.
Essentially what I am asking the more experienced players here is whether there is a sweet spot between Population, Production and Morale? Is it possible to have an Empire where everybody is happy?
Thank you.
You started your post with a seeming assumption that Morale did not matter. "Morale be damned". Then you ask this question. There is a contradiction in there somewhere.
First of all, Morale does matter. It affects Raw Production and population growth rate, two very key factors. It is not quite crippling, but pretty close.
There is no one sweet spot. In late game I dedicate 4-5 tiles to population improvements and 2 to morale. I get populations of 50-65 per planet. With techs and a couple Morale Relics I can maintain high 90s for Morale. That is one example. It includes much Terraforming and leverage of adjacencies. I have had occasional planets up 80-85 pop, but generally I get to a tech victory before there are enough turns to get to those levels, or I keep taking away population as soldiers. Again, this just me
This is on wide open maps with few factions. Closer factions lead to other priorities and you won't have the opportunities to achieve such levels. War gets in the way of everything else. Any other kind of map will lead to different results. The vast differences in results based on maps and playstyles lead to reporting of results that sound extreme to people that are playing under different conditions. For example, my 100 planet empires yield impressive numbers which scare others. They don't take into account the mind numbing micromanagement involved and the obsession required. Or that the AI had time to grow in their territory. Also, a lot of gamer claims need to be treated with skepticism.
It can be done, whether it is worth it for each person is another question entirely.
BTW, I am quite possibly the person you cite as saying population is the basis of everything. It sounds like what I have been preaching and how I have been preaching it. 