Home World Forum
Stars! AutoHost web forums

Jump to Stars! AutoHost


 
 
Home » Primary Racial Traits » IT » Is HP IT possible?
Re: Is HP IT possible? Thu, 22 September 2005 19:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dethdukk is currently offline dethdukk

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 200
Registered: June 2005
New race:

IT

IFE
ISB
NRSE
CE

0.58 - 2.72 gravity
-160 - 200 temperature
50 - 84 radiation

17% growth
1/6 planets

1/2500

15/8/20 costs 3
13/3/14

Weap. cheap
con. normal
rest expensive
no check for "starts at 3"

18 points to starting minerals

The race starts out with a warp 8 engine, has good factories and mines, and enough tech to get it through the beginning of the game. The only problem I can find is the low habitable range(espesially with no immune). I thought about getting rid of normal con. in trade for other things (ie. 19% growth, better mines, better hab.) but cant decide what to do. Any suggestions? Confused



If you cannot love, you will always hate, and in hate there is only death.
[img]http://dragcave.net/image/XIJh.gif[/img] <--- is teh dragon!

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Thu, 22 September 2005 22:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dogthinkers is currently offline Dogthinkers

 
Commander

Messages: 1316
Registered: August 2003
Location: Hiding from Meklar
I wouldn't worry about going for higher growth, 15-17% is enough for a HP.

You might suffer for going no-immune though - HP can't afford to spend much on terraforming so it's going to take you a while to develop the habs. That said, you're going to have a lot *more* planets so...

Perhaps you should consider trying to grab a few more points from LRTs. OBRM is nice for this - it boosts your economy and with your 1 in 6 habs and decent mining you probably won't miss the remote miners (although the very first post in this tread was asking for a race with remotes.) NAS is worth considering too, although painful.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Thu, 22 September 2005 22:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dethdukk is currently offline dethdukk

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 200
Registered: June 2005
One of my goals was not to take NAS. I've played in a few games without it, and although it has not been very painful yet, I fear it may hurt a little more when I get into a serious border war (thankfully, I know that 4 out of 5 races took NAS as well, not sure about the 5th). As for OBRM, I have to see what my average mining rate is. I'm having a problem with minerals in this one game, but I also have worse mines. What should my mine settings be, should I set them a little higher? And what about construction? Is it worth trading for better Hab. ranges?

[Updated on: Thu, 22 September 2005 22:33]




If you cannot love, you will always hate, and in hate there is only death.
[img]http://dragcave.net/image/XIJh.gif[/img] <--- is teh dragon!

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Thu, 22 September 2005 22:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dethdukk is currently offline dethdukk

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 200
Registered: June 2005
By takeing OBRM, I can improve my mines to 14/3/16 or 13/3/20. Which is better? And I cant find a good way of taking temp. immune, can you find one?

[edit] just tested race with 13/3/20 mines, produces 3740 resourses per optimal world, and mines 858KT of each mineral on the HW, when the minerals are at the HW bottom of 30. this same race, but with one more factery, one less mine, produces 3905 resourses, and 815 of each mineral. I dont want to test which setting (14/3/16 or 13/3/19) is better overall though. I think that 14/3/16 may be, because it helps early planets more, but I really dont want to testbed it.

PS. Nice talking to you again dogthinkers.


[Updated on: Thu, 22 September 2005 22:52]




If you cannot love, you will always hate, and in hate there is only death.
[img]http://dragcave.net/image/XIJh.gif[/img] <--- is teh dragon!

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Thu, 22 September 2005 23:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
crr65536 is currently offline crr65536

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 180
Registered: June 2005
dethdukk wrote on Thu, 22 September 2005 19:08

New race:

IT

IFE
ISB
NRSE
CE

0.58 - 2.72 gravity
-160 - 200 temperature
50 - 84 radiation

17% growth
1/6 planets

1/2500

15/8/20 costs 3
13/3/14

Weap. cheap
con. normal
rest expensive
no check for "starts at 3"

18 points to starting minerals

The race starts out with a warp 8 engine, has good factories and mines, and enough tech to get it through the beginning of the game. The only problem I can find is the low habitable range(espesially with no immune). I thought about getting rid of normal con. in trade for other things (ie. 19% growth, better mines, better hab.) but cant decide what to do. Any suggestions? Confused



Having a hab field on the edge (as in the case of your temperature) is a waste - edge values never occur.

It seems to be the consensus that a HP without immunities should have hab at at least 1/4.

Your remaining points (after implementing changes) might be better spent on concentrations. A recent thread in the Academy asserts that mineral concentration points are much more effective than the help file suggests, and germanium concentration is very important.

It seems to be a common belief that the optimal factories for an HP are x/7/x - x/8/x costs too many resources and x/6/x costs too many points.

To get these goodies, you'll probably end up looking at either 16% growth, OBRM, NAS, or lower mining efficiency.

[edit - inserted link]
...



[Updated on: Thu, 22 September 2005 23:35]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Thu, 22 September 2005 23:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dethdukk is currently offline dethdukk

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 200
Registered: June 2005
Temp on the edge doesnt matter, its so big that it takes up the entire thing Laughing . I still need to get the immunity though.

[Updated on: Thu, 22 September 2005 23:43]




If you cannot love, you will always hate, and in hate there is only death.
[img]http://dragcave.net/image/XIJh.gif[/img] <--- is teh dragon!

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 00:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dogthinkers is currently offline Dogthinkers

 
Commander

Messages: 1316
Registered: August 2003
Location: Hiding from Meklar
RE: mine settings
For a HP I would usually choose 14/3/16 over 13/3/19. Ramp up will be marginally faster and long term minerals will be greater. Hwever the mid term minerals at each world will be slightly worse and the HW won't produce as much as it would after it hits 30 (but by this point you won't be relying on teh HW any more...)

I also think that 3g factories are overvalued. In my simulations an extra point of mine efficiency results in the same ramp up, similar amounts of leftover germ at each world, and more of the other minerals. It does make it slightly harder to support your fledgling colonies growth with G shipments however.


RE: habs
If you want temp immune you will need to reduce the overall hab. As already mentioned - don't leave habs on the edge, it's better to narrow it and use the points elsewhere. I almost never take a hab within 10 clicks of the edge, and usually try to keep them at least 20 clicks from the edge (that way your terraforming envelope covers all the likely values, but not too much else.) If you want mega wide habs you'll have to settle for some inefficiency here though. At absolute minimum you should narrow your hab 1 click and move it 2 clicks from the edge - you'll get almost identical coverage (if fact, you'll probably end up with slightly better %ages...) but for less points...

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 07:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dethdukk is currently offline dethdukk

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 200
Registered: June 2005
by taking OBRM, taking con. exp. and lowering my mines to their original settings, I can get 1/8 planets with temp. immune. It may be me, but it just doesnt seem worthwhile. I ccan leave the mines and con. where they are, and average out my hab. though, so it sets to:

grav. .55 - 3.68
temp. -84 - 148
rad. 42 - 84



If you cannot love, you will always hate, and in hate there is only death.
[img]http://dragcave.net/image/XIJh.gif[/img] <--- is teh dragon!

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 08:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
About standard IT HP is like...
ISB, NRSE, CE, OBRM Arrow no NAS is good idea actually but taking IFE just for one level of prop is unforgivable waste of points i believe. BTW ... RS is quite nice option if game will last up to nubians (and usually it will when there are HP-s present).
1 in 4 without immunity hab Arrow i have experienced that HP can terraform OK and small & yellow planets (so common for immunityless) are not worthless for HP.
say (0.21 to 4.64g / -144 to 144 / 56mR to 90mR) proportional
or (0.20g to 1.84g / -76C to 148C / 13mR to 69mR) rad narrow
17% growth
2500
15/7/20 3g Arrow HP uses about 60-70% of its germanium for factories so 4g would turn it into 80-90% while one more mine efficency gives only 7-9% more germanium.
12/3/20 Arrow its better to take more operated versus higher efficency on case you play without immunities
construction normal, weapons cheap rest expensive and no checkbox.
When anything is leftover put it into concentrations.


