[Updated on: Mon, 16 July 2007 20:21]

Report message to a moderator

THE EARLY YEARS OF EXPANSION
In this section I’ll discuss various combinations of NRSE and IFE. Firstly, let me make sure that everyone knows that IFE will give you the FM and Galaxy Scoop, and then clicking NRSE will take away the Galaxy Scoop but not FM, and add the Interspace 10.

NRSE/IFE combo vs. IT without combo
To start, I’ll quote Coyote:

Quote:

If you're IT you don't need IFE. Don't take NRSE. Go radiation immune and use the Radiating Hydro-Ramscoop for your first main engine.

Now, any race needs to move its pop, and IT is no exception. So, I would agree strongly with Coyote that an IT that doesn’t take the IFE/NRSE combo should take either rad immune, or shifted far to the right, so that it can use the radscoop early, and also since it will have the higher mineral concentrations and more planets due radiation not being a Bell curve. If one does decide to play such an IT, without the combo, using the radscoop practically becomes a must.

So, let’s review two possible races. The first will be Coyote’s IT without the NRSE/IFE combo, and with prop expensive. Comparing it to another IT with the combo would be too easy, so instead let’s take some other race—like SS, IS, or PP—that starts with 0 con and prop (1 prop after IFE) and prop and con exp.

Right from the start, Coyote’s race would get an additional ~25 RW points by not taking the combo, and would start with prop and con 5. It would be 1,050 resources from prop 6 and the radscoop. If it’s a +f, it should invest its 25 points into its factory ramp up, or maybe higher growth, to get prop 6 faster. Then it starts building those factories on its HW, until it’s ready to research prop 6. It will depend on when it switches to research, but it will probably get prop 6 around 2410, perhaps a little later.

The radscoop isn’t a very efficient engine at warp 8 or 9—less so than the FM certainly. Also, the FM’s mass is 6kt, whereas the radscoop’s is 10kt, so fuel efficiency will drop yet a little more. The IT could just decide to go at warp 7—but in that case, why not just use the DLL7, since it starts with it? If the IT wants to have decent radscoop speed to keep up with the FM, it’s going to build plenty of boosters, along with its actual colonist transports (remember, this early on the IT won’t have any gates up, except at the two starting planets). Fortunately, the radscoop costs only 8 resources, whereas the FM costs 10, so it’s going to save a few resources. If each builds a total of 100 rams during its expansion, Coyote’s race should spend 200 resources less than the combo race, which is certainly a nice savings.

Unfortunately, possibly the worst drawback for the radscoop is the Germ cost. Whereas the FM costs 0 Germ, the radscoop costs 9. Coyote’s race saved 200 resources with the radscoop, but it spent an additional 900 Germ, which would equal 225-300 factories. That’s a fairly high number this early in the game. Combined with the fact that it’s going to need to build more boosters, by 2420 it’s probably going to be quite a bit behind the combo race in resources and planets, perhaps 20% lower, since the advantage of pop gating—and ISB, if it took it—has yet to kick in much. As time passes it will catch up with the combo race a bit with these advantages. During that time though the combo race will probably have grabbed up quite a few more planets.

As an alternative, the IT could go –f. Instead of putting its ~25 extra points in factories, it will probably put them in its hab, or PGR. This setup makes a lot more sense with the radscoop, since a –f will be able to weather the Germ cost a lot more easily, and because it doesn’t build factories early on it will probably have the radscoop around the same time as the +f version. However, one of the most important things for a –f to do is move pop quickly. It is likely that it will want even more boosters/transports than the +f. Fortunately, resources aren’t going toward factories, so it can spend more on boosters faster, from the HW and new colonies. If it focuses on getting up as many boosters/transports as possible it will probably be able to grow fairly well, and better once gates pop up. However, -f’s typically rely on killing a nearby race early. With its economy heavily devoted to boosters (particularly early on) it may not have the resources, ships, or tech for decent warfighting until the late 20’s or early to mid 30’s. By then its internal pop-moving struggle will mostly have ended, due to the population mostly using gates, but it will have been delayed some years. It is likely that the –f race that simply takes the combo will be a in a better position earlier to strike at a nearby race.

One last possibility is that the IT takes prop normal or cheap, which is probably the worst solution to make up for not taking the combo. If it does this, rather than starting with 25 points more than the combo race, it will start out with ~49-92 points less. Such a race will probably have significantly worse factories, habitat, LRT’s, etc. The cost to prop 6 will be either 300 or 600 resources, but it will probably be slower and/or have less capacity than the combo race fairly quickly. Unless this race gets a greater advantage from cheaper prop later in the game (which I’ll also discuss), this is probably a severe disadvantage.

