Director of Terraformation and Colonization campaign thread: Term III

Maniac · October 20, 2002, 18:23

The current candidates for that position are:
Maniac

Questions are welcome. For now I'll just copy and paste what I wrote in the nominations thread.

Early game I personally stand for one heavy nutrient tile per base for the first worker, the others forest. I also give a high priority to creating a road network. I stand for thin expansion, so I give high priority to producing formers and CPs. Once we have crawlers, condensers to max nutrients on certain suitable tiles are also a good idea. This approach gradually changes once the production limits are gone, but that's not for right now. Besides, I believe the people have the word in deciding what to do. The Director is just their servant and his personal opinion is unimportant. More important is how good he is at organizing polls and referenda. A quote from yours truly:

quote:

After some more thinking I'm with DE. The proposed system will create more and more complex polls compared to the system I'm currently using. Pandemoniak wants to reinstitute the system of polling every square of every base. Just like I have made some more general polls such as what should be the focus: nutrient/minerals and at what size should the focus switch, Pandemoniak should create some more general polls for his directorate. For example, he could make polls every month asking:

What should be the standard terraformation in the following tile:

rolling&rainy above 1000 metres, rolling&rainy below 100, flat&rainy above 1000... All those combinations with the option of farm&condenser, farm&solar, forest etcetera... The same can be done for rocky terrain and sea tiles etcetera. The Director should only have to do this once a month and can therefore concentrate on polling other matters such as colonization, special bonus tiles, how much former power to concentrate on what task... To know what tiles he should terraform first around a base, he could refer to the polls of D of IE regarding nutrient, mineral and in a while energy and specialists focus.

That's at least what I would do if I was D of TC. Less workload for the Director and less repititous polls but clear general decision making for the citizens.

So I would organize one poll in the beginning of the month to decide default actions for the most frequent tiles, and decide what actions to give priority based on the actions of the next D of IE, presuming s/he continues my style of polling. Furthermore, I would organize polls 1) for special tiles, 2) where to colonize and 3) where to use our formers.

There has also been a question regarding boreholes from dmm1285.

Yes, I suppotr building boreholes. But only after we have researched technologies to remove our limits on mineral and energy production. Before that they're rather useless. I'd build them on rocky tiles where the lay of the land allows it. But naturally I'd poll for such major terraforming projects.

GeneralTacticus · October 21, 2002, 03:47

As to your personal opinion: what do you think should be done about the fungus?

Pandemoniak · October 21, 2002, 05:31

What is you rpolicy about more effcient terraforming than what has been done before,beiong available after completion of the Weather Paradigm ?
(Boreholes, Mirrors, Condensor).

Maniac · October 21, 2002, 17:17

My fungus philosophy is "Let it be" unless it crosses our objectives like connecting all our bases with a road network. Then the terraforming crews will be merciless.

Boreholes: on rocky after EcoEng and EnvEco.
Mirrors: not yet - we have other priorities right now. On request I can of course always organize a poll on the issue.
Condensers: after we have crawlers: perhaps on nutruent squares and flat&rainies?? I must admit I rarely use condensers in my own games. Advice from more experienced people would be appreciated...

Method · October 21, 2002, 19:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
Boreholes: on rocky after EcoEng and EnvEco.

we can't do that! boreholling rockies means we can't mine/crawl them, for less former time. plus, we get to send our workers to somewhere else to work...energy!

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
Mirrors: not yet - we have other priorities right now. On request I can of course always organize a poll on the issue.

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
Condensers: after we have crawlers: perhaps on nutruent squares and flat&rainies?? I must admit I rarely use condensers in my own games. Advice from more experienced people would be appreciated...

i myself usually build them on flat squares, regardless of raininess, since they make moist tiles rainy. a few of them next to each other on the Unity wreckage can turn a wasteland into a....non-wasteland

.
a rainy/condensor/farm tile will get us 4 nuts, and that's great to crawl.

how about sea forming? when we get doc: flex, do you think it would be a good idea to send out a few sea formers (or even a sea colony pod) into the freshwater sea to improve (and crawl) some of the nutrient resources there?

