Tweet
Posted by Skanderbeg on 22-01-2001 06:46:
clean reactors
I have to confess that I haver never built a unit with clean reactor. But I read in the threats that many poeple build clean units.
My opinion is, that support plays only a role in the early game, than mineral production is low. But in this time, clean reactors aren't avaliable.
Later in the game, I build military units in specialised bases with high mineral production.
I didn't care about two ore three minerals for support,
if my city produces 40 or more minerals each turn.
Additionally, clean reactor is an expensive special ability (factor 2), which means that the clean unit takes longer to produce and, because of this, the reactor pays itsself only if the units survives long enough.
Third argument, an unit can have to special abilities maximally. Clean reactor takes one of this away. I think it is better to use this place for anonther special ability which helps this unit in defense or attack (i. e. AAA, soporific gas etc.). That lets them live longer and so, let them pay the price for the support mineral in another way: You don't have to produce a substitute.
The only units that seem to me perhaps valuable for clean reactors are formers, because they are detemined for not fighting and need no fighting special abilities.
So, what are the arguments what let You produce clean units.
************************************************** ********************
Posted by DogberryMan on 22-01-2001 07:06:
Clean reactors are good for several reasons. First of all you are right that you wont take much of a hit in production if you have a couple of units in bases that produce 40 or more minerals, but if you have a poor support rating (when I play as Morgan I have a –1 support) you may not be able to support any units for free. This brings me to the point, if you build more than a few units in each base (I often build upwards of 10 to defend each base) then that will actually start to take a toll on your minerals. Another example is with navel units. I usually only have one or two costal bases and because of this those are the only cities that can build navel units. If you want to field a large navy, then you will cripple the mineral production of those two cities unless you use clean reactors.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 22-01-2001 10:03:
The value of clean reactors come into being when you decide to become an energy rich faction as opposed to a mineral rich one. In the case when you have made the decision to forgo minerals to bulk up on energy instead then clean is invaluable. A bazillion bases topped out on minerals at about 20 or so thereby staying under the radar with respect to eco damage but also staffed with 8 or more engineers raking inthe expendable energy makes for an effective and respectable tech advance rate and bank account. In this case the ability to make expensive units is a two turn process where in turn one a trained shell is created then upgraded to a cleanunit in turn two. If this was not the case the bases would and could bog themsleves down in terms of support. Take a look at industry gifted factions as played by the AI. By mid game Yang and Domai with incredible industry ratings have mired their ability to develop any further infrastructure b/c they have built unit after unit chewing up their available mins.
True enough thats a poor example as any human would know better but the real point here is that if you choose to limit your mineral intake in order to beef up energy for rush buys and tech gains every last min counts to at a minimum ensure you have flexibility to turn best weapon units around every 2 turns.
OTOH if your approach is to load up on mins, you can build an effective fighting force but you pay for it in terms of opportunity cost lost vs. the more energy intensive approach.
Your comment regarding survivability is a good one. If all your intending to do is send X-chopper after X-chopper across the waves for suicide missions then clean is a very wasteful proposition. However, for long term usage ie. AAA garison units, formers etc. clean has its purposes as after a number of turns it has more than paid for itself. Realistically speaking one needs to understand the industry capability of the base, the energy reserves your willing to commit, and the expected lifetime of the unit in question.
So in summary in the situation I described an energy rich, mineral poor society clean becomes more attractive. Long term units such as formers and garrison units clean becomes a good option as well.
Posted by Blake on 22-01-2001 11:51:
I always use clean reactors on Formers, with the exception of my Super Fungicide 3-res Rover Formers (altough I only have a few of those).
Otherwise I mainly use them on specialist units, for example I always have a "cops" unit, 1-1-1 clean,police this unit quells two drones at truly minimal cost, and if you are attacked can be upgraded into a real unit.
I also play Yang a lot, by making all formers and drone control units clean that means I have four free units per base, and because Yang is usually a bit cash strapped it's more of an issue to upgrade trained scouts to expensive clean varieties.
************************************************** **********************
Posted by mark13 on 22-01-2001 15:01:
Just think of it this way - you build a unit and plonk a clean reactor on it for an extra 20 minerals. Assuming that the unit lasts longer than 20 turns, you are always going to make a net gain - without any extra eco-damage.
Also, if your number of bases is minimal, for whatever reason, clean reactors become essential in order to support a large army, to keep your production high, and to keep eco-damage away....
