| Re: Energy at normal / expensive |
Wed, 28 May 2014 16:56   |
|
 skoormit |
 | Lieutenant |
Messages: 665
Registered: July 2008
Location: Alabama | |
|
Testbedding can be useful, but for comparisons like these there's just too much noise from the randomness (like you said, 1 more green within 1 hop makes a huge difference).
I've always had a hard time coming up with a useful way to calculate the value of hab settings and econ settings on a single scale.
A monte carlo sim might work:
Generate random hab values for a huge number of planets. (someone knows the random algorithm, right?)
Then iterate the following:
1) select from the set a random collection of X, Y, and Z planets as 1hop, 2hop, and 3hops from the HW. (universe size/density + geometry should tell you the expected values of x, y, and z, modulo corners--so assume universe remapped to a circle and hw at least 245ly from edge of circle).
2) pass those 3 planet sets and a set of hab/production settings to an algorithm that determines the optimal expansion pattern among these planets for this race and spits out a "resources by year" theoretical result (smells crunchy, but probably doable, especially if you handwave some stuff that doesn't move the needle much)
3) dump those theoretical results into a database of some sort
After you've got enough data, compare the results for different hab/production settings.
I'd really love to know how long it takes Total Terraforming to pay off....
What we need's a few good taters.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
