Home » Primary Racial Traits » AR » AR design
| Re: AR design |
Tue, 15 August 2006 13:29   |
|
|
|
| Kotk wrote on Tue, 15 August 2006 18:59 |
I am no math teacher, but okay i try... 
Simple example situation: you have 32 planets. 20 are 60% planets and 12 are 100% planets, all planets are fully terraformed and 1 500 000 full, max energy. Now the QUESTIONZ:
How many all 60% planets grow per year together?
How many all 100% planets generate resources per turn?
If you fill all 100% planets up how many they generate resources?
How many LF of pop you need to fill up all 100% planets?
How many all 100% planets grow per year?
How many all 60% planets generate resources?
If you fill all 60% planets up how many they generate resources?
How many LF of pop you need to fill up all 60% planets?
So what strategy you suggest for faster ramp-up and why? 
|
Well, tried to calculate and here is what I got:
Assume we have En22, /10 divisor and 15% growth rate. Assume also that we have 15 100% planets and 25 60% (for simpler math). Assume we move all pop in 2 years (average).
100% planet generates 1816 resources.
60% generates 1089.
At 3M of pop:
100% planet generates 2569 resources.
60% generates 1541.
So, if we fill in one 100% planet instead of one 60% to 3M of people, we get (2569 - 1816) - (1541 - 1089) = 301 resource more. It looks like packing of 100% planets first is better.
Now, 100% planet at 1.5M grows with rate 100,000 pop. 15 planets give 1,500,000 of pop. Other 60% planets also grow with rate 60,000, that gives additional 1,500,000 of pop. This allows fill in 2 planets at the first year.
Now, strategies to compare:
1. 100% first strategy.
First 3 years we just grow and pick up pop.
- year 3: we pack 2 100% planets, so we get more resources there, but no growth. Now we have 1,300,000 each year off from 100% planets. 6M of pop in flight.
- year 4: 4 planets packed, 100% planets give 1,100,000 each year 5.8M of pop in flight.
- year 5: 6 planets packed, 5.4M in flight, 100% grow by 900,000
- year 6: 7 packed + one almost packed (ignoring here), 5M in flight, 100% planets grow by 700,000
- year 7: 9 packed + 900k for one (ignoring here), 4.6M in flight, grow by 500,000
- year 8: 11 packed + 300k for one (NOT ignoring here - assuming 100k more). Grow by 400,000
- year 9: 12 packed + 1M added to one (ignoring here). 100% Grow by 200k.
- year 10: 14 packed exactly. 100% grow by 100k.
- year 11: all 15 100% planets are packed + 400k leftover.
- year 12: 16 (1 60%) packed + 600k leftover
- year 13: 17 (1 60%) packed + 700k leftover
2. 60% first strategy.
First 3 years we just grow and pick up pop.
- year 3: we pack 2 60% planets, so we get more resources there, but no growth. Now we have 1,380,000 each year off from 60% planets. 6M of pop in flight.
- year 4: 4 planets packed, 60% planets give 1,260,000 each year 5.88M of pop in flight.
- year 5: 6 planets packed, 5.64M in flight, 60% grow by 1,140,000
- year 6: 7 packed + one almost packed - +1.38M (ignoring here), 5.4M in flight, 60% planets grow by 1,020,000
- year 7: 9 packed + 1.14M for one (ignoring here), 5.16M in flight, grow by 900,000
- year 8: 11 packed + 780k for one (NOT ignoring here - assuming 20k more). Grow by 800,000. 4.92M in flight
- year 9: 13 packed + 300k added to one (NOT ignoring here). 60% grow by 720k. 4.7M in flight
- year 10: 14 packed + 1.2M added to one (ignoring here). 60% grow by 600k.
- year 11: 16 60% planets packed + 500k leftover.
- year 12: 17 packed + 1.22M leftover
- year 13: 19 packed + 320k leftover
At this moment, we can compare.
Packed 100% planets give 11295 additional resources. With strategy 2, 17 packed 60% planets give 7684 additional resources (extracted 2 60% packed from strategy 1).
Let's continue our packing some more and see what if with strategy 2 we move all pop from 60% planets to 100% planets in 2 turns and pack 100% by that. We get the same as with strategy 1, but 2 years later. More, we get 2 more planets packed than with strategy 1, that gives more final resources - you got more people in the end. It is 904 resources.
