how much does the +2 research do?

[icevic]

if not, then the UN Peace Keeper would have a definate upper hand against the UoP drone infested population. All is fine with population lower than 20 but above it becomes a more significant problem. Can a well energized UN faction with Knowledge beat a University faction in tech?

Vic

[WhiteElephants]

I suppose anything is possible, but you might be forgetting that each University base gets a free +50% to their labs because of their free net nodes. I would also think that a base as large as 20 would have quite a lot of specialists and psych enhancing facilities to counteract all those drones.

Edit: I believe that the +2 research adds 20%.

[Teeks]

It really depends. The thing is that the University has to allocate energy towards psych or spend maintenance on drone-reducing facilities, thereby decreasing allocation in energy and/or labs. The PK's can get into a GA quite easily, and with their exceeded hab limits, can get their pop up quickly, thereby producing more energy. If the University can snatch the VW, however, it's a whole different story. Instead of having to allocate energy or labs into psych or spend maintenance on drone reducing facilities, it's got a free Hologram Theatre at every base.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Teeks
It really depends. The thing is that the University has to allocate energy towards psych or spend maintenance on drone-reducing facilities, thereby decreasing allocation in energy and/or labs. The PK's can get into a GA quite easily, and with their exceeded hab limits, can get their pop up quickly, thereby producing more energy. If the University can snatch the VW, however, it's a whole different story. Instead of having to allocate energy or labs into psych or spend maintenance on drone reducing facilities, it's got a free Hologram Theatre at every base.

Teeks,

I play the University a lot, and have found that a specialist approach is very effective. By replacing workers with crawlers and terraforming to suit crawlers (ie maximizing the output of a square to stress one FOP) I can kick major butt in research without any drone problems at all. Typically I only work boreholes and shelf squares with kelp farms and tidal harnesses. All rocky squares get roads and mines, and all other squares get farms / condensors (& soil enrichers when I get the tech). Aside from negating the University's only real negative (the probe thing can be handled by probe garrisons and getting the HSA first), specialist cities can be useful in a number of other ways as well.

For instance I like to run Demo / Planned / Wealth to pop boom my way to size 14 bases. Normally this would be an economy killer, as tons of energy goes down the drain to inefficiency. With most of my energy coming from specialists I don't worry at all, as specialists production is immune to inefficiency. When running FM I can build bases which are all specialists and no workers to host my military expeditionary forces and air units. No workers = no drones = no riots due to military deployments.

One final note about specialists. In the early game the best specialists can produce three energy type FOP, and the best non-special squares can produce 4 nuts. Thus you can produce 6 efficiency proof labs or econ for every square. That's as good as a borehole energy wise (better if you count the efficiency loss of a worked borehole), and all you need is a crawler to haul the nuts (no drone facilities required to keep those two specialists in line). The advantage only increases as the game goes on. Soil enrichers increase your per square yield by another 50%, and Fusion brings Engineers and a further 66% increase in specialist productivity. Eventually transcendi, food satelites, cloning vats and hab domes blow the lid off of your productivity. And your bases can be numerous and spawled across the map, the specialists don't care about bureacracy!

[mark13]

One thing you have to remember is that the UoP have three *major* advantages when it comes to research over every other faction:

- Free Net Node in every base, effectively adding 50% labs (usually a little more, as it rounds up)
- +20% research
- Every tech costs less, as they start with a free tech.

This often allows the UoP to be at IndAuto by 2112-2113, whereas a faction like the PKs will struggle to hit it before 2130. OTOH, the extra talent gives the PKs the ability to run FM pretty much from the get-go, whereas the UoP have to wait until they get Rec Commons' up.

However, this is a small advantage in comparison, and the UoP gets a *huge* research boost in the early game. Of course, these advantages are cancelled in the later game by the probe bonus, and the drone problems you will get. However, get the VW and the HSA and you're singing - this makes the UoP an immensely powerful faction.

The specialist theory with the more economically-advantaged factions is one that I have never gotten on with, as generally in the mid-game (assuming FM) most squares will net you more energy than a specialist (and extra nuts and/or mins to boot). Specialist bases tend to kill production, and though I can see how the efficiency benefits can be handy, as long as you are not playing pure ICS, it is often more advantageous to only use specialists when pressed.

Just my opinion, anyway

[The Commodore]

Bah! The 'Borgs are better than the UoP at researching anyway. True, they don't get a free net-node, but they can run FM alot easier then Zak, as well as being able to expand faster than Lal with their great eff.

Even in old SMAC, I'd take Morgan over either. He never has to run FM at all.

[mark13]

Nope, I'd disagree with that - both the Cyborg and Morgan claims.

The only thing the Cybrogs have going for them is their +2 research, and +2 efficiency. This gives them a lot of flexibility in the early game as to their SE choices, but it is really no easier for them to run FM than the University.

However, this brings the Cyborgs their biggest advantage - assuming they have sufficient drone control, the can run Demo/FM/whatever at +4 efficiency i.e. no allocation penaltes.

