Home » Primary Racial Traits » IS » Best way to make a -F IS
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Sat, 15 September 2007 00:08   |
|
| Soobie |
 | Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia | |
|
| Dogthinkers wrote on Tue, 11 September 2007 16:14 |
m-m-m-m-multi post 
Had a bit of a silly idea for a race... I gotta try this in a test bed some time....
IS
CE,OBRM,NAS,RS
0.21g to 8.00g (76 clicks wide)
-144^C to 200^C (76 clicks wide)
57mR to 87mR (30 clicks wide)
20% PGR
1 per 800 pop eff
5/25/5/4g facs
10/3/10 mines
Prop, weap, con cheap; el normal; en, bio exp; no start@3 (could swap el and en around by preference, but prop really wants to be cheap)
|
I like this idea a lot - not to play in a game, but to see how it handles in a test. Anything different is good. 
So had a play with it. On the face of it 420 RW pts for 1/800 is A LOT; I found another 162 pts for TT. [Slightly less than it should be: RS COSTS 10 points since you are otherwise taking 4 bad LRTs - TT *kind of* reduces that penalty to the usual -7 pts for 5 LRTs as far as I can tell] Yes, TT is not listed there, but no immune and no TT for a -f seemed tough - in hindsight, probably a mistaken perception. ISB was probably more important. So, narrowed hab and left shifted it a bit to 1 in 5 (almost 1 in 6, but 1in4 almost 1in3 with starting TT) and reduced the number of mines a bit. Ran 2 tests in same seeded universe small/dense (won't do that again - too many planets) 1 with LSP, 1 with CE - CE was painful because of the extra MM to get ships to max out <warp6 travel potential.
C8/P9/En3 in 2414 for both and 1 large green, 1 small green and 2 x -1/-2 yellows within 2 warp9 jumps. No ISB was not hard, but hurt psychologically. Built a grand total of 4 Pvts and no FTs. I would consistently put ~15% pop on new planets (or around 100K on yellows and small greens) as that seemed to be the breakpoint for completing terraforming and hitting 25% capacity at full-terra. Tended to leave the freighter and escorts there for later pop export (other than occsasionally taking some minerals back to bases if they were short and mineral freighters were still a bit far away). Typically ran the Q at Auto10% terra/auto 10 mines (inve
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Sun, 16 September 2007 03:33 |
|
|
|
I'm currently toying with the idea of using a non-immune -F with 1/800 19% PRG,TT with CE and LSP.
Tests show it's REALLY fast at converting yellows to greens. Significantly faster than 1/1000 with TT and 1 immunity (30% terra in 20 years for 1/1000, and 15 for 1/800 TT and no immunity, it's 10 years faster than 1/900 with 1 immunity no TT as well.)
It can terraform a -6% in 4 turns. I'm not really sure that it matters much to such a race that it's got no immunity. It's the CE that worries me. And the fact that no immunity probably also means harder territory negotiations.
Any thoughts.
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Sun, 16 September 2007 05:54 |
|
 iztok |
 | Commander |
Messages: 1202
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
| Captain Maim wrote on Sun, 16 September 2007 09:33 |
I'm currently toying with the idea of using a non-immune -F with 1/800 19% PRG,TT with CE and LSP.
...
Any thoughts.
|
I did some calculation using habcalc (http://home20.inet.tele.dk/craebild/hab_range_tool/habcalc.h tml). It seems that your non-immune -f is not so good, because it starts with significantly lower amount of good greens (breeders).
Compared to one-immune, your race has with all three terra-7 done significantly less breeders (9%) than the one-immune at the same level (18%). With relatively cheap TT-10 your race is still behind (14%), and breaks even only at 2*TT-10 and terra-15. Remember, the immune is still only at terra-7, but "produces" the same amount of pop than the non-immune with 60k more resources invested in tech!
At the end or terraforming (3*terra-15) has your race 26% breeders and 33% planets between 25% and 75% hab (61% livable), and produces from average space of 40 planets ~21k resources with 1/800 pop eff. The immune has 37% breeders and 24% planets between 25% and 75% hab (62% livable), with the output from the same space of 40 planets about 19k.
I'd say that for a -f one simply MUST have one immunity, because it gives him the only source of resources - population - significantly earlier and in greater quantity.
BR, Iztok
[Updated on: Sun, 16 September 2007 06:20] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Sun, 16 September 2007 10:17 |
|
| Soobie |
| Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia | |
|
| iztok wrote on Sun, 16 September 2007 19:24 |
Hi!
I did some calculation using habcalc (http://home20.inet.tele.dk/craebild/hab_range_tool/habcalc.h tml). It seems that your non-immune -f is not so good, because it starts with significantly lower amount of good greens (breeders).
... lots of interesting data ...
