T'Aleen Empire Posted August 8, 2003 Report Share Posted August 8, 2003 Hello my fellow players, I have a question for you all to probe and talk about: Topic: Placement of Colonies Question: Would you think it a good idea, using "Domed City" Inst to place a small Science colony on each and every orbit (planet/moon/gas giant, and asteroid belt) within your HW system? Also if you had all the Science Inst there and a scientist as well, do you think you might get a bonus in Science Tech break throughs? Also when setting up a colony, do you mine all of the orbits resources or do you just focus on 1-2 needed elements? So what do you guys think? Penn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobknob Posted August 8, 2003 Report Share Posted August 8, 2003 I am not sure that having lots of colonies is that much of an advantage. For each colony you have you will also need a freighter fleet to bring back the mined materials, a colony fleet to move pop over to it and several convoy routes that will need to be maintained. If your potentials are high then it is generally worth it, if you pots are kinda mediocre then it may not be worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azuth Posted August 8, 2003 Report Share Posted August 8, 2003 Let me answer the 2nd question first. I have only 1 planet with no moons, therefore, I do not have the opportunity to colonize anything else in my homeworld system. However, I do have colonies in other systems. Some because the planet conditions were ideal for me (therefore, don't have to worry about attrition) and others because of the high yields of certain resources. As for the 1st question. Where I place a colony at, I make sure a build a Science Output or something there with a scientist (if I can spare him/her). Convoy routes are the best thing so far in this game. Once you make them, just build the ships and send them on their way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laserwolf Posted August 8, 2003 Report Share Posted August 8, 2003 I just landed my 20th colony and let me put it this way... do the math. Every colonist is hundreds of times more efficient at mining than the union guy you pull off your HW. For us colonizers it is about squeezing every last tenth of a percent of efficiency our of our workforce. SO what if you have to use a dozen orders to set up a convoy route. You do it once and you are done. For those of you with a few crud planets in your home system I challenge you. Take 100 people directly from your crystal mines and put them on each of the planets as if they were mining crystals there. So 5 worlds = 500 dropped from HW crystal mines. Do the math. You'll be amazed. ~ Laserwolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clan Elder 'Keen Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 While you are doing math, also look at the timeline for a colonial break-even return to pay back the materials for the ships, and CMs for the mines and power. You will discover just how long-term this game is structured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ur Lord Tedric Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 For those of you with a few crud planets in your home system I challenge you. Take 100 people directly from your crystal mines and put them on each of the planets as if they were mining crystals there. So 5 worlds = 500 dropped from HW crystal mines. Do the math. You'll be amazed. I'm sorry, I don't understand this statement? If I take people off mines, then they are wasted vis a vis Stripmines. Your HW should be maxed out on mines! If I take 100 people to the other planets in my home system - they'll die! However, if you mean the maths that shows that Mines on colonies are so much more efficient that SMs & ICs on the HW, then I'll certainly agree. Chief Planner to Ur-Lord Tedric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WKE235 Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 Lets take an example. Say I have 400 for a deposit on the homeworld. At 1985 mines, I'm generating 400,970 units of whatever. Now lets say I find another world with a 400 deposit on the same material. I decide to take 100 POP of the current mines along with the mines and transfer them. back on the homeworld, I'm now generating 1885 mines at 399,620 units ... or a loss of 1,350 units. Once the colony is set up, the colony will generate 39,000 units of the material. Hence overall I am now generating a total of 37,650 units more per turn than before! WOW! The key here is the first mines / refineries generate the near the maximum yield for the location. As you get higher and higher in numbers, you get decreasing yields for each new mine. Hence for big deposits, you get a lot more per worker off world than you do on the homeworld. Of course this takes some good planning to work out. You need a world were attrition is at least offset by pop growth. In that way you set down the workers and materials and start producing and the pop will be stable at the least. You can do this for all the high end yields. You can also build enough