Forest - The Best Terraform

b&i_c · June 18, 2001, 12:22

I think that forests are above and beyond and other terraform.

#1: They can have a sensor build on top of them.
#2: They expand on their own

#3: Once you get a Hybrid Forest, you're gonna have +100% Psych and Econ.
#4: With a HF, you can have a flat arid square produce 3/3/2, which is darn good.

I use Forests for almost everything, except:

Arid Rocky: Borehole if possible, and if not, flatten and forest
Moist Rocky: Mine
Rainy Rocky: Level and then if < 1000m Farm/Mine/Road, and if >1000m Farm/Solar/Road
Rainy: Same as above

Forests are the best, PERIOD!

Iskandar Reza · June 18, 2001, 12:50

i only use forests if it's arid and nothing more. otherwise, why waste a perfectly good rolling rainy square on some lousy forests that won't let you expand beyond size 2?

theohall · June 18, 2001, 12:56

Yes, forests are great you big tree lover. However, specialized terraforming (ie farm/condenser combos for one) also has it's benefits.

It requires workers to make those hybrid forest sqaures work. A worker which could be acting as a talent and increasing labs/econ/psych without even working a square.

Specializing sqaures, especially for maximizing nutrient production, and then using Crawlers to send the food back, frees up workers.

As to collectors - find the highest ground you can, even raise it, then build rows of Echelon mirrors and collectors side by side. Then crawl the energy back to base. (Energy Park strategy) This also frees up workers from having to work squares.

A combination of foresting and specializing has worked best for me.

Don't get me wrong, I love forests for their eco-damage reduction, but don't overlook other forms of terraforming combos.

johndmuller · June 18, 2001, 12:59

IMhO, it depends.

bondetamp · June 18, 2001, 14:05

Quote:

Originally posted by johndmuller
IMhO, it depends.

Now, that's a statement I can agree with.

Forests Vs specialized depends on how much trouble I feel like going through. If I'm going for an anal retentive four monts long game, then I make scores of bases in a coastal sircle around a decent sized continent and then put crawlers on specialized squares in the middle. I usually fit enough room for a small energy park, and then mine/road all the rocky squares I can find, borehole the coast and farm++ the rest. This can give me approx 150+/- bases with good production and growth and one base with awesome energy output. It also gives me a lot of polution, but that's just a bonus with the planet pearls et. al.

If I'm feeling lazy, I just forest the whole thing, with maybe one crawlered farm per base and a few scattered boreholes. It isn't as efficient but it makes the turns go twice as fast or more.

WhiteElephants · June 18, 2001, 15:22

Yes, I imagine it depends mostly on what stage of the game your in (what techs you have availabe) ,what facilities, and the lay of the land.

All that aside, B&I piqued my interest because he differentiated what terraforming he'd put on an arid rocky tile vs. a moist rocky tile. So, why the difference B&I?

Oh, and as for #3 -- well, yeah you have to have Hybrid Forests AND a Tree farm-- in the mean time you've got a size 2 base.

And for #4 -- I always thought a Hybrid Forest would give you 2/2/2. And even if you did have a tree farm wouldn't you only get 3/2/2, not 3/3/2?

b&i_c · June 18, 2001, 15:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Iskandar Reza
i only use forests if it's arid and nothing more. otherwise, why waste a perfectly good rolling rainy square on some lousy forests that won't let you expand beyond size 2?

I said that if it was rainy I do either Mine/Farm/Road, or Solar/Farm/Road depending on the altitude.

I'm almost positive that you get 3/3/2 with a Hybrid Forest (of course to get a HF you need a Tree Farm).

My bases are usually big enough to build good facilities before I build the HF because I plant one forest, then proceed to terraform all the other squares that aren't "suitable" for forests so that they get lots of nutrients.

I put a mine on a moist rocky square because then you will get 5 resources total (with the one nutrient), and help pay the way for that worker's food, where as with a arid square, you only get 4 resources, and with a forest, you get 4 resoureces even w/o any Forest improvements, and WITH them, you get 8!

