2450; 25K; En normal; non-AccBBS; tiny dense. |
Sun, 26 August 2007 02:04 |
|
Soobie | | Officer Cadet 3rd Year | Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007 Location: Australia | |
|
OK, with AccBBS I can pretty consistently get 25K+ in a tiny dense with En normal (but nowhere near Kotk's 43K ). With En cheap, if I shoot for real-game techs and ships, my result is *less* consistent - sometimes better sometimes worse depending on hab draw and race design - mainly hab draw.
With non-AccBBS with En cheap and a lucky hab draw I got *close* to 25K at 2450, but with En normal I can't get close unless I do a pure economy drive - and even then I come up very short (like about 10K short).
As a matter of interest, are there any gurus out there that have managed 25K with AR and En normal in tiny dense with non-AccBBS, or am I shooting for an impossible target?
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: 2450; 25K; En normal; non-AccBBS; tiny dense. |
Sun, 30 September 2007 16:18 |
|
|
For the 25k by 2450 standard, the benchmark is generally accepted to be a small, normal universe and ACCBBS start. For an AR, you will need energy cheap (in fact, anybody playing an AR without energy cheap is simply planning on being a very dead AR)
Ptolemy
Though we often ask how and why, we must also do to get the answers to the questions.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: 2450; 25K; En normal; non-AccBBS; tiny dense. |
Sun, 30 September 2007 20:39 |
|
Soobie | | Officer Cadet 3rd Year | Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007 Location: Australia | |
|
Machalot wrote on Thu, 27 September 2007 13:46 | Is the average planet value a weighted average?
|
This is the explanatory thread of how to use KotKs economy formula:
http://starsautohost.org/sahforum/index.php?t=msg&th=352 8&start=0&rid=1075&S=a1df3c92ecc44f6f9c4ee67524f 4a79e
RE: Testing. I just find it too easy to get over 25K with AccBBs, small normal and have OK tech with most PRTs (nothing like what you can get with a CA or HE of course) - its not a good indicator. Small, normal non-AccBBS or Tiny, Dense is more vaguely more realistic imho, although non-AccBBS skews my race design too much.
For AR I would think cheap Con is more important than cheap En, with the savings on En normal going towards hab, but that's just me. In my (albeit very beginner) tests, AR is short on RW and the value of higher En tapers faster than wider hab and bigger planetary populations and more well maintained CAGR once the divisor is set, as far as I can tell. If I were to limit myself to 2.5 cheap, I would tend towards W,Con cheap, En normal.
I'll leave it to better AR players than I to decide on the merits of cheap versus normal En and testing in different size universes. I was just asking a novice question
Cheers,
S.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: 2450; 25K; En normal; non-AccBBS; tiny dense. |
Mon, 01 October 2007 21:32 |
|
|
Mmm, yeah. 2450/25k/small normal does feel a bit easy. But that's why it's considered a *minimum* benchmark If you can't hit 25k most tries, unopposed or against the alarmingly helpfull 'expert' AI, in those settings, then you need to take a good look at your race design and playstyle. For more serious testing, then you'd want to be looking at how many of x design ships you can chuck out by 2450. I don't testbed that seriously though, so I don't really know what'd be a reasonable target.
Regarding en-normal... 1/10 AR can do ok with en-normal (don't forget, this gives more RW points to AR than taking other techs normal does,) but it does slow you down at the start, which is a Bad Thing for AR. I'd also shy away from it because I like having more strategic options in mid game. With en cheap you always have the option of sitting tight and teching en to improve your econ if your neighbours are too strong to conquer. Without it, then researching en gets less appealling very fast, with some massive times to wait to get a return on research. My opinion is that if researching the next level of en will take 10 years to repay itself, then you could probably do better building fleets and increasing your econ through conquest (yeah you heard that right. AR. Attacking.)
[Updated on: Mon, 01 October 2007 21:36] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|