************************************************** ********************
Posted by Mars_Col_44 on 22-01-2001 21:21:
Well, you do not "need" to use clean reactors. You may wish to spread your military units' "home bases" around. You could also crawl-in lots of minerals to support the units.
But I personally rely heavily on clean reactors. I use a core of bases as military unit production centers with Bioenhancement Centers/Command Centers/Creche to pump up the morale(same goes for naval yards). So I don't need to build command centers & bioenhancement centers everywhere, which frees up the outlying bases to build infrastructure. Also, I don't need to manage spreading around the home bases of units. And I can build up a sizeable invasion force with decent morale.
************************************************** ********************
Posted by Sikander on 24-01-2001 00:28:
Well I must admit that I rely on clean units extensively for the reasons that Ogie mentioned. Obviously garrison units and formers usually live a very long time and are thus great candidates. When I am defending my casualty rate is usually very low, so those defensive units are also good candidates for the clean ability.
Where I probably go overboard is my offensive wars where I use the 1 trained shell unit per base per turn (if necessary) and upgraded the next turn style of conquest. Many of these units will not survive to old age, as I use them as ammunition to overwhelm and crush the AI. Still I usually end up with an oversupply of this helicopter (or whatever) stream (those caught in the pipeline as the war is concluded), and it seems cheaper to just keep them around to beef up my defenses, and to serve as the nucleus of my next wave of destruction, and having upgraded them to clean already, I don't have to spend another joule on them.
Players who rely on a high mineral production to build 'super units' would do well to consider an intensive cost benefit analysis. If nothing else those minerals could be converted to energy at a 1 to 2 rate (or better). It might be better to build almost exclusively clean units, and save those few free units (depending on your support rating) for your specialized troops.
One final factor which may limit the utility of clean units is the rate at which your military techs are advancing. It can get pretty expensive to keep your military up to date when your techs are coming in every 1 to 4 turns. Players rich in minerals but poor in cash might find it preferable to simply scrap and rebuild updated units rather than constantly upgrade. I usually let my designs get at least two behind cutting edge at this point in the game before I upgrade them.
************************************************** *******************
Posted by Skanderbeg on 24-01-2001 01:38:
For me, garrisons would be the last unit I gave clean reactors. The reasons: It's their job to defend against a) other factions unit's, especially air force, B) native life. For the reason of this, they need two special abilities: AAA and trance. No place left for clean reactor. Second reason: Until You have a very bad support rate, Your first units, and to this belongs the garrison, will be free.
To Ogie and the others: I agree that long-surviving clean units pay their price, and I am sure I would use clean reactors if I could build units with more than two special abilities. But because I can use only two, I very like to use both of them to push up the strengh of the unit.
I will use my "nightmare"-gravship for example.
It is a best weapon, psi armor gravship, special abilities X-Gas and D-Wave. The thing made to play around on Marr's territory. If I would change one of the special abilities against clean reactor, it would not work any longer, because X-gas is essential against the aliens and D-Wave is necessary to avoid empath attacks.
It's the same with other units.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Lord Maxwell on 24-01-2001 03:58:
I often build clean reactor units, but mostly for home use. I find it to be the most degenerate part of the game. (Well, that and getting 2-3 techs per turn without an energy park.
All my bases can complete some kind of unit on the chassi I really want, if nothing else so atleast a bare scout, which can then be upgraded with money. After the opening play I find energy coming out of my ears, especially from the specialist heavy bases. If a base has engineers it will still produce cash no matter if research is set at 100%.
So, turn 1, build the troop. At the end of the turn it builds it gets a bought upgrade to a better chassi. I have a special base with lots of minerals set up for building prototypes. Prototypes are also never disbanded, rather their special morale bonus gets used to benefit.
Playing as morgan I can field more units than the AI Yang can ever match. Against the AI this is excessive, but against a human opponent you can't generally conquer his entire empire with 3 rovers and 2 probes. (My usual force against the comp.)
Why does the same guy need AAA and trance? You get one AAA/clean, one trance/clean one empath/clean. You get the picture.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Skanderbeg on 24-01-2001 06:06:
Simple answer.
Building AAA/trance garrison needs two turns: turn 1: building scout patrol, turn 2 upgrading. Building AAA garrison + trance garrison needs 4 turns.
