 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:37
|
|
Guys
I think thats why bintravkin was using rows minus 1 to calculate rush cost-- I believe he was assuming a 10 mineral carryover ( which is very legitimate for most players) and he stated his 0 Industry assumption
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chaos Theory
|
 |
Missouri / Misery; CC
Oct 2002
time: 04:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Straybow
quote:
Money has time value even in the absence of inflation. Its because you can do things with it now that can add productive value to your economy |
No, capital has time value and money can buy capital. Banks pay interest because they lend the money at interest to increase the borrowers' capital.
A recycling center rushed on the first turn costs the same as a recycling center rushed on the 100th turn. By definition, no inflation and no intrinsic time value.
|
Which one's worth more? The one on the first turn, of course. They both cost the same price in terms of ECs, so the ECs are worth more on the first turn than on the 100th. Therefore, if you hold onto ECs, they become less valuable: the essence of inflation.
quote:
If I loan you 20, I decide what return is worth my time. Not some economically derived time value. If I have already rushed everything to the max and have 20ec left over and you're my ally I'll lend it to you, maybe even for a flat repayment. If you're my competitor, call me Sharky. |
If you loan me 20, *we* decide what return is worthwhile. Charge too much and I walk, even if I want the 20. The value of money on the real-world market is a result of consensus. Loans in SMAC are unfortunately hard to negotiate and enforce, so its value isn't very well established by this method.
I'm not conducting this poll so I can demand a 5% loan from you, since the value of money to you varies according to your circumstances. I'm polling so I can get a rough idea of what sort of returns people expect from their ECs.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chaos Theory
The 10 minerals carried over, however, have a value of about 20 ECs. If you use them towards an Energy Bank, you've spent those 20 ECs on it. |
Well, yes and no. In higher mineral producing bases, you must produce something or stockpile energy. So the "cost" of producing something with that mineral production could be portrayed as the energy you gave up by failing to stockpile.
Also, if we are talking the cost to purchase those minerals, we cannot forget that the first 10 minerals cost more but of course you are assuming that you overpay on a rush by just enough to have the 10 mineral carryover.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Straybow
[Q] [SIZE=1]
But let's look at a counter offer. Play until both economies produce at least 100ec/turn. Then I lend you 1ec/turn for 50 turns, after which you repay 1 ec/turn for 50 turns. Do you think that will have any impact beyond simply adding 1ec to your bottom line?
|
1 ec a turn is trivial even pretty much at turn 1. If you truly believe there is no time value to money, you would make the amounts significant. In your 100 ec economy, lets make it 50 a turn. So you lend me 50 a turn for 50 years and then I will return 50 a turn. All other things being equal, the guy with the money earlier wins.
. . and yes its not about the having of the money, it is due to what the money can buy... SO ??
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chaos Theory
If your mineral production is large, then your minerals are worth less relative to energy. The cost of an Energy Bank would then be the lost opportunity to build something else. However, in this case, you aren't spending ECs, so interest is not directly relevant. |
I agee-- I just don't see the cost of using the minerals in the build as being the 2 ec that it would cost to buy such minerals.
On the interest issue, I think it would would take significant interest to make holding cash worthwhile to me, although the answer is it depends. I have turns where I have nothing really great to rush and very little interest would be a great enticement. Other turns , those rec tanks or CPs are very tempting and even higher rates of inteest wouldn't sway my decision
It might be interesting to play a scenario with interest enabled to play with the impacts
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Straybow
|
 |
SG(2)… gone but not forgotten
Jan 1970
time: 23:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chaos Theory
quote:
A recycling center rushed on the first turn costs the same as a recycling center rushed on the 100th turn. By definition, no inflation and no intrinsic time value. |
Which one's worth more? The one on the first turn, of course. They both cost the same price in terms of ECs, so the ECs are worth more on the first turn than on the 100th. Therefore, if you hold onto ECs, they become less valuable: the essence of inflation. |
Neither is worth more or less. If I have enough ECs to rush the recycler on the first turn it doesn't matter whether I have 1 EC left or 100. Next turn I will want to rush something, and then it will matter how many EC I have. But whether I had the money on turn 1 or obtained it on turn 2 doesn't matter. The money neither gains nor loses value between turns.
