Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Colonizing Planets
Colonizing Planets |
Tue, 16 March 2004 21:57 |
|
Strat | | Petty Officer 1st Class | Messages: 62
Registered: March 2004 | |
|
I'm working on a race for the Beginners game. My question is:
My race has a 1 in 5 Hab set
Kepp in mind, these question apply to early, and beginning of game.
What percent hab level planets do I colonize?
---I hear of many article talking about 20 planets real fast, but for me to do that in any reasonable amount of time, I have to colonise yellow and low percentage planets, OR colonise green planets that a sparse all over.
Should I colonise yellow planets early?
--- I have figured to make terraforming a priority early, it this the right way to do it?
How should population MM be handled?
--- I just read parts of a thread talking about transferiing colonists when the population reaches %25 of the planets total.. Did I understand this properly?
What is a 'Producer Planet"?
--- A planet used for gaining colonists? ???
Ummmm, I have a lot more questions, nut I'll post them as they come to me...
Thanks!
Strat
[Updated on: Tue, 16 March 2004 21:58] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Tue, 16 March 2004 22:17 |
|
Hyena | | Master Chief Petty Officer | Messages: 109
Registered: January 2004 | |
|
Okay, I'll apply my limited experience.
1. With 1 in 5 hab you should not have trouble finding plenty of planets to colonize, unless you're in a small universe and the other players are going to be close.
2. This really depends on your growth rate.
As a general rule, colonize any nearby greens (although this really depends on your PRT). Colonizing yellows and reds really depend on your PRT. CA have no yellow planets. ARs produce a lot of resources on small colonies, so if you're AR you can afford to colonize a good number of yellows and reds.
If you're not CA or AR it might make sense to avoid colonizing yellows until some time in the mid-game when you can afford to relocate a large amount of colonists. And you might consider colonizing a few reds in the late game when everyone's starved for minerals.
Of course if you find a planet early on that's only 1 or 2 percent outside your hab range, you might try colonizing then setting that planet to send only leftover resources to research until it's green.
3. Your planets' growth is at a faster rate before it reaches 25% of its total possible population. Don't send any colony ships until your homeworld reaches 25%. If you have a good growth rate this is fairly easy.
Never send just 2500 colonists at once (unless you're AR, but you're probably not, so I won't go over that part). Send a colonizer and merge it with a medium or large freighter (and if you don't have ramscoops, add a fuel transport. Maybe add one even if you do, if it helps you get there faster). Fill the fleet with colonists and send it to colonize a planet. Before it arrives there, split the fleet (the colonizer in one, the freighter and fuel ship in the other). Turn off colonize for the freighter fleet, but let it reach the planet the same turn. The next year, after the planet's colonized, dump the colonists and send the freighter back to get more. Keep it going between the two planets as long as the HW stays at roughly 25% and the colony doesn't grow exceptionally large. If the colony gets large enough to support itself, stop transporting colonists.
You should have a number of small colonies going through this process at once.
A colony with a population of only 2500 is an easy target for a neighbour and in a mixed skill game a more experienced player will say to themselves "Hey, a n00b" and will probably come after you.
4. A producer planet is a planet geared towards producing as many resources as possible. This is a planet with a high population and a LOT of factories. There should be a starbase, as you'll probably want to use a producer planet to build warships when you need them.
Now, I'm not the most experienced player in the world, so someone else might come along with better, simpler, and less wordy advice . Listen to them.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Wed, 17 March 2004 06:42 |
|
|
IMHO, as AR your main decisions are these:
ARM or not? (mining)
ISB or not? (extra starbase designs are great for growth)
Single or Double Immune (don't even think about no-immune)
Resource efficiency
Personally I favour single immune, one narrow hab, one wide, good efficiency, and either ARM or ISB.
Many favor double-immune with low efficiency. I hear this gets far better resources in test beds, but I think in real games it's slower early ramp and greater need for space makes it too easy a target.
Be sure to check out the AR section of the PRT's part of the forum!
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | | |
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Thu, 18 March 2004 00:24 |
|
Strat | | Petty Officer 1st Class | Messages: 62
Registered: March 2004 | |
|
Kotk wrote on Wed, 17 March 2004 04:55 | The only acceptable excuse for not taking something useful is that despite you summed up all minerals from all planets you could not build one more pinta.
|
This is the main thing I'm am trying to arrive at... What is considered a useful planet and why?
From my limited understading, I do know that it being AR and all, a planet with less than %25 hab will generate resources still as a %25, just a pop difference.
