Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Miniaturization
| Miniaturization |
Thu, 28 July 2011 11:44  |
|
|
|
So I always thought that for tech0 components, miniaturization doesn't come into play.
However in a game I'm currently in, having Prop13 is causing the engine QJ5 to cost 2/0/1/2 while having prop14 is resulting in QJ5 costing 1/0/1/1.
Could someone please help me out.
Thanks.
I know my minefields.. but I'm a chaff sweeper.
I used to curse when I got stuck in traffic... till I realised I AM traffic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Miniaturization |
Thu, 28 July 2011 11:55  |
|
 Void |
 | Ensign |
Messages: 369
Registered: January 2011
Location: California, GMT -7 | |
|
| nmid wrote on Thu, 28 July 2011 08:44 |
So I always thought that for tech0 components, miniaturization doesn't come into play.
However in a game I'm currently in, having Prop13 is causing the engine QJ5 to cost 2/0/1/2 while having prop14 is resulting in QJ5 costing 1/0/1/1.
|
According to the archives (RGCS), base components - those with no tech requirements - appear to have a tech level of 0, but in actuality the operate as if they require ALL tech fields to be at level 0. So miniaturization does occur, but only when ALL tech fields increase.
In other words, if you're at Weapons 12 and Bio 0, your laser will cost full price. If you research Bio to level 4 the next year, your laser will start to miniaturize (presuming, of course, all your other research was at level 4 or higher).
In your game, did you increase research in other, non-related fields?
Cheers,
Void
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Miniaturization |
Thu, 28 July 2011 13:15 |
|
|
|
| Void wrote on Thu, 28 July 2011 21:25 |
| nmid wrote on Thu, 28 July 2011 08:44 |
So I always thought that for tech0 components, miniaturization doesn't come into play.
However in a game I'm currently in, having Prop13 is causing the engine QJ5 to cost 2/0/1/2 while having prop14 is resulting in QJ5 costing 1/0/1/1.
|
According to the archives (RGCS), base components - those with no tech requirements - appear to have a tech level of 0, but in actuality the operate as if they require ALL tech fields to be at level 0. So miniaturization does occur, but only when ALL tech fields increase.
In other words, if you're at Weapons 12 and Bio 0, your laser will cost full price. If you research Bio to level 4 the next year, your laser will start to miniaturize (presuming, of course, all your other research was at level 4 or higher).
In your game, did you increase research in other, non-related fields?
Cheers,
Void
|
Thanks for clearing that up.
As for the specifics, I'll have to check with the other player.
I'll post the exact details later.
[Updated on: Thu, 28 July 2011 13:46]
I know my minefields.. but I'm a chaff sweeper.
I used to curse when I got stuck in traffic... till I realised I AM traffic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | |
| Re: Miniaturization |
Thu, 28 July 2011 19:51 |
|
|
|
| Void wrote on Fri, 29 July 2011 11:14 |
| craebild wrote on Thu, 28 July 2011 13:21 |
It is well documented that "zero tech" items are miniaturized according to the lowest tech field.
|
I'm not sure I would agree with the characterization that this is well documented. But I'm looking to be corrected if you can point me to it.
|
I believe it comes up most frequently in the topic of chaff...and why frigate-red laser is better than scout-blue laser.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | | | | | |
| Re: Miniaturization |
Fri, 29 July 2011 10:45 |
|
| wasp |
 | Crewman 2nd Class |
Messages: 16
Registered: January 2008
Location: Finland | |
|
| BeeKeeper wrote on Fri, 29 July 2011 17:09 |
The reason why the QJ5 engine costs only one resource at prop level 14 is I think easily explained. Each tech level reduces the cost by 5% (see table below) so with a starting cost of 3 at tech level 0 reducing 5% each time shows that between 13 and 14 the cost drops below 1.5 - and I assume Stars! just rounds off the figure - in this case rounding down to 1. What I don't understand is why the mineral costs also reduce and by what rules they follow.
Tech Res
0 3.00
1 2.85
2 2.71
3 2.57
4 2.44
5 2.32
6 2.21
7 2.10
8 1.99
9 1.89
10 1.80
11 1.71
12 1.62
13 1.54
14 1.46
|
Note that the ship designer and production queue dialogs use different rounding than the actual game engine. Say you build 100 ships with a tech 13 QJ5 engine. The cost estimate in production queue is calculated as if the engines cost 100x2 = 200 resources, but the actual cost is 100x1.54 = 154. Cost for the hulls and other slots is added up the same way.
Elen sila lumenn' omentielvoReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Miniaturization |
Fri, 29 July 2011 10:51 |
|
| BeeKeeper |
 | Officer Cadet 1st Year |
Messages: 214
Registered: December 2007
Location: Devon, UK, GMT | |
|
So it displays only the integer but actually uses a more accurate figure? This being the case the difference in cost remains just 5% per tech level and there is no sudden change between levels 13 and 14.