I save 2 turns for producing something.
************************************************** *******************
Posted by Gregurabi on 24-01-2001 07:05:
Building a clean-AAA unit and a clean-trance unit does not take 4 turns -- it takes 2.
Turn 0: Begin construction of 1-1t-1 (or better), rushing production if appropriate.
Turn 1: first 1-1t-1 completed and active; upgrade it to 1--1*2 clean (or better) and continue production of next 1-1t-1 (or better), rushing production if appropriate.
Turn 2: second 1-1t-1 completed and active; upgrade it to 1-3tr-1*2 clean (or better) and assign production to whatever you want next.
That's only two turns' worth of production time & minerals, and a large chunk of cash.
************************************************** ********************
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 24-01-2001 08:52:
Skand,
Gregarubi is correct. Basically a best weapon or best armor or whatever unit with one specialization is turned out one per turn per base after the first turn.
So if you need 10 units from a base (assuming you have the energy to handle it) it would take 11 turns to build said units.
One of the reasons I'm fond of transport units is that it allows the shaving of that one turn. The transport unit takes the units in question en route and they get upgraded on the way. It ends up being the same amount of time if you had build an expensive mineral unit from the ground up. Plus way I figure it if the transport gets plugged on the first turn out I'd rather lose the shell units vs. cost of the expensive jobbies.
Og
************************************************** ********************
Posted by big_canuk on 24-01-2001 12:09:
Gregurabi and OO:
You guys are right. You can build 10 clean one specialization units in 11 turns. But the point Skand was making is that you can build 5 two specialization units in 6 turns. Basically 2 for 1.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 24-01-2001 14:01:
Big C & Skand,
Ahh now I see where you are going with this. My feeling is however that given a choice between a double specialized unit and two single specilized units w/clean, you've gotten a benefit of an additional line of defense/attack (albeit maybe not appropriate to the attack mode in question). What's more by putting clean on those garrison and/or former units if you really really need a double specialized unit say a X chopper with soporific then at least those first few can be made sans support issues.
Aside from the first round production and a 1 turn delay to upgrade (which can be gotten around) meanwhilst second round a unit comes off and then upgraded in turn three. Meanwhile turn 3 shell production rolls off for upgrade and use in turn 4 and so on.
Of course the get around makes all this an aside if one continually upgrades 1-1-x's from the workshop vs. upgrading at the unit level.
So depending on how many double specilized units we are really talking 'bout garrisoning you net yourself a one turn loss/double specialized unit in build Q flexibility by having to build second unit with appropriate special capability.
Have I rambled incoherently enough to confuse everyone yet?
Og
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Sikander on 25-01-2001 00:23:
Given the choice between two clean units (1 AAA and 1 Trance) and a single unit with AAA/Trance I will take the two units every time. The only reason against having twice the options / hit points etc. of two units is their cost, and if they live awhile that is recovered by not having to pay any support for them. Obviously if you have any free units due to your support rating it makes no sense to waste that advantage by making them clean. I usually run a fairly low support rating, so if I have any free units available I save them for those specialized units which use both ability slots.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Skanderbeg on 25-01-2001 01:38:
OO and Gregurabi: You're right of course, but Big C. brings it on the point.
I think I use those AAA/trance and other combinations of two special abilities because I am safety-mad, like the guy who wears belt and a pair of braces at the same time. ;-)
10 Units from a single base? You really do this often?
Perhaps this is this reason why I don't rely on clean units. I don't build so much units, because I always rely on quality, not on quantity.
For defense, my basic crew is 3 or 4 units (one or two best armor AAA/trance, one best weapon/empath+something else rover or needeljet, one probe (needs no support)).
In this way, my normal base had only to support 3 to 5 units (included 1 or 2 formers), which wouldn't hurt me very much.
The attack crews (not 10, but only 3 or 4 units, but only of the best) are produced in specialised bases with high mineral production. And of course, when they have do their duty, they conquer a base and can be rehomed to this base, or they get lost and need no support any more.
************************************************** **********************
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 25-01-2001 03:49:
Skand,
The example of 10 units may be a tad extreme on average but yes I would definitely say there are bases that I have well over 20 or more units from all but one or two being formers.
Military units probably not more than 4-6 on average 'cept if I do a PS base in FM. Then the # of units supported may be approaching the 10+ number.