And what of the combo race? It starts ~158 resources from prop 2 and the FM. It probably builds a few factories early on, though it can’t ramp up as fast as Coyote’s race. It won’t take it too long to get to prop 2 after that—probably one year. Then it will need to research privateers, for ~998 resources since con is exp and starts at 0. This should be done after 2410 probably. Then it goes into production on privateers, as well as boosting, though probably only half as much is needed compared to Coyote’s race. It will have plenty of Germ, since the FM doesn’t cost any, meaning more can be spent on factories. Later on, as the IT builds gates and puts pop through them, the combo race’s advantage will become less pronounced, but should still be very strong.

So by the mid 20’s, chances are it will have more factories, more resources, and more resources devoted to transport/colonization than boosting, and as a result more planets colonized and developed than Coyote’s race. This won’t necessarily guarantee it a win, but its somewhat faster start should help it out down the road.

This, of course, represents an extreme possibility. If the combo race instead already starts with higher prop than 1 and higher con than 0, or either of them is cheaper than expensive, it will be able to complete its research faster, or possibly go into production immediately, and thus its early advantages will become even greater.

Non-IT without NRSE/IFE combo
Next, here’s a comment by Dogthinkers:

Quote:

Sometimes I play without IFE or NRSE. It's painfull to live without the fuel mizer in early game, but in the mid game you get rewarded with cheap lightweight engines.

If a non-IT takes prop exp and neither NRSE nor IFE, it’s going to be even worse off than the IT that doesn’t take the combo. The QJ5, LH6, and DLL7 are terrible engines for moving pop. If it doesn’t build any boosters, the movement will go extremely slowly, putting the race far, far behind others, and the paltry ~25 extra points will never make up for it. If it goes for the radscoop it will cost a huge amount of resources. The least it could cost is ~1,050, for a JOAT with start at 3 and CE checked; this race would have ~44 points more than the combo race, but would have delays because of CE. These would probably be offset by better factories and engines that are cheaper, but still probably wouldn’t be worth it. For a race without start at 3 checked and no CE (and prop exp still), it would cost ~2,650 resources to reach prop 6. Even with the ~25 RW points invested in faster ramp up, it would still take until around 2415-2420 to get prop 6, assuming no pop movement during that time. By then, this race would be ages behind the rest of the galaxy.

Dogthinkers continues:

Quote:

Works well for -F races that don't need the germ elsewhere *if* you can cope with the lack of the FM. IS for example, can cope well thanks to their cheap and early tech fuel transports.

Rather than researching up to prop 6, the non-combo race could just build lots of boosters. IS, SD, and HE could best get away with it via their Fuel Transport, Mini-Minelayer, and Settler’s Delight booster, though the cost would still be high, and ~25 RW points probably wouldn’t make up for it. Other races would have to build the far more expensive DD or scout boosters, and the MM cost on all races would be greater than taking IFE/NRSE.

A –f could have some luck with this setup, but for consistent warp 8 or 9 it would need plenty of boosters, which again is high cost, both MM and resource-wise. –f generally needs high speed early on. The ~25 RW point advantage would probably be invested into hab or PGR, so it might be a bit faster, making up for some of the extra boosting needed. Overall, a –f going for crappy engines with good early boosters would probably come out about a wash, except for the MM. If the race doesn’t have decent boosters, I doubt this is going to be worth it. Going for LF’s early would probably be the easiest way to mitigate this race’s speed issues, without which boosting would be pretty inefficient.

For the –f getting the radscoop can make sense, since the Germ cost is higher and the Iron and resource costs lower than for the FM. Once again though, the cost (still assuming prop exp) is going to be ~1,050-2,650 resources to research prop 6. Since the radscoop is so far off, it’s probably just best to build more boosters, or spend the ~25 extra points for the combo.

Another thought - all those prop exensive races will be keen to buy prop12 from you - being significantly different to the other races works wonders for diplomacy.

The final possibility for the non-IT (and IT as well) without the combo is to take prop normal or cheap. It only needs to spend ~500-1,500 resources (for the JOAT with CE) to get the radscoop, while the combo race only has to spend 158 to get the FM, so the FM race will have its engine, and its ships, available and transporting colonists a little sooner. Besides that, the non-combo race will have spent ~25-67 more points than the combo race for its cheaper prop, meaning the race design will probably be a good deal weaker. These effects will probably compound very quickly; all else being equal, the combo race will likely outpace the one without, and if they meet at some point in the future will probably be in a much superior position. However, cheaper prop can have its advantages, and I’ll discuss that later.

