Director of Terraformation and Colonization Debate

[Maniac]

The following candidates are competing for the position:

Pandeminiak (CCCP)
M@ni@c (P4)

Please ask questions to the different candidates what's their position and plans on issues concerning early game terraformation and colonization.

Personally I'm a follower and pretty good executor of the theory presented by the 21th century economist Velocyrix de Candle' Bre. That's why I'll first reread parts of his guide before making any official statement. But in short, I stand for rapid ultrathin colonization, extensive terraformation (1 or 2 formers per base early on, mostly forest and a few farms) and creating an efficient road network for speeding up colonization, and creating a big "comparable turn advantage".

Pandemoniak, are you familiar and trained in Velocyrix' methods?

[Zakharov VII]

How close together would you want bases? As close as possible, or a couple diagonal tiles away? 3 tiles? 4?

How important are nutrients early on: for some early population building up (maintaining steady size 2's, at 3 just for the pod) or only just enough to support colony pods (size 1, 2 for the pod)?

How many scout units do you think is the D of Exploration and Intelligence's "fair share" early on?

Z

[Maniac]

Personally I don't know follow rigid patterns of base planning like other people do. Though as a good hopefully future director I know of course several of the most important reasons why building bases tight together is beneficial:

1) As Habitation Domes come so late in the game, the maximum possible population for almost the entire game is 140000. Therefore it doesn't matter if you let the base radii overlap.

While this might be true for all other factions, it doesn't for the Peacekeepers. First they have an inherent +2 population limit bonus. Secondly my party holds Ascetic Virtues in high esteem and supports such a moral policy. This will also allow more people to live on a smaller space. As a result we can have bases of 180000 people. So IMHO this first reason for building bases tight doesn't count for our faction.

2) Closer bases allow for easier defence and transfer of garrisons.

While this might be a good argument in PBEM games with skilled human players, it doesn't really count in a game against the AI. I would be surprised if the AI could threaten us that much that tight bases are worth it.

3) If you build bases closer together, your colony pods reach their destination site a bit sooner, creating comparable turn advantage.

The argument of comparable turn advantage still remains valid, no matter with what faction or with which opponents you are playing. Still, I doubt this alone is enough to justify an "as close as possible" base planning policy. Though I would of course allow overlap to a certain degree, I wouldn't specifically seek it. My base construction plan will be much more influenced by the will of the people and the lay of the land (rainy tiles, special bonus tiles and such...).


As for your second question, I have already stated several times I'm in favour of a thin expansion policy. This means I will try to expand as quickly as possible, ignoring "vertical" expansion to favour "horizontal" expansion...

Will be continued tomorrow. I'm off to bed now.

[Zakharov VII]

Thank you very much for your answers.

I was already aware of your thin expansionist policies (which I totally agree with); mostly it was a question for your worthy opponent, whom I'm eager to hear from.

I'd also like to rephrase my last question to something slightly different. I know the job you two are seeking requires you to push for Formers and Colony Pods, but what do you consider "fair" that other Directors would want? It's unreasonable to always build nothing but Formers and Colony Pods; what do you think the other Directors should get to build?

Z

[Pandemoniak]

Originally posted by Zakharov VII
How close together would you want bases? As close as possible, or a couple diagonal tiles away? 3 tiles? 4?

I suggest we first extend quite large (ie 6/8 tiles away ), and then have a build queue like : terraformer, colony pod, garrison, recycling tank, etc...
The first colony pod is used to found another base, 6/8 tiles away.
When the base reach size 3 (or size 2 if we can have lots of ressources easily, ie with a monolith), we stop the building queue. At this point, the new base founded keeps producing colony pods to found other bases in the blank and unused areas.
I suggest to make a poll to see if citizen want bases 2, 3 or 4 tiles away. In some cases, of course, that wont be appropriate and I would then go for other strategies : for example, the land neck, which makes a Channel of Panama and block entrance for the land, exceptionnal ressources, fundus field, etc...

How important are nutrients early on: for some early population building up (maintaining steady size 2's, at 3 just for the pod) or only just enough to support colony pods (size 1, 2 for the pod)?

see above

How many scout units do you think is the D of Exploration and Intelligence's "fair share" early on?

This is not directly depending of this directorate, but I think one scout for 2/3 bases is a fair share.

Another important thing is to build sensor arrays at a square where we plan to build a base. Thus, we can see if ennemies are approaching, we are sure to keep this SA even if frontiers moves, we spare other tiles to build some more intersting things : boreholes, condensors, mirors, etc...

[Maniac]

Six to eight tiles away?? It will take ages before our colony pods reach their destination, and it will leave many tiles uncovered by base radii. I ideally propose a base every 3 or 3.5 tiles diagonally (so 2-2.5 tiles between, creating 2 to 0 tiles overlap with the next base) or every 4 or 5 tiles (so 3-4 tiles between, creating 3 to 0 tiles overlap) in a straight line. This creates some overlap, but not too much.

To continue my response on your second question, certainly don't expect to see a size 4 base in the early game. Most of the time I'll try to time the completion of a colony pod production when the base is about to reach size 3 or has just reached it.