************************************************** ********************
Og
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 25-01-2001 08:38:
One other hidden not often talked about benefit of clean reactors is the ability to rehome to any base without issue.
Just as an example say your Dee in the midst of a conquer fest. Your 8 or so 'dirty' X- soporific missile rovers are taking out Alien after Alien base. You've decide to capture and hold an alien base in the meantime for heal up purposes. Out of the blue your home base for these 'dirty' x-soporifc speeders get subverted by Morgan or Rose. All those units in the field rehome themselves to the nearest base. In this case that puny size 1 taken fromthe aliens. All of sudden that measly size 1 base supports but 4 units and the other go poof. Your offensive grinds to halt.
Same holds true for needlejets, choppers what have you.)
Jus' some more rambling on clean.
Og
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Misotu on 25-01-2001 18:02:
Clean units have their place - I build quite a lot of them under certain circumstances. In MP, the role of clean is less important - you can rarely be sure that units will survive long enough to repay the additional cost. Depends on the map.
In SP, garrisons and formers are invaluable clean. I have had games with 60 or 70 formers, the majority of which survive indefinitely.
Similarly, almost all garrison units will survive forever in SP, if you are playing a builder game In fact, I'm often forced to upgrade garrisons simply to free up slots in the workshop, otherwise those original 1-2-1 chappies would be there to the end of the game
I'm surprised at the importance placed on trance. By the time you have clean, you are also close to very decent armour and decent defences. If your ecodamage is ridiculous, then trance may become an issue. In my games, trance has rarely been required, since I have an energy focus and minerals in the later game are provided by non-polluting satellites. Native life attacks are rare, and the only ones worth worrying about are locusts. In which case, AAA will do the job ... In any event, I would simply build an additional clean, best armour, trance defender if it were absolutely necessary. The attack will be countered by the defender best-equipped to handle it.
The game in which clean reactors are indispensable though, is the One City Challenge. Without it, you simply cannot support the number of units that will be required to survive and prosper in the mid to late game.
************************************************** ********************
Posted by Travathian on 25-01-2001 18:23:
(to Ogie post) I %&%^? hate it when that happens!
Oh, and another reason to have more than one defender . . . That 1-1-1 scout patrol maybe the difference between that rover destroying the patrol, or rolling into his new city.
clean reactors
I have to confess that I haver never built a unit with clean reactor. But I read in the threats that many poeple build clean units.
My opinion is, that support plays only a role in the early game, than mineral production is low. But in this time, clean reactors aren't avaliable.
Later in the game, I build military units in specialised bases with high mineral production.
I didn't care about two ore three minerals for support,
if my city produces 40 or more minerals each turn.
Additionally, clean reactor is an expensive special ability (factor 2), which means that the clean unit takes longer to produce and, because of this, the reactor pays itsself only if the units survives long enough.
Third argument, an unit can have to special abilities maximally. Clean reactor takes one of this away. I think it is better to use this place for anonther special ability which helps this unit in defense or attack (i. e. AAA, soporific gas etc.). That lets them live longer and so, let them pay the price for the support mineral in another way: You don't have to produce a substitute.
The only units that seem to me perhaps valuable for clean reactors are formers, because they are detemined for not fighting and need no fighting special abilities.
So, what are the arguments what let You produce clean units.
************************************************** ********************
Posted by DogberryMan on 22-01-2001 07:06:
Clean reactors are good for several reasons. First of all you are right that you wont take much of a hit in production if you have a couple of units in bases that produce 40 or more minerals, but if you have a poor support rating (when I play as Morgan I have a –1 support) you may not be able to support any units for free. This brings me to the point, if you build more than a few units in each base (I often build upwards of 10 to defend each base) then that will actually start to take a toll on your minerals. Another example is with navel units. I usually only have one or two costal bases and because of this those are the only cities that can build navel units. If you want to field a large navy, then you will cripple the mineral production of those two cities unless you use clean reactors.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 22-01-2001 10:03:
The value of clean reactors come into being when you decide to become an energy rich faction as opposed to a mineral rich one. In the case when you have made the decision to forgo minerals to bulk up on energy instead then clean is invaluable. A bazillion bases topped out on minerals at about 20 or so thereby staying under the radar with respect to eco damage but also staffed with 8 or more engineers raking inthe expendable energy makes for an effective and respectable tech advance rate and bank account. In this case the ability to make expensive units is a two turn process where in turn one a trained shell is created then upgraded to a cleanunit in turn two. If this was not the case the bases would and could bog themsleves down in terms of support. Take a look at industry gifted factions as played by the AI. By mid game Yang and Domai with incredible industry ratings have mired their ability to develop any further infrastructure b/c they have built unit after unit chewing up their available mins.