Once a base has a recycling center it can't build another one. A new base needs a recycling center, and now you compare the two. All the income from previous turns by the recycler in the first base is "sunk" and contributes nothing to the present or future value of the facility. Therefore the new recycler rushed in the new base has exactly the same cost and return as the earlier recycler.
quote:
Originally posted by Flubber
1 ec a turn is trivial even pretty much at turn 1. If you truly believe there is no time value to money, you would make the amounts significant. In your 100 ec economy, lets make it 50 a turn. So you lend me 50 a turn for 50 years and then I will return 50 a turn. All other things being equal, the guy with the money earlier wins.
. . and yes its not about the having of the money, it is due to what the money can buy... SO ?? |
That's my point. If the money is not enough to make or break a rushbuy it has no value unless you save it turn by turn until it can contribute to your capital. If it had time value even trivial amounts would make a difference over 50 turns, and the one who received the first 50 payments of 1ec would be way ahead because of the huge time interval involved.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Straybow
|
|
SG(2)… gone but not forgotten
Jan 1970
time: 23:37
|
|
Chaos Theory, to answer your "real question" the only decision is whether you need the item now, or not. If it costs 100ec to rush production in base X, holding that money for one turn isn't going to make a difference unless the interest is sky-high.
If base X is producing an EB the returns are strictly financial, but there is also the factor that by rushing the EB this turn I get to start production of something else next turn. I will also weigh the production at base X (both the EB this turn and my planned production next turn) against the production at other bases.
If I have no facilities left to build at X other than EB, and no pressing need for new units, I will likely not bother to rush. If base X has my only Command Center and I need ground units, I'll rush the EB just so I can start production on the next rover or whatever.
The primary consideration is not time value of the money, but the opportunity cost of base production. So in my book you still need to think the other way around, as it were. Only capital has time value, money (in SMAC/X) does not.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chaos Theory
|
|
Missouri / Misery; CC
Oct 2002
time: 04:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Straybow
quote:
Originally posted by Chaos Theory
quote:
A recycling center rushed on the first turn costs the same as a recycling center rushed on the 100th turn. By definition, no inflation and no intrinsic time value. |
Which one's worth more? The one on the first turn, of course. They both cost the same price in terms of ECs, so the ECs are worth more on the first turn than on the 100th. Therefore, if you hold onto ECs, they become less valuable: the essence of inflation. |
Neither is worth more or less. If I have enough ECs to rush the recycler on the first turn it doesn't matter whether I have 1 EC left or 100. Next turn I will want to rush something, and then it will matter how many EC I have. But whether I had the money on turn 1 or obtained it on turn 2 doesn't matter. The money neither gains nor loses value between turns.
|
That's just another way of saying that your ECs won't depreciate enough by next turn for the returns from next turn's purchase to be less than those from a purchase this turn.
quote:
Once a base has a recycling center it can't build another one. A new base needs a recycling center, and now you compare the two. All the income from previous turns by the recycler in the first base is "sunk" and contributes nothing to the present or future value of the facility. Therefore the new recycler rushed in the new base has exactly the same cost and return as the earlier recycler.
|
How can you compare the two facilities, when you've already paid for the first and the second is still an option? The returns from your rec tank in the past will not cause it to contribute more in the future, but they're in your pocket.