Non-IT with NRSE, ISB, prop cheap/normal, and no IFE
Soobie wrote:

Quote:

Does anyone play ISB/NRSE/NO IFE/prop cheap (or normal) (/not grav imm)(/not IT)? I tried it with an HP after reading this just now against AIs and it does quite well but lets face it, they are AIs and you can beat them in your sleep. I mean, does it work against humans? Biggest nuisance was that the CCs were hard to gate during the 150/600 era, which came early (but didn't last long).

We’ll look at this race vs. the one with the IFE and prop exp.

If the ISB race takes prop normal, it has ~28 more points than the one with IFE. If it likes it can build lots of boosters from the start to move its population, but it’s probably better for it to research better engines. It can spend 290 resources for prop 3 and the LH6; 910 for prop 5 and the DLL7; or a whopping 3,970 for the AD8 (the TGD with it’s huge cost of 6,380 shouldn’t even be a consideration). If it takes prop cheap, it starts with ~15 less RW points, while the research costs drop in half, making it 1,935 for the AD8, which should be reachable in the second decade. On the other hand, the IFE race starts 158 resources from the FM. And all these engines take more Germ than the FM, so the ISB race won’t be able to build as many factories, if it’s +f. And of course, the large RW point deficit due to cheaper prop is going to be quite a big constraint, giving it a slower start. Overall, my guess is it will have ~33-50% less resources than the IFE race at 2430. Hopefully that cheaper prop is worth it down the road . . .

Quote:

Non-IT with NRSE, ISB, prop exp, and no IFE

I think joseph’s race will have a hard time:

Quote:

I play ISB/NRSE/No IFE/not grav immune fairly often particularly with IS. I do normally take prop expensive though as if you have NRSE you will only research prop to lvl12 (It is the NRSE that makes most people take prop expensive).

The expensive prop will actually give him ~11 points more than the IFE/NRSE and prop exp race. Hopefully he put the 11 extra points in faster ramping, because researching engines better than the QJ5 will be a killer, and boosting the QJ5 will be similarly painful, even with the FX and dock. If he takes start at 3 to get the LH6 right away, the DLL7 will only ~1,100 resources away, but he’ll be ~49 points in the hole compared to the IFE race.

If this race starts with prop 0, its FX boosters will have QJ5’s. It will need a lot of them to get any sort of decent pop movement. Eventually it can also start building docks, once it gets the tech and planets get strong enough, but even then its ships will still need to move. How much will it cost?

Let’s say each race has a 1300kt fleet—a mostly laden LF with 2 fuel tanks, say—traveling 162ly to a planet they just colonized, and they want to get there in 2 years at warp 9, and back in two after that. The IFE race will probably want a couple boosters for the LF, such as scouts with FM’s and tanks (could use DD but let’s not go there), adding 34kt to total mass and 600 to fuel (totals now 1334 and 3700). They travel 81ly using 1,654 and the two boosters get split off and return to their origin. The LF continues another 81LY, using another 1,612 fuel, for 3,266 fuel used. The LF then also returns to its origin at warp 9, again in two years, without refueling.

Now let’s say the other race is IS and decides to use its FX’s for boosting. Each has a QJ5 (mass 16kt) and 750 fuel, plus the ability to generate 200 more fuel a year. The first year they travel 81ly using 5,204/9,100 fuel, while the FX’s generate 1,600 fuel, for a total of 5,496 left. Four FX’s transfer their fuel and return home, and the 5 other ships travel 81ly more to the target planet, now with 1,324 fuel. The cargo dropped, they head back and also make it back in two years.

The non-IFE race spent ~53 resources, 13 Iron, and 6 Germ per booster, and 110 resources, 51 Iron, and 23 Germ for the LF, for a total of 534 resources, 155 Iron, and 71 Germ.

The IFE race spent ~23 resources, 19 Iron, and 4 Germ per booster, and 128 resources, 65 Iron, and 21 Germ for the LF, for a total of 174 resources, 103 Iron, 29 Germ. This means the IFE race saved 360 resources, 52 Iron, and 52 Germ compared to the non-IFE race.

One option for this race is only to move pop to planets that are with one year’s travel of current planets—making for more like single 81ly jumps than 162ly jumps. If it takes this path it will save on boosting costs (though not compared to the IFE race), at the expense of travel time. Expansion will be quite slow, plodding along with the docks.