industry to reduce the cargo load. Crushing 39,000 Light metals per turn into 13,000 Transaluminum would only take 156 IC. Add a few more POP for soem IC's to produce Coal, and build a few coal plants to run the mines .. and you're still more efficent than the homeworld. Overall, you should keep the HW maxed out if you have nothing better to do with the POP. But if you can set-up colonies on other worlds with very good yields and set-up the convoy route to bring home the bacon .. you're set. TO THE Original Question -- I have been building colonies on at least one world in systems so I can build science stations to help scan the systems warp points. I have also sent ships to those worlds to do explores on the hope the sci buildings will increase the odds of finds. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. But I needed them for the warp surveys anyway. Beyond that, will it increase the chance of a breakthrough? I do not know. You would have to have a scientist on the world with the buildings if there is to be any impact (it won't impact the folks back on the HW). I concentrate on mining the big yields of materials I use a lot of. Mining lesser yields if you really don't use a lot of them are not the best "economical" choice at this point. Iron of course is always popular. Crystals for all the electronics. Lumber is good since unless you are blessed with a terrestrial world, you spend a lot of raw on creating the lumber needed for timber for construction materials. And so on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowKitsune Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 [Deflector Shields ON] Is it just me or does the game seem to be Oxy-centric, favors Oxygen-atmospehere worlds, with regards to resource availability and variance while the SN:ROTE Universe, in and of itself, is not? While I've found Crystals, Iron, Gaseous Elements and Industrial Chemicals on most of the world's I have found regardless of Atmosphere. Certain items, such as Foodstuff components: Meat, Grain, Water, Fruits & Vegetables, and Lumber seem to be predominantly on Oxygen/Water worlds. I've also noticed that non-Oxygen worlds tend to have a smaller variety of resource types (avg: 7) when compared to Oxygen worlds (avg: 11). I'm not complaining, per se. I was just wondering if anybody else noticed a similar pattern in their GEO Surveys? [Deflector Shields OFF] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyarlathotep Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 [Deflector Shields ON] Is it just me or does the game seem to be Oxy-centric, favors Oxygen-atmospehere worlds, with regards to resource availability and variance while the SN:ROTE Universe, in and of itself, is not? While I've found Crystals, Iron, Gaseous Elements and Industrial Chemicals on most of the world's I have found regardless of Atmosphere. Certain items, such as Foodstuff components: Meat, Grain, Water, Fruits & Vegetables, and Lumber seem to be predominantly on Oxygen/Water worlds. I've also noticed that non-Oxygen worlds tend to have a smaller variety of resource types (avg: 7) when compared to Oxygen worlds (avg: 11). I'm not complaining, per se. I was just wondering if anybody else noticed a similar pattern in their GEO Surveys? [Deflector Shields OFF] >>>>> I think the game is terrestrial-centric, with with *maybe* a slight bias in favor of oxygen worlds... But I have seen a 16 commodity carbon dioxide world, with a high value of 558 and sufficiently high hydro that hydro-electric is more useful than fission plants. It also had fruits and vegetables... I will, however, be the first to say this little gem is possibly an outlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobknob Posted August 11, 2003 Report Share Posted August 11, 2003 I have seen that Oxygen planets are one of the least frequently found atmospheres that I have seen and I feel for anybody who started on one. I also see that oxygen planets tend to suck for fuel skimming. As far as resources go, I find the moons have 7-9 resource potentials while planets generally have 13-16 potentials. My data does reflect a rather small sampling since I don't routinely GEO any planet that isn't a potential colony. I noticed early on that lumber and grain were not to be seen on planets and moons. When I pointed this out to Pete he said he noticed it too and was looking into what the cause was. I never heard what that cause was, but it has been noted since the game started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EternusIV Posted August 11, 2003 Report Share Posted August 11, 2003 Here is my two humble cents. I have max colonization bonuses and exploration traditions. I've scanned a ton of worlds early on and found lots of great places! However - CBs and CMs "cap" my colonization potential. Not to mention I have some STEEP warp points between myself and the more desirable systems and sadly - my 625 Iron Yield world within my home system is quite turbulent. So- My game plan? 1) Work on tech to get to that 625 yield ASAP 2) Build enough CBs and CMs to start sending