I'd say that for a -f one simply MUST have one immunity, because it gives him the only source of resources - population - significantly earlier and in greater quantity.
BR, Iztok
|
What I failed to mention above was that in the same seeded universe that I ran the non-immunes above, I also ran a 1/900:19% PGR and 1/1000:20% PGR single immunes using Dogthinkers sample race at the start of this thread as the template (some minor mods, like reducing temp for the 1/900, En normal instead of Elec, etc). There where differences in playstyle to the non-imm which partially invalidate a comparison. eg: I scouted ALL planets and colonised ALL starting greens. Both the 1/900 and the 1/1000 achieved over 25K, good tech and lots of minerals and ships before 2450 - the 1/900 being marginally easier to manage and with slightly more resources at 2449. On 2449 I dropped pop to *sustainable* overpop and the 1/900 went to 31K and the 1/1000 went to 32K for 2450.
I wouldn't say the 1-imm's had a 60K cumulative advantage over the non-imms, but I felt that they had a signifcant edge.
Other than the number of breeders and useful planets after basic terra, my limited testing indicates Iztok is quite right: In terms of simplicity and pure performance I would go with the 1-immune any day. But I would not discount the 1/800 as a no-hoper if I came up against one ...
That's my 2 cents 
Cheers
S.
...
[Updated on: Sun, 16 September 2007 10:18] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| | |
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Mon, 17 September 2007 13:56 |
|
|
|
When is a good time to start an orgy given 19% or 20% growth? And when doing so, how much pop? How large a freighter? How is the pop accumulated? I'd like some spesfic details on how to make all this work. I'm not pulling better than 14k on this and all my pop is either in transit or on planets. I've been growing in space but only during trips and on arrival.
Also what are the best hold levels? 50% 42% 33% 25%? I've been holding at around 50% though I got kinda lazy and let it climb to 60% or 70%. How should a -F IS manage its pop best? This was one of the reasons I started this thread. To know how to play -f in general.
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Mon, 17 September 2007 22:06 |
|
| Soobie |
| Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia | |
|
| Captain Maim wrote on Tue, 18 September 2007 03:26 |
When is a good time to start an orgy given 19% or 20% growth? And when doing so, how much pop? How large a freighter? How is the pop accumulated? I'd like some spesfic details on how to make all this work. I'm not pulling better than 14k on this and all my pop is either in transit or on planets. I've been growing in space but only during trips and on arrival.
Also what are the best hold levels? 50% 42% 33% 25%? I've been holding at around 50% though I got kinda lazy and let it climb to 60% or 70%. How should a -F IS manage its pop best? This was one of the reasons I started this thread. To know how to play -f in general.
|
There is plenty of that in this thread. I like Joseph's earlier summary.
In my **extremely limited** experience, I fill all my *available* good greens (50%<80%hab ) to 25% of capacity before thinking about orgies, then start building/filling the freighters until I can sustainably grow it faster in the freighter than on the world they orbit, then let the planet grow to about 42% - which gives about the same pop to lift as 25%, and the planet has terra'd itself along the way. For big greens (>80%) I try to hold them at 25% a bit longer - usually until 1 or 2 years of growth in the freighters would take it straight to ~42% and then I let a year or two of freighter growth drop to get it to that point.
(I like 42% - it's a good psychological break point for me: same growth as 25%, so I feel like I'm still getting good value. I don't like 33% - the absolute growth from that 8% gap is woeful - I'd rather have that 8% pop (say, 85K pop?) sitting on a low hab/high conc world personally. And on a breeder I get my freighter pop up quickly enough that I don't hang around 25% too long.)
So, I tend to move the freighters that are sitting over the breeders to the smaller greens (<50%) and let them fill up the planet a bit through freighter growth (not dropping the pop), since the growth of the smaller greens is 2/5ths of nothing anyh
...
[Updated on: Mon, 17 September 2007 22:09] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Mon, 17 September 2007 23:37 |
|
|
|
Short answer... Depends on the game.
Longer answer... If there are green worlds you can take from the opposition, then emphasise pop on the surface over pop in the sky - maximise your short term resources, so you can quickly build the fleet you need to go take those green worlds.
If you don't think you can take your neighbour's green worlds without a massive effort, then emphasise pop growth - 25% on the surface, the rest growing in freighters.
If you are worried that neighbour is not only too strong to eat, but is thinking of eating *you*, then you need a middle ground - a bit more on the ground, go to 33%, maybe more as needed, to make sure you are able to compete against them while you work on your mid/long term potential.
Bottom line, is it's about the resources, not the pop. If getting more resources now (at the expensive of taking longer to get the rogies up) means you can get more worlds... Then it's probably better in the long term to sacrifice some pop growth to have the resources to take those worlds (which will in turn boost your growth...)
