What economics?

[Admiral]

Up to this point I generally play the UoP, the Gaians, or the Spartans. I generally devote myself to a transcendance victory (the most points). As I happen to like capturing mindworm, I generally chose green, but is that the best tactic to use to achieve fast research?
TIA
[This message has been edited by Admiral (edited February 23, 2001).]

[Walt]

The short answer to this is that a Free Market economy generates energy, and thus labs, more rapidly than does a Green or Planned economy, all other things being equal. However, usually all other things /aren't/ equal.

One strategy is to rely on the population boom created by the +6 Growth of Dem/Planned/Creche, assuming nutrients adequate to sustain growth. Generate a large population, then switch to Free Market and reap the energy rewards. Use the cash generated to build base improvements and a new wave of colony pods/rovers/needlejets/whatever, then switch to Planned and do it again.

At a certain point, inefficiency reduces the economic contribution of additional bases to zero. Especially in the late game, completion of SP's and acquisition of specific technologies leads fungus squares to become resource producing terrain at positve Planet ratings. Because of the efficiency bonus it lends, and to a varying degree because of the additional use one can make of fungal terrain, Green becomes more and more attractive later in the game: income rivals that created under a FM economy, and your civilization does not generate the negative Police and Planet effects of a Free Market. Plus you can convert stacks of mindworms, or are more likely to convert them into cash (read: beat them in a fight).

However, because of the Growth penalty, which can be crippling in a game in which everyone else is running dem/planned/creche, Green is not an ideal SE choice early in the game, unless one is using it to conduct mindworm recruitment sweeps (and possibly an immediate psi war).

So, Green is a good choice for when efficiency becomes a real problem for your empire. This occurs to large empires and to those who are running non 50/50 Econ/Tech spreads. Green is also a way to deal with mindworm problems (either too many or not enough). However, Green's Growth penalty may outweigh the lab/economy gains it can provide.

Walt

[Walt]

An additional note (sorry for the double post):

Deirdre, obviously, is a special case as far as the above strat goes, because she can't select Free Market.

I usually deal with this by staying in Planned a little longer, thus making use of the extra nut in fungus squares to grow a little bigger than I would with another faction, and then switch to Green to hunt mindworms and make a little money.

For Deirdre, and for anyone who doesn't want to follow a FM path, specialists (and the all-specialist city) are good options. I'll leave this topic with a mere mention, b/c there are plenty of posts on this forum about how to set up one of these beauties.

Okay, that's all.

Walt (again)

[Sikander]

Most players indeed use FM economy at least early on to bump up their research. Later most Master Players (including some of the big names from the multi-player rankings) use Green, as this setting allows a mature economy to produce more labs than FM. The main reason is the fact that Green gives you +2 efficiency, and efficiency has three effects which help you.

1) At +4 Efficiency or higher (paradigm efficiency) you can set Labs to 100% without losing any energy.

2) With a higher efficiency rating you suffer less from 'Efficiency Drones', which may allow you to build more bases or spend more resources on labs and less on psych.

3) Finally, the higher efficiency rating you have, the less your raw energy is wasted.

One final benefit to running Green is that your industries can kick out more minerals without causing ecodamage. And if you build the Cloning Vats you can pop boom using Green (or for that matter any SE settings).

Another alternative for a player who is not playing tech stag and / or blind research is using a specialist strategy. This strategy requires good terraforming, crawlers, and in most cases nutrient restrictions lifted. It is also important to be able to pop-boom either constantly or regularly. The technique basically involves terraforming your squares to produce mostly one FOP (ie Nutrients), and then placing a crawler on the square to harvest them. Instead of a worker harvesting the nutrients or minerals, the former worker is 'picked up' from the base area production screen and placed above the base production graphic in the queue. Now he is a 'Specialist', and may produce varying quantities of energy related subproducts (ie Labs, Psych or Econ). Early on these specialists will only produce about 3 energy subproducts, but later they can produce 4, 5 and finally with Transcendi large amounts of production. (I can't remember exactly, but a lot!)