[Updated on: Fri, 23 September 2005 08:16]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 08:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mazda is currently offline mazda

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 655
Registered: April 2003
Location: Reading, UK
Dogthinkers wrote on Fri, 23 September 2005 05:13

RE: habs
If you want temp immune you will need to reduce the overall hab. As already mentioned - don't leave habs on the edge, it's better to narrow it and use the points elsewhere. At absolute minimum you should narrow your hab 1 click and move it 2 clicks from the edge - you'll get almost identical coverage (if fact, you'll probably end up with slightly better %ages...) but for less points...


Sorry to keep hounding Razz you, but there is an awful lot of confusion about what happens when people change hab widths.

There is a very complex effect of shifting habs into the tapered edges of the bands. It generates points, makes the average hab of the initial greens better but gives you less greens and yellows.

To say that the opposite of that, moving bands away from the edge, is just better in all cases seems stupid to me.
Say you try to move away from the edge and then try to raise the points needed for that by narrowing the hab as well then you are simply cutting away your primary gain (of more greens) and if you are still in the tapered part of the band then you will continue to make the average hab slightly worse.
So possibly less greens and all of them worse on average.

Doesn't sound like a bargain to me.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 09:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
mazda wrote on Fri, 23 September 2005 15:34


Doesn't sound like a bargain to me.


Its quite good bargain if we talk about grav or temp band at edge. Nod

You can make it 1 click more narrow and 3 clicks away from edge without much points gain.

As result: You lost 3 clicks of hab at edge inside whose sum likelihood of actual planet is 3 (0+1+2) in 10 points scale. You gained that one click in center where likelihood (on same scale) is 10. So really you get more greens doing that. Cool Making hab one click more narrow gives points to get hab another 4 clicks away from edge so you gain 2 clicks in center worth 20 points on likelihood scale (10+10) but lose only 18 (3+4+5+6). Another hab gain! Very Happy

Additionally more narrow hab makes terraforming effect better. So ...having edged hab with grav or temp does seem to be bad idea on most cases. Confused

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 11:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mazda is currently offline mazda

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 655
Registered: April 2003
Location: Reading, UK
Kotk wrote on Fri, 23 September 2005 14:53

You can make it 1 click more narrow and 3 clicks away from edge without much points gain.

As result: You lost 3 clicks of hab at edge inside whose sum likelihood of actual planet is 3 (0+1+2) in 10 points scale. You gained that one click in center where likelihood (on same scale) is 10. So really you get more greens doing that. Cool Making hab one click more narrow gives points to get hab another 4 clicks away from edge so you gain 2 clicks in center worth 20 points on likelihood scale (10+10) but lose only 18 (3+4+5+6). Another hab gain! Very Happy

Yes, quite right.
I tend to think of it in reverse, i.e widening and shifting to the edge to keep the same numbers of greens.
I believe that it's not immediately obvious whether it always costs or saves points.
I suspect it *depends*.
Depends on the hab scheme you are shifting.

Quote:

Additionally more narrow hab makes terraforming effect better.

This is another frequently quoted statement that annoys me Smile
While it is true in the literal sense, the scale of the effect is overemphasized in relation to the drawbacks (of taking narrower hab).

Let's forget shifting the bands for a while (if not completely).

If you take any hab, and consider all the planets you intend to use with that hab, then widening the hab will make *all* those planets have a better hab value (unless perfect).

This applies *before* and *after* any terraforming you do.
True, terraforming closes the gap (because we can reduce the argument to where all planets become perfect), the smaller band gets more effect from it.
But your planets never become better than if you had chosen wider hab.