My regular production queue would be:

1) Terraformer (rushed for 19 to 25 energy credits, depending on our SE stance)
2) Free slot for a second terraformer, (colony pod) or exploration unit. Since the first terraformer is rushed, it might be possible that the base would still be at size 1 when the colony pod would be completed. Another unit will have to be produced then.
3) Colony pod
4) Garrison
5) Too far to predict - similar to 2). If the base grows fast enough, we might continue with colony pod - garrison.

You probably have noticed I didn't mention the building of a garrison early on. That's because I recently tried out a PK game on the Huge Map of Planet, and I found out that due to the talent bonus it wasn't necessary to have a garrison for anti-drone purposes in the base all the time. That's why I would suggest when a base completes a colony pod, the garrison of that base is sent along with the colony pod. This gives the new base an immediate new garrison and protection from mind worms. The old base then builds a new garrison and can accumulate some nutrients in the growth queue before it builds another colony pod. Constantly producing new colony pods after the initial build queue Pandemoniak suggests might go too fast for the base growth to keep up, before we go Demo+Planned that is.

You probably also noticed I didn't mention Rec Tanks. Personally I find them a bad investment in the early game. They give 3 extra resources to a base A for the cost of 40 minerals. Compare that to a former built in base B. He costs 20 minerals, which means he is completed earlier than the rec tanks in base B. While base B is still busy producing the rec tanks, the former of base A can already have planted two forests, giving more extra resources than the rec tanks. So a former creates a bigger comparable turn advantage. Unless we are swimming in money, which I suppose we won't in this first term, I don't plan to build any base facility.

As for the third question regarding exploration units, see my build queue above. Slot 2 and 5 are certainly open for discussion.

[DeathByTheSword]

ok question how are you two going to deal with:

*fungus
*changing weather patterns (rising/lower terrain)
*sea terraforming and colonization

...?

[Maniac]

IMHO changing the altitude of terrain and sea colonization is too far away to discuss about in this first term. So this is also a disclaimer for my previous post. It only counts for the first few decades. Plans slowly change over time.

Fungus however is a problem from day one, as it slows down transportation of material across our empire. So the simple answer is: if a fungus tile is in the way of the best possible road network, that fungus patch will be removed. But because removing fungus takes so many precious time, I would try to plan a road network crossing as less fungus as possible. Otherwise I don't think there will be many fungus removal in the first few decades - there will be enough non-fungal tiles to terraform. Of course if fungus lies on a perfect base site or on a brilliant bonus resource, say rocky + mineral, we'll remove it.

[Haon]

OOC:I am assuming it is ok to enter mid-game, I also asked if I can join in the "Join the SMAC Demo game thread", though I dont see why I cant start posting now...

IC: I have a question to both candidates.

A) What are your opinions on Thermal Boreholes?? They do provide benefits but cause extensive ecological damage as well.

B) In any way do you think your parties ideals in SE affect your terraforming methods?

[Pandemoniak]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
ok question how are you two going to deal with:

*fungus
*changing weather patterns (rising/lower terrain)
*sea terraforming and colonization

...?

DBTS, same than M@ni@c, except for one big difference about Fongus. Since we play the Pk, we wont have any perticular benefits of nearby fungus, so I suggest we give the DoTC enough terraformers to eradicate EVERY fongus inside base control tiles.

A) What are your opinions on Thermal Boreholes?? They do provide benefits but cause extensive ecological damage as well.

B) In any way do you think your parties ideals in SE affect your terraforming methods?

Even assuming we have the WP, its foolish to build boreholes that soon before we raise the mineral and energy bonuses
Well, about early SE, Demo +2 Growth,+2Eff allows larger and more cities, so more land to terraform, and more terraformers to do it. The main problem is the -2 Support, that need to be counterbalanced by the +1 Industry of Planned, at least for the early game.

[Crisler]

What is your position on Colony placement? Do you place inland and terriform the are and wait for limits to raise or do either of you support coastal bases that allow early terriforming of the water and thus proivde a better early rescource return?

E.L. Crisler
First Commissioner

[Maniac]

DBTS, same than M@ni@c, except for one big difference about Fongus. Since we play the Pk, we wont have any perticular benefits of nearby fungus, so I suggest we give the DoTC enough terraformers to eradicate EVERY fongus inside base control tiles.

In the early game? First, in the early game we don't have enough industrial power to support lots of formers. One or two per base is the maximum. Later this changes of course. Second, what's the use of eradicating every fungus tile early game if we can't even harvest that tile due to our low population. Once we have built ourselves a large colonial empire, then of course we might switch to actively removing many fungus patches, eradicating them from rainy and bonus tiles. However personally I don't remove them from moisty or arid tiles. I usually just plant a forest right next to the fungus patch and let the trees do the hard work. It is also possible we might go green sometime in the late-game, and fungus can then produce up to 2-3-3 resources. So personally, unless we have an enormous terraforming power which we don't know what to do with, I have other priorities than starting a crusade against every last patch of fungus. Needless to say, if the citizens do want to eradicate the fungus, I'll do what they want. I'll post polls on the subject once the issue comes up in my hopefully future directorate.