There are several advantages to this system. First of all it does not care particularly what sort of efficiency rating you run, as the specialist approach gets around all of the problems inherent in running a low efficiency. Drones are no problem, since only workers can become drones, and you won't have very many of those. Energy waste is not a problem since specialists do not suffer from energy waste. Thus you can get about the same production from a base on the other side of Planet as your headquarters. Finally, by manipulating your specialists by changing them from one type to another you can also manipulate your output of econ or labs without having to run a paradigm economy.

One final note about the efficieny of fungus production in the late game. It can produce 3 nuts, 4 mins and 5 energy (6 with +2 econ) in the very late game for a faction with a high Planet rating and the correct SPs. (The Gaians get 4 food!). This is very good, but it is not as good as any land square terraformed to level (not rocky) and containing a farm / condensor / soil enricher. These squares produce a minimum of 6 nutrients, which can be harvested by a crawler. Thus the square can support 3 transcendi. With a proper assortment of satelites, it will also produce 3 energy, 3 minerals and 3 more food, which in turn will produce another 1.5 transcendi 1.5 mineral and 1.5 energy. Thus the square will produce 4.5 minerals, energy, and Transcendi easily beating out the great production of the fungus. Of course this is all late game sophistry, and the enormous cost to terraform the land vs planting fungus needs to be taken into account for each situation.

[NorthSwordsman]

quote: Originally posted by Walt on 02-25-2001 10:55 AM The short answer to this is that a Free Market economy generates energy, and thus labs, more rapidly than does a Green or Planned economy, all other things being equal. However, usually all other things /aren't/ equal. Walt

The police rating hit isn't a concern for me, but the only thing I have concerns about on the FM path is the effect on planet, and thus, Mindworms. Having been clobbered by worms before, it's not an experience I am anxious to repeat. It is my understanding that running FM has a tendency to bring the worms down on you. Is my understanding of this wrong? If it is, I want to know.

NorthSwordsman

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

NS,

A couple of general comments on the choice of economics for the early game.

FM - Early
Upside - Great research and energy (read ability to rush buy facilities) in the all important early game. If playing directed research this can be a godsend as ability to get to all imprtant beeline objectives of Industrial Auto and Restriction Lifting are greatly hastened. Just as a point of reference this is my normal first SE choice.

Downside - Vertical growth of bases is somewhat impeded until build and/or rush buys of rec commons and or build of HGP. Second citizen has to be set to a doctor (and will be only supported if base has a 2 nutrient square worked and/or recycle tanks). Horizontal growth is not impeded tho as efficiency is average. Planet will get uppity when mins exceed normally 15 16 ish depending on amount of rocky, roaded mines crawlered/worked. Defense against natives is not an issue, However attacks against natives are very problematic b/c planet rating only affects the attacker. The biggest downside tho' IMHO is the ability to go out and see the world. Poor police and pacification means your ability to scour the countryside outside your borders for AA's from pods is limited only to independent units (rare) and/or transports and probe teams also your ability to meet factions early on when they are more inclined to be amenable to treaty and pacting is also severly curtailed. As a consequence of not being able to gather a host of AA's you may find yourself onthe short end of the stick when it comes to capturing the all important early SP's where otherwise you could cash them in.

Planned - Early

Upside - great ability to expand horizontally and vertically with +'s to industry and growth. As a point of reference this is my second SE choice to allow pop booms.

Downside - Curtails ability to expand horizontally due to -2 efficiency. Also hamstrings research rate in the early game due to same. Since I normally play a directed game I normally choose FM as I am most concerend about the tech advance rate. Also I tend to avoid having too many SE chocie changes. Each 40 energy switch could have been 40 energy put into two formers, the majority of a rec tanks or rec commons. I rationalize I'll take benefits vs. a capricous change from planned to FM then back to planned when I want to pop boom.

Green - Early

Upside - Maximum ability to expand horizontally. Ability to get a worm army. Good but not great research/economy due to minimal losses. Better tolerance to industry at about 18 + mins before ecodamage. As a point of reference this is my third SE choice inthe game after pop boom phases are complete.