Compare the value of purchasing a rec tank on turn 1, vs waiting to buy it on turn 10. Assuming you sit on your ECs, by turn 10 you're better off if you purchased the rec tank on turn 1. By the time you want to buy your second tank, it's later in the game and your expected returns may be less, so your return on investment for building or buying the tank is less.
quote:
Chaos Theory, to answer your "real question" the only decision is whether you need the item now, or not. If it costs 100ec to rush production in base X, holding that money for one turn isn't going to make a difference unless the interest is sky-high.
|
With the consensus for interest at around 5%, the 5 ecs you'd waste by delaying production a turn aren't a big deal, but they add up if you do this at every base, every turn. The only time you truly need a build is if it would grant you victory or potentially stave off defeat. Otherwise, it has a finite expected return dependent on circumstances. My poll is intended to discover the typical expected return.
quote:
If base X is producing an EB the returns are strictly financial, but there is also the factor that by rushing the EB this turn I get to start production of something else next turn. I will also weigh the production at base X (both the EB this turn and my planned production next turn) against the production at other bases.
|
Meaning that you compare your expected returns for various combinations of purchases, picking the best.
quote:
If I have no facilities left to build at X other than EB, and no pressing need for new units, I will likely not bother to rush.
|
Until rather late in the game, you can find something to do with your production. However, you describe discovering that your minerals have become worth less.
quote:
If base X has my only Command Center and I need ground units, I'll rush the EB just so I can start production on the next rover or whatever.
|
When you rush a facility, you aren't simply buying it, you're buying minerals. When the base is slated to produce something else in the future, you've bought a piece of it by buying minerals now.
quote:
The primary consideration is not time value of the money, but the opportunity cost of base production. So in my book you still need to think the other way around, as it were. Only capital has time value, money (in SMAC/X) does not. |
Your phrase "time value" is unclear to me, but I'd say the primary concern is maximizing your expected return on investment. Holding onto ECs reduces your future expected returns, though they may still be higher than expected returns if you spend now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Straybow
|
|
SG(2)… gone but not forgotten
Jan 1970
time: 23:37
|
|
quote:
Compare the value of purchasing a rec tank on turn 1, vs waiting to buy it on turn 10. Assuming you sit on your ECs, by turn 10 you're better off if you purchased the rec tank on turn 1. By the time you want to buy your second tank, it's later in the game and your expected returns may be less, so your return on investment for building or buying the tank is less. |
I won't try to counter you point by point for time considerations. This paragraphs demonstrates how you are wrong on three counts.
First, you've neglected that there are two sources of capital investment: minerals and ECs. By waiting you are allowing both minerals and ECs to accumulate. If you are building units rather than facilities the accumulation of minerals decreases the per mineral cost of rushing. This, of course, could indeed be offset by a high enough interest rate.
Second, under conditions of limited resources (early in the game or in warfare) the needs anticipated in future turns may outweigh the value of rushing a unit or facility now. Your assertion that "by turn 10 you're better off..." is not based on the time value of money, but on numerous unstated assumptions you've made about when and why you are rushing a rec tank (or whatever).
Third, it is impossible for the expected returns on a base facility to be less just because "it's later in the game." If that is your expectation, what is it based on? Not the game parameters but perhaps your strategies or something.
Rec tanks cost doesn't increase. Maintenance doesn't go up. In fact, later in the game there's a tech that changes rec tank from 1ec maint to free. The value of a min, nut, or energy unit may increase if other base facilities become available to multiply their effects. So what return is decreasing later in the game, in your view?
Please, if you are leaving out of your explanation some critical steps in your thinking process, fill them in.
quote:
Your phrase "time value" is unclear to me, but I'd say the primary concern is maximizing your expected return on investment. |
But by definition not everything can be maximized. You are sacrificing cash reserves to bring capital on-line. You must state what one thing (or maybe two) you are attempting to maximize.
Time value is just exactly that: value relative to time. 1ec buys exactly the same on turn 1 as on turn 100. It has no time-variance in value in the absence of inflation.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:37
|
|
To me its much simpler-- take a simple example
In the very early game, I offer you 50 credits right now or 50 ten years from now-- Obvious-- take it now . . . can anyone dispute this?
If I make it 50 now or 75 ten years from now it might be a tougher call. the balance is the benefits now versus slightly greater benefits later.