Still though, don't you lose coloists on a red/yellow planet? Should I initially send more people to a red planet, so they last longer? OR should I do the opposite, keep it to a minium to they die slower, but get less resources and mining? Hmm, I guess I should keep it high.....
How red is too red?
I really appreciate yall's post and the detail you included, I'm all about detail. Heh, I just hope I'm asking the right questions. Please always let me know of something you think I need to know.
Again, thanks for help,
Strat
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Thu, 18 March 2004 00:34 |
|
Strat | | Petty Officer 1st Class | Messages: 62
Registered: March 2004 | |
|
Another question, also related to colonization is:
In a Medium, Dense map, would it be better to go with IFE, or drop it since things are a little closer?
From what I understand, IFE is a great thing to have for fast colonization, the Fuel Mizer which I absolutly love. But I have also heard the it is not a Must Have, and can be done without...
If so I think I would definitly get ARM in its place. In my curernt designs, I can't have both without wasting a lot of points.
I am leaning to no IFE, but I could still benifit from the experiances of others.
Thx,
Strat
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Thu, 18 March 2004 02:15 |
|
iztok | | Commander | Messages: 1207
Registered: April 2003 Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
Strat wrote on Thu, 18 March 2004 06:34 | In a Medium, Dense map, would it be better to go with IFE, or drop it since things are a little closer?
|
Fuel Mizer is for most races the only thing that allows to expand quickly almost from the start (only con-4 and prop-2 needed, gives 2 W9 jumps with Medium Freighter, 3 W9 jumps with PVT). The only two races that came close are HE with its Settler's Delight engine, and IT with starting prop 5 (DLL-7 engine) and 2 planets to expand from. If your race isn't HE or IT you have to invest in prop quite a lot of resources before you are able to move your pop fast. And when you're ready, races with IFE already got the best planets and 've built much more factories...
There's one small niche you can use: RadRam-6 engine, but it requires investment in en-2 and 1.8k in normal (which is by many players regarded as a waste of points) prop and very high rad (85 or more) or rad immunity in order to move pop without losses. Is still worth only 2/3 of a FM (one W9 and one W8 jump with a PVT) much much later than FM.
I'd suggest you to try a "standard combo" IFE + NRSE + expensive prop + (maybe) grav immunity. This way you could invest your resources into economy or warfaring techs instead in a non-productive propulsion, and buy prop-9/12 only when you really need that.
My .
BR, Iztok
[Updated on: Thu, 18 March 2004 02:32] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Thu, 18 March 2004 12:30 |
|
joseph | | Lt. Junior Grade | Messages: 440
Registered: May 2003 Location: Bristol | |
|
Quote: | This is the main thing I'm am trying to arrive at... What is considered a useful planet and why?
|
Difficult question which I will answer by veering wildly away from the point.
For AR
You want to get your energy up as quick as poss (more resources)
Testbed with your favorite race design.
You should be able to advance 1 energy level each year for the first few years. If you can build a couple of cheap scouts to scout. (send off your pinta as soon as you see a green)
When you hit about en5 you will find that you cant reach the next level in one turn.
Build many Pintas and a couple of scouts (more if you havent already built some).
Then colonise everything in 2 years range in this order.
Green, Yellow, UnScouted, (green 3 years away),Red.
Next turn (send off Pintas)
Build enough MF to take the pop your planet makes in one turn (2 or 3) build some pintas -BUT leave enough resources so that you can get to next energy level next turn.
Next Turn - get to next energy level.
Send off MFs one to each green you can see (in 2 years range).
Build more MF if you have spare resources.
Next Turn build MF and Pintas.
By this time you should have colonised most planets within 2 years travel - new planets if green (or -1 , -2 yellow) should be Terraforming) all else should be providing research.
Get to Const 4 (building Pintas with any spare res)
The MF should be shipping colonists (one MF load per planet)
to any greens in 2 years distance then yellow then red.
When at Const 4 build Privateers at 2 a turn to fill up any greens at 3 years distance.
Switch research back to Energy.
For reds - only put more colonists on them if the colonists make more resources there than on a green (which will happen ie 200 colonists added to a green with 40000 colonists will make much less than if they were on a red with 25 colonists)
Build Space Docks on your greens when they get close to 25%
Sometimes build them earlyer and build more pintas.
As a rule of thumb 25tons of colonists on your home planet (or another big (in pop) green) make 2 res. 25 Tons of colonits on a red make 8res).