I also think joseph’s quite confused when he says:

The more expensive engines are a pain but as I tend to build factory heavy IS races the savings on germ help make up for it (a bit )

I think he should take a look again at the Germ costs of the FM vs. all the standard engines. The FM costs 0 Germ, 1 for QJ5, 3 for DLL7 and AD8 (depending on levels). The resource costs are also higher on the DLL7 and AD8 than FM. The Germ savings alone should be enough to make a +f switch from ISB to IFE, at the cost of one mine in the RW that it will no longer need to build anyway; and for both –f and +f, the big reduction in the number of boosters needed, and the resources that go into them, should make IFE worth it.

Quote:

NRSE but not IFE

knightpraetor had a couple interesting ideas:

Quote:

so what engine combinations are worth getting, like so far i've enjoyed using IFE with NRS, and I think it is viable to do full IFE (though i'm not sure how useful it is), but i have no clue whether it's worth doing NRS by itself..does that slow down early growth too much (i assume cheap engines is usually too horrible to be worth getting).

I’ll address the question of IFE by itself in the next section. For now, I’ll just cover NRSE alone.

The race that takes NRSE but not IFE can never build any ramscoops, and its engines will use more fuel than those of a race with IFE. Early on, it will need to do one of two main things that I can think of: either it will need to build a whole lot of boosters and use them with a starting engine; or it can research a better engine and build a few less boosters. Either path will cost many resources.

Fortunately, it will have ~53 more points to spend to reduce its burden. So far it seems that decreasing the prop cost has negative effects on most races, but perhaps in this case reducing the cost to a good engine would be better. It could take ISB, but it probably still wouldn’t be as fast as if it took IFE, and would spend plenty more on research and boosters. Another choice is to use the points to increase its final capacity, but with such low travel speeds, getting there would be based more on luck than on good race design. The safest bet would be to use the points for ramping up its economy faster, such as with a higher growth rate, or better factories or mines.

If the race uses normal prop and starts at 0, it will still be 4 RW points ahead, and pay 290 resources for prop 3 and the LH6; 910 for prop 5 and the DLL7; or 3,970 for the AD8, and half that for prop cheap, resulting in ~39 less race points than the race that took IFE/NRSE. If it settled on the DLL7 with prop normal it would probably have it research a little before 2410. Later on in the game it could have advantages of cheaper prop, with the Interspace 10 being available sooner, and could trade better with other races. Still, it would have several problems. All these engines use Germ and would slow factory production, and even with the better boosting of an IS or SD booster costs would be high. A –f might be able to do somewhat better, since Germ is rarely a problem. The race is likely to be quite a bit slower than if it took IFE, having spent so much on boosting.

Are there any races that are likely to do well by taking NRSE but not IFE? Some AR races can be very strapped for Iron, particularly early on, and find that the Iron cost of the FM is too much. AR already has a poor economy and is quite fragile. For other races, not taking IFE would result in a very low growth rate, but AR’s wouldn’t necessarily be as hard hit by this because of their resources, and might actually grow faster than with IFE due to RW advantages they bought with the ~53 points, and more available Iron.

SUMMARY
In summary of the Early Years of Expansion, my opinion is that for the cost in RW points and resources, as well the speed of ramp up, NRSE and IFE with prop exp is generally the best combination. There are a few specific instances where other combinations might be better.

An IT that doesn’t take NRSE or IFE won’t have too much slow down researching the radscoop, but if it builds factories it will experience a lot of slowing and probably be behind other races for a very long time. A non-IT with both, on the other hand, will be able to go fast from the beginning, and probably out ramp the IT with the combo for a long time, even though it has those extra ~25. A –f IT with this setup should do significantly better than the +f IT, due to the radscoop’s Germ cost.

A non-IT that doesn’t take the combo will go even slower than the IT. IS, SD, or HE can probably handle the boosting better, but they’ll still be a fair deal behind the IT without NRSE/IFE, and it will be behind the races with the combo. –f and +f will probably both be hit about equally as hard until the radscoop, and then the –f will be better off.

The non-IT that has NRSE and ISB instead of IFE will likely find that docks don’t make up for the FM, and the ~11 extra points won’t either. Again, races with decent boosters can make up for it a little, but even they will still be a huge deal behind the race with IFE, though probably slightly ahead of the non-IT without ISB, NRSE, or IFE. If this race has to start with the FM it will quickly be paying huge amounts for boosters, and even if it has far better ramp speed otherwise, it will still fall behind the other races very quickly. –f races can handle this setup better.

