how much does the +2 research do?

[icevic]

if not, then the UN Peace Keeper would have a definate upper hand against the UoP drone infested population. All is fine with population lower than 20 but above it becomes a more significant problem. Can a well energized UN faction with Knowledge beat a University faction in tech?

Vic

[WhiteElephants]

I suppose anything is possible, but you might be forgetting that each University base gets a free +50% to their labs because of their free net nodes. I would also think that a base as large as 20 would have quite a lot of specialists and psych enhancing facilities to counteract all those drones.

Edit: I believe that the +2 research adds 20%.

[Teeks]

It really depends. The thing is that the University has to allocate energy towards psych or spend maintenance on drone-reducing facilities, thereby decreasing allocation in energy and/or labs. The PK's can get into a GA quite easily, and with their exceeded hab limits, can get their pop up quickly, thereby producing more energy. If the University can snatch the VW, however, it's a whole different story. Instead of having to allocate energy or labs into psych or spend maintenance on drone reducing facilities, it's got a free Hologram Theatre at every base.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Teeks
It really depends. The thing is that the University has to allocate energy towards psych or spend maintenance on drone-reducing facilities, thereby decreasing allocation in energy and/or labs. The PK's can get into a GA quite easily, and with their exceeded hab limits, can get their pop up quickly, thereby producing more energy. If the University can snatch the VW, however, it's a whole different story. Instead of having to allocate energy or labs into psych or spend maintenance on drone reducing facilities, it's got a free Hologram Theatre at every base.

Teeks,

I play the University a lot, and have found that a specialist approach is very effective. By replacing workers with crawlers and terraforming to suit crawlers (ie maximizing the output of a square to stress one FOP) I can kick major butt in research without any drone problems at all. Typically I only work boreholes and shelf squares with kelp farms and tidal harnesses. All rocky squares get roads and mines, and all other squares get farms / condensors (& soil enrichers when I get the tech). Aside from negating the University's only real negative (the probe thing can be handled by probe garrisons and getting the HSA first), specialist cities can be useful in a number of other ways as well.

For instance I like to run Demo / Planned / Wealth to pop boom my way to size 14 bases. Normally this would be an economy killer, as tons of energy goes down the drain to inefficiency. With most of my energy coming from specialists I don't worry at all, as specialists production is immune to inefficiency. When running FM I can build bases which are all specialists and no workers to host my military expeditionary forces and air units. No workers = no drones = no riots due to military deployments.

One final note about specialists. In the early game the best specialists can produce three energy type FOP, and the best non-special squares can produce 4 nuts. Thus you can produce 6 efficiency proof labs or econ for every square. That's as good as a borehole energy wise (better if you count the efficiency loss of a worked borehole), and all you need is a crawler to haul the nuts (no drone facilities required to keep those two specialists in line). The advantage only increases as the game goes on. Soil enrichers increase your per square yield by another 50%, and Fusion brings Engineers and a further 66% increase in specialist productivity. Eventually transcendi, food satelites, cloning vats and hab domes blow the lid off of your productivity. And your bases can be numerous and spawled across the map, the specialists don't care about bureacracy!

[mark13]

One thing you have to remember is that the UoP have three *major* advantages when it comes to research over every other faction:

- Free Net Node in every base, effectively adding 50% labs (usually a little more, as it rounds up)
- +20% research
- Every tech costs less, as they start with a free tech.

This often allows the UoP to be at IndAuto by 2112-2113, whereas a faction like the PKs will struggle to hit it before 2130. OTOH, the extra talent gives the PKs the ability to run FM pretty much from the get-go, whereas the UoP have to wait until they get Rec Commons' up.

However, this is a small advantage in comparison, and the UoP gets a *huge* research boost in the early game. Of course, these advantages are cancelled in the later game by the probe bonus, and the drone problems you will get. However, get the VW and the HSA and you're singing - this makes the UoP an immensely powerful faction.

The specialist theory with the more economically-advantaged factions is one that I have never gotten on with, as generally in the mid-game (assuming FM) most squares will net you more energy than a specialist (and extra nuts and/or mins to boot). Specialist bases tend to kill production, and though I can see how the efficiency benefits can be handy, as long as you are not playing pure ICS, it is often more advantageous to only use specialists when pressed.

Just my opinion, anyway

[The Commodore]

Bah! The 'Borgs are better than the UoP at researching anyway. True, they don't get a free net-node, but they can run FM alot easier then Zak, as well as being able to expand faster than Lal with their great eff.

Even in old SMAC, I'd take Morgan over either. He never has to run FM at all.

[mark13]

Nope, I'd disagree with that - both the Cyborg and Morgan claims.

The only thing the Cybrogs have going for them is their +2 research, and +2 efficiency. This gives them a lot of flexibility in the early game as to their SE choices, but it is really no easier for them to run FM than the University.

However, this brings the Cyborgs their biggest advantage - assuming they have sufficient drone control, the can run Demo/FM/whatever at +4 efficiency i.e. no allocation penaltes.

The Cyborgs' big downfall, of course, is their -1 growth. This makes it exceedingly difficult for them to pop boom, which does their productivity and research capabilities a lot of harm. This is where the UoP come into their own - you can hit size 12-15 size 14 bases by the turn of the century, running FM and *raking* the cash in. The Cyborgs simply can't do this early on.

Of course, their early research is also a little second-rate when compared to the UoP - which is their ultimate downfall. An ability to hit IndAuto very early would offset most of their deficiencies, but it simply isn't possible.

Morgan. Hah, Morgan - I'll give you my views on Morgan. He gets a support penalty, which makes running Demo impossible early on - a hab limit, which means he is way behind in pop until he hits hab domes, and an inability to run planned, which makes life difficult with regard to pop booming (impossible in original SMAC, of course).

And what does he get for his trouble? A +1 economy rating. Gimme a break.

Having said that, as a pure builder faction, he can be quite competent in the early/mid-game - it is his many deficiencies which negate his usefulness in a practical situation. If you are on an island, all on your own for 100 years, that is fine - but how often does that happen in a normal SMAC scenario, SP or MP?

So, techwise, the UoP eats the other two you mentioned for breakfast. Sure, the Cyborgs have many military strengths (despite -1 morale) but that isn't the issue here.

[cbn]

I do not know if this matters in any practical sense but doesn't the +2 research reduce the cost of a new tech (fewer tech points needed) rather than increase research (more labs produced). It may be academic but I am trying to understand better how to maximize tech production.

Good debate on the factions. I tend to prefer the university over the borgs mainly because of the free net node as it really jump starts the research. BUt then again, one of my favorites is the drones with a research penalty--

[mark13]

cbn - the +2 research increases all labs production by 20%. Check the F2 screen early on in the game - your RP/turn will come up as 2.4, even though your base screen only says 2 labs/turn.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by mark13

The specialist theory with the more economically-advantaged factions is one that I have never gotten on with, as generally in the mid-game (assuming FM) most squares will net you more energy than a specialist (and extra nuts and/or mins to boot). Specialist bases tend to kill production, and though I can see how the efficiency benefits can be handy, as long as you are not playing pure ICS, it is often more advantageous to only use specialists when pressed.

Just my opinion, anyway

Mark,

Compare:

A forest square with a tree farm and hybrid forest produces:

3 nuts, 2 mins, 3 energy (+1 for FM), and uses one pop to harvest it. Total 4 energy and 1/2 specialist for another 1.5 to 2.5. Totals = 5.5 pre fusion, 6.5 post fusion. In addition you also receive 2 mins.

Any non-rocky square with farm / condensor produces 4 nuts, and takes no worker just a crawler. Those nuts can support 2 specialists = 6 energy pre-fusion, 10 energy post fusion.

Both strategies require additional costs. In the worker strategy you need drone management facilities, police (though not with FM) and or psych. In the specialist strategy you need a crawler (redeemable at full value later if you want) and more terraforming time.

The specialist strategy is superior to forests in terms of energy at almost every point in the game on a per square basis. It is not more productive than boreholes until the later stages of the game however, though you are limited to a maximum 1 in 4 squares boreholed, and that is very hard to get into play by mid game.

There are several advantages to having a superior productivity per square, but one of the most important is that you can place your bases closer together, which yields a significant turn advantage in the early game, as your bases are producing while other's colony pods are moving into position.

I don't start right out with specialist bases of course, it takes crawlers and terraforming to get them going. And I rarely build all specialist bases either, I work shelf squares and boreholes. That said it's nice to be able to build a lot of big bases in a small space (ten squares of land can easily support a size 14 base with decent minerals before satelites or soil enrichers) and it is also nice to be able to run planned without missing a beat. Left alone I can get my techs up to 1 every other turn by 2220 or so while running demo / planned and pop booming.

One obvious disadvantage to a specialist strategy in MP is the difficulty in defending your crawlers from marauding choppers. If I ever play MP I will think long and hard about what I can do quickly, cheaply and defensibly. OTOH, choppers can blow away terraforming as well as crawlers, so the best defense is probably a good offense.

[mark13]

Sik,

Thanks for that - though I still struggle to see the viability of such a strategy in MP games. So, you get a slight labs boon - even then, your production is way down, and you have to expend both the terraforming time (16 turns per former w/o the WP, 11 turns with) and the crawlers to get it into effect. I suppose in something other than FM, they are extremely useful indeed, but otherwise the gains seem too small for me to want to take either the time or expend the resources. Still, I can see how it might work - and even with bad SE settings, it will bring in a decent tech rate.

[cbn]

I have only begun experimenting with specialist bases but do find them very useful but have only used them in a limited way. I tend to create some bases that are designed to grow larger and get all the lab facilities and use specialists heavily. Other bases are more general and get a mix of forest, boreholes and nuts squares and use workers. Last are the bases that I might stick in a rocky area that will never grow beyond size 3 or so. You crawl just enough nuts to keep the pop at size 3 or so, work 2-3 boreholes and crawler in minerals. These bases have next to no facilities (perhaps some morale enhancers) and are designed simply to produce units be they probes, formers, military. This evolves depending on the terrain and other factions.


It has always seemed to me that you can efficiently crawl all of your crawled energy back to your HQ. While this would be very dangerous in MP and I therfore try to create a few science centres, it really works in SP where the AI never seems to understand that this base is both your biggest strength and your biggest vulnerability.

[WhiteElephants]

Mark -- I think the loss of mineral output is offset by producing crawlers for minerals first, and then crawlers for nutrients. Though I'm not sure I agree with the farm/condensor combo for the 4 nutrients.

Sik -- How many minerals can you bring in before you start generating eco damage with the condensor/farm combos lying about? (I imagine you've probably got Tree Farms at this point, I would think you've still got a short ways to go before Hybrids).

[Velociryx]

Every faction can benefit from specialists....some more than others of course, and there are a number of considerations:

First, your effie rating. If you've got a paradigm economy, then specialists fairly near your HQ may or may not be a good investment for you, as one of their chief selling points is immunity to inefficiency, and bases close to your HQ won't lose much, if anything. For this reason, I recommend heavily foresting the area surrounding your HQ and letting workers do their thing. Most important of all, this saves you terraforming time....time you NEED in order to do all the fancy terraforming work at your outlying bases. It's true that by the late game, you might wanna go back and revisit the forest in favor of something else (farm/condensor), but by that time, you're talking Transcendii, and the game's over anyway.

Second, how many pacts/treaties do you have? If you have a lot, then limit your use of specialists to far-flung bases that won't net you much anyway.

Third, if you've got certain SP's at certain bases (ie - the ME base), you might want to take a close look at what you're giving up by using specialists. Post restriction lifting, a worker working a forest tile with a river running through it will net you a TIDY sum of energy on his own (1 standard + 1 River + 1 ME, and possibly +1 FM) = 4. If I'm not mistaken, Hybrid forests add another +1 Nut and Energy(?) making them excellent producers all 'round.

If you build your bases close together, you WILL wind up using quite a few specialists, whether you want to or not....as the base continues to grow, you'll just plain run out of places for the workers to work, and will have no choice about it. They're good investments, but as with anything, I'd recommend taking a look at the opportunity costs involved with making an "all-specialist" empire.

At first glance, it looks astonishing. I mean, if you make every single member of your population a specialist, then you have no drone problems, meaning that you won't need drone control facilities. You won't suffer any effie problems, so you can run wierd SE configurations a la Yang and laugh as it has no effect on you. You can fight a war under FM, and home your units anywhere, and not have to worry about unrest. Pretty cool, eh?

But....

You WILL need Drone Control facilities.....because it'll take a long time for you to get all that set up, so you'll have to build all the usual drone control facilities, pay maintenance on them until you finish setting up your specialists everywhere, and then tear them down (for half value).

You'll Need a TON of crawlers. Even if you keep spiking your mineral counts at each base till you reach 30 and can build a crawler a turn, you'll still spend a significant portion of your game just building enough crawlers to support the all specialist approach.

You'll be vulnerable. Lose a crawler, the base starts to starve. Lose several crawlers, the base is in a crisis. Each time the base grows, you've gotta build a new crawler or hydrosat (or both) to maintain the base at its new size. This requires a lot of micromanagement and carries with it a high PIA factor.

On top of that, to minimize your crawler vulnerabilities, you'll need a big standing army and active patrols all over the place. Most players do this anyway, but adding the tedium of vigilent patrolling on top of the serious micromanagement of running an all-specialist empire and you get a game where turns take a couple hours each and your brain is numb from the effort of keeping everything running.

Not to knock the specialist approach at all, cos I use the HELL out of them myself, but what you should keep in the back of your mind is that the more specialist-intensive your game is, the more total terraforming time you need. If you forest your interior and let the workers at it, it's 3-4 turns and you're done. Significantly longer if you're wanting to do a farm/condensor and build a crawler for that tile.

WOW...did I write all that?

-=Vel=-
::feeling long-winded today...lol::

[Ned]

If one measures the factions solely on how they well they do against the human in an SP game, I have to say that Dr. Z is not a powerful faction. He tends to have fewer bases, and to keep them small. On the other hand, LAL always gives me a real headache. He expands, he grows, he is the governor and he is powerful.

Based on my personal experience playing these two factions, I would estimate that LAL would win in a fair fight against Dr. Z.

It might be interesting, now that we all know how to automate the game, to try a few tests. Take 6 Dr. Z factions and 1 LAL faction and see who wins. Repeat with 3 of one and 4 of the other. Finally have 6 LAL factions and 1 Dr. Z.

I may give this a shot tonight.

Ned

[Misotu]

Originally posted by icevic Can a well energized UN faction with Knowledge beat a University faction in tech?

Yes.

The PKs are my favourite faction. I have won a number of games by transcendence against UoP players, having out-researched them. Having said that, the key is well-energised - as in *better* energised. Otherwise, it's pretty tough

[Sikander]

Originally posted by WhiteElephants
Mark -- I think the loss of mineral output is offset by producing crawlers for minerals first, and then crawlers for nutrients. Though I'm not sure I agree with the farm/condensor combo for the 4 nutrients.

Sik -- How many minerals can you bring in before you start generating eco damage with the condensor/farm combos lying about? (I imagine you've probably got Tree Farms at this point, I would think you've still got a short ways to go before Hybrids).

White Elephants,

You are correct that I run my minerals to 15+ long before I start replacing workers with crawlers. As for ecodamage, I can't really say with any firm count where my clean limit is because it varies from game to game. Usually it is around 25 when I start really cranking out the condensors. I run some ecodamage from a very early part of the game (2140-2145 usually) so sometimes I get quite a few 'pops' before I start to switch over to specialists. For some reason I don't really notice much terraforming ED even with a fair number of condensors (there may be an overlap effect where a square is within two base radii, and both bases have Tree Farms). I do eventually get around to building Hybrid Forests as my boreholes are built, and I do notice a significant jump in clean minerals when I do this.

Btw, the whole switch is a gradual thing. At first I run around and lay forest almost everywhere. My first pop boom is usually a GA pop boom while running DEMO/FM/Wealth, and is done while I am still using workers exclusively (perhaps a couple doctors to get my bases to 7 pop), and right after I have my Tree Farms and Creches built. Usually I only have about 7 bases up to snuff, but the cost is minimal and the payoff so great that I don't worry about my last few bases that are behind. They will catch up in spades pretty soon. While this is going on I build the colony pods for my next round of base expansion (pop booms are the best time to build colony pods).

At this point my core of bases is at pop 7 (ie plenty of extra room around them), and I have either just gotten or will soon get clean reactors. Once I do every mature base cranks out four or five more formers (their earlier formers have already departed for the periphery to prep those new base sites), and it is these which start to convert my terrain from forest to condensor farms. The first step is to build a few mines so that as I convert I don't suffer a drop in minerals. I pull the crawlers which were hauling minerals from forests to the mines as they are completed. The next step is to convert unworked forests to condensor farms, and using my surplus crawlers (about half of those that were hauling mins from forests are superfluous as the other half have moved to mines) to haul the nuts back to the base. It takes about three turns for a stack of formers to a turn square into a condensor farm, and it takes about three condensor farms to bump my pop to 14 from the 7 they are at currently.

Meanwhile my outlying bases are starting to build infrastructure. Usually I send one crawler along to each new base, and place it on a mine to help get them started. When most of my core bases are prepped (regardless of where my new bases are at) I start another pop boom. This time however it is a classic Demo/Planned affair, and all the new guys are turned into Librarians. This pop boom can go on for quite a while, as my science doesn't suffer from the inefficiency. As my first round of condensor farms are being finished I start to crank out boreholes to replace the energy and mineral production from the 6 or so forests that are still being worked. Eventually (exception HQ base if I have built the ME) all of the forest will be removed and replaced by condensor/farms and crawlers, or boreholes.

Usually my core bases will hit the hab limit well before I quit this second pop boom. There are plenty of things to build, including crawlers for the new bases, probe teams, SPs, and military units. However I tend to focus on clean colony pods at this point, which are stored up for a future pod boom at every mature base. When my core bases are maxed out (for the moment) in nut production I then pod boom them up to their new capacity. At that point these bases are finished for the midgame. They have a good number of crawlers hauling nuts (perhaps 8-10 or so) and perhaps 4-5 boreholes for mins and energy. Populations run at 20+, the vast majority being librarians.

The outlying bases do not go through the hybrid build up via forests. Instead I build them from the start as specialist bases with mines first, then condensor farms, and finally boreholes. I only run these guys up to the hab limit (usually 16). I will usually switch to Demo / Green / Knowledge here and drive toward fusion as fast as I can. When I get soil enrichers in place I will pop boom again, and the outlying bases (those that didn't pod boom previously) will crank out colony pods for the core bases (to bump them up to their new nuts level), and when this is done they will crank out clean colony pods for their own pod boom. Sometimes this new pop boom is the final one via the cloning vats, but most of the time it is another Demo/Planned affair.

All this goes smashingly well if I am alone on a medium to large continent, and sometimes a good deal less so if I am next to Yang. If I have enough room for my core bases, I will usually just hold Yang off with probes until air power (it's expensive to buy him out so early, and going for military techs early enough to take him out militarily slows my progress so much that it usually isn't worth it.

[Ned]

Ran two automations last night, with 4 Dr. Z's and 3 Lal's on a standard Planet. Score: Lal 2, Dr. Z 0.

I will try a couple more on 180 x 120 maps, one with lots of water, one with very little.

Howerver, it appears that:

Size does count.

Ned

[WhiteElephants]

Sik --

I think the GA pop boom combo is interesting in that I haven't put much thought into this besides for factions that can't pull off a "normal" boom. I imagine this is only viable for a faction (like Lal, that I presume your refering to in your post) who can run the Demo/FM/Wealth combo. I also like the idea of building pods when you pop booming.

Often I try to boom pre-tree farms, so the farm/condensor combo would be out of the picture because of eco damage and because of the fact that I simply wouldn't be able to build condensors unless I've built the Weather Paradigm.

I'm still iffy about whether I could sacrafice building units for defense, and or facilities like command centers and perimeter defenses (I'm talking MP) over building four to five terraformers to build all those farm/condensors. Granted they would probably only take a turn or two at this point, but would also drag down my mineral output by that many notches until clean reactor become available.

I also build my bases roughly two tiles apart and on occassion one. This doesn't leave room for an abundance of crawlers without sacraficing something in the process. For example, do I keep the crawler on the forest for two minerals, or change that tile into a farm/condensor for 4 nuts? I suppose boreholes would aleviate this problem, but they take time and come a little later in the game.

[Sikander]

White Elephants,

Originally posted by WhiteElephants
I think the GA pop boom combo is interesting in that I haven't put much thought into this besides for factions that can't pull off a "normal" boom. I imagine this is only viable for a faction (like Lal, that I presume your refering to in your post) who can run the Demo/FM/Wealth combo.

Actually I use it for the University (the example above is from a recent series of University games) as well, though only up to pop 7. With the HGP and VW and Rec Commoms and 20% psych allocation it works well. That may sound like a lot of early SPs to get, but I get them probably 90% of the time. Btw, the Demo/FM/Wealth/GA combo pays nice dividends if you manage to find a trading partner or two. That's +4 econ, which really rocks. For Lal I am tempted to run things further vis the GA pop boom because he is so easy to GA with (at least with those initial bases). I will wait longer (for techs and to build the Net Nodes) with Lal, but I tend to run his pop boom to 14 or as close as I can get to it.

Originally posted by WhiteElephants
I'm still iffy about whether I could sacrafice building units for defense, and or facilities like command centers and perimeter defenses (I'm talking MP) over building four to five terraformers to build all those farm/condensors. Granted they would probably only take a turn or two at this point, but would also drag down my mineral output by that many notches until clean reactor become available.

I know what you mean. I only build two formers per base (1 immediately and 1 after it reaches 16+ mins) before clean reactors. In the example above I wait for clean reactors before I crank out all those new formers. My beelines are Ind Auto, SotHB, Restrictions Lifted and then Clean. I usually get it somewhere near the end of my GA pop boom. Btw, all of this is supposing SP as I have never played MP. I quite agree that all of this finery would likely be suicidal in a MP game, as your enemies will be visiting your valuable but vulnerable lands well before the AI would.

Originally posted by WhiteElephants
I also build my bases roughly two tiles apart and on occassion one. This doesn't leave room for an abundance of crawlers without sacraficing something in the process. For example, do I keep the crawler on the forest for two minerals, or change that tile into a farm/condensor for 4 nuts? I suppose boreholes would aleviate this problem, but they take time and come a little later in the game.

I build three apart on the diagonals (two intervening squares) usually, or two to three squares apart along the coast (leaving a hollow center on medium and large continents where crawlers can be safe). The example above is a 'three on the diags' spacing, which allows plenty of room for 7 workers and some crawlers. I try to use mines when min restrictions are lifted to replace those mineral crawlers which previously worked forest. Eventually I will put boreholes down in numbers, but that takes a long time even with 5+ formers per base. Usually I finish up with super formers because I can get Fusion and Advanced Ecol. Eng. before all of my terraforming is completed.

[Ned]

Well, I would say it was a "draw" on a 180x120 waterworld. At the end, two out of the three LAL factioins were twice as powerful as any of the four Dr. Z factions. However, all the Dr. Z's were slightly ahead of the LAL's. SP's were evenly divided.

What does this suggest then? Dr. Z can keep up the tech race throughout the game while being hampered in his growth opportunities.

I would also like to report just how ugly this game was in the end. No faction build more than 3 tree farms and none build a Centauri Preserve. Pops were pandemic. Global warming abounded. In addition the artificial idiots voted to melt the caps. There was almost no land left.

This illustrates also that the AI has no understanding of the importance of tree farms, hybrid forests, CP's and TP's to reduction in faction ED.

Ned

[mark13]

Ned,

Much as I approve of the excellent work here, all your tests really show is the AI's ability to research with the respective faction. I would recommend a 'DT-style' MP game with the two factions (or even a hotseat game against yourself) which would represent the two factions' respective capabilities. What your tests really show is the AI's competence when playing the two factions (or lack thereof ).

[Ned]

Mark, If you look at page 48 of the SMACX manual, the game designers used this method to test whether the new SMACX factions were properly "balanced" with the SMAC factions. A logical extension would be to run the same test on the original factions.

What I think the data shows is what I thought was the case by playing these factions and by playing against them. Dr. Z can keep up with LaL in research, but Lal will be much larger and more powerful. In an MP game, this means only one thing, doesn't it?

Ned

[Net Maverick]

Originally posted by Sikander


Compare:

A forest square with a tree farm and hybrid forest produces:

3 nuts, 2 mins, 3 energy (+1 for FM), and uses one pop to harvest it. Total 4 energy and 1/2 specialist for another 1.5 to 2.5. Totals = 5.5 pre fusion, 6.5 post fusion. In addition you also receive 2 mins.

Any non-rocky square with farm / condensor produces 4 nuts, and takes no worker just a crawler. Those nuts can support 2 specialists = 6 energy pre-fusion, 10 energy post fusion.

Sikander:

I do not qualify as an experienced player, as opposed to yourself, but I'll have to argue with this view. In the second example, you've provided the specialist base with a crawler...and I think the only way to compare is to give both POVs an equal amount of units. When you alter your strategy so that the first one also has a crawler (note: let's assume here that commerce income and energy lost to inefficiency cancels each other out).

When running FM a forest square with tree-farm and hybrid forest produces:
1 nut-2 mins-4 energy, and it requires the allocation of one citizen. Send a crawler to a 2000+ square, with an already prepared solar collector and one echelon mirror. 3 energy as a base, 1 extra from echelon mirror, and 1 from FM....a total of 5 energy. But wait...it doesn't stop there. Say there is a river running through the crawled/forested square...there's a freebie +1 energy bonus. If you happen to have the ME...another +1. And if you have a second echelon mirror in range? Then you would be producing a total of 1 nut-2 mins-12 energy (let's just go with 10 as an average). Add a second worker, and you'll get 2 nut- 4 mins- 14 energy. The energy income would be more towards 18 if you happen to have constructed an energy park. Impressive indeed...much more productive than two specialists.

You might argue that the crawler brings in 2 nuts as opposed to 1 after the first worker is produced, thus the second worker would be produced much faster, netting you turn advantage. But consider this...after your second worker is finished, you would have 0 nuts until you produce a crawler, whereas the worker base would be producing 2. It all evens out.

[Sikander]

Net Maverick,

The response from which you quote me concerned the productivity of squares as opposed to methods. I was showing that food production can outpace forest in terms of total energy produced. I did note that there were numerous advantages to forests over condensor farms, including the crawler (1-2 turns production) and the extra terraforming required for the condensor farm square. Another consideration which may well even up the bonus supply crawler in cost is the fact that workers may need to be made content by facilities (1 time min cost and econ), psych (% of energy) or police (1 time min cost, and perhaps a support cost as well).

If you want to compare methods, then please consider that your energy park terraforming would require a good deal of time as well as some space not too far from your base to do it. I never thought that an energy park produced less energy than other forms of terraforming (though it will produce less in the late game where you have Soil Enrichers, Food Satelites, Energy Satelites, Mining Stations and Transcendii), but instead was comparing two methods of terraforming your base area by their energy productivity in the early and mid game. IMO specialists take longer to get into play, but are ultimately more productive in the long run for a given amount of space. This is why I shift from worked forests to condensor farms worked by crawlers and worked boreholes as the game moves along. I increase the output of the land by investing former time and crawlers. The crawler is a much less significant investment than the terraforming.

[Net Maverick]

Sikander:

Your specialist strategy can out-produce a worker strategy, but only when you've reached the maximum amount of squares you can work AND your specialists are all transcendi. If one of these requirements are not fulfilled, the specialist base's energy production would be equal to the worker base at best. Try it out if you don't find this plausible.
As for the drone control facilities...chances are that you have already constructed them before you convert your units to specialists, so the only advantage you would have is the extra income from the lack of maintenance costs...and this can be more than made up for with the worker base's higher mineral income. Even if you have not previously built drone control facilities, your advantage would be very minor.
Of course, when one utilizes a specialist strategy, one would not need to build tree-farms and/or hybrid forests. I cannot say from experience, but I believe that the resource advantage a worker base gains before the specialist base reaches maximum population would make up for the minerals spent on these two facilities.
One more thing I'll like to add...a specialist base would need to produce at least two crawlers to give it a mineral income of 10 or more, which would be two more extra crawlers for the worker base, meaning 12 extra energy average, and 28 extra in the best case.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Net Maverick
Sikander:

Your specialist strategy can out-produce a worker strategy, but only when you've reached the maximum amount of squares you can work AND your specialists are all transcendi. If one of these requirements are not fulfilled, the specialist base's energy production would be equal to the worker base at best. Try it out if you don't find this plausible.

Net Maverick,

Let's do a thought experiment.

Assumptions:

Non HQ base with no specials, and no SPs. The available production area is the base radius (ie twenty squares plus the base square).

Tech level = fusion, soil enrichers, hybrid forests

SE settings = +2 econ

Specialist base = 5 boreholes + 15 condensor / farms / soil enricher

Minerals = 5 boreholes x 6 mins = 30 (plus whatever the base square produces)

Raw Energy = 5 boreholes x 7 energy = 35 raw energy + base square

Nutrients = 15 condensor / farm / soil enrichers x 6 nuts per square = 90 nuts (plus base square)

Specialist energy = 45 pop - 5 working boreholes = 40 x 5 energy apeice for engineers = 200

Total energy = 235 + base square.


Worker + Specialist base = 5 boreholes + 15 farm (moist) / solar collector (3000 meters) / soil enricher

Minerals = 5 boreholes x 6 mins + 8 mins from rolling squares = 38 mins + base

Raw Energy = (5 boreholes x 7) + (15 solar collectors x 5) = 110 energy + base

Nuts = 15 farm / soil enrichers x 4 = 60 nuts

Specialist Energy = 30 pop - 20 working = 10 engineers = 50 energy

Total energy = 160 + base square

Even running demo planned (for the pop boom) and losing all raw energy to inefficiency this specialist scheme still outperforms the worker + specialist base, even if that base had the Merchant Exchange and was the HQ.

I realize that gauging the productivity of any scheme depends on several factors including that moving target (tech level) and your terraforming and spacing scheme. You may have a scheme which kicks butt in various circumstances. I for instance don't build bases which have 20 squares production area early on, as it is wasteful (pop limits, though I do pod boom fairly liberally).

The specialist strategy gets better with time no doubt. It starts out implausible (only doctors), works it's way to debateable (librarians), and by the time engineers are available it becomes a force to be reckoned with. With Transcendii and satelites it is clearly superior. Consider the above specialist base with food satelites and energy satelites aplenty(!). It costs more in former time, and those 15 crawlers, but it does produce more. Whether these costs are better spent elsewhere depends on so many different factors that there is undoubtedly no correct answer per se.

Originally posted by Net Maverick
As for the drone control facilities...chances are that you have already constructed them before you convert your units to specialists, so the only advantage you would have is the extra income from the lack of maintenance costs...and this can be more than made up for with the worker base's higher mineral income. Even if you have not previously built drone control facilities, your advantage would be very minor.

I'm not sure why you think that your worker base will have a significantly higher base mineral income. I build plenty of boreholes, and before that mines as a stopgap if necessary. I shoot for 30 minerals per base (I don't refuse more, nor do I expend any effort getting more than 30). Whatever advantage that I gain from not having to build drone facilities certainly is as significant as a few crawlers (I don't have the game here, but rec commons and holo theatres cost quite a few minerals up front, and 4 econ a turn IIRC).

Originally posted by Net Maverick
Of course, when one utilizes a specialist strategy, one would not need to build tree-farms and/or hybrid forests. I cannot say from experience, but I believe that the resource advantage a worker base gains before the specialist base reaches maximum population would make up for the minerals spent on these two facilities.

I always build the tree farm for the terraforming ED reduction and plus to econ. Eventually I usually get around to the hybrid farms too, though it's priority is lower.

Originally posted by Net Maverick
One more thing I'll like to add...a specialist base would need to produce at least two crawlers to give it a mineral income of 10 or more, which would be two more extra crawlers for the worker base, meaning 12 extra energy average, and 28 extra in the best case.

You overemphasize the opportunity cost of a crawler. They are dirt cheap to build, mobile, and pay for themselves fairly quickly even on an unimproved square. If necessary they can also be turned in for full value for an SP or a prototype. It is the terraforming which is valuable. You can bet that if I had a square sitting around which produced 6 energy I would have a crawler sitting on it very soon.

[Ned]

Sik, Sounds impressive. There are two problems: First, the Specialist base has a much greater investment than the non specialist base, considering the condensors and crawlers (and not considering that the average player will have virtually all forests by the time hybrid forests are in play). The other problem is commerce income. Correct me if I am wrong, but only raw energy, not energy from specialists, counts for commerce income.

I have never had a base size 45 since I began playing this game. However, I often have bases producing 200+ ec's per turn, a great deal of it from commerce.

The one advantage I see in the specialist approach is that specialist energy is not lost to waste. The disadvantages are cost, time to set up, lack of mineral production, and low commerce income.

Ned

[WhiteElephants]

As a supporter of specialist I feel I ought to chime in, though this subject can be difficult to articulate.

I think there is a myth surrounding the the specialist base concerning the amount of time and resources involved. I think the reason to use the specialist bases is because they create turn advantage, and are cheaper. I, myself, haven't created an all specialist base, but am undoubtabley specialist "heavy" when I can be -- usually over half a given bases total population.

In my experience specialist bases do not cost more, or take more time to set up, or produce less minerals. For the most part terraforming for these bases are exactly the same as a non-specialist base so time is not an issue. The only difference in time is the time it takes to build the crawlers that ferry in food and minerals, but if you build mineral crawlers first the amount of time it takes to build the next crawler becomes shorter and shorter (don't you really only need 10 minerals per turn anyway?). This is probabaly standard for any base. The difference comes when I continue to build crawlers to bring in nutrients. At this point the crawlers can be rushed after 10 minerals are accumulated. As that nutrient crawler takes its position in the field, workers are turned into specialists since the food they were generating is no longer needed (I'm assuming that I've pop boomed to size 7 at this point, or am quite near this). At this point, the only time/money loss you could argue is the time/money put into the crawlers used for nutrients, which, in my opinion, is offset by the transformation of a worker into a specialist. The only facilities required are a rec. common, and a children's creche -- net nodes, energy banks, research hospitals, and recycling tanks are bonus facilities. With the right amount of crawlers for nutrients you won't need a holo theatre, saving you three energy a turn and the time/minerals it takes to build it.

Think of this outside the variables that are being proposed (i.e. no borholes, Merchant Exchange, Free Market, Tree Farms, Hybrid Forests, forest with rivers, 4000+ meter land, energy parks, and the base being your HQ). Work from the ground up. The only really variable that is extremely helpful in this situation is that you've got a nutrient resource square (or your on the coast) in your base radius, and your using a faction that can pop boom. If you don't have either of these then you've got to wait till later to pull this off.

[Paul]

The biggest problem I see with Sikander's example are the populations of his bases. Hab domes come very late in the game, so it would be more realistic to use a maximum population of 18 (PK + AV) or less for your example.