Base Size and Pollution

[Fitz]

THANK YOU BLAKE!

Now I know that my formula version 2 is correct. I'm not sure I understood your fifth point, but I'll reread it.

Okay, so the official formula seems to be (using the term clean minerals):

{[(Terraforming + Minerals + 5*Atrocities - CleanMinerals)/(1+Goodfacs)] * Perihelion*Difficulty*Techs*(3-Planet)*Life}/300 = Eco-Damage

Where:

Terraforming = [(worked improvements)*2 + (unworked improvements) + (boreholes)*8 + (echelon mirrors)*6 + (condesors)*4 - Forests]/8
Can go negative. Improvements are Mines, Solar Collectors, Farms, Soil Enrichers, Roads, Mag Tubes, Condensers, Mirrors and Boreholes. Divide the final value by 2 if a Tree Farm is in this base, and reduce to zero if a Hybrid Forest is in this base. This value cannot be negative once a Tree Farm is present.

Minerals = Number of minerals produced this turn (but not from Orbit, but do include bonus minerals generated by multiplying Orbital minerals by a facility).
The easiest way of calculating this is to take total minerals and subtract orbital minerals. If you do this, the bonus minerals produced from orbital minerals by facilities are included in the total.

Atrocities = Major Atrocities??

CleanMinerals = 16 plus # of previous damages (fungus pops) plus # of Tree Farms, Hybrid Forests, Centauri Preserves, and Temples of Planet constructed in all bases since the very first fungus pop.

Goodfacs = 1 for each facility out of Centauri Preserve, Temple of Planet, Nanoreplicator contained in this base, plus 1 each for Pholtus Mutagen and Singularity Inductor Secret Projects if your faction possesses them.

Perihelion = 2 if Alpha Prime is at perihelion, or 1 if it is not.

Difficulty = Normally 3, but 5 on two highest two difficulty levels.

Technologies = Number of technologies discovered

Planet = Social Engineering PLANET value, to a maximum value of 2

Life = Native life level (1-3) from Custom Start

Truncate each calulation in turn, do not calculate and then truncate the final value.

I think that sums it up. Should I post that as a new thread and ask it to stick?

------------------
Fitz. (n.) Old English
1. Child born out of wedlock.
2. Bastard.
[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited May 10, 2001).]

[Blake]

I have a couple more points of interest.

Interested people should set up this test:
In the scenerio editor hit ctrl-shift-f2 to give all tech, this makes the tech multiplier massive. if you have no (or only 1) tech you get no ecodamage.

Now place a base and put a maximum amount of forest around it. Test the clean mineral limit, it should be 19. Now insert a CP using the SE and the clean limit leaps to 23(!) which is an increase of 4. Under situations were terraforming is no issue CP's seem to add +1 clean, but with forest they add more? Or do they increase the negative effect? Now insert a TF and the negative effect is completely eliminated, the base can only produce 17 as expected. Note that a treefarm completely eliminates -ve ED from forests, a HF is not required.

Oh yeah, and it is easy enough to get a base which has more than 16 minerals and terraforming ED, and you can get such a base where inserting a CP doesn't halve the ED, it does reduce it, but by something like 30%-40% (remember to add +1 mineral to account for clean effect of CP). This suggests something about how the values are carried over, or prehaps proves that they are carried over (rather than being calculated in one step). But anyway, if you have piles of mineral ED the situation is improved dramatically by building a CP.

[Ned]

Blake, Thanks a lot for your verification. I too have some data.

I measured ED at 5 different bases with 5 different sets of terraforming, all having Hybrid Farms. I measured the exact same ED for similar mineral productions at all bases. This indicates that Terraforming is indeed a non factor after Hybrid Farms.

I then tried to explain the large differential between the number of TFs etc. that I built and the observed ED limit. I first tried to see whether the Singularity Inductor had any effect on Clean Mineral. It had none that I could observe. But in taking the data, I began to suspect something else: That the TFs, HFs, CPs and TPs built after the Pholus Mutagen may contribute more than +1. The below numbers are approximate due to the difficulty in measuring the exact ED limit and because I am not rigorous in counting pops.

ED Limit TF HF CP TP SubT Pops 16 Total Diff from ED Limit

214 51 48 51 20 172 3 16 193 21
240 54 48 54 26 182 14 16 114 30

The reason I suggest the Pholus is because I completed it only 5 or six turns before the first of the above measurements.

I am not good at the SE, but I'll give a shot at testing this theory.

Fitz, Having seen the above, you must realize that we are not done.

Also, you should add Sea improvements to the terraforming improvements that cause ED. I suspect that kelp acts like a forest, but have not tested it.

Ned

[Ned]

Guys, I could not verify the hypothesis. However, I did seem to find data which suggests that the presence of TFs, HFs, CPs and TPs in a base all add 1 to Clean Minerals. Why? I sold my all my TFs in order to rebuild them the next turn. However, when I did that, the ED limit dropped in the base I was monitoring by what appeared to be one Clean Mineral. Also, I had previously totalled my TFs, etc., pops and 16 to yeild 173. The observed ED limit was approx. 177. The difference can be explained by the presence in this base of one TF, One HF and One CP plus a rounding error.