True enough thats a poor example as any human would know better but the real point here is that if you choose to limit your mineral intake in order to beef up energy for rush buys and tech gains every last min counts to at a minimum ensure you have flexibility to turn best weapon units around every 2 turns.
OTOH if your approach is to load up on mins, you can build an effective fighting force but you pay for it in terms of opportunity cost lost vs. the more energy intensive approach.
Your comment regarding survivability is a good one. If all your intending to do is send X-chopper after X-chopper across the waves for suicide missions then clean is a very wasteful proposition. However, for long term usage ie. AAA garison units, formers etc. clean has its purposes as after a number of turns it has more than paid for itself. Realistically speaking one needs to understand the industry capability of the base, the energy reserves your willing to commit, and the expected lifetime of the unit in question.
So in summary in the situation I described an energy rich, mineral poor society clean becomes more attractive. Long term units such as formers and garrison units clean becomes a good option as well.
Posted by Blake on 22-01-2001 11:51:
I always use clean reactors on Formers, with the exception of my Super Fungicide 3-res Rover Formers (altough I only have a few of those).
Otherwise I mainly use them on specialist units, for example I always have a "cops" unit, 1-1-1 clean,police this unit quells two drones at truly minimal cost, and if you are attacked can be upgraded into a real unit.
I also play Yang a lot, by making all formers and drone control units clean that means I have four free units per base, and because Yang is usually a bit cash strapped it's more of an issue to upgrade trained scouts to expensive clean varieties.
************************************************** **********************
Posted by mark13 on 22-01-2001 15:01:
Just think of it this way - you build a unit and plonk a clean reactor on it for an extra 20 minerals. Assuming that the unit lasts longer than 20 turns, you are always going to make a net gain - without any extra eco-damage.
Also, if your number of bases is minimal, for whatever reason, clean reactors become essential in order to support a large army, to keep your production high, and to keep eco-damage away....
************************************************** ********************
Posted by Mars_Col_44 on 22-01-2001 21:21:
Well, you do not "need" to use clean reactors. You may wish to spread your military units' "home bases" around. You could also crawl-in lots of minerals to support the units.
But I personally rely heavily on clean reactors. I use a core of bases as military unit production centers with Bioenhancement Centers/Command Centers/Creche to pump up the morale(same goes for naval yards). So I don't need to build command centers & bioenhancement centers everywhere, which frees up the outlying bases to build infrastructure. Also, I don't need to manage spreading around the home bases of units. And I can build up a sizeable invasion force with decent morale.
************************************************** ********************
Posted by Sikander on 24-01-2001 00:28:
Well I must admit that I rely on clean units extensively for the reasons that Ogie mentioned. Obviously garrison units and formers usually live a very long time and are thus great candidates. When I am defending my casualty rate is usually very low, so those defensive units are also good candidates for the clean ability.
Where I probably go overboard is my offensive wars where I use the 1 trained shell unit per base per turn (if necessary) and upgraded the next turn style of conquest. Many of these units will not survive to old age, as I use them as ammunition to overwhelm and crush the AI. Still I usually end up with an oversupply of this helicopter (or whatever) stream (those caught in the pipeline as the war is concluded), and it seems cheaper to just keep them around to beef up my defenses, and to serve as the nucleus of my next wave of destruction, and having upgraded them to clean already, I don't have to spend another joule on them.
Players who rely on a high mineral production to build 'super units' would do well to consider an intensive cost benefit analysis. If nothing else those minerals could be converted to energy at a 1 to 2 rate (or better). It might be better to build almost exclusively clean units, and save those few free units (depending on your support rating) for your specialized troops.
One final factor which may limit the utility of clean units is the rate at which your military techs are advancing. It can get pretty expensive to keep your military up to date when your techs are coming in every 1 to 4 turns. Players rich in minerals but poor in cash might find it preferable to simply scrap and rebuild updated units rather than constantly upgrade. I usually let my designs get at least two behind cutting edge at this point in the game before I upgrade them.