in large amounts of population to the favorable yield worlds. I dont "max" tho cuz I beleive in having ground forces to defend colonies and fleets...thats a strategic choice on my part. My initial thought was to "fill up" one colony at a time. After all, you get bigger pop growth bonuses with 1 large colony than several spread out ones. Also, you save CM efficiency by having to build infrastructure for one colony instead of several and one colony is easier to defend, supply and maintain. However the flip side with several colonies is that you ca spread out and have several little depots. Your growth will NOT be as beneficial as building a single big colony but you may have a slight strategic advantage and nice baby forward bases that can do some research and help with warp points in that system. I'm sticking with my plan of building the super colony until the maximum yield for favoralbe resources is met. Its costing me less orders and I can control it easier. Teh growth is kicking in and well...I just like it that way damnit! Once my first super colony is met - its on to the next (and by then I might have enough tech advances to land on that 625 Yield planet) I agree with 100% of waht WKE said. What I might add is this - dont be afriad to build up SM/IC like he suggested because you can convert them into CMs for more efficient industries down the line. Sadly, its impossible for me to "max" my populaiton workload because of my insane growth rate...and building 100% CMs is just bad strategy so I'm content with my current strategy for now until the new breakthroughs show up Lastly, I would strongly consider your fuel and order needs when implementing your colonization plan. Good luck! Edit: As for oxygen-bias....I love it. Its more realistic. Carbon lifeforms theoretically need oxygen to decompose to create fossil fuels and conditions for things like forests and grain and water. Water would be tough to come by without oxygen /salute to Pete and Russ if this was inentional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowKitsune Posted August 11, 2003 Report Share Posted August 11, 2003 Spawny, I do not disagree with what you are saying. However, I think you missed my point. Who said that we're all carbon based lifeforms? Heck, why don't species like yours require Plantfoods instead of Foodstuffs to make Food Concentrates for your people? If my race evolved on a world without trees, why would we learn to use lumber to build our structures? I accept that for playability certain simplifications are required, which is why I like the whole Raw Resources conversion solution. I was merely observing that Oxygen worlds tended to be more bountiful when it came to the variety of resources available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyarlathotep Posted August 12, 2003 Report Share Posted August 12, 2003 Spawny, I do not disagree with what you are saying. However, I think you missed my point. Who said that we're all carbon based lifeforms? Heck, why don't species like yours require Plantfoods instead of Foodstuffs to make Food Concentrates for your people? If my race evolved on a world without trees, why would we learn to use lumber to build our structures? I accept that for playability certain simplifications are required, which is why I like the whole Raw Resources conversion solution. I was merely observing that Oxygen worlds tended to be more bountiful when it came to the variety of resources available. >>>>> Prolly b/c plantfood is a heck of a lot cheaper to make than food concentrates, both in component resources and, therefore, in drain of processing capacity. As for variety, I will say again, I think you've got it wrong... temperature / planet class seems to be as much of a variable in planet output as atmosphere. Nyarlathotep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sha'thar of the Gosht Kohr Posted August 12, 2003 Report Share Posted August 12, 2003 Sha'thar blinks. All this thinking makes her head hurt. Best to trust one's instincts. If it helps you, it's a friend. If it doesn't help you, it's meat. Certainly, there's a lot of wisdom to knowing how many mines a planet can host, but that's what the ministers are for. That's a job for the cloistered males, freeing her clan sisters for more exciting things! Exploration, and the hunt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EternusIV Posted August 12, 2003 Report Share Posted August 12, 2003 I get your point NOW :lol: Sorry -- too much time under a hood replacing a steering line can screw everything up Good points. I see where you are coming from. Its hard to design non-carbon lifeforms I think. Didnt SNII have Silicoid somethings? Yeah - our troops eat meat ) Sort of funny -- but I imagine the meat translates into "fertilizer" after decombposing etc etc etc etc ) Ok - thats a stretch. The fact that our troops use grains etc doesnt bother me too much. Its a convenient system for establishing units that we all can understand and use. To me the resources are just labels anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.