The bottom line, though, even after the PM is built, each TF built adds only one to "faction" Clean Minerals.

I'll keep working on this, next trying CPs and TPs. Ned

[Ned]

Blake, I just got my spreadsheet out to determine how many minerals it would take to produce at least 1 ED in the game I sent you. Planet = 3, Life =3/300, Diff. = 5, Techs = 88, and all GoodFAC + PM and SI.

ED = 1 = Net Minerals * 1 * 5 * 88 * .01 * (1/(1+1+1+1+1+1))

Net Minerals = 1.363.

In other words, Rounding does not seem to be a full explanation 28 extra Clean Minerals. Ned

[Fitz]

quote: Originally posted by Ned on 05-08-2001 10:36 PM Fitz, No, Nanoreplicators do not add to Clean Minerals.

Thank you.

quote: As to the formula, please some of my earlier posts. It can be greatly simplified by realizing that "terraforming" never exceeds Clean Minerals. The formula, generally is ED = ((Minerals - Clean Minerals - Terraforming)/(1+GoodFAC))+5*MA)* X I have not verified that "Terraforming" can be negative in the early game before HFs, however I have see some bases with ED limits of 17 before any pops or other Clean Mineral Facilities. This does suggest that a negative terraforming result essentially adds to the effective clean minerals of a base. However, later, after HFs, terraforming is, in fact, a non factor and completely drops out of the equation. All bases that have HFs have the same ED limit which is set by "Minerals - Clean Minerals."

Okay, you've made a mistake, if the original equation order holds. In the original equation, the terraforming is not divided by goodfacs. That is why I asked about the different equations above. If you notice, number 4 is the original, and terraforming is not divided by goodfacs.

However, your formula becomes true as terraforming --> 0, which happens when you add HF.

[Ned]

Opps! Again. The large difference between the observed ED limit and the calculated ED limit is primarily due to not taking account of Orbital Minerals. There still is an offset, which just happens to be the number of Clean Mineral Facilities.

E.g. Base X has approx. 212 ED and a TF, HF, CP and TP. It receives 19 orbital minerals. The faction has built a total of 171 Clean Mineral facilites. There have been 3 pops.

212 - 19 - 16 = 177
171 + 3 = 174.

Blake earlier reported data that showed that a CP and a TP each added 1 Clean Mineral to the base they were in. The data did not show, however, the same effect for TFs and HFs.

If one adds 2, for the CP and TP in the base, 171 + 3 + 2 = 176.

I just confirmed that adding a TP adds 1 to Clean minerals. When I added a TP to one base using the SE, its ED limit went up one. A second base's ED limit remained unchanged reflecting the fact that the TP was not "built".

Still the data suggests that either the first pop is not counted, or only one of Tree Farms or Hybrid Forests counted in a base. I see a consistent 1 offset between the ED limit and the calculated limit if one adds 1 for CPs and TPs in a base.

The problem with confirmation is that if one eliminate a TF or Hybrid Forest from a base, one has to deal with the Terraforming portion of the equation.

Fitz, other than this last point, I think your equation is right on. In fact it is the same as mine (see an earlier note where I noticed that Terraforming was "added" not "subtracted.") with the exception that atrocities are now also divided by 1-GoodFAC.

We should also learn how to deal with Kelp.

Also we need to test if Nanoreplicators, another GoodFAC, similarly adds to a base's Clean Minerals, if not to a faction's.

ED = (Minerals - Orbital - Clean Minerals + Terraforming + (1 * GoodFAC) + 5*MA)/(1+GoodFAc)*X

[Fitz]

Okay, first of all, are you sure CPs and ToPs add one clean mineral to the base they are in over and above the global effect? Could you not be experiencing a rounding effect due to the fact that goodfacs just got increased by one? This would take a former eco-damage of 1.something and make it .5something, which would then be truncated to zero. This would make it look like the clean mineral limit had gone up by one.

Example:
Base with TF & HF (10 globally) 26 minerals:
(0+26+0-26)/1 = 0. 26 is clean limit because if you add one (0+27+0-26) = 1

Add 1 CP and one mineral (for the global effect):
(0+27+0-27)/2 = 0, but if add another (0+28+0-27) = .5 truncate to 0. This appears to be a second clean mineral from the CP, but it really isn't.

I assume that's why you put (1*goodfacs) in the top of that equation Ned. I think you guys are just seeing a truncation error. Try calculating the eco-damage for a positive amount and see if the +goodfacs makes sense in the top. Although even that may not work if the truncation occurs at this level, since a single goodfac always divides odd #s to .5, effectively 'adding' two, a third effectively 'adds' three, etc.

I forgot to put the TF/HF elimination of terraforming in the equation on page two, but have added it now. I will also put in a statement regarding negative values to reflect Blake's new info.

AFAIK, Sea enhancements are the equivilent to landforms of farm, solar, mine, and all cause eco-damage. I'm not saying that's how they actually act, just that's my understanding of how they are supposed to act.
[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited May 10, 2001).]

