bleeding red ink

[Blackfish]

It seems that I can't balance my finances in this gama in the later stages.

As one's population goes up, morale goes down, which means you have to drop taxes to keep the planets from rioting. Despite having all the happy social projects completed, I am still bleeding red ink all over the place.

Queries:
[1] Is there any way of instituting population controls to limit growth?

[2] Specific tech paths I should be following to counteract my usual style of isolationist development over expansion? (map size - usually huge or gigantic)

[3] Is this a common problem? I know it's being addressed in the latest patch (slightly lowered soc costs), but it seems like a band-aid solution...

[Lemmy]

1. Build transports, load the pop on them, launch the transports, disband the transports.
2. Isolationists don't fare well in this game, trade and tributes can do wonders for your economy.
3. It's a common problem in the late game, i've read about it on the official galciv forum at www.galciv.com.

I hope they change the morale formula in the future.

[Blackfish]

1. Yes - but is smells more of rule raping than anything else. Bit of an extreme answer to overpopulation, don't you think?

2. Trade - yes, doing that as well. It stems the tide of red ink, but hardly addresses the core problem. Tribute - I suppose I could be more aggressive about getting "donations" from neighbours. Though one has to wonder how the AI handles it. Different rules apply to them?

3. Alas, I thought I was missing something. Sounds more like a play balance issue. I think I'll put it on the backburner till they have it sorted. I saw the galciv thread, but nobody had a real answer...

===
Nice game. Pity about the installer, though. SD really licks the sweat off a dead man's balls.

[Lemmy]

1. Yes - but is smells more of rule raping than anything else. Bit of an extreme answer to overpopulation, don't you think?

It is..

2. Trade - yes, doing that as well. It stems the tide of red ink, but hardly addresses the core problem. Tribute - I suppose I could be more aggressive about getting "donations" from neighbours. Though one has to wonder how the AI handles it. Different rules apply to them?

The rules are supposed to be the same...perhaps the AI just builds less, with very low expenses

[vmxa1]

I think finances needs to be changes and trade be nuked a bit. It just seems like an exploit to have to go to all the races to make tech sales. I know they are going to cripple that some and then it will be even harder to make the ends met.
I have no problem with the concept of frieghters, but extortion and tech whoring seems wrong and it is tedious and monotonous.

[Harry Seldon]

It would be cool if you sold to one race, they would be extremely upset if you sold it to someone else. You just took away their extrememly pricey advantage. Or if you sell to a race, other races with bad relations with said race would see you as collaborating with the enemy (for not selling to them) and your relations would take a nose dive.

[xen001]

One huge but mostly neglected fact is rush buying from MITROSOFT, they maybe cheap back then but it haunts you at the late stages of the game, buyer beware,

[mindlar]

Population growth is tied to morale. Morale left alone will head to somewhere between 40 and 50.

If your finances are bleeding you can:
1) increase trade (more trade routes or +trade)
2) reduce spending
3) improve economy (social improvements, starbases, tech)

Improving your government will usually cause your finances to go further into the red because the +economy doesn't offset the +manufacturing.

[Boris Godunov]

I still say we need the ability to sell off planetary improvements like we can in Civ. It's just not right!

And we should get $$ back for disbanded ships.

[justjake73]

How about improving planetary quality?!?

I just instituted a policy of building Soil Enrichment and Habitat Improvement relatively early. They cost NOTHING and DRAMATICALLY improve morale (higher quality = more population before people start feeling squeezed!!!)