimal planet (IE: Ocean for Science, Methane for Industry, etc.), top tier exploitation (Finance Commission, Global Tech Park, 3D Replication Plant) and no improvements, here's what it looks like:



Tier 1: (Ocean (S), Terran (D), Jungle (I)): 8 per population (Asteroid belts rank here as well, giving 8 I, D or S per population depending on exploitation)

Tier 2: (Tundra (I) and Arid(D)): 11 per population

Tier 3: (Desert (D) and Arctic (S)): 14 per population

Tier 4: (Barren (S) and Lava (I)): 18 per population

Tier 5: (Helium (S), Hydrogen (D), Methane (I)): 26 per population



As I said, considering that getting enough food for your systems to grow isn't THAT hard, is it even worth it to terraform? Even with the approval issue, with improvements, you can usually offset that.



Edit: Even the population differences doesn't make a difference, a Huge Methane dedicated towards Industry (4 people, 104 industry), will still stomp a Huge Jungle dedicated towards Industry (10 people, 80 industry).



Granted, a Jungle is able to Dust and Science better than a Methane, thus making it a little more versatile, but in the end, is it still worth it?



What do you all think?

With the disharmony changes, yeah, terraforming kinda got the short end of the stick. The only time terraforming is worth doing now is if you want to turn your lava into a barren for more science.

Actually, thinking about it some, it seems like it's more useful to terraform down and have your entire empire made up of gas giants.



Worst case scenario is 6 gas giants, -120 approval. With improvements and a low tax rate (since you're not going to need a high one with a bunch of Hydrogen Gas Giants bringing in bucket tons of Dust) that's not a problem.

Uhm, I think terraforming to all tier1s is worth it...



Here, compare these two screenshots:







They're exactly the same system, maxed improvements, etc.



Jungle is still almost 30% industry ahead.

That's the only instance where it's actually better: Jungles with Hyper-Scale Farms and the "Convert all food to industry" improvement.



Which, while being a rather viable end-game strategy, kinda defeats a bit of the purpose of the system.



But you're not wrong, don't get me wrong, you're correct. But it's still kinda ridiculous.

Hmm, I guess the difference would be in how you set up your empire then, I suppose.



I typically play til endgame, so turtling hard and developing systems like this is what I aim for, lol.

Heh, this might sound stupid, but how do you terraform a planet? Is it after you research one of the planet transformations? Or is there a something else?

After you research the necessary technology, you can terraform a planet by clicking on that planet. It'll be on the middle left hand side of the screen.



You can only terraform one tier level down, one tier level up or in the same tier (e.g: you can terraform an Arctic (Tier Level 3) into a Lava (4), Barren (4), Desert (3), Tundra (2) or Arid (2) with the appropriate technologies, but not a Terran (1), Jungle (1), Arid (1) or Gas Giant (5), even with the appropriate technologies). Asteroids cannot be terraformed.

OK sweet. Thanks man.

I did a lot of number crunching on the different worlds which might help:



/#/endless-space/forum/27-general/thread/10286-fids-new-planetary-values-and-analysis-which-planet-is-best!



Terraforming is definitely a choice now rather than something you do automatically.

T1 with Adaptive Industry and Food exploit is still the best outright.

Waylander1982 wrote:
T1 with Adaptive Industry and Food exploit is still the best outright.

Not if you want Science/Dust