Factoryless SD: some thoughts, by Will Waggoner and Jason Cawley

From Stars!wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Factoryless SD: some thoughts

By Will Waggoner (will_waggoner@my-deja.com) and Jason Cawley (jasoncawley@email.msn.com)

Will's post:

Since someone was querying about a -f SD recently, I thought I would try my hand at a slight variation on the idea. This is a small merge of the -f SD and Cap'n Marv's high mineral designs.

Race:

  • Asteroids ( minefields and occasional planet strike.. =)
  • SD ( duh )
  • IFE, TT, OBRM, ISB, and NAS
  • .50g to 2.00g, -100C to 100C, and 26mR to 74mR ( 1/7 )
  • 19%
  • 1000 5/25/2 12/3/16
  • N,C,W,B cheap and P,L expensive - no start at 3

Now, my reasons for the race design. I'm looking for a -f SD (obviously) that can use its -f speed to take out one opponent and then use the cheap energy to get early packets and remove another opponent from contention. This is helped by the fact that -f normally has extra minerals, and this one with Marv's mineral settings will have LOTS of extra minerals. Also, lots of planets = lots of small packets, reducing a defended planet much more efficiently (research thanks go out to Dog, and to Marv in a current game.)

I'm aware of the penalty for more than four LRTs, but I think all of these fit the race design - ISB for orbital forts for quick builds and spread since the race is -f, TT to make the terraforming 30% cheaper and eventual live everywhere capability, OBRM since i won't need remotes, and NAS for points.

The hab hurts - a variation would be to remove IFE and increase the hab. This will require some testing, though, since the whole name of the game for this race is speed.

The tech: cheap weapons for all the obvious reasons. cheap construction to help get the cruiser horde. cheap bio since the race is TT and an SD, and the cheap energy is to speed heavily to the flingers.

Comments, suggestions? One fear I have for this race is that I may be reaching for too many things at once. I'm also wary of how this race will perform in testbeds, since there are no opponents to attack, no packets to fling, etc. I will, however, give it the BB standard test to see how long it takes - my guess will be at least 2465, maybe more, since I will have to spend some time on the TT. Experts? What say you?

Jason's reply:

will_waggoner@my-deja.com wrote in message <7nsjll$lao$1@nnrp1.deja.com>...

Since someone was querying about a -f SD recently, I thought I would try my hand at a slight variation on the idea. This is a small merge of the -f SD and Cap'n Marv's high mineral designs.
Race:
  • Asteroids ( minefields and occasional planet strike.. =)
  • SD ( duh )
  • IFE, TT, OBRM, ISB, and NAS
  • .50g to 2.00g, -100C to 100C, and 26mR to 74mR ( 1/7 )

This is the problem. When you go -f, you need to invest far more than others do in the hab. I know you have TT. But pop doesn't grow on -8 yellows, and that for a long time. They terraform pretty slow too, even with TT, when there are no factories to push with. You need enough breeders to fill all the yellows and preferably over-pop them to work them up faster, and you need the greens alone to get you to a 10k horde-attacking level. Some TT races can wait for the yellows to kick in, but with -f you have to conquer someone long before then.

I try to have 1/4 hab width with -f TT designs. The resource speed is going to rise in close to direct proportion with the initial greens (a little less, but only a little). Another advantage of 1/4 TT hab is that all the "eventual perfects", thus the breeders, are initially green (or -1/-3 yellows at worst, with a narrower 1/4), and all worlds are eventually somewhat centered not at the edges of the ranges. That boosts the capacity as well as the speed, in the resource area (which -f race need a lot of). Even a narrower 1/4 (nearly 1/5) could give you 50% to 65% more early resources from 65% more initial greens.

  • 19%
  • 1000 5/25/2 12/3/16
  • N,C,W,B cheap and P,L expensive - no start at 3

I'd go 3 cheap 1 normal rather than this. A 50% reduction in tech expense in 1 side-field is not important enough to blow all those points on (130). I'd go energy normal probably - you want 15 or 16 there but that isn't the 25s and 26s you eventually want in the other 3.

That gives 130 points. Doesn't quite get you to 1/4 hab, but most of the way. You can get the rest (to 1/4 almost 1/5) with 12/3/12 or 12/4/14 mines, and retain your 20% eventual mineral edge for the late-game.

and then use the cheap energy to get early packets and remove another opponent from contention.

Early packets are unlikely to do this for you completely, energy speed or no. You have to be close, and he has to be asleep / no defenses up. You aren't going to overpower full tech 10 defenses with the kind of minerals you will really have. Some shots, to be sure.

The hab hurts - a variation would be to remove IFE

No, don't. You need that speed, and it doesn't give enough points. Normal energy is a much better point-option than the loss of IFE. You'd have to give up some cheapness if you did this anyway, because -f + no IFE + expensive prop just isn't an option (pop would run away from you, or all be in space). To terra places, the pop has to be on the ground, not flying. Yes, you can try SD boosters and docks - but it is not going to be enough with warp 6 engines. -f planets can't just buy all the extra shipping you need; the HW at a 25% hold is only 275 resources. It can build the freighters to move that; adding lots more shipping on top of that to haul cargo at warp 9 with a warp 6 std engine and trying to get tech too? Just won't have the resources.

By comparison, with IFE and a few re-used fuelships, all the pop will go warp 9 and easily, without eating all the resources on all your breeders just for shipping.

Now, if you made the *prop* one of the cheaps, you might live without IFE. You do want 12 for the best cruiser horde design (and the cruiser-gate). But then you'd have to give up the energy or the con anyway (both normal, more like). Since you'd still have normal energy that way, why not cut out the middleman and just take those 130 points? ;-)

The trade this change winds up making, therefore, is -

1/4 hab vs. 1/7 -> +60% initial green space (~= early resources) Also, worst worlds much faster to get green, and higher eventual value. 12 or 14 mines vs. 16 -> slightly slower min income per world, but on far more greens. energy to 15 or 16 at twice the cost. I think the extra resources from the first will more than pay for the last. With a bigger horde when you do buy ships into the bargain.