Updated the FAQ - Page 9

Asmala · #81 August 22nd, 2003, 04:36 PM

You can also try the printer-friendly Version (link to it is in the bottom of the page).

Rich · #82 August 23rd, 2003, 12:54 AM

Couldn't find the printer friendly link but was able to save it as a txt file. Thanks very much.

Asmala · #83 August 23rd, 2003, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich:
Couldn't find the printer friendly link but was able to save it as a txt file. Thanks very much.

There is Printer-friendly view of this topic link at the bottom of the place just below the new topic link.

Slick · #84 August 25th, 2003, 08:38 PM

This is a call for any new additions for the next update. As soon as the next installment (17.12) of the strategy articles by Stone Mill is complete, I will be posting an update to the FAQ in approximately a week. The info in this thread will be included, plus a few other goodies I am working on. If anyone wants to get something added (or fixed), please speak up - there are still several sections that are nearly empty. Thanks.

Slick.

AMF · #85 September 1st, 2003, 12:52 AM

Well, now I've gone and done it. Decided to see how bad playing a "neutral culture" emprire really was. I always played peaceful or warlike before...

And, so whenever I met another empire, I wen tofr the non-intercourse treaty, and thats it. Well, now, all of my planets are rioting. How in the world does one make neutral people happy? I think my game is a wash unless I can figure this out...

Do the effects of having warships/troops in a system help with neutral empires? Admittedly, I am very low on warships and have NO troops...been expanding, and never built more than a few warships...

I guess this is what I get for playing a bunch of anarcho-libertarian belter types who just want to be left alone...sounded like a fun idea at the time...

any help greatly appreciated...

thanks,

Alarik

Slick · #86 September 1st, 2003, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by alarikf:
Well, now I've gone and done it. Decided to see how bad playing a "neutral culture" emprire really was. I always played peaceful or warlike before...

And, so whenever I met another empire, I wen tofr the non-intercourse treaty, and thats it. Well, now, all of my planets are rioting. How in the world does one make neutral people happy? I think my game is a wash unless I can figure this out...

Do the effects of having warships/troops in a system help with neutral empires? Admittedly, I am very low on warships and have NO troops...been expanding, and never built more than a few warships...

I guess this is what I get for playing a bunch of anarcho-libertarian belter types who just want to be left alone...sounded like a fun idea at the time...

any help greatly appreciated...

thanks,

Alarik

Most of the same things work on a neutral empire. From FAQ:

12.1 Riots & Riot Control (Note: see also section 4.4.7)
12.1.1 The following things can increase happiness on a planet: ships in the system, ships in the sector, urban pacification centers, troops on the planet, winning a battle, colonizing a planet, capturing an enemy planet, (sometimes) new treaties, building ships or facilities.
12.1.2 Since the number of troops matters for happiness, not the strength, someone suggested making small troops with just a cockpit to use for use as �riot police.�
12.1.3 A homeworld will never riot. Their anger will go up but it maxes out at 80% (where 100% is required to riot) But, if the HW is glassed, then recolonized, it can then be capable of rioting, as it is no longer a HW. (Slick, Imperator Fyron, Aaron)

The thing with neutrals, is that most things make them angry, (an exception to the above is that most treaties and battles make them upset) so load up on the troops and make a Urban Pacification Center in each system. Or better yet, don't pick neutral. To see what affects their happiness, read the appropriate text files.

Slick.

Nocturnal · #87 November 19th, 2003, 12:43 AM

In my late-game, I now use this more expensive (takes two turns to build in most worlds) colonizer for colonization at any range, though the overwhelming majority of my colonization is short-range:
Bridge, life support, crew quarters, colony pod, cargo bay, one (1) best engine (quantum III), solar sail, best emergency propulsion (emergency propulsion V).
This has an effective one-turn speed of 12 allowing it to reach any planet in its system the same turn it’s built, but it runs out of fuel quickly. If I’m colonizing long-range, I usually send a bulk transport full of population along with it, and my bulk transports generate unlimited supply. So I don’t bother designing another ship. Or, I use an “obsolete” colonizer. I call this design simply “Rock Colony”, “Ice Colony”, and “Gas Colony”, and you may use it if you like. Feel free also to cut out the jabber from this post if it makes it into the FAQ.

JLS · #88 November 19th, 2003, 12:47 AM

Sounds like a great design, squeeze a reacter or some steller harness on that and you will be in buz, Nocturnal.

[ November 18, 2003, 22:49: Message edited by: JLS ]

Nocturnal · #89 November 19th, 2003, 01:23 AM

Thanks! You'd need to take out the emergency propulsion V or the cargo bay to make it a longer range design capable of self-resupply.

One advantage for remote mining that I didn't see discussed was that it costs you no space on your planets at all. Playing a race of god-like researchers, I got a HUGE advantage in tech very early by getting well over 60% of my minerals from remote mining ships, and stuffing every planet I could find full to the brim with research centers.

Now later in the game, remote mining only gives me about 30% of my minerals income because I've maxxed out all my research. (My colonies are focusing on intelligence now, but I'm already the Mega Evil Empire and pwn the azzes of all teh mofos wtf lol. Smaller empires sometimes capitulate immediately at my "Resistance is futile" speech that I give as soon as I get a new "first contact.")

Of course, this is against the AI, and such a plan may have weaknesses that a canny human player can exploit. However I feel that vigorously mining asteroids before you have the tech to build planets out of them can give a gigantic ROI in terms of resources and also planet space. For best efficiency, use the largest hull available for your miners - until the late-mid-game, my mining fleet was a bigger drain on my economy than my battlefleet, but the payoff was fantastic.

Note: Remote mining with other than satellites or bases is COMPLETELY USELESS on limited-resource games. You can never make up both the upkeep costs and the initial investment in a timely manner, unless you can reduce upkeep.

[ November 18, 2003, 23:36: Message edited by: Nocturnal ]

Fyron · #90 November 19th, 2003, 02:38 AM

Quote:

One advantage for remote mining that I didn't see discussed was that it costs you no space on your planets at all. Playing a race of god-like researchers, I got a HUGE advantage in tech very early by getting well over 60% of my minerals from remote mining ships, and stuffing every planet I could find full to the brim with research centers.

You can't mine a colonized planet though...