I agree with Pandemoniak regarding boreholes and SE.

terriform the are and

Crisler, I fear I don't completely understand your question due to this supposed grammar error. But I won't terraform anything if it doesn't give a return. For example, I won't build a farm on a non-nutrient-bonus rainy tile before we discover gene splicing. There are many other important projects that deserve the attention of our formers early on. The same counts for sea tiles: before gene splicing/environmental economics, they only give a small percentage of their maximum output: a meager 2-0-2. So before the food & energy production limits are away, it's better to focus mostly on land terraformation.

[Pandemoniak]

First, in the early game we don't have enough industrial power to support lots of formers. One or two per base is the maximum. Later this changes of course. Second, what's the use of eradicating every fungus tile early game if we can't even harvest that tile due to our low population

Hmm, well...
For the first thing, I consider two formers per base lots of terraforming. 2 formers + 1 garrison, plus optionnaly a colony pod that hasnt been settled down yet, makes 4 units to support, therefore -2 minerals, -3 in democracy, IIRC.. Between one and two per base seems better. Anyway, M@ni@c and I are both running for DoTC, so I guess we both want many many terraformers.
For the second thing, the biggest interest of suppressing fungus tiles is that no mind worm can hide in it, neither any artillery who would keep destructiong our terraforming. The tree thing is good, but far too slow. We can use it when our terraforming is not really threathened (ie many units in the area, or very poor terraformin, or many monoliths), but I go for fungus eradication, not a mindless crusade, simply a big clean within our base squares. There's indeed no need to delete fungus where we cannot harvest the tile, but there may often be need to delete fungus when someone can hide in it, when it slows our movements, etc...

[Crisler]

Maniac,

What I was referring to was the use of coastal bases to maximuize the effect of terriforming on the sea, since this is the best early game mehtod ofr gathering rescources.

E.L. Crisler
First Commissioner

[Maniac]

Pandemoniak, for the most part I agree with your plan for garrison, two formers and an optional colony pod. However you are forgetting the needs of the Director of Exploration and Intelligence.

I hope that Director will be Lemmy, a member of ACE who supports rapid exploration. That requires some extra scout patrols/rovers besides the usual base garrison. So my suggestion is we build a scout unit in the bases we only have one formers. That satisfies both the needs of us, wanting lots of terraforming capacity, and the needs of the D of Explo&Intel, requiring many scout units.

Pandemoniak, you do realize that if you remove many fungus tiles early in the game, that will take formers away from important duties like roadbuilding, forestplanting etcetera and slow down our expansion. Or are already talking about mid-game?? Then I can better understand your point of view.

Crisler, how does building coastal bases maximize the effect of terraforming on sea? In regular SMAC we don't have Aquafarms, Subsea Trunkline or Thermocline Transducers, reducing the value of sea terraforming. And why do you consider sea terraforming the best early game way of gathering resources? They're great after Gene Spl./EnvEcon : 3-0-4, but before that any land tile can produce better.

Of course, as soon as we discover D:Flex (if I would be D of TC at that time, which is doubtful), I would post polls asking how many sea formers we should build in our many coastal bases, which bases, etcetera.

[Pandemoniak]

Originally posted by M@ni@c
Pandemoniak, for the most part I agree with your plan for garrison, two formers and an optional colony pod. However you are forgetting the needs of the Director of Exploration and Intelligence.

I hope that Director will be Lemmy, a member of ACE who supports rapid exploration. That requires some extra scout patrols/rovers besides the usual base garrison. So my suggestion is we build a scout unit in the bases we only have one formers. That satisfies both the needs of us, wanting lots of terraforming capacity, and the needs of the D of Explo&Intel, requiring many scout units.

Since neither the DoTC nor the DoEI have been elected, I didnt take account of such possibilities. But that might be useful in a campaign, so i will study these possibilities.

[QUOTE]Pandemoniak, you do realize that if you remove many fungus tiles early in the game, that will take formers away from important duties like roadbuilding, forestplanting etcetera and slow down our expansion. Or are already talking about mid-game?? Then I can better understand your point of view.

You missed my point : removing fungus is only to improve our formers speed. Many times, mindworms or ennemies hide in that fungus, and come to destroy some terraforming, or attack our peaceful bases. As well, for a good exploration, it is better when the center of our faction is clean of fungus.
To sum up : for the beginning of the gmae, I suggest we remove critical fungus, with the goal to remove all fungus at middle game.

Of course, as soon as we discover D:Flex (if I would be D of TC at that time, which is doubtful), I would post polls asking how many sea formers we should build in our many coastal bases, which bases, etcetera.

[DeathByTheSword]

i see here a great differents between the two candidates on the subject of fungus. cool

[Maniac]

It's a reverse world. The CDC (green) candidate wants to eradicate all fungus, while the P4 (FM) candidate has a more "let it be" attitude.

Maybe we should switch parties.

[DeathByTheSword]