I'm just saying that wider hab can be underestimated.
Sometimes because of a couple of "stock" quotes about "don't go near the edge" and "terra is better in a narrow band".
Also that "near the edge" ties in with wider hab because going near the edge is one way to afford wider hab.

Shifting just confuses this pay-off
...

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 12:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
mazda wrote on Fri, 23 September 2005 18:14

I believe that it's not immediately obvious whether it always costs or saves points.
I suspect it *depends*.
Depends on the hab scheme you are shifting.

You are right of course that the operation i described has no fixed RW cost. It sometimes gives you 2-3 points and sometimes costs. It usually gives if you dont have TT and usually costs if you have TT. It is no point mine or investment (sometimes people seem to talk of it like it was), but simple way to make your hab slightly better for almost no cost or gain. Very Happy The 7 clicks at most edge of gravity or temperature bands are worth about same as 2 clicks away from edge so if you got 3 clicks away from edge and paid with 7 at the edge you actually made greens more likely. Nod
Quote:

While it is true in the literal sense, the scale of the effect is overemphasized in relation to the drawbacks (of taking narrower hab).
I fully agree if we just talk about investing into wide hab or taking points for something from narrow hab. Nod Wide hab is good thing in general so getting twice less greens and losing about one third of resources from a territory to have immunity with HP is waste of money i feel. Confused HP-s whole idea is to have best resources from same territory. Otherwise why to play HP? Razz However that is no way related to "getting away from worthless edges" logic i am afraid.
...

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 12:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
crr65536 is currently offline crr65536

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 180
Registered: June 2005
dethdukk wrote on Fri, 23 September 2005 07:56

by taking OBRM, taking con. exp. and lowering my mines to their original settings, I can get 1/8 planets with temp. immune. It may be me, but it just doesnt seem worthwhile. I ccan leave the mines and con. where they are, and average out my hab. though, so it sets to:

grav. .55 - 3.68
temp. -84 - 148
rad. 42 - 84


Now you see what IFE is costing you! Without it, you could probably get back at least one of those goodies. If you remove ISB, you can get another. Iztok asserted that OBRM and mine eff. 10 is not enough germ (even with my 20 mines operated), so keeping mine eff. above 11 or not taking OBRM would probably be good.

The way I see it, your race is awesome on the LRT screen (IFE, ISB, remote mining ability, no NAS) - but the price is paid on the hab and econ screens. I believe that the latter are more important - especially for IT, who, as freakyboy showed in a thread a while back, doesn't have a strong need for any.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 13:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dogthinkers is currently offline Dogthinkers

 
Commander

Messages: 1316
Registered: August 2003
Location: Hiding from Meklar
Kotk wrote on Fri, 23 September 2005 22:13


15/7/20 3g Arrow HP uses about 60-70% of its germanium for factories so 4g would turn it into 80-90% while one more mine efficency gives only 7-9% more germanium.


Lets assume an average of 75% habitability throughout my empire, OBRM, 20 factories per 10k pop. I think these assumptions are fairly G demanding. In this case I would need 5280g per planet with 4g facs and 3960g per planet with 3g facs. So we've got a difference of 1320g to try to make up.

Now, I read elsewhere that typical output per planet is around 20k of each mineral. That sounds a little high to me, it'd make my job of persuading you much too easy.

Lets knock the assumed output down to 15k of each mineral. 1 extra point efficiency in this case would net you 1500g. So here you get *more* G as well as more of other minerals.

Now lets knock our assumed mining down to just 10k of each mineral, in case that other thread was *way* out. Here the eff nets you just 1000g. Now we are losing out 320g, but gaining 1000 Ironium. IT HP races are going to enjoy gating around Missile ships more than most races, so I'm quite comfortable with the idea of trading off 320g for 1000i

IMHO the true cost of 4g facs is more to do with shipping than anything else, and for HP that's no big problem.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Fri, 23 September 2005 18:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dethdukk is currently offline dethdukk

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 200
Registered: June 2005
I have made some changes to my race and am pleased (but not delighted) with the results. Here is the race:

