Purposely recycling headquarters

[Sarxis]

Has anyone ever scrapped their headquarters for the purpose of gaining (losing) the efficiency it provides? I have heard of players losing their headquarters, but, due to their excessively large and sprawling empires, have actually gained in total energy output. This is because of the across the line efficiency rating the game uses when no headquarters exists, instead of the 'distance from capitol' equation.

[zsozso]

I've heard similar rumors too, but so far in my own games I always got better total energy output if the capital existed in the center of my empire. I.e. if it turns out that you have grown in an assymetrical shape from your original capital, then it is definitely worth shifting the capital to the center (building HQ in the optimal base) when you are big enough.

Mind you, I never played on bigger map size than 'huge'. Maybe Googlie could comment on what happens on realy enourmous maps that you can choose with custom size.

Zsozso

[Lefty Scaevola]

I do not believe that you can scrap a headquarters.

[Sikander]

David Byron used to rid himself of his headquarters regularly once his huge 'Borg' empire had gotten out of hand. I believe he relocated his HQ in a small base on the frontier, then left it empty of garrison troops.

[Sarxis]

It was in the back of my mind that you couldn't scrap headquarters, but I just didn't bother to try it out. The method of moving the HQ to a small base then trading/losing/obliterating it sounds rather raw, but it could be worth it if you figure that your overall output would be increased.

[Sikander]

It's a

[Sikander]

WTF? Well, I was going to say that it pays to do this only if you have a sprawling empire, your capital is not an SSC, and your energy production is well dispersed. I've never bothered, as I build a tight core of bases which are very productive.

[DogberryMan]

Sounds kind of cheap to me...