[Updated on: Fri, 29 July 2011 10:52] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: Miniaturization |
Fri, 29 July 2011 22:48 |
|
|
|
| wasp wrote on Sat, 30 July 2011 02:45 |
Note that the ship designer and production queue dialogs use different rounding than the actual game engine. Say you build 100 ships with a tech 13 QJ5 engine. The cost estimate in production queue is calculated as if the engines cost 100x2 = 200 resources, but the actual cost is 100x1.54 = 154. Cost for the hulls and other slots is added up the same way.
|
I don't recall ever reading this before.
The extension is that at tech 14 the queue will estimate 100x1=100 and it will really cost 146? IE I'll try to build 100 and only get 68? That doesn't sound right...
[Updated on: Fri, 29 July 2011 22:49] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: Miniaturization |
Sat, 30 July 2011 06:20 |
|
| wasp |
| Crewman 2nd Class |
Messages: 16
Registered: January 2008
Location: Finland | |
|
| gible wrote on Sat, 30 July 2011 05:48 |
I don't recall ever reading this before.
The extension is that at tech 14 the queue will estimate 100x1=100 and it will really cost 146? IE I'll try to build 100 and only get 68? That doesn't sound right...
|
This has been discussed in rgcs, here's the first post I found:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.computer.stars/msg/ f50c08403dcc9219
Elen sila lumenn' omentielvoReport message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Miniaturization |
Sun, 14 January 2018 08:31 |
|
| Tenderfoot |
 | Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 6
Registered: May 2017 | |
|
Greetings, all.
Miniaturization of ship hulls and components (star bases not tested), with single or multi-tech requirements:
a) occurs per item, not per fleet, ship or slot;
b) building cost is the original cost deducted of the rounded (to the nearest integer, 0,5 rounded to 1) miniaturization bonus:
c) the costs reported in the Production queue pane are accurate, at the item level (and the total production line cost if completed in the same turn).
I'm emboldened to make these statements (hoping they're not common knowledge), having just concluded a testbed with the following parameters:
a) Stars!2.6jRC4, running in DOSBox0.74 (DOSBoxStars.rar, downloaded here in April 20, 2017);
b) single-race testbed (tiny, packed, close, beginner maximum minerals, accBBS, no random events).
Miniaturization affects both minerals and resources, so noise reduction became paramount.
Mineral effects were easier to assess: production centres with no mines; quantities required deposited on the surface; building queue with no extraneous elements; production batches with one turn length.
One little trick as 512-maximum fleet wasn't an issue: deposit the 100% mineral cost; add cargo capacity to the completed fleet; load any remaining minerals; edit fleet's name to reflect miniaturization level; and at the end of the testbed I have a log of mineral bonuses.
Resource effects were a little trickier: overflow research directed to a "sink" field (Biotechnology was a natural choice). As sinks aren't bottomless, production centres with capability as close as possible to the 100% resource cost, all other planets with Mineral Alchemy active (and spilling to the next turn) during the production run made sure that only miniaturized resources went into research that turn; kept a log of resources budgeted (and/or spent in the previous turn) and research levels (including resources required to reach next level).
Research management was critical. Both in the preparation stage as in the testing stage, resources went into research only if/when needed, Mineral Alchemy was used extensively to ensure levels were advanced (mostly) one at a time with leftover resources (usually) to Biotechnology.
Given that miniaturization works in 4% (or 5%) increments, building 100 each of a component was a natural enough option. Building 100 components that miniaturize the whole range from 100% to 25% cost, at the same location, in one turn, and with little or no extraneous noise, required some extra thought and preparation.
Luckily, the Scout+QJ5 combination provided a 0% miniaturization option if at least one tech field was kept at 0.
The X-Ray/Yak/Blackjack trio would miniaturize up to the full 75% and provide a range of base values to apply the miniaturization to (6b/6r, 8b/7r and 16b/7r, respectively, or 6, 7, 8 and 16). They only require Weapons technology, keeping research management simple.
The Scout+QJ5+weapon combinations initial cost would be 7 Ironium, 8, 10 or 18 Boranium, 5 Germanium, and 19 or 20 resources. Thus I would need at least one planet with 1.900 resources and two planets with 2.000 resources each to run production batches of these ships.
Due to the design slot limit, I was planning to split the testbed and do two separate runs, first with the Scout+QJ5+weapon designs, then with Battleship+QJ5 and different combinations of total number of weapons and number of weapons per slot. This meant that I needed to research Construction to 13 and no further, so the BB hull would not miniaturize. It would also be easier to do in the common trunk of the testbeds.
Never having played with it before, I knew Interstellar Traveller have the best logistics in Stars! The plan being to eventually build Battleships, Hyper Producer economy was the goal, so resources 1/2500, factories 15/7/25/3g, mines 10/3/25. The mines were only to be built at the homeworld.
For completion sake, the race also had IFE, NRSE, ISB, NAS, TT, 19% growth, 20-wide centred Gravity, Temperature and Radiation, all expensive technology starting at 3. None of these were critical for the test conditions, but they help make life easier: Fuel Mizer equipped Privateers and Space Dock at year 2400, a good number of ideal (or near-ideal) planets terraforming with only one research field that doubles as a resource sink.
Research strategy thus started out as:
a) Energy at 0, making sure 0-tech items would not miniaturize;
b) Weapons at 0, micro-managing miniaturization;
c) Propulsion at 6, with no particular role;
d) Construction at 5, researched to 13 in the preparation stage;
e) Electronics at 0, with no particular role except as a backup for 0-tech item miniaturization;
f) Biotechnology at 0, researched up to 17 in the preparation stage (Total Terraforming 20% was eventually necessary for enough big enough planets).
During the preparation stage, the homeworld didn't seem to generate enough minerals so I eventually decided on remote mining. As Construction was already at 13, Electronics was brought to level 6 unlocking the Robo-Super-Miner.
Trivia: a fleet of 15 Maxi-Miners with 10 Robo-Super-Miners each, 4.020kT/year (limited to 4.000kT/year), drops mineral concentration of 100% to 1% in 63 years yielding 31.280kT of ore; five such fleets take 14 years, yielding 31.400kT (of each ore, remember it was Beginner Maximum Minerals).
At the end of the preparation stage:
a) Research levels of Energy 0, Weapons 0, Propulsion 6, Construction 13, Electronics 6 and Biotechnology 17;
b) homeworld, filled to capacity, fully developed (2.500 each factories and mines);
c) fifteen colonies, fully terraformed, filled to capacity, gated docks:
c.1) two 100% colonies: 1.068 factories, 2.002 resources each;
c.2) seven 100% colonies: 1.000 factories, 1.900 resources each;
c.3) six colonies from 99% to 86%: 1.000 factories each, 1.896 to 1.844 resources.
Now for the test results.
The designs were Scout hull (4i/2b/4g/10r) + Quick Jump 5 (3i/0b/1g/3r) + weapon:
1) SQX (X-Ray), 0i/6b/0g/6r, total 7i/8b/5g/19r at Weapons 3;
2) SQY (Yak), 0i/8b/0g/7r, total 7i/10b/5g/20r at Weapons 6; and
3) SQZ (Blackjack), 9i/16b/0g/7r, total 7i/18b/5g/20r at Weapons 7.
The leftover minerals (Boranium only) were:
W, Weapons level at production.
W SQX SQY SQZ
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 100 0
7 100 0 0
8 100 100 100
9 100 100 100
10 200 100 200
11 200 200 300
12 200 200 300
13 200 200 400
14 300 300 400
15 300 300 500
16 300 300 600
17 300 400 600
18 400 400 700
19 400 400 800
20 400 400 800
21 400 500 900
22 500 500 1.000
23 500 500 1.000
24 500 600 1.100
25 500 600 1.200
26 500 600 1.200
The leftover resources were:
W, Weapons level at production;
R1, total resources into research;
R2, relevant resources into research, given that the planets where SQY or SQZ were built had a production capacity of 2.002 resources.
W R1 R2 SQX SQY SQZ
3 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
5 0 0 0
6 102 100 100 0
7 104 100 100 0 0
8 204 200 100 100 0
9 304 300 100 100 100
10 404 400 200 100 100
11 404 400 200 100 100
12 504 500 200 200 100
13 604 600 200 200 200
14 704 700 300 200 200
15 804 800 300 300 200
16 904 900 300 300 300
17 904 900 300 300 300
18 1.004 1.000 400 300 300
19 1.104 1.100 400 400 300
20 1.204 1.200 400 400 400
21 1.204 1.200 400 400 400
22 1.304 1.300 500 400 400
23 1.404 1.400 500 500 400
24 1.504 1.500 500 500 500
25 1.504 1.500 500 500 500
26 1.504 1.500 500 500 500
So, miniaturization occurs at the component level, not at the fleet level. Else the SQX at W4 (not W3) would have 24b leftover (6 x 0,04 x 100 = 0,24 x 100 = 24).
Next, I tested for miniaturization at the slot level.
Remember I had planned to do it with a branched testbed using Battleships?