Any race with NRSE but not IFE is probably going to be in the worst position of all. Whatever it takes to make up for IFE won’t be as good. It will be slower and spend more on boosters throughout its lifetime than any of the other races, particularly if it invests the points from NRSE in its factories, hab, or tech. However, if it’s lucky someone just might mistake it for an HP and decide to subsidize its existence hoping for a late-game bloomer, though they’ll likely be sadly mistaken before too long -f and +f will both suck about equally with this setup.

Next: The Years Before Warp 10

7/16/07 EDIT: Corrected some errors in the numbers, added more information on boosting.

[Updated on: Tue, 17 July 2007 02:02]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Mon, 16 July 2007 20:21]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Interesting reading.

Minor quibble:

Quote:

Many NRSE races will go on and research prop 12 for the Overthruster (which they should also be able to obtain much earlier than the non-NRSE race can hope to), reducing the IS10 cost to 58 resources, so that it only costs 38 more than the TGMS. At this point the NRSE race can build 684 IS10's, rather than 650, and still spend less resources than the non-NRSE race.

The non-NRSE prop-cheap race will reach prop 12 for the overthruster *far* faster than the NRSE prop-expensive race will. 13000 resources vs 46000 resources, even with your research schedule (more on that in a moment.) It'll have to wait longer for warp 10, but it'll most certainly get the overthruster first. It gets there with less than half of the spend the NRSE race has to invest to get to prop11, in fact. It will have a battle speed advantage for a while.

Interesting quibble:
I wouldn't necessarily compare IS10 with TGMS. For combat ships, at least, my main desire for the IS10 in mid-game is for the battle speed, not for the warp 10 capability. So going for a cheap warp 9 engine and an overthruster doesn't sound so terrible. I think it would typically be enough cheaper that one dangerous warp 10 trip in a ship's lifetime shouldn't be overly expensive. But it's not that great a like-for-like comparison for costing, so I'll let that one lie.

Major quibble:
You've made your research costings based on zero tech levels in all other fields. Let's now suppose 45 tech levels in other fields (this would be enough for en10, w12, con9, el10, bio4)

Cost to reach prop11 from prop0 with prop expensive: 37,433
Cost to reach prop12 from prop0 with prop expensive: 55,685
Cost to reach prop12 from prop0 with prop cheap: 15,910
Cost to reach prop16 from prop0 with prop cheap: 57,770

Now that's an interesting shift in the numbers. The battlespeed of prop 12 comes far faster for the NRSE+prop cheap race and it reaches warp10 less than 2100 resources after the NRSE race - less than 53 engines in cost difference - breaks even after ~26 cruisers and we're saving for the rest of the game.

In practice the actual costs will probably lie somewhere between your figures and mine. Mine don't look far off those you might see in a real game where players have gone for warp10 early (with a few levels shifted around by personal preference,) but the prop will have been trickling in throughout the game, not all at the end (like my costs) or all at the beginning (like your costs.)

If we grab other techs first - w14 beams, juggs, battleships, BSC - then the numbers start to skew further to the advantage of the non-NRSE prop cheap race.

From what I see, the non-NRSE race can expect a substantial advantage in both cost (scoops) and battle speed (it'll always be a few levels ahead in prop, so better engines) through to mid game, the advantage growing when it hits prop12, but then a strategic hiccup for a year or two when it's opponents start building ships that can move at warp10 and it can't. But it won't have to wait long.

If the race manages to consistently trade prop for one of it's expensive techs (very plausible - not many races take prop cheap), then the 'real' cost is just the cost of the LRT (assuming you would've taken 3.0 or 3.5 cheap anyway.) With ramscoops and prop cheap, I'd usually drop IFE too, putting the race ahead in points, but I don't want to subvert your very interesting analysis into a IFE discussion, so maybe best to ignore that asepct for now

Not taking NRSE still looks like a viable choice to me.

[Updated on: Sun, 05 August 2007 19:35]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

In the examples of the HP's I gave, the IFE/NRSE race w/prop exp. obtained the AD8 before the IFE/prop normal race got the TGFS.

Also, don't forget that a -NRSE race isn't forced to ramscoops all the time... AD8 is a lovely combat engine, and a prop-cheap race will get to it faster than the prop-expensive race does, regardless of whether they are NRSE or not. By the time the prop-exp race get's it too, the -NRSE should also have a comparable (or better) ramscoop engine available to replace it...