[Updated on: Mon, 17 September 2007 23:37] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Tue, 25 September 2007 13:05 |
|
|
|
I'm testing a race that uses far right extreme radiation. The center of the hab is 84mR. I've noticed that the radiating hydro ramscoop only kills a very small percentage, like around 1% or so of my population in transit. And with something like ~9% growth it's easily overcome and not a significant problem.
Question I have is:
1) How much better is it to use that ramscoop for early expansion? Cause it shaves off like 3 or 4 years of research for me to use that one instead of waiting for the sub galactic fuel scoop. I believe someone, (perhaps not here) was saying that they use it early, but they use rad immune instead of rad extreme.
2) Does that engine's kill rate increase as the center rad hab gets lower? Cause I've seen it signifcantly higher when I had habs far further from 85mR center. My guess is for every % lower the rad center is, it adds that much to the kill rate, but I'm not sure if there's a cap or not. My guess is it caps out at 80% if that's so. (10mR - 85mR = -75mR = -75% growth.) I'll have to test that but it seems about right I think.
I'm also aware that if I used a rad immune I wouldn't need to be right shifted. Though this is true it doesn't fit well into my overall plan (for which I've had to take a hit by having an extreme right shifted hab.) Plus I hit my all time record for a -f race with my current build so I'm rather happy with it. It scored on par with my typical best factory race (CA excluded.) But was extremely advanced techonogically.
Also another question: When some of you were testing your -f races, were you constantly expanding in the expectation of having a lot of space (either through war or peaceful measures?) Or were you more compact expecting to be boxed in, in a game?
I could probably have done better once I master or at least habitualize creating orgies. That takes a lot of MM though since I can't automate it and still get the 12% or 11.5% freighter growth bonus that's been mentioned.
...
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Tue, 25 September 2007 22:12 |
|
| Soobie |
| Officer Cadet 3rd Year |
Messages: 270
Registered: May 2007
Location: Australia | |
|
| Captain Maim wrote on Wed, 26 September 2007 02:35 |
I'm testing a race that uses far right extreme radiation. The center of the hab is 84mR. I've noticed that the radiating hydro ramscoop only kills a very small percentage, like around 1% or so of my population in transit. And with something like ~9% growth it's easily overcome and not a significant problem.
...
2) Does that engine's kill rate increase as the center rad hab gets lower? Cause I've seen it signifcantly higher when I had habs far further from 85mR center. My guess is for every % lower the rad center is, it adds that much to the kill rate, but I'm not sure if there's a cap or not. My guess is it caps out at 80% if that's so. (10mR - 85mR = -75mR = -75% growth.) I'll have to test that but it seems about right I think.
|
Ran a quick test with a JoaT -
1) 20click rad, fully left shifted, median hab tolerance 10 milliRads. Move 100,000 pop with a LF with radram. 38,000 pop die.
2) Same JoaT, rad 20 clicks wide, right shifted to 70~90mR (80mR median), 100,000 pop moved. 3,000 pop die in transit.
3) Same Joat - 84mR median. 100,000 pop moved, 1,000 pop die.
No matter what tolderance you use, minimum death is 100 col so eventually all cols die.
Interesting, but since I don't use radram in fleets with cols, I've never noticed. Someone else can work out the formula
| Quote: |
The center of the hab is 84mR. I've noticed that the radiating hydro ramscoop only kills a very small percentage, like around 1% or so of my population in transit. And with something like ~9% growth it's easily overcome and not a significant problem.
|
Since you don't have IFE, have you considered running to con8 fast (<2410) and using a couple of LFs (and an FT if absolutely necessary - maybe 1 or 2 max) with QJ5 while you run for prop (I tend to put a Coloniser module on a QJ5 LF, if I make any at all). If you simply can't stand doing the fuel consumption calculations of QJ5, have you considered using AD8? Another alternative that springs to mi
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Tue, 25 September 2007 22:21 |
|
|
|
Well there's a distinct method to my madness regarding prop cheap or expensive and IFE. Yes IFE's faster, I know that, a PVT with 3 fuel pods fully loaded can travel at warp 9 222ly (unassisted) and dump it's load and still return at warp 9 with virtually all by a few mg (like 3) of it's fuel used. Where as the same design with the rad ram, at warp 9 can still return without refueling if it only travels 110ly.
Adding a single fuel export bumps it upto 153ly.
With 2 Fuel Exports it can go 190ly.
With 3 fuel exports and one PVT with rad ram and 3 fuel pods it reaches 220ly round trip at warp 9 with full cargo one way only. That is, if you wanted to travel at warp 9. Probably more if you let the pop grow in flight rather than filling the thing up all the way. But I don't feel like figuring out a formula to account for that sort of dynamic fuel usage. Even Stars doesn't do that for you, if it did it'd be a lot easier to see one's limits on travel.