Its subjective but you know that money now can allow the purchase of things that improve your inductrial capacity NOW
The assumption here is that you have something useful to build/buy. If you don't then money now is no more valuable than money later in the absence of interest ( except for any value you place on being able to rush things you don't want)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chaos Theory
|
|
Missouri / Misery; CC
Oct 2002
time: 04:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Straybow
quote:
Compare the value of purchasing a rec tank on turn 1, vs waiting to buy it on turn 10. Assuming you sit on your ECs, by turn 10 you're better off if you purchased the rec tank on turn 1. By the time you want to buy your second tank, it's later in the game and your expected returns may be less, so your return on investment for building or buying the tank is less. |
I won't try to counter you point by point for time considerations. This paragraphs demonstrates how you are wrong on three counts.
First, you've neglected that there are two sources of capital investment: minerals and ECs. By waiting you are allowing both minerals and ECs to accumulate. If you are building units rather than facilities the accumulation of minerals decreases the per mineral cost of rushing. This, of course, could indeed be offset by a high enough interest rate.
|
I've been discussing facilities rather than units because units are more complicated. The longer you wait, the lower the price per mineral, which often offsets the loss of return caused by waiting. I find that I avoid paying more than 2.5 ECs/mineral when rushing units.
quote:
Second, under conditions of limited resources (early in the game or in warfare) the needs anticipated in future turns may outweigh the value of rushing a unit or facility now. Your assertion that "by turn 10 you're better off..." is not based on the time value of money, but on numerous unstated assumptions you've made about when and why you are rushing a rec tank (or whatever).
|
You're right, I was assuming nothing dramatic had happened by turn 10, since it's unusual for serious problems to manifest so early. I assume you're rushing a rec tank to reap its returns of 1 nutrient, 1 mineral, and 1 energy/turn.
If you delay rushing a rec tank because you worry you might need the ECs in the future, you are placing a higher value on your expected future returns than your potential current returns, is all.
quote:
Third, it is impossible for the expected returns on a base facility to be less just because "it's later in the game." If that is your expectation, what is it based on? Not the game parameters but perhaps your strategies or something.
Rec tanks cost doesn't increase. Maintenance doesn't go up. In fact, later in the game there's a tech that changes rec tank from 1ec maint to free. The value of a min, nut, or energy unit may increase if other base facilities become available to multiply their effects. So what return is decreasing later in the game, in your view?
Please, if you are leaving out of your explanation some critical steps in your thinking process, fill them in.
|
First, rec tanks never cost anything to maintain. Apart from that, rec tanks built late in the game will yield returns for a fairly short period of time before the game end, thus their expected returns are less. It's why players tend to stop building bases even when they could cover the planet in drop singularity colony hovertanks.
quote:
quote:
Your phrase "time value" is unclear to me, but I'd say the primary concern is maximizing your expected return on investment. |
But by definition not everything can be maximized. You are sacrificing cash reserves to bring capital on-line. You must state what one thing (or maybe two) you are attempting to maximize.
|
One thing: expected sum future discounted return summed over your empire:
r = a fair interest rate, expressed as a fraction (say, 1.05)
sum over empire( sum over time( r^-t * income(t) ) )
Where t = 0 is now.
Income may be a vector, since some quantities are hard to measure in terms of energy, in which case I'd want at least some non-dominated sum return.
quote:
Time value is just exactly that: value relative to time. 1ec buys exactly the same on turn 1 as on turn 100. It has no time-variance in value in the absence of inflation. |
Early in the game, if someone drops 1000 ECs on you, you'd have a hard time spending it, though it would be a huge boon. Later on, but before the end of the game is looming, you could get much better immediate returns on the ECs, through such things as genejack factories, fusion speeder crawlers, satellites, and so forth. So it seems that an EC can buy more later in the game, but what this really means is that ECs can buy more after sufficient investment. Holding on to ECs in general delays being able to spend them for greater gain. Assuming you spend your ECs wisely, this can look like interest on your empire's value.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-06-2005 18:04
/rant
|