Paul · June 18, 2001, 16:43

A forest gives only 2 minerals. If you have a TF and HF you will get 3-2-3 (assuming +2 econ).

WhiteElephants · June 18, 2001, 17:20

B&I -- Ahhh... it has been so long since I put a farm and a mine together I had forgotten you could even do it.

Here's two free tips --

1. Skip the farm/mine/road combo. Go mine/road. Yes, I know 5 resources vs. 4 resources, but why not put a crawler on that mine/road for the 4 minerals and put your worker somewhere else? By the time you can get 4 minerals from a mine/road combo you already have crawlers so don't waste time putting a farm on a mine/road when you could be building it on a moist square above 1000 meters with a solar collector. They take the exact same amount of time to build only you'll be getting an extra nutrient for the farm that's not on the mine.

2. Be careful when you start judging the usefullness of a tile by adding up the amount of resources it gives you -- i.e. forest with tree farm/hybrid forest 3/2/2 = 7. Example, say you've reached your pop limit. What good are three more nutrients when your already adequetely feeding a population that can't grow? Essentially those extra three nuts are worth zero and that 3/2/2 tile in really only good for the mins and energy, therefore equals a value of 4. Or lets say you've reached your ecodamage limit and any more minerals are going to put you in the red. While they would still be contributing to progress, unlike the extra nuts, they're above and beyond what you might need or want to risk in the case of a mindworm pop. What I'm getting at is that while a 3/2/2 tile looks good there are only so many uses for them and 2 minerals and 2 energy isn't all that appetizing in the mid to late game.

johndmuller · June 18, 2001, 17:44

b&i_c , have you tried out heavy use of specialists yet? Engineers produce both econ and labs IIRC, and are not subject to efficiency losses but are subject to "multiplier" effects from energy and most lab enhancing facilities. I think that they are available around the time that HFs are, but there are also Technicians (who only produce econ) earlier in a similar role; they also keep erstwhile drones out of trouble. I bring up specialists because they prosper with a development heavy in Nutrient production (so that you can have more of them). I think you can produce at least 6 nuts from a tile with enough farm/soil-enricher/condensor action going on. That translates into room and board for 3 specialists; you likely wouldn't need the condensor in each tile, so you could still get a min and an extra energy or two. Thats not to say that the TF/HF thing is bad, but neither is being rich and smart.

In the early game, a forest on a special (any kind) is a nice thing to have, and in the late game, plain old fungus isn't bad either.

I think that forested tiles with TF & HF are worth 3-2-2, or 3-2-3 if on a river or uranium tile.
Fungus tiles with all the restrictions lifted I believe are 2-3-3 unless you are Dee who would get 3-3-3.

b&i_c · June 18, 2001, 18:04

Wait, you mean putting a crawler inside the base radius???

Well with a Hybrid Forest, there is no terraforming limit, and with a Centauri Preserve, your minerals limit is pretty high, but the pop limit is a major problem you're right.

Yes, fungus does get pretty good late in the game, especially if you have the Manifold Harmonics

, but by the time you get all the techs, you have spent the whole game getting rid of fungus, so you don't really want to plant more of it.

WhiteElephants · June 18, 2001, 21:35

Yes, in the base radius. That way you reap the benefits from the mine/road and then put that worker on, say, a farm/solar collector or one of your beloved forest tiles. Sure, you miss out on one nutrient from the farm/mine, but you gain on average (assuming you put the worker on a farm/solar) +1 nut +1min +2 energy. Or if you like specialists (everybody likes specialists, right?) you can alternately change the mine worker into one, usually netting you +3 enegy or +3 labs, until the advent of Fussion power where you can change that lazy American worker into an Engineer netting you +3 energy and +2 labs -- what wonderful little buggers. Before you know it your bases will be running with the speed and efficency of a Japanese auto factory.

Depending upon your base spacing you probably won't work all your tiles anyway and by that time you can always build satellities to supplement nuts, mins, or energy.