If strategy 2 continues some more to pack 60% even more using full growth of 100% planets before return pop to 100%, it may improve.
Anyway, it takes 20 years or so to pay off initial resource loses compare to strategy 1. Loses here: 14k because you move pop from 60% to 100% (though pop grows even more during that  ), and resources you could accumulate in research from 100% planets that were not accumulated because 60% planets filled instead of 100%. These are 301*2 + 301*4 + ... etc for all years we are packing.
CONCLUSION: packing 100% first is better if you are critical in techs research for next 30 years. Otherwise, if you can wait, after 30 years or so, you will end up in more total resources invested into reasearch/building than with strategy 1, as well as in 15 years you get better resources output than withs trategy 1.
30 years is a lot  (It is turn 80-90!) So the right path would be filling in 100% planets first, unless you have allies that you trust or unless it is a team game
WBR, Vlad
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Tue, 10 June 2003 07:04 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Sotek on Wed, 03 September 2003 23:33 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: freakyboy on Thu, 04 September 2003 02:39 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Fri, 05 September 2003 02:41 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Tue, 04 July 2006 13:27 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Tue, 04 July 2006 15:53 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Thu, 06 July 2006 02:34 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Thu, 06 July 2006 08:08 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Thu, 06 July 2006 12:49 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Thu, 06 July 2006 17:30 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Fri, 07 July 2006 10:14 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Mon, 10 July 2006 14:35 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Fri, 07 July 2006 09:28 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Mon, 10 July 2006 09:42 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Mon, 10 July 2006 14:03 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Mon, 10 July 2006 15:35 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Tue, 11 July 2006 06:48 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Tue, 11 July 2006 16:50 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Tue, 11 July 2006 18:33 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Wed, 12 July 2006 03:05 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Staz on Tue, 01 August 2006 14:22 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Marduk on Tue, 01 August 2006 16:50 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Staz on Tue, 01 August 2006 19:08 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Staz on Wed, 02 August 2006 07:49 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Tue, 01 August 2006 11:59 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: multilis on Tue, 01 August 2006 17:56 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Wed, 02 August 2006 04:39 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Tomasoid on Wed, 02 August 2006 07:50 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Wed, 02 August 2006 14:09 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Thu, 03 August 2006 03:59 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: joseph on Thu, 03 August 2006 07:09 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: multilis on Thu, 03 August 2006 10:36 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Fri, 04 August 2006 10:26 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: multilis on Sat, 05 August 2006 11:46 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: crr65536 on Wed, 09 August 2006 11:55 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Sat, 12 August 2006 20:05 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: multilis on Sun, 13 August 2006 01:04 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: crr65536 on Mon, 14 August 2006 01:58 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Tomasoid on Mon, 14 August 2006 12:19 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: crr65536 on Mon, 14 August 2006 14:11 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Mon, 14 August 2006 15:45 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Tomasoid on Tue, 15 August 2006 04:48 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Tue, 15 August 2006 08:51 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Tomasoid on Tue, 15 August 2006 09:30 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Tue, 15 August 2006 11:59 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Tomasoid on Tue, 15 August 2006 13:29 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Tue, 15 August 2006 19:51 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Tomasoid on Wed, 16 August 2006 07:46 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Wed, 16 August 2006 12:15 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: multilis on Wed, 16 August 2006 15:58 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: multilis on Wed, 02 August 2006 17:17 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Thu, 03 August 2006 00:23 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: multilis on Thu, 03 August 2006 02:37 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Thu, 04 September 2003 07:27 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: freakyboy on Thu, 04 September 2003 18:32 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Fri, 05 September 2003 02:12 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: freakyboy on Fri, 05 September 2003 02:41 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: freakyboy on Fri, 05 September 2003 02:46 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Fri, 05 September 2003 03:13 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: freakyboy on Fri, 05 September 2003 08:19 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: freakyboy on Fri, 05 September 2003 22:16 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Steve on Wed, 10 September 2003 09:38 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: iztok on Wed, 10 September 2003 09:55 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: XyliGUN on Mon, 26 June 2006 20:31 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: XyliGUN on Tue, 27 June 2006 20:49 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: Kotk on Tue, 27 June 2006 21:29 |
|
|
Re: AR design
|
|
|
Re: AR design
By: XyliGUN on Wed, 28 June 2006 03:41 |
|
|
Re: AR design
By: XyliGUN on Wed, 28 June 2006 03:59 |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun May 05 15:24:43 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