IT

ISB
CE
OBRM
NAS

grav 0.62 - 2.96
temp immune
rad 58 - 88

17% growth
1/7 habitable, one click away from 1/6

1/2500

15/8/20 costs 3
13/3/17

Weap. cheap
Con. normal
rest expensive
no check for 3

no points left

I had to drop IFE and take OBRM and NAS. I was able to drop NRSE though. Got to keep my con. normal, still had good mines and great factories, but I hate not taking IFE. I can take NRSE, and then make my mines 14/3/15 with my hab. ranges more toward the center, but with so may LRTs selected, it doesnt give you very much, it may be better just to leave it and use the ram-scoops.

[edit] fixed race and writing


[Updated on: Fri, 23 September 2005 18:41]




If you cannot love, you will always hate, and in hate there is only death.
[img]http://dragcave.net/image/XIJh.gif[/img] <--- is teh dragon!

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Sat, 24 September 2005 04:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
iztok is currently offline iztok

 
Commander

Messages: 1211
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe
Hi!
Dogthinkers wrote on Fri, 23 September 2005 19:53

IMHO the true cost of 4g facs is more to do with shipping than anything else, and for HP that's no big problem.

Being HP you aim at long games, where Nubian is the hull you'll build the most. In the BB era you're still not able to fight at the same level HG races can. So forget about hordes of BBs, and check the mineral price of a "standard" AMP nub (6 AMPs, 6 elephant shields, 9 capacitors, 12 deflectors, 3 jammers-30) at tech 18/26/12/26/16/7. That's about the tech you have when you start serious building of nubians. I didn't check the exact price, but from my previous games I can say the price of that nub will be about 150/140/200/600. Now check your mineral stock and you'll see that the distribution is about 37/37/26. With your big HP's deficit in germ you'll be able to build about 25 nubians less per planet you have, or generally speaking 30% less of ANY kind of warship.

So just checking the g box would save you 1300kT of germ, or 6.5 nubians per planet, or 2 years less waiting for a planet to get green, or a bit of MM to send freighters with germ to all your planets.

Anyway, your call. Twisted Evil
BR, Iztok


[Updated on: Sat, 24 September 2005 04:30]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Sat, 24 September 2005 11:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Staz is currently offline Staz

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 514
Registered: November 2003
Location: UK
iztok wrote on Sat, 24 September 2005 09:28

So forget about hordes of BBs, and check the mineral price of a "standard" AMP nub (6 AMPs, 6 elephant shields, 9 capacitors, 12 deflectors, 3 jammers-30) at tech 18/26/12/26/16/7. That's about the tech you have when you start serious building of nubians. I didn't check the exact price, but from my previous games I can say the price of that nub will be about 150/140/200/600. Now check your mineral stock and you'll see that the distribution is about 37/37/26. With your big HP's deficit in germ you'll be able to build about 25 nubians less per planet you have, or generally speaking 30% less of ANY kind of warship.


If you are playing HP, and know you will have less G than B, surely you'd design your nubs with 3 slots of weapons and only 1 of shields.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Sun, 25 September 2005 00:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Dogthinkers wrote on Fri, 23 September 2005 20:53

IMHO the true cost of 4g facs is more to do with shipping than anything else, and for HP that's no big problem.


Your theory is based on speculations how many stuff is out of rock by what turn? I tried to have balanced race not paperbag tiger. Nod

The race i posted is quite typical HP. It has to avoid real fight in 2430-2440 frame. But ... then it catches up with HG-s. At year 50 it has about 8-9 millions of pop. That pop operates ~17000 factories. So all together 28k resources. HW was able to get 13k minerals out of rock (it was not terribly poor at start) rest of planets ~60k. So there ... 51k germ gone to factories and i have 73k iron/22k germ ready for shipbuilding.

Even if i build only armored missile BBs i have some leftover iron. No BB has such proportions. So okay i can have about 60 BB-s for my idle germ and so i can participate in warfare without sacrificing further rampup.