[Ned]

Fitz, What I did see is the base I added a TP using the SE did have its limit raised by 1 but another base remained unchanged. Since the rounding is as to the "amount" of ED, not whether, I believe TPs do add one.


However, I am going to try to double check all this today.

As to Blake's example with the 20 forests, he did not mention a pop, so I say the following with the assumption there was no pop. Assume the following equation:

Net Minerals = Minerals - Orbital - Clean Minerals - GoodFAC + Terraforming. Set Net Minerals to 0 to determine ED limit, we get

ED Limit = Orbital + Clean Minerals + GooFAC - Terraforming

Clean Minerals begins at 16.

What his data suggests is that CPs "double" the forest effect in Terraforming. When TFs are added, this effect is halved.

Forests = 20. (-1 * 20)/8 = 2.5 which rounds to - 3.

ED Limit = 0 + 16 + 0 - (-3) = 19

Add CP.

Forests = 20, effect doubled. (-2 * 20)/8 = -5

Ed Limit = 0 + 16 + 1 - (-5) = 22

However, The observed value is 23. So CPs also apparently add 1 to "Clean Minerals" in the first part of the equation during the turn they are added, which is apparently not retained for later turns or faction wide if there have been no pops.

So Clean Minerals = Clean Minerals + 1 (this turn only?)

Ed Limit = 0 + 17 + 1 -(-5) = 23

Add a TF, which should also temporarily add to Clean Minerals and halve the Terraforming effect.

Forest effect halved. ((-2 * 20)/8)/2 = -2.5 rounds to -3.

Ed Limit = 0 + 17 + 1 - (-3)) = 21

However, the Observed value is 17, indicating that NEITHER the temporary increase to Clean Minerals nor the Terraforming effect are passed on to the second portion of the algorithm. The "halving" subroutine apparently sets the output of Terraforming calculation to zero if negative, and does not update Clean Minerals.

Blake, et al., does this make sense?

If it does, it seems to confirm that GoodFACs should be added to the calculation of Net Minerals, as suggested above. It also seems to confirm that TFs are not GoodFACs, either for the calculation of Net Minerals, or for the (1+GoodFACs) divisor.

Ned

[Fitz]

quote: Originally posted by Ned on 05-10-2001 01:22 PM Fitz, What I did see is the base I added a TP using the SE did have its limit raised by 1 but another base remained unchanged. Since the rounding is as to the "amount" of ED, not whether, I believe TPs do add one.

Reread my post Ned. If the truncation affect drops a fraction, they will appear to increase the "whether" or not ED occurs (ie increases from 0) at the break point, thereby appearing to add one to clean minerals. If you actually add them into the equation, I think you'll end up with the wrong actual value when trying to calculate actual ED.

I had trouble understanding the rest of your post, but I'll read it again (and again, and again ...).

[Fitz]

First of all, why temporarily add to clean minerals? It looks to me like you are stretching the equation to make it more complicated than needed, to fit the numbers you have at your disposal.

It does make sense to me that the halving routine would change a negative to zero, but that they didn't include the set to zero into the first calculation.

Blake, the fact that you can insert a CP into a base with both terraforming eco-damage and mineral eco-damage, and not have the result halved suggests to me that the terraforming is not divided by goodfacs. I thought you said you had tested that already?

Edit: Formula's scratched, since they were obviously incorrect. I withdraw my point.
[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited May 10, 2001).]

[Ned]

I have confirmed that each GoodFAC, but no other, adds 1 to the Net Minerals base calculation. I did this by individually adding the GoodFAC, and then by adding combinations. The ED limit varied accordingly.

I also carefully analyzed kelp. My conclusions are

1 for base

1 for each improvement, tidal or mine

1 additional for each worked tidal or mine

1 for each kelp farm - but no extra for working.

I still don't know the answer to the first pop question. I assume that the first pop does not count.

So the formula seems to be

ED = (Minerals - Orbitals - Clean Minerals - GoodFACs + Terraforming + 5*MA)/(1+GoodFAC) .....

Where GoodFACs are CPs, TPs and NanoReps.

I suspect now, that since GoodFACs will also include the Pholus and the SI in the divisor, it will also include it in the calculation of Net Minerals. I will try to confirm.

Ned

[Fitz]

Sratch that, I think my numbewrs are wrong. Damn.
[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited May 10, 2001).]

[Fitz]

Scratch 2
[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited May 10, 2001).]

[Ned]

Fitz, I reread your post. Let me explain the way I determine the clean mineral limit.

First, I take data from the max minerals the base can produce and reduce that one by one by unworking a one or two mineral square(s). At each resultant mineral level, I note the ED. At some point, ED drops to zero. I then "chart" minerals vs. ED. The line tells me fairly accurately where the 0 ED limit is, and overcomes any rounding problems.

I followed your post on multipying terraforming by 1 + GoodFACs. It seemed that your answer was 24, not 23, the observed value. Am I wrong?

Ned