PS -- There was an interesting debate recently between those who supported only using specialists after all the base squares had been worked and those of us who supported using specialists before all the base squares were worked. You might want to look it up. Oddly enough, I believe that title had something to do with "+2 Research". I think it was called "What does +2 Research do?". Or something to that effect.

No more freebies.

b&i_c · June 19, 2001, 02:12

I'm for not using specialists until base limit has been reached then. It just seems like a total waste putting a crawler in a city radius square when you could just as easily (and more cheaply) put a worker there.

theohall · June 19, 2001, 07:10

Here is the argument for putting a crawler in the base radius

One crawler - crawls in minerals or nutrients from a special.

The worker that would've worked either sqaure is then turned into a specialist and rakes in Econ + Labs (Engineers rule). When the specialist become Empaths a mix of Engineers, Librarians and Empaths with Crawlers handling the grunt work is very effective.

The only sqaure I find absolutely essential to place workers on his Boreholes. The others can be handled by Crawlers if managed effectively. Farms/solars on high elevation sqaures usually get worked as well, though.

This is for later in the game. Early game is a different story entirely.

johndmuller · June 19, 2001, 11:36

Quote:

Originally posted by b&i_c
I'm for not using specialists until base limit has been reached then. It just seems like a total waste putting a crawler in a city radius square when you could just as easily (and more cheaply) put a worker there.

Former=20mins; Crawler=30mins; Total Cost=50mins
Crawled forest or early mine=2mins/turn; paybacik=25turns
Crawled unrestricted mine/road=4mins/turn; payback=12.5 turns

During those 25 turns, the specialist could have produced 75 econ or labs (pre engineer) or 75 econ and 50 labs with an engineer; empaths and transcendi have other possibilities. You also end up with a fully amortized former and crawler to boot (although you have invested a few turns of opportunity cost in building the crawler).

These specialists will also usually allow for population growth beyond the drone limit without using any psych. If you are dependent upon psych, you may find yourself in a resource bind when the ED starts creeping in.

If you crawl a few mines and maybe a high nut tile or two and have a bunch of forests (hopefully enhanced), you can sustain a highly productive base.

Fitz · June 19, 2001, 18:08

Quote:

Originally posted by b&i_c
I'm for not using specialists until base limit has been reached then. It just seems like a total waste putting a crawler in a city radius square when you could just as easily (and more cheaply) put a worker there.

Here is an alternate, non-specialist way to look at it:

If you put the crawler on a square inside the base radii, you can use that same worker to work another square inside the radii. Then you have a crawler and a worker! Better than just a worker, wot?

Ogie Oglethorpe · June 19, 2001, 22:36

b&i_C,

It's been awhile since I espoused the virtues of specialization and since I was one of the original proponents many moons back let me give a little background.

First off let me say whole hearted forest are great especially in the early game. However they do reach a point wherein they become less useful vs say other more specialized forms of t-forming.

A heavy specialist approach offers a number of pros and some definite cons so lets start with the cons.

1. Heavy on t-forming time. Comparitively speaking I'll give examples of forest vs. condensor/farm or condensor/farm/soil enrichers. Forest are a mere 4 turns per square (3 w/ WP) vs. condensor farm of I believe 4 for the farm and 8? for the condensor. (3& 6 respectively with WP)

2. Further the forest expand on their own whilst the others do not.

3. The heavy t-formed land makes eco damage more susceptible in bases.

Pros

1. Energy!!! Energy is the key to any game much more so than mins. Sure mins have their purpose but after the first 10 mins I'll take energy over mins every day (granted I want enough mins to field a formidable fighting force but you get my point). Energy is accomplished by taking otherwise worker citizen and transforming them into specialsits. I've proven and written on this extensively to say that in the first phase of the game (librarians and technicians availaible) Generally forestation is a better approach for the reason listed above. Once beefier specialists become available tho' then the pendulum swings the other way and a specialist approach becomes much more favorable. Trouble with this is by the time you get fusion 99 times out of 100 you've got the game in hand anyway so it's no biggy.

2. Efficiency who needs it. Specialists offer their contribution to final energy forms econ or labs indpendent of efficiency loss.

3. Starvation who cares. Labs and/or econ from the specialsit still accrues even under starvation conditions.

4. Drone issues. If your a specialist you don't riot. That is stricty reserved for worker bees. Often times the best means to stave off a drone riot is to simply take enuff workers fromthe field convert them into the best specialsit you have and then buy the appropriate facility and/or 1/1/1 police unit. Caveat bases with less then 5 pop points allow only doctors/empaths/transcendi. A doctor is useless empaths are OK but transcendi WOW. Of course this is extremely late game.

Now onto the comparisons.

Hybrids on tree farms vs. Condensor/farm/soil enricher with 4 rocky roaded mines
fusion power discovered.

Assume max base population of 16 (say your either Lal or got Ascetic Virtues SP)

Hybrid trees
16 * 3/2/2 or 3/2/3 if +2 econ ignoring base square then output is 48nuts/32 mins/32 or 48 energy all in all not bad. Your 16 population will eat 32 nuts leaving you an excess nutrient total of 16. Remember in total you've worked 16 squares.

Condensor farm/soil encicher

Condensor farm Soil enricher
6 nutrients ea worked/harvested by crawler
4 rocky roaded mines worked/harvested by crawler

All 16 population points engineers

total of but 10 squares used

output = 4 excess nuts/20 mins/80 energy (48 econ 32 labs)

All in all the specialization route affords much higher returns on energy. Unfortunately it comes late in the game. It does behoove you though to start the paving over of you forest towards high one resource crawlered squares immediately upon discovery of fusion or shortly before.

One caveat IF you have a number of trade partners either through submissives and/or playing nice nice then trade energy is calculated based upon energy from worker bees not crawlers nor specialists. Trade energy component may outweigh the benefits of specialists.

In the beginning tho' I mostly agree forest are the way to go. Get a 2 nutrient square forest 2 others and get your bases to a stable drone free size 3 ASAP via growth or the PTS.

Og

P.S. White E. Damn I've been away such a long time I miss the good debates +2 research you say. Looks like I need to check that thread out.

KrazyHorse · June 21, 2001, 17:38

I always found that the best solution was to improve the squares which were rolling and rainy (or at high altitude even those which were flat and rainy) and to completely cover the rest of my area with forests.

Avenoct · June 22, 2001, 01:31

Well, I must say I love the way the Topicstarter frames his position, and funny thing is, had he said that in the middle of the discussion this would be twice as long a thread as each 'side' tried to tell the other that it was right and the other then must be wrong. Ogie, you are a SMAC God IMHO, and I'm one who's always glad when you chime in, even though we've mostly all been through this complicated argument many times. Of couse Forests Rule! There are so many reasons why they do. Experience will lead most people to use them heavily in the beginning of a game. But at a certain point comes a choice.....continue with forests, or ....
Oddly enough I switch to specialized squares...condensers, almost never mines, boreholes, (and when I can ) energy parks, because I need the nutrients as I start filling up my core base squares with boreholes. Though I do make the occasional all-specialist bases, especially if I'm running or plan to forever run Free Market (to home my army to this base..no drones), I have yet to sucessfully max out my specialist use. Instead, I'm forced into it, but obviously I don't reccomend that as a strategy! The real choice in my situation comes down to Crawlers, as well it should. In the beginning I'm crawlering a whole lot of forests (yes I am embarrased) for minerals to get my production beyond 10 for every base and about 15 or so for SP bases. When boreholes come into play, or some nice mines, that's not an issue, and too many of my base squares are covered in crawlers for my workers to get in and do there thing. I use a few crawlers to finish some Secret projects, and hopefully I've founded an energy or mineral or nutrient park somewhere out of base range at this point and I send them over to continue crawlering back to their base of origen. Also, I can't tell you how great it is to send a few crawlers out when making new bases. Have them home to the base and speed the construction of necessary garrison/ facility products. After all, where do you really need fast production the most? On the frontier! Nine out of Ten times. Better yet, if you really need to, you can cash those crawlers instead of rush-buying (or in addition to) the critical things on the frontier. Crawlers there are a buffer in many ways....

Experience will teach you what works best for you, and I do think that's different for everyone with these 'everyone IS right' arguments. I do suggest trying extreme strategies if you have the time. When I've succeeded in having mostly specialized squares, it's been 'the best'. When I've developed Hybrid Forests early enough, I've been convinced that nothing could be better (especially in the Monsoon Jungle). The only limit on both strategies is the ever annoying rocky square. Build a base in the great desert before on a rocky plateau..trust me...chuckles....

Oh, forgot to address my header...I'm always glad when this topic presents itself...it recurrs because it is both central and unanswerable to SMAC strategy. It rears it's head in many forms 'Crawlers Rule!' or 'All Specialist Bases for Victory'...because all these things are intertwined in the most subtle and important aspect of the game. Get the most FOP's you can, quick as you can, and you win (with a few notable exceptions, the main of which is getting everyone elses FOP's instead of developing your own). Easy right?
-Smack

Iskandar Reza · June 22, 2001, 05:44

i still say that if you've got a rainy square, farm it and put enrichers on it.

if it's flat and rainy, farm it and crawl it

if it's flat and rainy with nut bonus, farm it and crawl it

if it's flat rainy with other bonuses, work it

if it's rolling rainy wth a river, work it.

if it's rolling rainy with nut bonus, farm it and crawl it

if it's rolling rainy with other bonusesm work it

if it's just rolling, forest it.

if it's just flat, forest it.

Blake · June 22, 2001, 08:21

I have little doubt the "strongest" terraforming strategy is maximum density of boreholes, and every other tile farm+condensor.

However a nice comprimise to reduce MM is using mostly forest, then for every base add 1 farm+condensor (crawled) and one borehole. As former time allows add more boreholes and condensors, in approximately equal ratios.

Another handy hint: Boreholes can be built anywhere, just lower the tile you want to build the borehole on, one lower terrain will ALWAYS allow you to build a borehole on that tile. Consider a borehole costs 24, and a lower terrain 12, your only increasing the terraform cost by 50%, which really isn't so bad. I've experimented with maximum density boreholes (you gotta pre-plan the city layout), and it is very powerfull. But utimitaly using a mixture of forest, borehole, condensor is almost as good.

The place non-forest terraforming really shine is when you have the WP, and it's a double-blind game, even without crawlers you can easily use condensors to build a city up to size 5 and support several libarians. If you get a city with 2 nut resources, for a total of 14 nuts you can support a size 7 city with only 2 workers. That's a lot of lab points (especially for Yang!).

Provost Harrison · June 22, 2001, 08:26

I generally tend to use forests on low lying moist terrain that isn't that interesting otherwise and arid land. I generally tend to use wet squares for food, but it depends on the nature of the base to be honest with you...

Iskandar Reza · June 22, 2001, 14:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Blake
I have little doubt the "strongest" terraforming strategy is maximum density of boreholes, and every other tile farm+condensor.

However a nice comprimise to reduce MM is using mostly forest, then for every base add 1 farm+condensor (crawled) and one borehole. As former time allows add more boreholes and condensors, in approximately equal ratios.

Another handy hint: Boreholes can be built anywhere, just lower the tile you want to build the borehole on, one lower terrain will ALWAYS allow you to build a borehole on that tile. Consider a borehole costs 24, and a lower terrain 12, your only increasing the terraform cost by 50%, which really isn't so bad. I've experimented with maximum density boreholes (you gotta pre-plan the city layout), and it is very powerfull. But utimitaly using a mixture of forest, borehole, condensor is almost as good.

