Re: "Not habitable", my foot! |
Wed, 29 May 2019 19:21 |
|
magic9mushroom | | Commander | Messages: 1361
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
iztok wrote on Wed, 29 May 2019 20:36Your numbers already did show that in games I'd play (some 30 planets per player) one 75% "breeder" would be sufficient to pop all the reds I'd expect to get in my share of the universe.
Quote:OTOH when those conquest give me lots of planets, then I start hitting RL and Stars! hard-coded limits, and colonizing reds just compounds them.
Good points.
Quote:Please do add a TL/DR for mere mortals.
BR, Iztok
I kinda did, actually, with the last paragraph of each section.
Altruist wrote on Thu, 30 May 2019 04:01The genius of science, to ask the right question so obvious that everybody wonders how could this have not been asked ever before.
Oh, it's been asked and answered before, I just haven't seen anyone pony up the hard numbers before. For instance:
Wreck wrote on Sun, 15 May 2005 10:25This is generally the best use for pop. Any PRT, not just IS, can benefit from red planet colonization. IS are a bit better in that they can grow pop to replace red-planet losses without having to lose productivity on their green worlds.
As for whether to overpop normal worlds or do red planets - reds are a much better deal. Overpop on a normal world will quickly get to 1.5% losses, or 3.0%, etc.
The only real problem with red planets is that there aren't enough, assuming a reasonably viable race design. A single 100% planet can grow enough pop to keep ~20-30 reds topped off. But nobody plays races with ~1/20 greens after terraforming.
Altruist wrote on Thu, 30 May 2019 04:49What's TL/DR?
"Too long/didn't read".
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|