Downside - By the time you've discovered green your probably getting near mid game. Growth penalty kills you inthe early game.


Og

[NorthSwordsman]

Og,

Thanks for the great analysis. Basically, then, it is a matter of choice, and/or dictated by what kind of situation you find yourself in, i.e., what you want to do, what is stacked against you, etc. Thanks for giving me something to think about!

NS

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 02-27-2001 09:27 AM NS, A couple of general comments on the choice of economics for the early game. FM - Early Upside - Great research and energy (read ability to rush buy facilities) in the all important early game. If playing directed research this can be a godsend as ability to get to all imprtant beeline objectives of Industrial Auto and Restriction Lifting are greatly hastened. Just as a point of reference this is my normal first SE choice. Downside - Vertical growth of bases is somewhat impeded until build and/or rush buys of rec commons and or build of HGP. Second citizen has to be set to a doctor (and will be only supported if base has a 2 nutrient square worked and/or recycle tanks). Horizontal growth is not impeded tho as efficiency is average. Planet will get uppity when mins exceed normally 15 16 ish depending on amount of rocky, roaded mines crawlered/worked. Defense against natives is not an issue, However attacks against natives are very problematic b/c planet rating only affects the attacker. The biggest downside tho' IMHO is the ability to go out and see the world. Poor police and pacification means your ability to scour the countryside outside your borders for AA's from pods is limited only to independent units (rare) and/or transports and probe teams also your ability to meet factions early on when they are more inclined to be amenable to treaty and pacting is also severly curtailed. As a consequence of not being able to gather a host of AA's you may find yourself onthe short end of the stick when it comes to capturing the all important early SP's where otherwise you could cash them in. Planned - Early Upside - great ability to expand horizontally and vertically with +'s to industry and growth. As a point of reference this is my second SE choice to allow pop booms. Downside - Curtails ability to expand horizontally due to -2 efficiency. Also hamstrings research rate in the early game due to same. Since I normally play a directed game I normally choose FM as I am most concerend about the tech advance rate. Also I tend to avoid having too many SE chocie changes. Each 40 energy switch could have been 40 energy put into two formers, the majority of a rec tanks or rec commons. I rationalize I'll take benefits vs. a capricous change from planned to FM then back to planned when I want to pop boom. Green - Early Upside - Maximum ability to expand horizontally. Ability to get a worm army. Good but not great research/economy due to minimal losses. Better tolerance to industry at about 18 + mins before ecodamage. As a point of reference this is my third SE choice inthe game after pop boom phases are complete. Downside - By the time you've discovered green your probably getting near mid game. Growth penalty kills you inthe early game. Og

[xeno7667]

Let's see the question from another side. What's about ideology and war?

FM is good in peace time... that's the problem of FM! If all players are peacefull and run FM, there is no problem. But if I would be one of the players, I would go to war with them. I think green is the best choice in war-time.

Maybe I am idealist. I like faction which don't tend to run FM:
- Gaianas (they can't run FM)
- Believiers (cause -4 planet is very hard to manage)
- Hive (they tend to run planned)

I know, that's not an analysis. But I assume other players also tend to choose the factions and SE-choices sometimes in this way.

[Kinjiru]

When you know you are heading for war, one rather fun option is to run FM with 80% going to energy (build up a war chest), then switch to any other kind of economy (I like planned myself) and start running a Fundamentalist government.

Your mode of war then becomes an all-out probe attack. Send stacks of 5-6 probes at each objective. Follow along with 1-1-2 rovers. If you encounter an enemy stack, place your rovers out as sacrifical lambs that draw the stack out into groups of unstacked units, then probe them. When you get to a city, sabotage, drain energy, cause revolts, or just plain buy the base.

If you have the army and terrain, you can use the above tactic to set up the enemy for a big hit. Do the probe stuff from one angle of attack and then send your real army to a different part of the enemy empire. If you time it correctly, the enemy will divert forces to stop the probes and you can then exploit their reduced defensive structure.