|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Thu, 01 January 2009 08:21   |
|
 iztok |
 | Commander |
Messages: 1202
Registered: April 2003
Location: Slovenia, Europe | |
|
Hi!
All 3-immune, tiny packed uni, AccBBS, no MaxMin, assuming meticoulous pop management until 2445:
- 4% (IIRC) 11 or 14k,
- 5% 26-27k,
- 6% 32-34k.
With 4% there's virtually no crowding (most planets held at 25% cap for most of the game). With 5% PGR crowding occurs on core planets around turn 35, so you need to move to 50% hold and can (have to?) max some of them to 100% pop before turn 50. IIRC with 6% you can max about 1/3 planets.
BR, Iztok
[Updated on: Thu, 01 January 2009 08:32] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Thu, 01 January 2009 09:03 |
|
|
|
You should go for the Ship benchmark , tells normaly more than
a resource benchmark.
ccmaster
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Thu, 01 January 2009 11:04 |
|
| magic9mushroom |
| Commander |
Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
I'm talking max testbed results as well as "real" races here. A 7% triimm with all techs expensive and crap mines should do well in a testbed, right?
EDIT: To be clearer, I refer to races of the same ilk as this CA (copypasted from "CA monster").
204K (broken race)
Testbed Terrors
CA
IFE, TT, NRSE, OBRM, NAS
0.53/1.40 -72/48 31/65
1in24 20% 1/900
15/8/12 N 8/3/12
Bio cheap, rest expensive
[Updated on: Thu, 01 January 2009 11:05] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Fri, 02 January 2009 05:30 |
|
|
|
@ magic
What kind of testbed you want give me the univers setting i give you the resources.
ccmaster
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Sat, 21 February 2009 10:11 |
|
|
|
Someone also ask for a -f benchmark
here is a Benchmark -f HE 2 immune 16% grow
year 2413 -- 2,2 k
year 2419 -- 5,0 k
year 2420 -- 5,6 k
year 2425 -- 11k ( 10,6)
year 2430 -- 16k
From ther on only hiting F9 no MM
year 2450 -- 40K
with MM you should get 55-60k by year 2450 .
so far
ccmaster
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Tue, 19 July 2016 22:37 |
|
| magic9mushroom |
| Commander |
Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
I'm running a testbed at the moment (for something else), and I thought the following result might be interesting:
Standard 25k@2450 testbed (small packed, max minerals, AccBBS, no random events)
HE
NRSE, OBRM
3i 6(12)%
1/1000
15/8/21 3g
10/3/23
Weap cheap rest expensive (start at 0)
got 46k @ 2450 on the score screen. I might have gotten a smidgen more had I continued expansion, but I wanted a fully duplicable result (as I said, I'm actually testbedding something else; I'm using a 3i specifically because hab draw doesn't confound results) and as such only did 3 1/2 waves of colonisation (to 60 planets). There's also a bit of pop in orbit, as my 12 core worlds are at 50% resource-integral hold; with that dropped it'd be 47.8k.
Not too bad, IMO, for a playable race (penscans, decent mines if perhaps not exceptional).
Random lessons I've learned during this:
- Sending to multiple worlds helps your achieved growth rate, because more of your pop at any given time is on planets under 25% of cap that aren't exporting pop. I first sent three colonies two years away, then colonised two planets one year away from each of those (making 12 total), then went to two neighbours from each of those (making 36 total). Obviously, that might be a bit difficult in a less dense universe; I'd consider running the second wave two years as well in a normal. As I said, I then attenuated the fourth wave and only went to 24 more for 60 total (going to one neighbour from each of the most recent colonies); I'd have gone to more if I were playing seriously, but I wanted 60 worlds and an exactly-duplicable result for my testbed (which isn't anywhere near finished yet; I'll be playing 'till 2700). Indeed, I first planned to do the test in a tiny packed, but I realised the random starting position (starting too far to one side) would confound the results.
- If any race can make -IFE -ISB +NRSE work, it's the tri-immune HE. Mini-colonisers with the Settler's Delight are simply amazing. Not only do they get decent fuel
...
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Wed, 20 July 2016 07:06 |
|
| magic9mushroom |
| Commander |
Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
XAPBob wrote on Wed, 20 July 2016 19:59magic9mushroom wrote on Wed, 20 July 2016 03:37
- If any race can make -IFE -ISB +NRSE work, it's the tri-immune HE. Mini-colonisers with the Settler's Delight are simply amazing. Not only do they get decent fuel efficiency, but as ramscoops generate fuel per engine and fuel pod mini-colonisers are so incredibly cheap, you can quite cheaply use fleets of them to generate all the fuel your transports need out of thin air.
Well, thin vacuum...
Thin interstellar medium. Nature does abhor a vacuum...
EDIT: I will say that running NRSE does make it a bit harder to use those 98%-cloaked metamorphs for infiltration.
[Updated on: Wed, 20 July 2016 07:10] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Thu, 17 November 2016 03:58 |
|
| magic9mushroom |
| Commander |
Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
magic9mushroom wrote on Wed, 20 July 2016 12:37Standard 25k@2450 testbed (small packed, max minerals, AccBBS, no random events)
HE
NRSE, OBRM
3i 6(12)%
1/1000
15/8/21 3g
10/3/23
Weap cheap rest expensive (start at 0)
got 46k @ 2450 on the score screen. I might have gotten a smidgen more had I continued expansion, but I wanted a fully duplicable result (as I said, I'm actually testbedding something else; I'm using a 3i specifically because hab draw doesn't confound results) and as such only did 3 1/2 waves of colonisation (to 60 planets). There's also a bit of pop in orbit, as my 12 core worlds are at 50% resource-integral hold; with that dropped it'd be 47.8k.
Same race, but with 11/3/18 mines, got 46k, but 48.6k with all pop dropped (more efficient mines allow slightly-faster compounding on planets with limited G). Same somewhat-hobbled colonisation strategy. I think at that point I can pretty clearly say that 50k from a 3i is possible, but it'd be hard to milk much more out of it without dropping to bi-immune or one-immune and getting better growth. 7% gets faster growth than 6%, yes, but you'll have much poorer factory settings to make up the >800pt cost of 7% so I doubt you'd get substantially over 50k even then.
(Feel free to prove me wrong, though!)
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: 2450 benchmark |
Mon, 21 November 2016 07:39 |
|
|
|
lot of testbedding wealth here.
For future HE players, can you upload all the game files and upload it on the wiki or dropbox?
Would be nice to have a look (in 15-30 mins) instead of spending a few days recreating the testbed!
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: 2450 benchmark |
Tue, 22 November 2016 14:58 |
|
|
|
Hi ,
still looking for nummbers ?
Only resources counts by 2450 ?
Small Packed , max minerals , no random events
ccmaster
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
)
). As I've said, though, I didn't go for absolute max but replicability, so I'm not entirely sure how much help the files would be.