Quote:

I'm surprised that there's such a huge difference: the extra 45 tech levels you indicated increased the final costs of prop 11/12 for the prop exp. race about 10,000 resources more than I'd thought. I thought it would only be 18 resources per level gained. 10,000 certainly isn't 18*45 though.

But it is close to 18*45*12 For expensive tech, it's 17.5 more per level, but you pay it over and over - once for every new level you research. And yes, it's suprising how much it adds up, isn't it.

And regarding your final comments, about trade and the value of different fields... Everyone wants prop 11 and 12. Many people take IFE, so favour prop expensive. This leads to a nice supply and demand dynamic. El is possibly a bit rarer to see 'not expensive', but is less of a necessity. Nice extra trading chip for -NAS races, of course. En is certainly desired, but it seems to be a more common cheap/normal field, so it tends to be easier to trade for. I also consider that if I really have to research everything myself, I'll probably be content to stop at en10, prop11/12, el11 (after that, I'm going to see more benefit pushing weapons and con.) So, I can see here that prop is the one I *have* to take furthest if I don't want to leave myself too open to counterdesign / being outmaneuvered. I'd like en14/15/16 and el16, but I can live quite happily without them. Don't forget, if you are -NRSE, you are likely to be temp immune or temp wide, since you will be able to terra in grav earlier and further.

Quote:

Quote: Not taking NRSE still looks like a viable choice to me. Oh, yes I believe it always has been, and always will be. But viable isn't necessarily optimal.

Couldn't agree more. It depends tremendously on the universe and on the opposition. I love the fact that the game is so balanced that it's possible to go into this much detail and find making a choice continues to be a challenging decision to make.

Just wish some of the other LRTs were so well balanced *Pokes mineral alchemy.

I should add too, that I've never taken prop cheap, and rarely taken it normal. I've only played one game where I didn't take NRSE. But the thinking that your article has prompted, is rapidly convincing myself to try it more often.

[Updated on: Sun, 05 August 2007 22:51]

Report message to a moderator

I agree here with Dogthinker:

Quote:

Just wish some of the other LRTs were so well balanced *Pokes mineral alchemy.

Ultimate Recycling and Bleeding Edge Technology as well

Ptolemy

[Updated on: Sat, 11 August 2007 02:49]

Report message to a moderator

*shudder*

Cruisers with IS-10s... You do realize that your engines cost more than your hull

I've successfully fielded a race that used IFE+CE. You can read about Cancer exploits here http://starsautohost.org/sahforum/index.php?t=msg&th=998 &rid=168&S=6a72105575224eb7a2a091bcbfd4c954&pl_v iew=&start=0 and here http://starsautohost.org/sahforum/index.php?t=msg&th=102 6&rid=168&S=6a72105575224eb7a2a091bcbfd4c954&pl_ view=&start=0

The last post on the 2nd link was the race description.

Through most of the game the engine is quite a significant cost to a ship, and resigning yourself to use no scoops other than the FM dramatically increases ship cost over scoops. I find it odd you compare the IS-10 to the TGMS when you should really compare it to the TGSS. Saves you 72 resources which is going to be at least 10% of the cost of a cruiser (likely closer to 20-30%) which gives you ~3 years at warp 10 and you still break even.

Of course, these were decisions based on a complete package. Smaller cheaper ships were an emphasis. Rad immune, cheap prop. 25% weapons discount and I could generally field armies with 30-40% more strength for a given input in the early going. Throw in a movement bonus for WM and you have some very nice advantages. In RWIAB I had an economic advantage over everyone for most the game as well, which was fun indeed.

I'd also like to say that I generally agree with your position that IFE is irreplaceable. It seems to be a common beginner mistake to not select this option. I have issues suggesting NRSE is a good idea, I generally abhor the LRT.

The exceptions are IT and HE can both quite happily live without IFE.

The race that won 2006 dueling club championship was an IT without IFE.

[Updated on: Mon, 20 August 2007 00:20]

Report message to a moderator

Dogthinkers wrote on Mon, 06 August 2007 08:20

Major quibble: You've made your research costings based on zero tech levels in all other fields. Let's now suppose 45 tech levels in other fields (this would be enough for en10, w12, con9, el10, bio4) Cost to reach prop11 from prop0 with prop expensive: 37,433 Cost to reach prop12 from prop0 with prop expensive: 55,685 Cost to reach prop12 from prop0 with prop cheap: 15,910 Cost to reach prop16 from prop0 with prop cheap: 57,770 Now that's an interesting shift in the numbers ...

ahhh ... interesting numbers. I'm glad people are better at numbers than I am.