Before going to that trouble (including upgrading the Space Docks to Ultra Stations), I ran a quick test with the following designs:
a) CQ0x0 (Cruiser hull, QJ5, all other slots empty), 100% cost 46i/5b/10g/91r;
b) CQ1x2 (Cruiser hull, QJ5, 1 X-Ray at each Weapons slot), 100% cost 46i/17b/10g/103r;
c) CQ2x1 (Cruiser hull, QJ5, 2 X-Ray in one Weapons slot), 100% cost 46i/17b/10g/103r.
Building 10 each, at Construction 13, Weapons 26:
a) CQ0x0, 60i/10b/10g left from 460i/50b/100g, cost 400i/40b/90g;
b) CQ1x2, 60i/110b/10g left from 460i/170b/100g, cost 400i/60b/90g, thus 20b for the 20 X-Ray;
c) CQ2x1, 60i/110b/10g left from 460i/170b/100g, cost 400i/60b/90g, thus 20b for the 20 X-Ray.
There were 3.350 leftover resources:
a) CQ0x0, 1.900 - 10 x 77 = 1.900 - 770 = 1.130;
b) CQ1x2, 1.900 - 10 x 79 = 1.900 - 790 = 1.110, thus 20 for the 20 X-Ray;
c) CQ2x1, 1.900 - 10 x 79 = 1.900 - 790 = 1.110, thus 20 for the 20 X-Ray.
So, miniaturization still occurs at the component level, not at the slot level. Else the X-Ray would cost 2b (2 x m[6 - 6 x 0,75] = 2 x m[6 - 4,5] = 2 x 1) in the CQ1x2 design and 3b (m[6 x 2 - 6 x 0,75 x 2] = m[12 - 4,5 x 2] = m[12 - 9]) in the CQ2x1 design.
At this point I was ready to call it a day and post my results. Re-read this thread and huh-ho?! What about zero-level items? Would they work differently? Well, I can work that out with what I've got. Zero-level items miniaturize fully when all fields reach level 19. Weapons was taken care of at 26, Energy at level 0 would be the control, so brought Propulsion, Construction and Electronics to exactly 19, Biotechnology to 19 and still tasked as sink.
Design was Scout hull + Quick Jump 5 + Laser, all zero-level items, starting cost 7i/8b/5g/18r, production runs at a planet with 1.844 resources.
Results:
E, Energy level at production;
I, B, G, minerals leftover from 700/800/500 Ironium, Boranium, Germanium respectively;
R1, total resources into research;
R2, relevant resources from miniaturization.
E I B G R1 R2
0 0 0 0 44 0
1 0 0 0 44 0
2 0 0 0 144 100
3 0 100 0 244 200
4 100 100 100 344 300
5 200 100 100 444 400
6 200 100 100 444 400
7 200 300 100 544 500
8 200 300 100 644 600
9 200 300 100 744 700
10 300 300 200 744 700
11 300 400 200 744 700
12 300 400 200 844 800
13 400 400 200 1.044 1.000
14 400 400 200 1.144 1.100
15 400 500 200 1.144 1.100
16 500 500 300 1.144 1.100
17 500 500 300 1.244 1.200
18 500 500 300 1.344 1.300
19 500 600 300 1.444 1.400
Phew! Zero-level items follow the general rule, and clears a potential doubt. Miniaturization occurs at the component level, not at the ship level.
Best regards,
Tenderfoot
Edited Jan 17, 2018: corrected mistake, the SQX would never miniaturize at W3.
[Updated on: Tue, 16 January 2018 19:30] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Miniaturization |
Wed, 17 January 2018 10:54 |
|
| Tenderfoot |
| Crewman 3rd Class |
Messages: 6
Registered: May 2017 | |
|
iztok wrote on Wed, 17 January 2018 09:4520+ years after Stars! was released and we're still doing research into its workings... 
Well, I was around 20+ years ago 
Never an active player, at the time I read a lot of Jason Cawley, William Buttler, Ezequiel Camara et all both in rcgs and in various websites, their style of thorough examination and explanation struck a chord.
Lost touch with the game for several reasons, most critical when upgraded Windows stopped reading my CD.
About a year ago, took the plunge into downloading DOSBoxStar and having a blast relearning to play the game. Solo for the moment, I've been long periods without access to my computer (keeping in touch with the forum with a borrowed tablet) at very short notice, so I won't risk playing.
I have a number of things I want to look into:
a) first and foremost terraforming doesn't work exactly as advertised, right now I can say for sure that it doesn't compare the outcome of the full formula including all three variables; I know this for sure because, trying out JC's Bugs with ranges 30/30/34, I have enough instances where the clear winner doesn't get picked; JC's Foundation Immune/Narrow/Narrow on the other hand worked just right;
b) more work into miniaturization (starbases);
c) items started one turn and finished the next (or later);
d) multi-turn travel;
e) I'm sure I'll think of more
Regards,
Tenderfoot
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 19 18:10:43 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