The place non-forest terraforming really shine is when you have the WP, and it's a double-blind game, even without crawlers you can easily use condensors to build a city up to size 5 and support several libarians. If you get a city with 2 nut resources, for a total of 14 nuts you can support a size 7 city with only 2 workers. That's a lot of lab points (especially for Yang!).

well put, Blake. exactly my point. why build forests when you can have these. you can just crawl everything, and change all workers to specialists

Iskandar Reza · June 22, 2001, 14:32

i mean why terraform all forest?

b&i_c · June 22, 2001, 15:13

Well I guess this sounds like a pretty good idea then, especially the part where Reza said what to work and what to crawl. I think I'll try using specialists more in my next game.

n.c. · June 22, 2001, 16:52

Um, crawlers and formers are not free. In other words, when I read "just crawl it," I'm thinking of several turns lost, plus a unit I need to defend.

While people are building (and manuevering) huge #s of those, I'm building units and improvements. Here's the n.c. approach:
-only 4 to 7 ocean squares
-at least one nutrient bonus
-all forest save three boreholes

And why wouldn't you build the TF and HF? They are great, but less so with every non-forest tile. I also can't understand why anyone would take on more eco-damage. Mindworms and fungus growth are a huge pain. I imagine the latter is far moreso with these complex terraforming techniques.

The only time I make significant use of crawlers is to build two or three out-of-radius boreholes per city. The crawler stays on returning energy unless I need help with a quick build order. The other exception is if I am close enough to the Monsoon Jungle, but even then I am wary since it is tough to protect them.

(Sorry if this is harsh; I am almost exclusively a resident of the Off-Topic.)

theohall · June 22, 2001, 17:11

Why Crawlers vice TF and HF? How many Crawlers can one build in the same time it takes to build a TF or HF? Usually several. All of those crawlers then provide returns which can significantly reduce the time needed to build TF and HF gaining the benefits of both worlds.

Fitz · June 22, 2001, 17:20

n.c., I agree that the protection of crawlers and terraformers can be a pain, but you'd be suprised at how well a combined terraforming/crawling program really works.

And incidentally, if you are truley combining across an empire (ie some forest bases some non-forest) the Tree farms and Hybrid Forests in the forested bases will probably negate the majority of the eco-damage in the non-forested bases (ie - there is a "faction wide" effect of these facilities).

Try it some time. Make half you bases, preferably away from known enemies, crawler/terraforming intensive, and the other half forested, and compare and contrast the effects.

-Fitz

Incidentally, long time no chat nc. I kinda dropped out of Off Topic a few months ago, since I found a new online roleplaying game. Good to see you are still around.

WhiteElephants · June 22, 2001, 17:29

Yes, on top of what Theohall stated you generally crawler minerals from forest squares first until you can bring in +4 mins from a mine road on a rocky tile. So what this does is speed up production above and beyond what a base without crawlers would be building in the long term. Therefore your initially losing turns, but those turns are then recovered because the base would have a higher production of mins.

Also crawlering out of radius boreholes is quite inefficient as your losing the other half of what your crawlering. In your case, minerals. Rather than build one out of radius borehole, why not build two tidal harnesses on the sea and send out two trawlers to bring in the energy? Toss in a thermocline transducer (or whatever it's called) and your bringing in 8 energy as opposed to 6 at half as much terraform time cost. The only cost involved would be the trawlers, which become cheaper with fussion power.

It's also unrealistic to have built three boreholes as that too involves considerable terraforming time. On top of that you would probably already need a tree farm and hybrid forest in place to handle the outrageous amount of eco damage produced. Given the above considerations I would think that you wouldn't have this set up until the end of the mid-game or early late-game. Post fussion power I imagine, a nice time to build trawlers instead.

N.C. -- I didn't think you harsh at all. You off-topic types aren't as bad as you think.

b&i_c · June 23, 2001, 00:57

It is called a Thermocline Tranducer.

Well n.c., if you build a HF, then you get rid of all eco-damage caused by terraforming, so that point is kind of moot.

Yeah, crawlers are a huge thing to defend, I wouldn't put them on a frontier base especially during war time, but in your central bases, you don't really need to defend them.