If i had taken efficency 13 i had enjoyed 6k more minerals however factory costs 4 turns the factory cost into 68k germ. That makes only 11k germ and 79k iron?!? Being skilled with AR-s and all i can stay alive with only 30 BB-s. But what to do with that iron? Iron Packets? Laughing

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Tue, 11 October 2005 04:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Robert is currently offline Robert

 
Lt. Junior Grade

Messages: 393
Registered: November 2002
Location: Dortmund, Germany
I have some comments on this:

First:
do you think it is good to have a mine-efficiency higher than 10? It costs a lot and maybe either having remotes (especially as an IT can distribute the minerals very efficiently and gate heavy miners easily) or wider habs for more planets and more minerals in total might be a better choice?

Second:
the problem for HPs to early terraform can be partly compensated by picking ultimate recycling. I know that LRT is not very popular, but I have learned to love it!
As an HP will have (especially IT with 2 starting planets) some very well producing planets very quickly, he can buield and send cheap ships to yellows, scrap them there and get a nice boost for early terraforming until they are greens. I would just build factories as many as I can on the yellow and then scrap some old ships every turn to get a quicker start...
I experienced it being worth the points...

(you may search for my old thread about ultimate recycling somewhere here at the forum where I present testdata to show the effect)

just a few thoughts

Robert



2b v !2b -> ?

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Tue, 11 October 2005 07:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Robert wrote on Tue, 11 October 2005 11:32

First:
do you think it is good to have a mine-efficiency higher than 10? It costs a lot and maybe either having remotes (especially as an IT can distribute the minerals very efficiently and gate heavy miners easily) or wider habs for more planets and more minerals in total might be a better choice?

Without OBRM your main production planets are 10% smaller and thus mine less. They additionaly have 20% less germ to export at efficiency 10 versus 12. That all together means that no "OBRM/mine eff 10" breeder has 75% early germ of what OBRM/mine eff 12" has. Sure, at midgame+ the remote miners are quite handy ... but early it seems almost waste of effort to colonize something without immediate privateer of germ dropped. Nod
Quote:

Second:
the problem for HPs to early terraform can be partly compensated by picking ultimate recycling. I know that LRT is not very popular, but I have learned to love it!
As an HP will have (especially IT with 2 starting planets) some very well producing planets very quickly, he can buield and send cheap ships to yellows, scrap them there and get a nice boost for early terraforming until they are greens. I would just build factories as many as I can on the yellow and then scrap some old ships every turn to get a quicker start...
I experienced it being worth the points...

UR costs same points as going from factory cost 8 to 7. Testing exactly that deal leaves me with mixed feelings. "UR/factory cost 8" races breeders get up slightly slower to boot despite stalwart defender and swashbuckler scrapped. Later there is lot of additional MM involved i dont like. However "no UR/factory cost 7" ... is also weak and any ships it builds for defense are wasted and cant be reused. So i dont know ... without UR it just feels simpler to play. Nod


...

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Tue, 11 October 2005 09:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
goober is currently offline goober

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 175
Registered: December 2003
Location: +10
Robert wrote on Tue, 11 October 2005 04:32

I have some comments on this:

First:
do you think it is good to have a mine-efficiency higher than 10? It costs a lot and maybe either having remotes (especially as an IT can distribute the minerals very efficiently and gate heavy miners easily) or wider habs for more planets and more minerals in total might be a better choice?



Yep.

If you've read through this thread Iztok recommends a higher mine efficiency from personal experience IIRC due to G shortage later in the game.

As to habs, don't you already have about 1 in 3 habs as a HP? You want extra habitability so you have more planets with high G concentrations. A G min-con of 50 is recommended (by JC?) to make a planet worth colonising.

Robert wrote on Tue, 11 October 2005 04:32


Second:
the problem for HPs to early terraform can be partly compensated by picking ultimate recycling. I know that LRT is not very popular, but I have learned to love it!
As an HP will have (especially IT with 2 starting planets) some very well producing planets very quickly, he can buield and send cheap ships to yellows, scrap them there and get a nice boost for early terraforming until they are greens. I would just build factories as many as I can on the yellow and then scrap some old ships every turn to get a quicker start...



