Recycling Tanks vs Pressure Dome

[Darrell01]

I never build recycling tanks if I can help it. I would much rather build a pressure dome. It has no upkeep, so if I have some huge expansive Hive Empire out to the boonies, I have 1 less energy upkeep per base, and if the Spartans are triggering global warming (there are no ice caps in the game!) I don't have to worry about it. This, I imagine, would be very powerful in an ICS game. Anyone who agrees or disagrees?

[Petek]

Well, part of your analysis is flawed: Recycling Tanks also have no upkeep cost. Since Domes cost twice as much to build as Tanks, you have to decide whether the extra cost is worthwhile. Personally, I never build Domes unless Global Warming takes place.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Petek
Well, part of your analysis is flawed: Recycling Tanks also have no upkeep cost. Since Domes cost twice as much to build as Tanks, you have to decide whether the extra cost is worthwhile. Personally, I never build Domes unless Global Warming takes place.

I very rarely build pressure domes. Its a pretty easy job to keep your base out of the water by raising land

[Chaos Theory]

Just build pressure domes when you need them. It's not like the seas rise in 2130 or whenever you're putting up your first recycling tanks.

[Leon Trotsky]

You might build Pressure Domes in all your coastal bases as part of an evil plan of world domination through drowning.

[Darrell01]

I coulda swore they cost 1 energy. Man... They must have changed that in a patch or something, because I distinctly remember a time I built the self aware colony and upkeep was have of my rec tanks. Man, do I ever feel foolish.

[Hydro]

Yup, RTs are one of my first improvements, although I may build a rec commons first if I'm growing quickly. Rush building is a priority, especially when my Gaians are energy rich from the 'gifts' our mindworm friends have given us - ah, the bounty of Planet!

BTW - if you haven't read the posts on the how-tos of rush building please do so. It is a powerful tool. And Darrell01, welcome to the SMAC forum!

Hydro

[Leon Trotsky]

Originally posted by Darrell01
I coulda swore they cost 1 energy. Man... They must have changed that in a patch or something

I think that was changed in the very first patch.

[CEO Aaron]

I suppose there might be some merit to using extensive sea colony pods, then going on an aggressive land raising campaign to bring them to land (or more accurately to bring the land to them). The since sea pods come complete with pressure domes, they're less expensive in aggregate than a regular CP with RT. That said, there's also the opportunity costs in the longer production time of sea pods, both in terms of production time in the original base, and lost resources in the delta between base foundations.

[Kataphraktoi]

And since seabases are unproductive anyway, so until you raise the land the sea base is a waste of resources. Seabases are not that great, really, esspecially since most pbem players are builders, not attackers like way back when smac multiplayer started. Then, seabases were good for defenses. As pirates, you want to get on land asap with normal pods, imo.

In the later era's of the game, a seabase is so vulnerable to probes, air attack, etc, its just not worth it. Its already a military weakness to have a port city, much less one out on the water. They make good aircraft carriers though.

[CEO Aaron]

Yeah, based on conventional wisdom, I agree with you. Besides, I list the main drawback of seabases is the inability to plant a sensor beacon under them, and folk wanting early warnings of incoming invasions can use trawlers as expendable pickets.