| Re: How to survive with 16% growth |
Sat, 01 September 2007 13:41  |
|
 Marduk |
 | Ensign |
Messages: 345
Registered: January 2003
Location: Dayton, OH | |
|
| Dogthinkers wrote on Fri, 27 July 2007 04:36 |
With IS though, I'd really question the logic of taking less than 18%, preferably 19%. You really want that orbital growth to compound *fast* so it pays off fast enough to justify the investment.
|
The logic is much the same as the argument between -f and HP; you sacrifice growth rate for a better end result, whether it is through better hab settings, better tech settings, or whatever else.
I did quite well with a 16% IS, though it was clear after about 20 years that I would have done better to narrow my hab in favor of raising my PGR. The logic seems sound, but the 16% growth rate ended up delaying the orgies by too many years through a combination of having fewer resources for research and taking longer to build the excess population.
The race plan was all about rapid expansion, grabbing as much territory early on as possible. Having those extra greens close seemed nice, but they ended up slowing my expansion in terms of area controlled. If I had gone out farther sooner, I would have had about the same number of good green worlds but would have controlled a much larger area. With so many more systems, my overall planetary population would have been about half again as high despite the average planet value being lower.
The only way I can see a 16% IS working is with wide hab settings and a plan to quietly occupy a corner and just keep building. If you try this, you should not be -f; though as Dogthinkers points out a full HP doesn't really suit IS racial abilities. After all, once you are ready to come out of your corner you will need to build up new systems quickly. Also, you need good resources from population in case your neighbors aren't the type to let you sit quietly and need to be convinced otherwise.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