You could spend your points on growth and habs. For a HP with wide habs, i.e. aforementioned 1 in 3 habs, there are plenty of nice juicy greens about without having to worry about terraforming early on. The high G yellows can just be left to themselves with 100 000 colonists and 200kt of G when your backfilling your empire. 18% PGR will get you out of the starting blocks quicker and allow you to fill you big producers up to full capacity earlier as well as fill up those yellows once they finally get terraformed. Although, the higher PG may also mean not so many factories either ... so you have more G later.



...




Goober.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Tue, 11 October 2005 09:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Robert is currently offline Robert

 
Lt. Junior Grade

Messages: 393
Registered: November 2002
Location: Dortmund, Germany
Ok, maybe I did not think hard enough or was not very precice (and did not read the whole thread)...

The way I played HP (I did not for a long time) was one immune and 2 narrow (suggested also by JC by the way)... so I expected rather narrow habs (1 in 10).
So my assumtion was to invest the points from mine-efficiency into remotes. It is right that this automatically gives 10% less mines, but not 10% less minerals. Also all planets can be mined later and less g is spent on the planets because you build 10% less factories. For me it was just a question to have less g from populated planets to be compensated by g from remotes - ofc this will not help in the early game - right.

The second part I assumed that it is not easy for a HP to colonize bad yellows... (which is IIRC not true because for very very bad yellows the HP is actually faster than a HG, dont remember the exact break-even-point).... Anyway - early terraforming and getting yellows to work is always easier with UR. I did a test on whether UR or lowering factory costs from 9 to 8 (and some other things) for HGs, and it must be somewhere around here - and I found that UR is best, but when calculating speed up compared to points needed, lowering factory costs is better.
Still with UR you have some other nice advantages...

My fault was to expect everybody plays HP like I do, which is a one-immune 1 in 10 hab scheme without OBRM.

I should have checked all the posts before - sorry...
But mainly I think I just like UR and wanted to convince the rest of the universe to understang the advantages...
(I dont want to say I pick UR every time I play, it does not make sense in every game and for every race...)

Anyway... I am not an experienced HP player because I love early wars and kills...

Smile

Robert



2b v !2b -> ?

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Tue, 11 October 2005 11:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kotk

 
Commander

Messages: 1227
Registered: May 2003
Robert wrote on Tue, 11 October 2005 16:58

So my assumtion was to invest the points from mine-efficiency into remotes. It is right that this automatically gives 10% less mines, but not 10% less minerals.

Breeder of 10/3/20 mines without obrm versus 12/3/20 with obrm? Sure ... the concentrations of second drops bit quicker and also it needs 10% more germ for its own factories but that wont negate the effect of 32% bigger early mining power to be actually less than 10%. Shocked It may be is effectively 25-29% but its anyway LOT more than 10% better. Rolling Eyes

Report message to a moderator

Re: Is HP IT possible? Tue, 14 April 2009 12:24 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
DaYng1 is currently offline DaYng1

 
Chief Petty Officer

Messages: 71
Registered: February 2009
Location: Alexandria, VA

hi,
I was wondering if you would consider a 1i 1-4 13/8/20 an hp it. this design gets little under 3k but with rad I, narrow centered t, and max to terraform wide g this race gives good and plentiful p's

the reason I ask is I am considering using this in a monster game with no accbbs and galaxy clumping. it would be to my advantage to lock down clusters before monsters get big tech or tt bio improvements to hab.

also the I would decrease ramp up time for terra. I have used this with joat true hp 1i 15/8/21 against quicker races and had sucess. the rad I would also make my planets somewhat less tasty to narrow band high rad ca tt monsters

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: Best Pop Management
Next Topic: CE
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Jul 21 22:02:57 EDT 2024