Pandemoniak · October 22, 2002, 04:34

Sea forming : Farm/Solar everywhere : no mineral platforms, except if really needed (ie: total sea base). The amount of energy being 3 for an amount of mineral of 1, the choice is really clear. a base in Freshwater with two sea formers can get us an impressive energy/tech boom, maybe better than any social engineering at the moment.

Archaic · October 22, 2002, 09:35

I believe we should have no standards, but also no polling on every tiny decision. If you're in, you should be left to do your job.
Anyway, if you need standards, I suggest...
Most squares as forest or boreholes, excepting only 2-3 high elevation rolling/moist or rainy (Farm/Solar), or low elevation rolling/moist or rainy (Farm/Condensor).
Once we have Tree Farms and above, scrap all non-Forest/Borehole/Condensor/High elevation tiles for Forest.

Boreholes: Why won't you support Pre-building them before we have the required tech's, assuming we get the WP? Seems to me that it'd be best to have them built beforehand so they can be used as soon as possible.

Condensors: Can go to 4 Nuts even when you don't have GS. Pre-build them before Crawlers and GS to turn more tiles Rainy (Meaning less need to build farms before GS), and Crawler ASAP. Only 1 to 3 required per base at this stage. If 2-3, all other worked tiles up 2 size 9 (ie. Pre Hab Complex Limits) can be Forest or Borehole.

Quote:

maybe better than any social engineering at the moment.

Pan has no clue what he's talking about with that statement, however if you can get a viable sea base in the FWS, by all means do so. Preferably close to land or near a potential min supply though. (Is there a Min bonus in there? I don't recall.)

Pandemoniak · October 22, 2002, 09:48

Archaic, stop being stupid and saying nonsense. If we switch to free market now, we should get a benefit of 26 energy, 8 in EC, 9 in labs, 9 wasted by inefficency. If we switch to Demo/FM, we should still have a benefit of 26 energy, with only two MW wasted : +13 EC per turn, +11 REs per turn.
So if we build two bases in the Freshwater sea and put Farms/"Solar" all around, when these two bases will reach size 4, we'll have 30 MW of energy, which is more than 26 (And not counting any kind of ressource bonus).
Ther is enough space to put three-four bases in the Fresh water sea, with minimal overlap radius.

Maniac · October 22, 2002, 17:43

Do NOT turn this thread into another Archaic vs Pandemoniak, all right?

Keep it civil if that's in your dictionary.

Maniac · October 22, 2002, 18:23

How would you place boreholes then? Personally when faced with the choice between forest or a borehole, I always pick the forest. So only on rockies a borehole because there's nothing better to construct there. Except a mine of course... This might make an interesting poll in the future.

Pandemoniak · October 22, 2002, 18:38

I usually dont put boreholes myself, since I prefer to have condensor and a huge population, turned into Enginners/Empath/Thinker/Transcends, while minimising the ecodamage. Minerals can still be crawled, and energy is brought by the specialists (on which no unefficiency is applied

).

Maniac · October 22, 2002, 19:12

So you're in favour of the famous "all-specialist bases"? How should we see this RPG? How about a technocracy where agriculture and industry are automized (supply convoying) and where the ideal of near-full education of the people is reached (all specialists), so they don't have to keep themselves busy anymore with manual labour and can concentrate on matters of the mind? Sounds great for the PKs. It would be a sort of Eudaimonia avant-la-lettre. Plus FM would be less important, and we could go Planned because inefficiency matters less.

