Am I correct in thinking that, once you build a thermal borehole somewhere, it ALWAYS gives 0nut/6min/6nrg no matter what (assuming restrictions are lifted)? I built a borehole on a nutrient bonus square, and even though once it was built the square info still said "nutrient bonus", the square gave me zero nutrients.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Thermal boreholes on nutrient bonus squares?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by jez9999 View PostAm I correct in thinking that, once you build a thermal borehole somewhere, it ALWAYS gives 0nut/6min/6nrg no matter what (assuming restrictions are lifted)? I built a borehole on a nutrient bonus square, and even though once it was built the square info still said "nutrient bonus", the square gave me zero nutrients.What do I care about your suffering? Pain, even agony, is no more than information before the senses, data fed to the computer of the mind. The lesson is simple: you have received the information, now act on it. Take control of the input and you shall become master of the output.
-
He has a point: boreholes should be built on crap squares, since they produce the same resources whether they're built on a desert or the monsoon jungle. If you build them on energy or mineral-rich squares, they'll produce one extra point of the relevant resource, but that's about it. Now, maybe the nutrient square was the only one that fit the slope requirements for that city, who knows, but generally you shouldn't borehole good farming squares.
Comment
-
I'm going to disagree slightly with Elok. While I wouldn't build a borehole on a square with a bonus, if you're alternating farms/condensers with boreholes, some borehole squares will probably be farmable.Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Ben Franklin
Iain Banks missed deadline due to Civ | The eyes are the groin of the head. - Dwight Schrute.
One more turn .... One more turn .... | WWTSD
Comment
-
Originally posted by Lord Avalon View PostI'm going to disagree slightly with Elok. While I wouldn't build a borehole on a square with a bonus, if you're alternating farms/condensers with boreholes, some borehole squares will probably be farmable.
Originally posted by jez9999 View PostIf you say so.What do I care about your suffering? Pain, even agony, is no more than information before the senses, data fed to the computer of the mind. The lesson is simple: you have received the information, now act on it. Take control of the input and you shall become master of the output.
Comment
-
To clarify; boreholes give 0-6-6 and are only modified by:
1) Mineral or energy resources, which give +2 as usual and lift restrictions;
2) Rivers, which give +1 energy as usual but are swallowed by the borehole (ie, they don't continue into any more squares);
3) +2 ECON, Merchant Exchange, and other globals (e.g. random event industrial bust which decreases minerals by 1).
Everything else has absolutely no effect on borehole production; both fungus and forest can expand into borehole squares but neither affects production (they still count for other purposes, though, forest mitigates ecodamage for instance).
EDIT: Oh, there was one thing I forgot. If, for whatever reason, you build a base on a borehole, the borehole is ignored. Dunno why you'd do that, though.
EDIT 2: Oh, and landmarks also count if they boost minerals or energy.Last edited by magic9mushroom; May 15, 2012, 09:03.
Comment
-
IMO, the reason you don't want to build a borehole on a nut bonus square is because you want to condenser/farm/crawl your nutrient bonus squares far, far earlier, since they bypass resource caps, normally not lifted until you research gene splicing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by CEO Aaron View PostIMO, the reason you don't want to build a borehole on a nut bonus square is because you want to condenser/farm/crawl your nutrient bonus squares far, far earlier, since they bypass resource caps, normally not lifted until you research gene splicing.
Comment
-
This is all a bit complicated for me. I'm more of a forest-and-forget-it type, except for certain special circumstances."My nation is the world, and my religion is to do good." --Thomas Paine
"The subject of onanism is inexhaustable." --Sigmund Freud
Comment
-
Originally posted by Guynemer View PostThis is all a bit complicated for me. I'm more of a forest-and-forget-it type, except for certain special circumstances.
Comment
-
I kinda wish there were a way to exploit the fungus (productively) earlier. The way it becomes better over time until eventually it's about as good as forest with farms and hybrids...that's cool, but all it means, in my experience, is that you can pretty much ignore end-game fungal blooms, especially if you're Deirdre (IIRC it's slightly better in one way and slightly worse in another, if you're her). Also, it eventually becomes a nice alternative to farming & harnessing every damn water tile, since you get some minerals out of it. Yay, less monotonous water bases!
Comment
-
I think it would get too powerful if someone had better fungus harvesting than Deirdre. Fungus is meant to be an obstacle to terraforming, and as it is, it's already a huge source of free cash or units, if you work it right. Forget direct working of fungus squares, just get a river through a fungus valley, then start patrolling a trance recon rover over it. If your planet rating isn't complete bunk (ie, running free market), you'll be popping worms for planet pearls in bulk. With a single nearby artillery, you can even crush worms without much investment in planet rating.
Late-game, nutrients are the ultimate resource, thanks to specialists and satellites. Even before mining sats, you only need a borehole or two to feed your base's mineral requirements. 2 boreholes plus recycling tanks is 14 minerals, enough to support 4 units beyond your support rating, and still pay down the 10 mineral minimum for rush-building whatever you want. So rock nutrient and credit production, and buy your production. It's more micromanagement-intensive, but is virtually pollution free, and far, far more efficient than mining anyway.
Comment
Comment