Home World Forum
Stars! AutoHost web forums

 Jump to Stars! AutoHost

 
 
Home » Primary Racial Traits » AR » Wide + narrow vs all average habs
Re: Wide + narrow vs all average habs Fri, 06 January 2006 07:21 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Tomasoid is currently offline Tomasoid

 
Chief Warrant Officer 3

Messages: 182
Registered: December 2005
Location: Ukraine

 Hi!

Thanks for suggestions. I'm testing in the same universe. Using large packed game for several AR races to compare at once, and have not intersettled them Smile

After all posts, once again, I'll re-formulate the disbalance statement to make it more exact:

"AR race benefits much more than other races from taking equal hab ranges vs narrow+wide with the same total number of teraforming points in hab ranges, no matter how you compensate points loss for that."

The point is not in just comparing 2 nearly identical races. Let me explain again. By taking equal hab ranges for race 2 with preserving total teraforming points, I lose advantage points in race wizard. This loss is THE SAME for AR and non - AR races. YES, equal habs in such case have better % of green planets. HOWEVER, non-AR race performs almost equally the same after that, while AR economy develops much better by that no matter how you compensate lost points - by worse growth rate, more costly techs, non-critical change in LRTs (do not uncheck IFE Razz) etc.

It appears for me, for proper balance, AR should lose more advantage points in RW for many cases of habitability selections. AR economy (and, possibly, non-AR -f race) is more dependent on hab % than +f non-AR race. Thus better hab range should be handicapped more by RW for AR races.

BTW, I did similar tests for non-AR races as well Smile


Quote:

Hab range is not sum of range clicks. People who design races invest RW points not mouse clicks.
For example: If you make say 80% hab band one click narrower (so its 78%) you lost from your total hab only by 2.5% while making 20% hab band one click wider (so its 22%) you add 10% to your total hab. Someone already explained here to you that for getting numbers of habitable planets you got to multiply the ranges. That means in numbers close to your example 100%*20%*60% = 12% hab for first race and that is not equal 100%*40%*40% = 16% hab for the second race. So RW puts you correctly into 62 points hole with second race for making hab 33% wid
 ...

[ Show the rest of the message ]


WBR, Vlad

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: AR guide
Next Topic: Iperithon's AR
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Apr 16 13:34:38 EDT 2024
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.3.
Copyright ©2001-2011 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software