Archaic · October 22, 2002, 19:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
Archaic, stop being stupid and saying nonsense. If we switch to free market now, we should get a benefit of 26 energy, 8 in EC, 9 in labs, 9 wasted by inefficency. If we switch to Demo/FM, we should still have a benefit of 26 energy, with only two MW wasted : +13 EC per turn, +11 REs per turn.
So if we build two bases in the Freshwater sea and put Farms/"Solar" all around, when these two bases will reach size 4, we'll have 30 MW of energy, which is more than 26 (And not counting any kind of ressource bonus).
Ther is enough space to put three-four bases in the Fresh water sea, with minimal overlap radius.

You fail to take into account The Pact with Morgan and Wealth SE for mine, and the Inefficiency on Energy with yours (Or do you intend to make them use lots of Trawlers for a Specialist Sea-Base, which would be impossible in the short term?). I reiterate. You don't know what you're talking about. Baka.

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
How would you place boreholes then? Personally when faced with the choice between forest or a borehole, I always pick the forest. So only on rockies a borehole because there's nothing better to construct there. Except a mine of course... This might make an interesting poll in the future.

That completly depends on the base. With my 2 on the diagonal base spacing, I usually fit 6 Boreholes in each base radius (4 of which will usually be used by other bases, though that can be changed when necessary for hyped production).

Really, I have no set "rules" on what type of squares to build the Boreholes on. Just as close as possible, wherever we can build them.

As for the Specialist base idea, it's unworkable at our current production levels. Even with it, it's agreed that as many citizens as possible should be on Boreholes so that the facilities can improve the energy intake, and so bases still have decent mineral levels. Yes, there can be inefficiency in the energy this way, but you still pull in a lot more once that's taken into account. And if you're in FM as well, especially if you've got some commerce....

Method · October 22, 2002, 20:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
How would you place boreholes then?

i put them mostly on the coasts, and put as many as i can in the remaining low-lying tiles. they're great things. i'll then have a few condensors on flat squares. the rest is forest

archaic: we already got the WP.

now come on you two! can't we just have a civil conversation without calling each-other names? could we refrain from saying 'you don't know what you're talking about" and say something a bit more...nice?

Pandemoniak · October 23, 2002, 03:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
Archaic, stop being stupid and saying nonsense. If we switch to free market now, we should get a benefit of 26 energy, 8 in EC, 9 in labs, 9 wasted by inefficency. If we switch to Demo/FM, we should still have a benefit of 26 energy, with only two MW wasted : +13 EC per turn, +11 REs per turn.
So if we build two bases in the Freshwater sea and put Farms/"Solar" all around, when these two bases will reach size 4, we'll have 30 MW of energy, which is more than 26 (And not counting any kind of ressource bonus).
Ther is enough space to put three-four bases in the Fresh water sea, with minimal overlap radius.

You fail to take into account The Pact with Morgan and Wealth SE for mine, and the Inefficiency on Energy with yours (Or do you intend to make them use lots of Trawlers for a Specialist Sea-Base, which would be impossible in the short term?). I reiterate. You don't know what you're talking about. Baka.

Use your brain : if we have four bases like that, these uncalculable differences are totally minor.

GeneralTacticus · October 23, 2002, 03:57

And how exactly are we going to GET four bases like that? We'll need 320 mins for the Sea Colony Pods, more for the Sea Formers, then decades of work to build up the infrastructure. All of that can be done under FM as well.

Archaic · October 23, 2002, 20:50

Quote:

Originally posted by TKG
archaic: we already got the WP

Yup. I realised that later. All the more reason to build those now while we can. Preferably with teams of 2 or more formers. It'll just take too long otherwise.

Pan, 4 bases like what? You didn't say if it was Specialist or Non-Specialist. In both situations, you're looking at far more production necessary to get them off the ground then what I'm proposing. While FM will need production of Rec. Commons, we were building them anyway, unlike your numerous Sea Colony Pods, Sea Formers, infrastructure for those Sea Bases (Which will be completly pathetic as mineral producing bases, meaning those Sea Formers will likely need to be produced elsewhere, and re-homed later.)....