************************************************** *******************
Posted by Skanderbeg on 24-01-2001 01:38:
For me, garrisons would be the last unit I gave clean reactors. The reasons: It's their job to defend against a) other factions unit's, especially air force, B) native life. For the reason of this, they need two special abilities: AAA and trance. No place left for clean reactor. Second reason: Until You have a very bad support rate, Your first units, and to this belongs the garrison, will be free.
To Ogie and the others: I agree that long-surviving clean units pay their price, and I am sure I would use clean reactors if I could build units with more than two special abilities. But because I can use only two, I very like to use both of them to push up the strengh of the unit.
I will use my "nightmare"-gravship for example.
It is a best weapon, psi armor gravship, special abilities X-Gas and D-Wave. The thing made to play around on Marr's territory. If I would change one of the special abilities against clean reactor, it would not work any longer, because X-gas is essential against the aliens and D-Wave is necessary to avoid empath attacks.
It's the same with other units.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Lord Maxwell on 24-01-2001 03:58:
I often build clean reactor units, but mostly for home use. I find it to be the most degenerate part of the game. (Well, that and getting 2-3 techs per turn without an energy park.
All my bases can complete some kind of unit on the chassi I really want, if nothing else so atleast a bare scout, which can then be upgraded with money. After the opening play I find energy coming out of my ears, especially from the specialist heavy bases. If a base has engineers it will still produce cash no matter if research is set at 100%.
So, turn 1, build the troop. At the end of the turn it builds it gets a bought upgrade to a better chassi. I have a special base with lots of minerals set up for building prototypes. Prototypes are also never disbanded, rather their special morale bonus gets used to benefit.
Playing as morgan I can field more units than the AI Yang can ever match. Against the AI this is excessive, but against a human opponent you can't generally conquer his entire empire with 3 rovers and 2 probes. (My usual force against the comp.)
Why does the same guy need AAA and trance? You get one AAA/clean, one trance/clean one empath/clean. You get the picture.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Skanderbeg on 24-01-2001 06:06:
Simple answer.
Building AAA/trance garrison needs two turns: turn 1: building scout patrol, turn 2 upgrading. Building AAA garrison + trance garrison needs 4 turns.
I save 2 turns for producing something.
************************************************** *******************
Posted by Gregurabi on 24-01-2001 07:05:
Building a clean-AAA unit and a clean-trance unit does not take 4 turns -- it takes 2.
Turn 0: Begin construction of 1-1t-1 (or better), rushing production if appropriate.
Turn 1: first 1-1t-1 completed and active; upgrade it to 1-
Turn 2: second 1-1t-1 completed and active; upgrade it to 1-3tr-1*2 clean (or better) and assign production to whatever you want next.
That's only two turns' worth of production time & minerals, and a large chunk of cash.
************************************************** ********************
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 24-01-2001 08:52:
Skand,
Gregarubi is correct. Basically a best weapon or best armor or whatever unit with one specialization is turned out one per turn per base after the first turn.
So if you need 10 units from a base (assuming you have the energy to handle it) it would take 11 turns to build said units.
One of the reasons I'm fond of transport units is that it allows the shaving of that one turn. The transport unit takes the units in question en route and they get upgraded on the way. It ends up being the same amount of time if you had build an expensive mineral unit from the ground up. Plus way I figure it if the transport gets plugged on the first turn out I'd rather lose the shell units vs. cost of the expensive jobbies.
Og
************************************************** ********************
Posted by big_canuk on 24-01-2001 12:09:
Gregurabi and OO:
You guys are right. You can build 10 clean one specialization units in 11 turns. But the point Skand was making is that you can build 5 two specialization units in 6 turns. Basically 2 for 1.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 24-01-2001 14:01:
Big C & Skand,
Ahh now I see where you are going with this. My feeling is however that given a choice between a double specialized unit and two single specilized units w/clean, you've gotten a benefit of an additional line of defense/attack (albeit maybe not appropriate to the attack mode in question). What's more by putting clean on those garrison and/or former units if you really really need a double specialized unit say a X chopper with soporific then at least those first few can be made sans support issues.
Aside from the first round production and a 1 turn delay to upgrade (which can be gotten around) meanwhilst second round a unit comes off and then upgraded in turn three. Meanwhile turn 3 shell production rolls off for upgrade and use in turn 4 and so on.