So it's significantly more costly in game to go with rad ram over fuel mizer in the short run. But with prop cheap you can always and quite easily upgrade later.
Though once gates go up it's not important how much fuel was used to get there. Getting back's a breeze.
Addendum: Those calculations DID NOT account for the fuel produced by the fuel exports. It was just straight usage. Again, I didn't want to figure out how to account for that. At least not right now.
Actually the minimum kill rate is 0. Even with the apparent max of 38% death, it still isn't a certainty, when I first started playing *I* didn't know anything about Rad Rams, I just saw a cheap engine with a decorative rad symbol on it. I found certain freighters regularly had deaths while others did not. I'd mark those with deaths as "haunted". But not all suffered, some never suffered deaths, even on longish voyages. It's weird but it's not a certainty that 100 will die.
[Updated on: Tue, 25 September 2007 22:34]
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Wed, 26 September 2007 01:47 |
|
|
|
| Soobie wrote on Wed, 26 September 2007 12:12 |
Someone else can work out the formula
|
Half a percent pop deaths per click less than 85mR, rounded up to the nearest percent.
Where 'meanrad' is the mid-point of your rad...
Divide meanrad by 2 and round up to the nearest integer
Multiply the population by this number then divide by 100
That is the deaths.
It'd look a bit like this in Excel... population*ROUNDUP((85-meanrad)/200,2)
I haven't tested this formula, but it fits all three of the examples Soobie gave, and it looks reasonable. It'd be good if someone tested with a few other values (esp some not even mR mid-points) to verify my formula, I'm too lazy to right now
Corrollary of this - if you want a mid-point under 85mR... With regard to deaths, odd numbers are better, in that 83mR has the same deaths as 84mR, but is further from the edge.
[Updated on: Wed, 26 September 2007 01:57] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Wed, 26 September 2007 03:21 |
|
|
|
Hmh.. Interesting. I'm glad you could figure that out so swiftly. I wonder if your actually right.
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Wed, 26 September 2007 03:23 |
|
|
|
| Dogthinkers wrote on Wed, 26 September 2007 01:47 |
Corrollary of this - if you want a mid-point under 85mR... With regard to deaths, odd numbers are better, in that 83mR has the same deaths as 84mR, but is further from the edge.
|
unless it's actually population*((1+(85-meanrad))/200) which also fits. i.e. base 0.5% + 0.5% per click.
I suspect it's the rounded up version tho.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Wed, 26 September 2007 04:39 |
|
|
|
Point of fact, with IS's space growth, and a mean rad of 84mR it doesn't really matter even that some die off, cause they just get replaced. Now if I had more centered rad hab I'd be in trouble doing this. What with something like 15% dying off, that'd REALLY hurt. I remember once (long ago) trying to attack the AI with a rad scoop shock transport. I lost 75% of my population in the 2 or 3 years it took to reach the front. I had to turn back but I dropped the pop, because a return trip would have surely killed them all. I retired that class of ship because it was counter productive to use it as an offensive attack transport.
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Wed, 26 September 2007 09:10 |
|
|
|
| Captain Maim wrote on Wed, 26 September 2007 04:39 |
Point of fact, with IS's space growth, and a mean rad of 84mR it doesn't really matter even that some die off, cause they just get replaced.
|
It still matters, you still lose pop that you wouldn't have otherwise.
| Quote: |
Now if I had more centered rad hab I'd be in trouble doing this. What with something like 15% dying off, that'd REALLY hurt. I remember once (long ago) trying to attack the AI with a rad scoop shock transport. I lost 75% of my population in the 2 or 3 years it took to reach the front. I had to turn back but I dropped the pop, because a return trip would have surely killed them all. I retired that class of ship because it was counter productive to use it as an offensive attack transport.
|
Well, not all. If your rad was extreme left/mininum width then, assuming that the formula mentioned is correct, you would lose 76% in 3 years; after the return trip you would have lost 91%.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Fri, 23 November 2007 06:07 |
|
|
|
How good is 1 in 9?
When making an Orgy, is it best to pool many worlds to get it up faster? Or to just let it grow from many locations at once?
[Updated on: Fri, 23 November 2007 08:24]
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Fri, 23 November 2007 09:17 |
|
|
|
I did a search and I couldn't find 1 in 9. But the other yes, when I realized it I was going to delete it, but you commented so I'll leave it.
[Updated on: Fri, 23 November 2007 09:24]
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
| Re: Best way to make a -F IS |
Fri, 23 November 2007 11:10 |
|
|
|
What were your habs in that game?
Rule 1: "Pillage, THEN burn!"Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 19 20:56:48 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