All excellent reading. Thanks Iconian and respondents

The key thing I don't understand in Dogthinkers commentary is this:

Quote:

...and it reaches warp10 less than 2100 resources after the NRSE race ...

Dogthinkers, do you mean the -NRSE race reaches P16 (Warp10) less than 2100 resources after the NRSE race reaches P12 (OT)? If you compare safe Warp10 to safe Warp10, isn't it more like the -NRSE reaches Warp10 (P16) around 20K research resources after the +NRSE race (P11)?

If this is the case, then would it be safe to say that the +NRSE can build ships that are only -1/4 battle movement (TGSS+O/T vs IS-10) or same movement (IS-10+MJ?) and safe Warp10 for quite a while before the -NRSE gets safe Warp10 - there would still be that large period of time early on (~20K+ research) where the +NRSE would have a slight battle speed disadvantage (TGSS+OT vs TGD+MJ before IS-10+MJ). [[Multiplied by # of O/Ts vs # of MJs, if any.]]

I think that if you include the extra cost of the engines for the +NRSE, then the 2100 deficit of the prop cheap going for P16 vs the +NRSE going to P12 is probably not there at all - in fact, with that research schedule, is it possible the prop cheap/-NRSE could get Warp10 slightly before the +NRSE gets OT if you include shipbuilding along the way?

Also, wouldn't it be a bit unusual to go for 10/12/16/9/10/4? I would think even with prop cheap, one would stop at P12 for a while? Perhaps going for W16/C13 then P16, or the like? ((I can see quite a few arguments for going for P16, particularly if you had an appalling hab draw and *needed* that extra terra?))

As a matter of interest, I am allied to a player in a dense universe who has -IFE/+NRSE/prop normal and he is steamrolling/crushing anyone that gets in his way, running short lines of supply and a densely clustered spoke/wheel empire. His economy appears to be able to absorb the extra cost of no ramscoops with little problem as he takes out multiple opposition worlds for expansion every year, no matter what they throw at him.

From what I can see, if you are in one of these denser universes and you selected a wider/decent hab for shorter lines of supply there appears to be something of an argument in favour of racing to Warp10/OT early if you have an economic PRT and you are happy to put about half of the points you would have spent on IFE into normal prop and the rest into hab/econ. Even with only prop normal, that early interest in prop also appears to allow you to comfortably select Rad (or temp) imm rather than the usual prop imm - albeit you will likely only ever have grav terra to +/-11 for the vast majority of the game. ((I don't know that I would be gutsy enough to then add CE to the mix, though it would bring the costs down a bit on those expensive engines and could give a stronger overall econ.))

Cheers,
S.

Report message to a moderator

Soobie made many excellent points on Tue, 21 August 2007 11:48

Quote:

Dogthinkers, do you mean the -NRSE race reaches P16 (Warp10) less than 2100 resources after the NRSE race reaches P12 (OT)? If you compare safe Warp10 to safe Warp10, isn't it more like the -NRSE reaches Warp10 (P16) around 20K research resources after the +NRSE race (P11)?

Ah ha! You noticed the little trap I left in my logic, to see if anyone was watching.

Oops.

Quite right, the +NRSE does get there a bit faster. Luckily for me (since I'm defending -NRSE for fun ) Backblast has made for me the excellent point, that we should actually be compareing TGSS, since the cost saving means we can quite happily overdrive them several times and still save resources.

Yes, I agree that the cheaper scoops will save a few early resources too, not to be sniffed at.

Quote:

Also, wouldn't it be a bit unusual to go for 10/12/16/9/10/4?

As I mentioned, I just chose these levels to show a reasonable number of tech levels one will have boosting the cost of each new tech level. I don't propose these as the best, but a merely a rough indicator of the total number of levels you might have about the time that you are pushing for a nice engine. I agree, that very often you'd have higher tech than this, but I wanted to try to be relatively conservative, so as not to appear to bias the numbers in favour of my argument.

Quote:

As a matter of interest, I am allied to a player in a dense universe who has -IFE/+NRSE/prop normal and he is steamrolling/crushing

Yes, I've taken this approach before too. Both IFE and NRSE are quite well balanced, to my eye, in terms of the RW points and the effects that each has. Personally I make my choice based on the style of race, the nature of the universe, and partly just on my whim.