Of course the get around makes all this an aside if one continually upgrades 1-1-x's from the workshop vs. upgrading at the unit level.
So depending on how many double specilized units we are really talking 'bout garrisoning you net yourself a one turn loss/double specialized unit in build Q flexibility by having to build second unit with appropriate special capability.
Have I rambled incoherently enough to confuse everyone yet?
Og
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Sikander on 25-01-2001 00:23:
Given the choice between two clean units (1 AAA and 1 Trance) and a single unit with AAA/Trance I will take the two units every time. The only reason against having twice the options / hit points etc. of two units is their cost, and if they live awhile that is recovered by not having to pay any support for them. Obviously if you have any free units due to your support rating it makes no sense to waste that advantage by making them clean. I usually run a fairly low support rating, so if I have any free units available I save them for those specialized units which use both ability slots.
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Skanderbeg on 25-01-2001 01:38:
OO and Gregurabi: You're right of course, but Big C. brings it on the point.
I think I use those AAA/trance and other combinations of two special abilities because I am safety-mad, like the guy who wears belt and a pair of braces at the same time. ;-)
10 Units from a single base? You really do this often?
Perhaps this is this reason why I don't rely on clean units. I don't build so much units, because I always rely on quality, not on quantity.
For defense, my basic crew is 3 or 4 units (one or two best armor AAA/trance, one best weapon/empath+something else rover or needeljet, one probe (needs no support)).
In this way, my normal base had only to support 3 to 5 units (included 1 or 2 formers), which wouldn't hurt me very much.
The attack crews (not 10, but only 3 or 4 units, but only of the best) are produced in specialised bases with high mineral production. And of course, when they have do their duty, they conquer a base and can be rehomed to this base, or they get lost and need no support any more.
************************************************** **********************
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 25-01-2001 03:49:
Skand,
The example of 10 units may be a tad extreme on average but yes I would definitely say there are bases that I have well over 20 or more units from all but one or two being formers.
Military units probably not more than 4-6 on average 'cept if I do a PS base in FM. Then the # of units supported may be approaching the 10+ number.
************************************************** ********************
Og
Posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 25-01-2001 08:38:
One other hidden not often talked about benefit of clean reactors is the ability to rehome to any base without issue.
Just as an example say your Dee in the midst of a conquer fest. Your 8 or so 'dirty' X- soporific missile rovers are taking out Alien after Alien base. You've decide to capture and hold an alien base in the meantime for heal up purposes. Out of the blue your home base for these 'dirty' x-soporifc speeders get subverted by Morgan or Rose. All those units in the field rehome themselves to the nearest base. In this case that puny size 1 taken fromthe aliens. All of sudden that measly size 1 base supports but 4 units and the other go poof. Your offensive grinds to halt.
Same holds true for needlejets, choppers what have you.)
Jus' some more rambling on clean.
Og
************************************************** *********************
Posted by Misotu on 25-01-2001 18:02:
Clean units have their place - I build quite a lot of them under certain circumstances. In MP, the role of clean is less important - you can rarely be sure that units will survive long enough to repay the additional cost. Depends on the map.
In SP, garrisons and formers are invaluable clean. I have had games with 60 or 70 formers, the majority of which survive indefinitely.
Similarly, almost all garrison units will survive forever in SP, if you are playing a builder game In fact, I'm often forced to upgrade garrisons simply to free up slots in the workshop, otherwise those original 1-2-1 chappies would be there to the end of the game
I'm surprised at the importance placed on trance. By the time you have clean, you are also close to very decent armour and decent defences. If your ecodamage is ridiculous, then trance may become an issue. In my games, trance has rarely been required, since I have an energy focus and minerals in the later game are provided by non-polluting satellites. Native life attacks are rare, and the only ones worth worrying about are locusts. In which case, AAA will do the job ... In any event, I would simply build an additional clean, best armour, trance defender if it were absolutely necessary. The attack will be countered by the defender best-equipped to handle it.
The game in which clean reactors are indispensable though, is the One City Challenge. Without it, you simply cannot support the number of units that will be required to survive and prosper in the mid to late game.
************************************************** ********************
Posted by Travathian on 25-01-2001 18:23:
(to Ogie post) I %&%^? hate it when that happens!
Oh, and another reason to have more than one defender . . . That 1-1-1 scout patrol maybe the difference between that rover destroying the patrol, or rolling into his new city.
Comment