Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Love the comments in the margins of the script about the Clausewitz engine, a nice chuckle, I feel your pain.
@Kepos Yes, if a world is taken which takes you below the level, it will remove a level from your cap. However, as Peter34 said, it won't remove a leader, just make it so if you lose a leader you won't be able to hire another until you gain another slot again.
There's no penalty for being above cap, because it's a *hard* cap. One you can't actively go over, unlike the cap on Systems, or Navy Size or Starbases where you *can* go over but there's a *scaling* *penalty* for doing so.
I think the Leader cap being hard is stupid. Paradox should strive to employ soft caps whereever possible.
BTW, what if an enemy captures one or more worlds...does the mod calculate downwards too?
Thats if you built a full ringworld in every single system. Which you cannot. But taking Habitats, some systems would provide more pops than a ringworld, especially if they take the Master Builders perk as well.
7 Habitats in one system (quite easy!) would be 105 pops (Master Builders). Or 8 Habitats (Not as easy) without Master Builders for 104 Pops.
Basically, 1800 seems like a very small amount. Maybe have it scale on map size?