If you have the spare resources to make a pinta and a planet in a few years range - make one and colonise it.
[Mod edit: fixed bold text]
[Updated on: Mon, 20 September 2004 06:40] by Moderator
Joseph
"Can burn the land and boil the sea. You cant take the Stars from me"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Fri, 19 March 2004 05:20 |
|
wizard | | Officer Cadet 3rd Year | Messages: 279
Registered: January 2004 Location: Aachen, Germany | |
|
Strat wrote on Thu, 18 March 2004 06:34 | Another question, also related to colonization is:
In a Medium, Dense map, would it be better to go with IFE, or drop it since things are a little closer?
From what I understand, IFE is a great thing to have for fast colonization, the Fuel Mizer which I absolutly love. But I have also heard the it is not a Must Have, and can be done without...
If so I think I would definitly get ARM in its place. In my curernt designs, I can't have both without wasting a lot of points.
I am leaning to no IFE, but I could still benifit from the experiances of others.
Thx,
Strat
|
Hi Strat,
with an AR, I would never go without IFE. As others wrote, the standard design with IFE+NRSE+Prop expensive is just fine. WOu will loose to much time otherwise...
Try to get ARM and ISB. In my opinion, you don't need 1 in 5 planets or pop growth 19% (don't know yours...). I have made good experiances with 17% and 1 in 9 or 1 in 11... There are more planets than you might think, especially the yellows get fine quite quickly...
ISB is absolutely important for growth and for early defense. ARM is important for the two starting miners and for cheaper and better Miners later...
Andreas
Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Sat, 20 March 2004 01:39 |
|
icebird | | Chief Warrant Officer 3 | Messages: 178
Registered: September 2003 Location: In LaLa land... | |
|
As far as I can tell, there are two places to hold a planet: 25% or 50%. 25% gets you the best growth rate for your pop, whereas 50% gets you a lot of resources without sacrificing too much pop growth. 1/3 is a number that has been floating around, because it is at that point that a planet produces the greatest volume of people. As someone pointed out though, it is not very efficient. You have 25% of the planets capacity growing at their full capacity, whereas the last people used to fill it up from 25% to 30% are only growing at 16% of the max growth rate, and this is not a very good number. So, for maxing population, use 25%, and for maxing resources without sacrificing too much pop, use 50%. Does this make sense? Am I babbling?
-Peter, Lord of the Big Furry ThingsReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Sun, 21 March 2004 03:57 |
|
iztok | | Commander | Messages: 1207
Registered: April 2003 Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
icebird wrote on Sat, 20 March 2004 07:39 | ... So, for maxing population, use 25%, and for maxing resources without sacrificing too much pop, use 50%. Does this make sense? Am I babbling?
|
Perfect sense, for races with factories. Maximizing AR's resources involves spreading pop on as may worlds as you can, giving them square(hab%) pop of the HW. If your HW has 250k pop then any planet below 25% should get 0.25% * 0.25% of 250k or 16k pop and a 90% planet 202k. In practice you start filling planets from best to worst in order to do as much terra ASAP, keeping most greens at 25% of orbital's capacity.
BR, Iztok
[Updated on: Sun, 21 March 2004 04:03] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Sun, 21 March 2004 13:22 |
|
|
Once you have filled most of your planets and want to use "breeders" for building excess pop (for pop drops, filling producer worlds, etc) then wouldn't 33% give you the best pop growth from those worlds ?
The fact that it is inefficient is not that important in this situation; holding at 25% would give less resources from the breeders, and holding at 50% would give you less growth from them.
Or am I missing something ?
[Updated on: Sun, 21 March 2004 13:27] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| |
Re: Colonizing Planets |
Sun, 21 March 2004 17:16 |
|
|
Kotk wrote on Sun, 21 March 2004 19:10 | Your suggestion is to fill 10 best planets and keep 6 lower value planets growing at 33%.
|
Depends on what you mean by "lower value". With dedicated breeders they would be the highest habitability value planets.
Also, by my calculations...
10*100 + 6*33 gives 1198 resources and 6*50k = 300k growth
8*100 + 8*50 gives 1200 resources and 8*30k = 240k growth
So we are about even on resources and I have significantly higher growth.
I guess I'm still missing something, but I'm still not clear what it is.
[Updated on: Sun, 21 March 2004 19:40] Report message to a moderator
|
|
| | |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 11 04:35:03 EDT 2024
|