Evolutionary prokaryotic dead end

i was imagining the player would (at the very least, be able to) take control of the species they became an endosymbiont for, and it would probably need to wait until after full endosymbiosis is implemented anyways to get past the player choosing between staying a part of their original species or taking over the species they became an endosymbiont for

2 Likes

For me this sound like some sort of an escape route if the player is outsped in evolution by auto-evo, which happens rather rarily unless you boost auto-evo to the maximum.

1 Like

it could also be used by the player to go from the only algae in the whole patch to an algae that can be more efficient and could possibly outcompete the former species

i wonder what’d happen if you became multicellular first and then decided to become an endosymbiont tho(with the full version of said mechanic)

So this would “just” be a popup question box asking if the player wants to switch to playing as the species that endosymbiosised them?

That kind of doesn’t fit the narrative for how you guide a species through evolution, because jumping to a more advanced species due to not doing too well doesn’t sound that good. There is now in easy mode a “switch to related species” option when extinct, but that’s purely to reduce the difficulty of easy mode.

1 Like

probably a popup box that lets them if they have something that’d benefit their new host(like photosynthesis or energy storage or a way to use an energy source the host previously couldn’t use as effectively but is relatively abundant or better digestion or even toxicity), but they should have to be able to at the very least not be a total detriment to their host, otherwise they’ll be outcompeted

and even then, they should probably split off of the species they got endosymbiosed by so they have to be able to be successful in an environment’

personally what i’d use it for is giving a species chloroplasts cause auto evo just won’t develop any algae that can survive the night, and then possibly doing it again, or once bioluminescence is out, using that to lure in species’ i can benefit(potentially by luring in species it can eat that also eat me, if it affects photoreceptors when those are a thing), or giving a bunch of species’ in ascending size multicellularity so there are actually multiple multicellular species

1 Like

So you want to give the player an ability to guide auto-evo onto certain paths?

yep, it’d make the player not have to rely as much on random chance to get specific types of organisms that they can use in their world

1 Like

It’s kind of as if the player was using their influence on other species like how species influence each other in real life…

2 Likes

Here I calculated the efficiency of eukaryotic organelles and the cost of the nucleus and came to the conclusion that the nucleus simply does not pay for its cost

The core has a cost of 10 for sessile organisms, 20 for mobile organisms

eukaryotic organelles are only 20% more efficient

Because of this, the eukaryotic nucleus makes sense only for large sessile photosynthesizers/thermosynthesizers; for predatory cells, the nucleus is ballast, predators need to have as little ATP costs as possible because hunting provides very little glucose, large sizes are unnecessary for predators because auto-evo makes autotrophic organisms very small (1-3 hexagons)

In my opinion, the solution to this problem is to increase the amount of glucose obtained through hunting, as well as to reduce the cost of the core by 2 times

This problem will become even more acute when moving to the multicellular stage, because there the organism has even greater costs, and if the problem is ignored, thrive can get a softlock at the multicellular stage.

1 Like

By the core you mean the nucleus? Also you mean osmoregulation cost right?

1 Like