| Re: Why 3%? |
Wed, 03 December 2008 21:59   |
|
 mlaub |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 744
Registered: November 2003
Location: MN, USA | |
|
| neilhoward wrote on Wed, 03 December 2008 13:00 |
Better pop efficiency and lower factory costs both argue for 3% in my book. This helps on both ends. Faster factory compounding and better max resources per planet. Lower growth rate helps justify having a larger percent of total pop in transit each year afaic. If you are willing to go as low as 4%, you might as well take 3%.
|
Wow. Old thread...
3% is to slow for pop growth.
You don't need the extra pop growth for resources, you need it to control all the factories you can build. 3% just gives to many extra points, but you can only go up to 15/x/25 on factories. What most fail to figure out is that you are better off putting your rw points to 15 eff factories, and all 25 per 1000 pop, rather than 1/700 pop eff.
Also, it's alot like playing an AR early game. You need strong diplomacy to survive. However, If you make it to ~Y2475 intact, you can really inflict some damage.
-Matt
Global Warming - A climatic change eagerly awaited by most Minnesotans.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