The Cyborgs' big downfall, of course, is their -1 growth. This makes it exceedingly difficult for them to pop boom, which does their productivity and research capabilities a lot of harm. This is where the UoP come into their own - you can hit size 12-15 size 14 bases by the turn of the century, running FM and *raking* the cash in. The Cyborgs simply can't do this early on.

Of course, their early research is also a little second-rate when compared to the UoP - which is their ultimate downfall. An ability to hit IndAuto very early would offset most of their deficiencies, but it simply isn't possible.

Morgan. Hah, Morgan - I'll give you my views on Morgan. He gets a support penalty, which makes running Demo impossible early on - a hab limit, which means he is way behind in pop until he hits hab domes, and an inability to run planned, which makes life difficult with regard to pop booming (impossible in original SMAC, of course).

And what does he get for his trouble? A +1 economy rating. Gimme a break.

Having said that, as a pure builder faction, he can be quite competent in the early/mid-game - it is his many deficiencies which negate his usefulness in a practical situation. If you are on an island, all on your own for 100 years, that is fine - but how often does that happen in a normal SMAC scenario, SP or MP?

So, techwise, the UoP eats the other two you mentioned for breakfast. Sure, the Cyborgs have many military strengths (despite -1 morale) but that isn't the issue here.

[cbn]

I do not know if this matters in any practical sense but doesn't the +2 research reduce the cost of a new tech (fewer tech points needed) rather than increase research (more labs produced). It may be academic but I am trying to understand better how to maximize tech production.

Good debate on the factions. I tend to prefer the university over the borgs mainly because of the free net node as it really jump starts the research. BUt then again, one of my favorites is the drones with a research penalty--

[mark13]

cbn - the +2 research increases all labs production by 20%. Check the F2 screen early on in the game - your RP/turn will come up as 2.4, even though your base screen only says 2 labs/turn.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by mark13

The specialist theory with the more economically-advantaged factions is one that I have never gotten on with, as generally in the mid-game (assuming FM) most squares will net you more energy than a specialist (and extra nuts and/or mins to boot). Specialist bases tend to kill production, and though I can see how the efficiency benefits can be handy, as long as you are not playing pure ICS, it is often more advantageous to only use specialists when pressed.

Just my opinion, anyway

Mark,

Compare:

A forest square with a tree farm and hybrid forest produces:

3 nuts, 2 mins, 3 energy (+1 for FM), and uses one pop to harvest it. Total 4 energy and 1/2 specialist for another 1.5 to 2.5. Totals = 5.5 pre fusion, 6.5 post fusion. In addition you also receive 2 mins.

Any non-rocky square with farm / condensor produces 4 nuts, and takes no worker just a crawler. Those nuts can support 2 specialists = 6 energy pre-fusion, 10 energy post fusion.

Both strategies require additional costs. In the worker strategy you need drone management facilities, police (though not with FM) and or psych. In the specialist strategy you need a crawler (redeemable at full value later if you want) and more terraforming time.

The specialist strategy is superior to forests in terms of energy at almost every point in the game on a per square basis. It is not more productive than boreholes until the later stages of the game however, though you are limited to a maximum 1 in 4 squares boreholed, and that is very hard to get into play by mid game.

There are several advantages to having a superior productivity per square, but one of the most important is that you can place your bases closer together, which yields a significant turn advantage in the early game, as your bases are producing while other's colony pods are moving into position.

I don't start right out with specialist bases of course, it takes crawlers and terraforming to get them going. And I rarely build all specialist bases either, I work shelf squares and boreholes. That said it's nice to be able to build a lot of big bases in a small space (ten squares of land can easily support a size 14 base with decent minerals before satelites or soil enrichers) and it is also nice to be able to run planned without missing a beat. Left alone I can get my techs up to 1 every other turn by 2220 or so while running demo / planned and pop booming.

One obvious disadvantage to a specialist strategy in MP is the difficulty in defending your crawlers from marauding choppers. If I ever play MP I will think long and hard about what I can do quickly, cheaply and defensibly. OTOH, choppers can blow away terraforming as well as crawlers, so the best defense is probably a good offense.

[mark13]

Sik,

Thanks for that - though I still struggle to see the viability of such a strategy in MP games. So, you get a slight labs boon - even then, your production is way down, and you have to expend both the terraforming time (16 turns per former w/o the WP, 11 turns with) and the crawlers to get it into effect. I suppose in something other than FM, they are extremely useful indeed, but otherwise the gains seem too small for me to want to take either the time or expend the resources. Still, I can see how it might work - and even with bad SE settings, it will bring in a decent tech rate.