And yes, being able to consider grav narrow is very, very appealing, for diplomacy reasons, since it's a common immunity choice of IFE/NRSE/Prop expensive races.

[Updated on: Tue, 21 August 2007 00:30]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

magic9mushroom wrote on Wed, 23 July 2008 12:45

There is one additional gaping hole in the NRSE camp's arguments. And that is... freighters. With NRSE, there is no engine until Prop 23 that both goes Warp 9-10 cheaply and is cheap enough to mass produce. Without it, you have the TGFS for warp 9, the TGSS for longer journeys at warp 9, and the TGMS and GS for warp 10. Why has noone pointed this out yet?

Possibly because it's an argument for NRSE?

The IS-10 makes Freighters a bit more expensive, but you're building hundreds, not thousands of the things, and the early Warp10 capability for logistics movements is priceless.

It also makes your cargo and troop shipments slightly harder for Pirates to kill.

Report message to a moderator

m9m said:

... and GS ...

IFE taken in isolation of NRSE or CE and with Prop cheap (or even normal) is horrendously expensive. I sometime feel that IS or SD can *almost* afford it.

(To my mind, IFE taken in isolation of NRSE or CE AND with Prop expensive is rather expensive and negates a lot of the benefit of taking IFE and having ALL Rams available. I played it a couple of times early and the results were tragic.)

I'm personally a fan of:
* Prop cheap; no IFE, no CE, no NRSE; or
* NRSE; prop normal or exp; or
* IFE; NRSE; prop exp;

in no particular order, but depending heavily on the environment. I make the wrong choice with terrible regularity

[Updated on: Fri, 25 July 2008 07:40]

Report message to a moderator

m.a@stars wrote on Wed, 23 July 2008 14:27

magic9mushroom wrote on Wed, 23 July 2008 12:45 There is one additional gaping hole in the NRSE camp's arguments. And that is... freighters. With NRSE, there is no engine until Prop 23 that both goes Warp 9-10 cheaply and is cheap enough to mass produce. Without it, you have the TGFS for warp 9, the TGSS for longer journeys at warp 9, and the TGMS and GS for warp 10. Why has noone pointed this out yet? Possibly because it's an argument for NRSE?

This is an argument for IFE+NRSE. When I in 2420-2425 build my first and *final* LF design it, has the FM and fuel tanks, even IS-10 comes too late for that. By then I usually have prop5 (for 100/250 gates, or at most prop6 for jihads). I can't see me having prop9 already solely for use on LF's, that hull has enough fuel and range for that period, heck, that's why I research it in the first place! And con is always a useful field. More prop research would be too much resources spent in an unwanted and unneeded field. Of course with cheaper prop research you would get higher with the same resources spend there but that means giving up other stuff I don't want to give up. And it means not taking NRSE and having even less RW points!

Now you can argue for having warp10 capable transports or colonizers, but by the time I have the IS-10 I usually have about 100 of LFs already, so why switch? Just plan one step further ahead when it comes to pop MM.
It does leave me sometimes in two minds about saving a design slot and combine colonizer/transport ... but fitting those 100 LFs with a colonizer pod makes me shiver about the waste of resources.

mch

Report message to a moderator

Micha says

...Of course with cheaper prop research you would get higher with the same resources spend there but that means giving up other stuff I don't want to give up...

... radram LFs if you take prop cheap/no IFE/no NRSE ... man, how I loathe the way I get stuck with them til the end of the game. But with prop cheap, radrams come so stupidly quick, and then the res can go to W that bit earlier ... just sayin

Wait. Dammit. I'm meant to be arguing in favour of NRSE. Or am I just arguing against going for TGFS?

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

magic9mushroom wrote on Sat, 26 July 2008 04:03

CE. I think it's a good complement for NRSE because you get a much cheaper IS-10, and you get a ton more points to boot.

... and a hell of a MM when I got into fighting, and that MM still didn't help many times. I had CE once. IMO it was enough.

BR, Iztok

[Updated on: Sat, 26 July 2008 11:46]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

I played a game with IS/CE and did extremely well.

I lost a game against a person who was using SS/CE (actually, he lost too ... but it was a near thing - one of those games where you watch on as 2 awesome players duke it out ).

I played a game with SD/CE and was annihilated ... zomg ...such a terrible combination.

... I know it can work with AR, but I wouldn't like to risk it myself (I've had a birds eye view of AR being played with CE by, imho, a good player ... it was hard work - there is just no room for error. )

If I ever take CE again, it would only be with WM, IT or IS methinks.

Report message to a moderator