adamb1011

adamb1011

Joined Member # 6156329
5 Posts 181 Replies 678 Reputation

interesting that you push so hard up the tree. I actually find the choice at #11 (growth vs production) to be a tough one when you are not the yor. big advantages and disadvantages to both IMO. anyone got thoughts on which is better? early game and late

34 Replies 194,611 Views

and finally, as someone mentioned - build factories on research and wealth specialised planets! I usually go for at least 2 and a solar plant. preferably 3. This, along with farms, is where the overheads come from. as for approval buildings, I usually consider them last resort. I'd rather beeline for +approval techs, or build star base modules, or get the tradeable resource.

34 Replies 194,611 Views

As for how to specialise your planets, the decision is usually not too hard IMO. the key thing to realise is that manu planets benefit from being in close proximity since shipyards can have multiple sponsors. research and wealth planets get no benefit at all really. also, due to overheads, it's usually better if research and wealth world's are of higher class. finally, I tend to prioritise research over wealth. usually at a ratio of about 3 research world's for eve

34 Replies 194,611 Views

I think generally there's a few things you could do. Firstly, the idea that the AI runs everything on a galaxy-wide scale makes a lot of sense given what Im seeing today. Just fixing this will probably make a huge difference. Running each planet individually (governers) will improve their economic management 10x. Even with a load of handicaps, I still think it will be better longterm to have a more economically intelligent AI. Secondly, races of the same ideology should te

150 Replies 731,798 Views

Actually, Frogboy - you should make a challenge based on what you said above! set some rules like: 1) large map 2) all 8 predefined races 3) godlike 4) you must play one of the predefined races 5) min-maxing is ok, but no cheese - ie sensor buoys, 3 constructor exploit, carrier spam, etc. You'd either be proven right, or you'd get a ton of valuable balance and AI feedback!

109 Replies 346,499 Views

I can't count the number of times ive given up on insane maps! The amount of micro required after a while gets out of control. Also you are screwed without patriotic if you go for military victory. Started a medium map the other day, much more fun. I colonised about 1/4 of the galaxy and while I am miles ahead, it's still very interesting. will probably start a godlike game on the weekend, and play without any of the blatant exploits. Alth

109 Replies 346,499 Views

I agree would be much harder without a custom designed race. Terrans are a particairily poor choice - their racials aren't very strong, although their tech tree isn't bad! But I can easily see how exploiting a long list of bugs or "unintended features", and designing the "perfect" race, etc can lead to some silly outcomes. ie, the whole take the 3 constructor and upgrade to colony ship thing is clearly an

109 Replies 346,499 Views

I'm sure it's very possible to do all the things the OP is claiming. God like AI can't get close to a minmaxing human, even with all its bonuses. That said I don't think the OP is making a fair comparison. This is still literally the first release build (with a few tiny updates). Let's compare to 2 games with a great reputation for balance - sc2 and dota2.... Both of those had big balance issues during vanilla launch. Give the devs some time and the

109 Replies 346,499 Views

I mentioned this in the other thread... but the easy answer is repair. right now repairing is so slow, and a really early military star base repair tech (or even base upgrade) would make a huge difference. ie, around the tech level of small hulls. If military star bases repaired at a rate of heavily damaged to full hp in a few turns (percent based repair) then I would build them early and often!

36 Replies 48,745 Views

altarian tech tree is probably the worst. For a few reasons 1) their unique building sucks. needs major buffs. there's better ways to get manu and research combos. The use case is either really rare or non existent - especially as most people specialise planets. 2)far far worse: Their late game tetra forming tech is shockingly bad. No ultra tetra former means late game your planets will be awful compared to others. They only seem

4 Replies 8,244 Views

Well, I think the devs mentioned that one of their goals post release would be to flesh out the star base system - either via expansion or dlc. I agree military bases just don't feel useful right now. although it would be a huge change, I think you shouldn't be able to stack economic star bases on a single planet. It takes too long, results in massive micro to min/max, and is generally poor game design. It would be a big change

54 Replies 227,644 Views

Im not sure how you arrive at the "building econ starbases sucks" theory. Level 1 is amazing - i try and get that asap. But even further levels are really good, provided you can build multiple constructors on a single ship. Sure, the first few upgrades suck, but since you can build 4+ constructors early on in a cargo ship (after a few techs), the total bonus to your planet can be +50% or more off a single turn worth of production from a manu world. Better yet, it gives your manu

48 Replies 137,121 Views

Well, I find starbases are highly effective - but mostly as a way to burn off excess production on manu worlds when im not at war. Far more effective than projects IMO. See, unlike buildings, you can stack multiple constructor modules on a single ship. Once I get large hulls I can usually stack at least 6 construction modules on a single ship, and pump them out at 1/turn. This is roughly equivalent to about 1 fully upgraded factory, assuming you have researched a decent way down the manu line

48 Replies 137,121 Views

cool that's about what my intuition thought. I was working off 25/75 roughly. I think by the time you factor in production bonuses etc this will be true. generally I use the main landmass for factories, stacking as much adjacency as possible, and remaining landmass for farms, trying to achieve about 25/75. As a very rough approximate.

48 Replies 137,121 Views

farms upgrade really aggressively though. Towards the endgame 1 farm is worth over 10 pop. I would generally neglect approval as it can be obtained by other means than buildings. arguably so can pop though - monsantium! I've generally built farms as I approach the pop cap, then let the planet grow towards the cap again, replacing another building each time. usually running at 100% approval. At some point though this strategy is likely to fall off hugely, to the poin

48 Replies 137,121 Views

benevolent has some big perks too. For example, if you pick the 3rd colonising trait, it can fuel a mass galactic expansion. just load your colony ships up with 0.5 pop (basically 1 per turn) and when they arrive your new world starts with 5.5! magic!

5 Replies 15,226 Views

That's actually an interesting point. There must be a value at which an extra farm diminishes below the value of an extra factory when calculating the overall manu of a planet. same deal with wealth and research. anyone worked out roughly what that point is yet?

48 Replies 137,121 Views

You can survive without patriotic - at least to 100 planets or so, provided your planets don't grow too much pop. 1) always take the flat approval bonuses in the approval tech tree. I always beeline for the first approval bonus really early - and grab the second one towards the start of midgame. 2) approval relics are your friend 3) harmony crystals are even better. Trade your left nut for these! you can basically never have enough. 4)

23 Replies 93,490 Views