[cbn]

I have only begun experimenting with specialist bases but do find them very useful but have only used them in a limited way. I tend to create some bases that are designed to grow larger and get all the lab facilities and use specialists heavily. Other bases are more general and get a mix of forest, boreholes and nuts squares and use workers. Last are the bases that I might stick in a rocky area that will never grow beyond size 3 or so. You crawl just enough nuts to keep the pop at size 3 or so, work 2-3 boreholes and crawler in minerals. These bases have next to no facilities (perhaps some morale enhancers) and are designed simply to produce units be they probes, formers, military. This evolves depending on the terrain and other factions.


It has always seemed to me that you can efficiently crawl all of your crawled energy back to your HQ. While this would be very dangerous in MP and I therfore try to create a few science centres, it really works in SP where the AI never seems to understand that this base is both your biggest strength and your biggest vulnerability.

[WhiteElephants]

Mark -- I think the loss of mineral output is offset by producing crawlers for minerals first, and then crawlers for nutrients. Though I'm not sure I agree with the farm/condensor combo for the 4 nutrients.

Sik -- How many minerals can you bring in before you start generating eco damage with the condensor/farm combos lying about? (I imagine you've probably got Tree Farms at this point, I would think you've still got a short ways to go before Hybrids).

[Velociryx]

Every faction can benefit from specialists....some more than others of course, and there are a number of considerations:

First, your effie rating. If you've got a paradigm economy, then specialists fairly near your HQ may or may not be a good investment for you, as one of their chief selling points is immunity to inefficiency, and bases close to your HQ won't lose much, if anything. For this reason, I recommend heavily foresting the area surrounding your HQ and letting workers do their thing. Most important of all, this saves you terraforming time....time you NEED in order to do all the fancy terraforming work at your outlying bases. It's true that by the late game, you might wanna go back and revisit the forest in favor of something else (farm/condensor), but by that time, you're talking Transcendii, and the game's over anyway.

Second, how many pacts/treaties do you have? If you have a lot, then limit your use of specialists to far-flung bases that won't net you much anyway.

Third, if you've got certain SP's at certain bases (ie - the ME base), you might want to take a close look at what you're giving up by using specialists. Post restriction lifting, a worker working a forest tile with a river running through it will net you a TIDY sum of energy on his own (1 standard + 1 River + 1 ME, and possibly +1 FM) = 4. If I'm not mistaken, Hybrid forests add another +1 Nut and Energy(?) making them excellent producers all 'round.

If you build your bases close together, you WILL wind up using quite a few specialists, whether you want to or not....as the base continues to grow, you'll just plain run out of places for the workers to work, and will have no choice about it. They're good investments, but as with anything, I'd recommend taking a look at the opportunity costs involved with making an "all-specialist" empire.

At first glance, it looks astonishing. I mean, if you make every single member of your population a specialist, then you have no drone problems, meaning that you won't need drone control facilities. You won't suffer any effie problems, so you can run wierd SE configurations a la Yang and laugh as it has no effect on you. You can fight a war under FM, and home your units anywhere, and not have to worry about unrest. Pretty cool, eh?

But....

You WILL need Drone Control facilities.....because it'll take a long time for you to get all that set up, so you'll have to build all the usual drone control facilities, pay maintenance on them until you finish setting up your specialists everywhere, and then tear them down (for half value).

You'll Need a TON of crawlers. Even if you keep spiking your mineral counts at each base till you reach 30 and can build a crawler a turn, you'll still spend a significant portion of your game just building enough crawlers to support the all specialist approach.

You'll be vulnerable. Lose a crawler, the base starts to starve. Lose several crawlers, the base is in a crisis. Each time the base grows, you've gotta build a new crawler or hydrosat (or both) to maintain the base at its new size. This requires a lot of micromanagement and carries with it a high PIA factor.

On top of that, to minimize your crawler vulnerabilities, you'll need a big standing army and active patrols all over the place. Most players do this anyway, but adding the tedium of vigilent patrolling on top of the serious micromanagement of running an all-specialist empire and you get a game where turns take a couple hours each and your brain is numb from the effort of keeping everything running.

Not to knock the specialist approach at all, cos I use the HELL out of them myself, but what you should keep in the back of your mind is that the more specialist-intensive your game is, the more total terraforming time you need. If you forest your interior and let the workers at it, it's 3-4 turns and you're done. Significantly longer if you're wanting to do a farm/condensor and build a crawler for that tile.

WOW...did I write all that?

-=Vel=-
::feeling long-winded today...lol::

[Ned]

If one measures the factions solely on how they well they do against the human in an SP game, I have to say that Dr. Z is not a powerful faction. He tends to have fewer bases, and to keep them small. On the other hand, LAL always gives me a real headache. He expands, he grows, he is the governor and he is powerful.

Based on my personal experience playing these two factions, I would estimate that LAL would win in a fair fight against Dr. Z.

It might be interesting, now that we all know how to automate the game, to try a few tests. Take 6 Dr. Z factions and 1 LAL faction and see who wins. Repeat with 3 of one and 4 of the other. Finally have 6 LAL factions and 1 Dr. Z.

I may give this a shot tonight.

Ned