Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Bar » Game idea, realistic growth rate
| Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate |
Mon, 31 July 2006 21:46   |
|
|
|
| Tomasoid wrote on Mon, 31 July 2006 21:25 |
AR in such game is too weak, IMO.
AR economy is starbase. Having Dath Star in 40-50 year in normal game gives AR's HW almost the same economy as for usual race HW econ. In this game, when AR would be able to reach C17?  Because small number of planets, AR cannot spread out, so cannot have any benefit from square root formula. While all others would have factories from their 80%-filled HWs, AR would stagnate without no enough resources because 80% AR initial HW gives little of resources, and no way to improve this.
Also, AR have no way to survive the satrabse-killing order. Any SS race (BTW, SS would benefit from such game a LOT  ) can sneak to AR's HW with war ships unnoticed or noticed too late and kill just starbase.  Lose of one planet inthis game where small numebr of planets per race anyway is really critical. Evacuate? Well, you can. And then lose pop in space for 10 years or so, being chaces by SS fleet?
You are kidding. AR cannot be strong in such game.
|
I guess the question is how many planets you think the AR can get... Sure, not as much as in more dense universes, but I think it'll most certainly get a lot more than any other races. I've ran tests with 6% AR in sparse and it still ran well in early game. I don't see the HW as important - a 6% AR shouldn't have any more pop there than anywhere else. In some tests I did recently (not for this concept) I pulled the homeworld down to about 2% capacity. I wouldn't bother trying to get death stars - 6% AR is very happy in space docks. I was also assuming non-acclerated starts rather than 80% capacity homeworlds - that's still up for discussion. Obviously thanks to sqrt any bonus starting pop is far less usefull to AR. Starbase killing order is a general weakness of AR, arguably less dangerous in this game than usual - more distance = more warning, less pop = less to carry.
Anyway, like I said, discussion of AR is off topic, I shouldn't have indulged myself before, and I've gone and indulged myself even more now (burp) 
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: tgellan on Tue, 25 July 2006 05:03 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: Kelzar on Tue, 25 July 2006 12:40 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: EDog on Tue, 25 July 2006 22:36 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: joseph on Tue, 01 August 2006 03:31 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: iztok on Thu, 27 July 2006 06:03 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: tgellan on Thu, 27 July 2006 09:55 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: iztok on Thu, 27 July 2006 13:30 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: JasonC on Sat, 29 July 2006 15:51 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
By: JasonC on Sat, 29 July 2006 16:14 |
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
|
|
Re: Game idea, realistic growth rate
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Jun 16 07:31:41 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
