Hi!

Kotk wrote on Thu, 06 July 2006 19:49

Tomasoid wrote on Thu, 06 July 2006 17:47 What to say... just try it out. Okay PM me a zip with tiny/packed/solo AR testbed with 1 in 5 hab and 35K resources at 2450 (start of midgame) or ... try that PRT out yourself first.

I feel tiny packed is too small for such testing

Quote:

Quote: Remember that you need to bring minerals back (see above about freighters). Whatever. Does not take rocket science to find other options to freightering. All i can add that I usually have 30+ colonies at 2420 so its possible.

And 60+ in year 30 or so, right? (To have any reasonable benefit from colonizing a lot of bad green and red planets, you need to colonize a LOT of them.) That's exactly what I tried too and such AR did not do weel afterall because lack of minerals. Or, maybe I did not put enough effort to bring back minerals from bad greens? Anyway I did not like MM of it for seems no much benefit.

Well, you may have your own strategy with really wide hab AR which you know so weel that I might ovelook some details or tricks related with it. I usually just build mining robots because see that this gives minerals a bit earlier than with colonizing bad greens.

Quote:

Quote: At the later game when you can drop tons of pop onto planet from neighbour Death Star and quickly get its hab 50% or even more, I agree, this pays off a lot. Yep but I did not talk about reds. With wide hab these all are greens I take plus some casual well-placed yellows for fuel docks.

I also meant by above bad green and yellow planets (with hab% less than 50%-60% after teraforming). These are slow for teraforming and barely could be useful for mid-game survival if you select too wide hab - because wide hab teraforiming is too slow.

Quote:

Quote: Quote: I am not saying that "pump everything into wider hab", that this is golden rule. Just ... in my testbeds wider hab seems sometimes better investment than IFE or cheap energy. It seems always better investment than growth rate, ARM, TT. We seems talk about different things here. Wider hab costs more RW points for any race. AR gets from too wide hab range much less, compare to RW points spent. Also, re-read again - I'm talking about benefit for mid-game survival, not a general (final) economy effect. What else you do with raw RW points but buy other things? I got also feeling that you talk about something else ... collect these RW points for mystery that you pluck out of pocket midgame. What is annoying you lack any direct suggestions what is better? I already said: IFE and/or energy tech are sometimes better especially in tight and not packed density environments, growth rate, ARM and/or TT are always worse. Either stop arguing or say where you disagree so i can correct your impression with ... lets say a duel?

YES, exactly! I did not argue. I just wanted to explain in details WHY too wide hab for AR is not good and IFE or cheaper Energy is better than really wide hab. I inisist however that it is not "sometimes" as you say. It is _always_ better not select too wide hab for AR and use RW points elsewhere.

Hey, Kotk, that's nice idea. AR vs AR duel? Looks ok for me. (I would not collect RW points here ) I just getting some more free time , so if you agree, we may start small/packed AR duel. But you select really wide hab range, say 1 in 2. Agree?

Quote:

Quote: AR should never be late in Weapons, specially with W10 if you got IT planet close. Right, i am no way advocating being weaponless. Sure, research it or buy asap. My point was that it does not take diplomacy genius to buy weapons in universe where most races got it cheap, especially for a race whose energy and construction tech are quite hard to catch.

In Infight game where that happened you could exchange techs (and ally) with only _ONE_ race. That was special to that game . In other circumstanses - you are right, tech exchange for AR is easier because AR always ahead in Energy and Construction.

[Mod edit: fixed quote}

[Updated on: Fri, 07 July 2006 04:52] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator