domed vs. subterranean

[octagon999]

In regards to the logic, I visualize it more like you start out with a city with basic, and then you put a dome on it, and then you dig underground and put all the sensitive stuff (like people?) safely away. So in that way it becomes additive.

 

The other way to visualize it is that each tech/build allows a much more robust version that includes the original model. For example, with Mk I Field Hospital you get bandaids and bourbon. With Mk II you get antibiotics plus the aforementioned medicinal supplies. Its not so much that the Mk I's stay around, its just that the strength of the mk II includes the strength of the mk I PLUS the additional strength of the Mk II without deleting the old value.

 

Case in point, nuclear pulse engine tech for fighters/drones.

[Drasn]

You need: 2nd Generation Civil Engineering and Improved Construction Materials (last one includes Improved Steel and Improved Timber ofcourse).

 

This is incorrect. You only need Timber and Improved Steel to build Improved Conmstruction Materials. RTG made a mistake in setting up the prereqs and left it as Timber. You will need to research Improved Timber though since when you are ready for Advanced Construction Materials, you will need Advanced Steel and Advanced Timber as well in order to build them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for the info guys. I'll make sure to write it down this time. Looks like I'm accidentally on the right track after all!

[ali-t-akua]

I have domed cities and have not been able to drop any moderates to zero attrition. I get very low to zero, but not yet moderate to zero. It could be other factors, such as race and, or course, gravity, temp, tilt, etc.

 

You are correct about there being other factors. In the case of my largest colony, atmosphere was the only major factor. Lifeform takes care of the rest which are minor differences.

[WKE235]

Are subterranean cities 1 per 100 like domed?  I would assume so but don't recall seeing it specifically stated anywhere.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My recollection (away from my materials) is 100 housed, 1 pop to run.

 

Octus

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Note that it is 1 per 100 to get the maximum benefit. But you do not need 1 for every 100 to get some nice benefits.

 

Example: I had a test colony where I had domed cities, cities, fluid conversion, and colonial training centers .. one for every 100 folks. With over 200 POP I was growing 1 and losing 10 (net loss of 9) per turn. I built 1, just 1, Subterranian City. All Population losses were eliminated. I went from High to very low (Domed City, City, Fluid Conversion Plant, and Colonial Training Center), and then from Very Low to nearly ideal attrtition (added Subterranian City).

 

Any installations are better then none. And you can get a lot of benefit with even a small number of installations (depending on the overall population size).

[ali-t-akua]

WKE thanks for the insight. My question is what were the negative factors facing the colony as I have the impression (reinforced in this thread) that cities have different impacts on different environmental factors. For instance Domed Cities in its description state that the impact of atmosphere is reduced. Also that Subterranean Cities add reduction of the impact of microbes and so on.

[Octus Imperium]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Note that it is 1 per 100 to get the maximum benefit. But you do not need 1 for every 100 to get some nice benefits.

 

Example: I had a test colony where I had domed cities, cities, fluid conversion, and colonial training centers .. one for every 100 folks. With over 200 POP I was growing 1 and losing 10 (net loss of 9) per turn. I built 1, just 1, Subterranian City. All Population losses were eliminated. I went from High to very low (Domed City, City, Fluid Conversion Plant, and Colonial Training Center), and then from Very Low to nearly ideal attrtition (added Subterranian City).

 

Any installations are better then none. And you can get a lot of benefit with even a small number of installations (depending on the overall population size).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Very useful insights from all. Much appreciated by myself and all the lurkers out there.

 

<rubbing hands together> Time to build some ACM's and slake (wish we had spell check) the thirst for iron on those nearly unihabitable rocks out there. Now about those crystals inventories....

 

Octus

 

[General Miles Avatar]

I on the other hand found a world with very low attrition. Atmosphere and liquid were identical.

only the temp was a bit off. After building enough sub cities(90) and other items such as a thermal transfer center and enough cities and training centers I still get horrible attrition.

 

Those items have lowered the attrition to almost half of what it was but I dont think my lifefirm can survive on anything other then thier homeworld unless of course there is something wrong

with my position which I doubt.

 

Im conducting experiments by dismantling the various installations and conducting CSV's to see if

anything really changes.

[WKE235]

WKE thanks for the insight. My question is what were the negative factors facing the colony as I have the impression (reinforced in this thread) that cities have different impacts on different environmental factors. For instance Domed Cities in its description state that the impact of atmosphere is reduced. Also that Subterranean Cities add reduction of the impact of microbes and so on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'll dig it up. As others pointed out, other factors (like radiation or gravity) may not be offset enough to make the world usable. In my case the big killer was Atmosphere, followed by Lifeform (yes, I have a negative to colonization .. man does that hurt). The domed cities reduced the atmosphere effects so the big thing was Lifeform, then atmosphere (then temp). I seem to remember that the subcity virtually wiped out any problems with atmosphere and something else as well. I'll have to find the old turn.

 

 

I did try experimenting on a Gas Giant (my HW is 4.6 G's, so at least no Gravity problems). With just the Subterranian city, I went from Very Nearly Prohibative (with the worst from temp and atmosphere) to High (and 0 from atmosphere .. any atmosphere problems were eliminated .. Temperture may have improved, but I'm not certain as it took up the slack in the numbers when Atmosphere went to 0).

[Lord Xaar]

I on the other hand found a world with very low attrition. Atmosphere and liquid were identical.

only the temp was a bit off. After building enough sub cities(90) and other items such as a thermal transfer center and enough cities and training centers I still get horrible attrition.

