I just colonised a planet with a temp of +4, with PR (says it is too low, even though tolerance is supposed to be -1 C to 45 C)
Check landmass %. If it’s to far from your races ideal landmass % their temperature tolerance range narrows
Another player encountered this yesterday - it is not a bug, but a feature. Guessing very low/high land mass is the cause.
I feel its confusing and unless the screen says exactly why its not viable this will be a recurring thing… IMHO the growth calculation needs to remove the link to landmass…
Like I said in another post, if you have 10 million hectare or 100 million a race would grow at the same rate at the same tempeerature… Populations should indeed be capped based on the landmass but growth not…
This will rage on
Hmm when you said “Viable” above it made me think “What if they roll the temp/landmass together in a single Viability Stat?”
Use the usual traffic light system of Red/Amber/Green for “Deadly” “Marginal” “Viable” Then let us guess what combo of temp adjustment & Hydroscopic adjustment would make the planet optimal for our respective races?
I mean they have virtually got that now but putting a simple notice on the Planets page might avoid all this sort of “Is it a bug or a feature/mechanic” confusion.
Idle thought really, as much as I like complications this is not an area that needs it… But I agree I don’t like the fact newer players are wondering if its a bug, anything that irritates the new user is to be avoided.
From what I’ve seen, when you have the planet view up (not planet info) the temp and landmass appear red when the combination is hostile. I know at one point there was a popup warning when attempting to colonize a planet that was hostile. I don’t know if that was only caused by temp, or if it included landmass in the calculation. It’s been a long time since I’ve tried to take a planet that was inhospitable, so I might be going off old info.
Thanks for posting, I’ll get one of the devs to take a look at this as it’s causing too much confusion.