 

Those items have lowered the attrition to almost half of what it was but I dont think my lifefirm can survive on anything other then thier homeworld unless of course there is something wrong

with my position which I doubt.

 

Im conducting experiments by dismantling the various installations and conducting CSV's to see if

anything really changes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How much of a temperature difference is a "bit off"? Temperature is very hard to counteract - in my experience DUCKs and TTCs don't really help if the world's temp is very far out of the race's temp range. I've seen Sub. Cities cut attrition in half on high attrition worlds, so they are clearly worth building. (By themselves though still not enough to guarantee no attrition)

 

If you needed 90 Sub. Cities on this colony you are probably over "the limit" on that world with current tech. I've not really been tracking this stuff closely, but it has seemed to me that attrition will pick back up as population increases, even if you've got all the Insts. you need.

 

-LX

[Lord Xaar]

I'll dig it up.  As others pointed out, other factors (like radiation or gravity) may not be offset enough to make the world usable.  In my case the big killer was Atmosphere, followed by Lifeform (yes, I have a negative to colonization .. man does that hurt).  The domed cities reduced the atmosphere effects so the big thing was Lifeform, then atmosphere (then temp).  I seem to remember that the subcity virtually wiped out any problems with atmosphere and something else as well.  I'll have to find the old turn.

 

 

I did try experimenting on a Gas Giant (my HW is 4.6 G's, so at least no Gravity problems).  With just the Subterranian city, I went from Very Nearly Prohibative (with the worst from temp and atmosphere) to High (and 0 from atmosphere .. any atmosphere problems were eliminated .. Temperture may have improved, but I'm not certain as it took up the slack in the numbers when Atmosphere went to 0).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Interesting. If we can build Domed Cities and Sub. Cities to wipe out Atmosphere differences, why would we would to build Atmosphere Exchangers which require a lot of power? I've not seen a AtmEx built yet...

 

I guess on a really large colony it would be better to build one AtmEx instead of 100s of Domed and Sub. Cities. I suppose I answered my own question.

 

-LX

[hobknob]

You will need atmosphere exchangers because a domed city will not reduce the effects of atmosphere completely. This won't matter if you have other CB bonuses, but if you don't you will find that the attrition never really goes away.

 

Each type of installation offsets specific bad elements. Domed cities are good for atmosphere, sub cities don't say much but mention microbes and alien floura and fauna. So you have to build the stuff to offset your exact problem. Your lifeform bonuses never go away or are lost due to building installations, they are only augmented.

 

 

Evey lifeform is different and will have unique solutions to many problems. for one of my positions I am ideal, or near to it, on any planet that is cold unless it has problems with pollution/radiation/microbes.

 

It all depends. One thing is for sure though, it is temperature that gives you the most trouble and has the least amount of corrective installations. Most everything else can be moderated by the proper installations.

 

[WKE235]

You will need atmosphere exchangers because a domed city will not reduce the effects of atmosphere completely.  This won't matter if you have other CB bonuses, but if you don't you will find that the attrition never really goes away.

 

Each type of installation offsets specific bad elements.  Domed cities are good for atmosphere, sub cities don't say much but mention microbes and alien floura and fauna.  So you have to build the stuff to offset your exact problem.  Your lifeform bonuses never go away or are lost due to building installations, they are only augmented.

 

 

Evey lifeform is different and will have unique solutions to many problems.  for one of my positions I am ideal, or near to it,  on any planet that is cold unless it has problems with pollution/radiation/microbes.

 

It all depends.  One thing is for sure though, it is temperature that gives you the most trouble and has the least amount of corrective installations.  Most everything else can be moderated by the proper installations.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, your random race start HW will decide alot as well. When you come from a 4.6 G Homeworld, Gravity tends to be a real big killer in finding suitable worlds. Makes settling asteriods nigh impossible. And there is nothing (yet) to fix gravity, except for Species Engineering (or racial choices at start). Add in a HW start with 110 K, and colonization is tough to accomplish.

[Ozboym]

Well, your random race start HW will decide alot as well.  When you come from a 4.6 G Homeworld, Gravity tends to be a real big killer in finding suitable worlds.  Makes settling asteriods nigh impossible.  And there is nothing (yet) to fix gravity, except for Species Engineering (or racial choices at start).  Add in a HW start with 110 K, and colonization is tough to accomplish.

 

I was just thinking that myself while trying to figure out what to do with my second position that seems to have been landed with a 3.5g homeworld. That's bad enough, but you have my sympathy for 4.6g.

 

Makes you wonder how HW are dished out. Is it random? If my races gravity could have been only say 1.5g instead of 3.5g, every asteroid in my home system would have been easily colonisable in spite of a not very strong CB. Instead what I've got is just about everywhere has a gravity modify 4 times as big as my CB. The only places that look like I have a hope of landing a colony are two moons with favourable terrain that can offset the gravity, neither of which has the strong iron resource (157 and 347) that I'm looking for now.

 

So is it random luck that has stopped me being able to exploit the asteroid who's CSV looks like:

 

Attrition: very high

Atmosphere: -----------------------------|

Ocean: -----|

Temperature: -|

Gravity: -----------------|

Lifeform (favorable) ....|

 

But which has an iron rating of 749!

[hobknob]

I have seen folks with a gravity of 5 that colonize asteroids as ideal with the proper installations.

[crossroads]

I have seen folks with a gravity of 5 that colonize asteroids as ideal with the proper installations. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And what for installations were used in the case you mentioned?