 |
| |
|
|
Drago Sinio
|
 |
New Jersey, USA
Oct 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Morale is most important to me, because I feel none of the other considerations are particularly important compared to controlling the planet with military power. I dont think it matters much how efficient you are, or how many techs you research or facilities you build, if you cant defend them.
Once you eliminate the military threats from the other factions, then I would say efficiency is second most important, since it strengthens everything else by maximizing your economy planetwide.
ICS stands for "Infinite City Sleaze", and involves building as many small bases as possible, very close together, until you cover as much area as you can with them. This gives you very many production centers, and the small population per base reduces or even eliminates drone riots. A very powerful strategy, although in SMAC I suppose it should be called "IBS", for infininte base sleaze. It is sometimes also known as "Borg Style".
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Marid Audran
|
 |
Salt Lake City, Utah
May 2001
time: 22:14
|
|
I forgot to vote last time I was here. Anyway, I'm joining the chorus of "Efficiency" voices since it really is the most important aspect of your empire overall. Even with a baseline 0 Efficiency rating you may find half or more of your energy siphoned off as inefficiency at the frontiers of your empire. And if it's negative, forget it; you can kiss notions of money and research goodbye, not to mention drone control via psych allocation and drone control period. You can get by without a strong economy (as if Society Affect), or with poor industry, or even poor tech rates, but you gotta have efficiency.
Currently I'm playing as the Pirates and this is especially crucial, because of their inherient inefficiency penalty and propensity for lazy, sprawling empires over land and sea. It adds up to a lot of potential energy loss. With them I'm drawn almost exclusively to Demo/Green to tame this problem.
Soft spot in my heart for probe rating though. If Zak's next door or a Builder faction running Knowledge, embrace the good Lord (Fundy) for a few turns and probe your way to prosperity! 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jokka das Trevas
|
 |
Curitiba, PR - Brazil - Earth /Solar System / Known Universe
Apr 2001
time: 05:14
|
|
Yes, but if I use clean reactor units I can't combine especials =)
Sure Eff will get you broke if it falls negative, but pray tell: industry will do it too, and support, and police, and economy, and research, and planet... and note: a high police rating isn't a SE dream for most people, but it still hurts bad on negative.
Almost every trait is damn bad when on negative, but I think the question was referring "What SE choice you choose to raise by any means?"
Still going by my way of thinking (IMHO), children creche gives your base +2 efficiency and +2 growth - but WHAT building raises your production rate, or your support rate? Non-genejack factories will come much later in the game, you know... And clean reactors are a little more expensive and, as I said, doesn't let you combine abilities...
To illustrate my opinion (but surely is only MY opinion  ), I feel great going pirate's with the -1 effic and all, but HATE morgans with that crappy -1 support...
Doesn't impress anyone, then, why I love playing the Hive with their +2 support early game (immunity to effic gives police state for free), and any "financial deficits" are solved with the planetary energy grid... 
I guess money doesn't buy everything hehehe
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ralf
|
 |
Sweden
Mar 2000
time: 06:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Deimos
ICS = Infinite City Sprawl. That's packing your available territory with bases as close together as you can, normally 2 or 3 squares between each base. |
Further explanation: ICS takes advantage of the fact that:
- 1 city of (for example) 8 pop-points produce 9 tile-outputs, while...
- 8 cities of 1 pop-point each produces 16 tile-outputs.
This is built-in flaw, but it can be counteracted effectively by adding smart anti-ICS measures, as they plan to do in Civ-3.
Ultimately, its also a very boring, unchallenging and empire-ugly way to play the game, by the way. ICS have a very inflationary impact on gameplay, and it have destroyed many MP-games. I have a hard time understanding why some people thinks its so fun to use this repetitious one-dimensional tactic. Beats me.
Last edited by Ralf on 17-06-2001 at 14:58
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Clear Skies
|
 |
looking for a saviour in these dirty streets
Jul 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
Good, a lively discussion
I always say that what matters to you most depends a lot on the style of game you play and your favourite faction, plus the factions around you. For example, if Miriam was nearby you wouldn't want to be caught running Wealth and Eudaimonia - too little Morale for when the bint attacks you!
However, being the techie I am, I think Research is quite important. Granted, it's no use without the Efficiency to support it, but usually Efficiency and Research go hand in hand - cf Knowledge and Cybernetic.
I'm surprised no-one's put Planet - does no-one else engage in mass Psi warfare? I do it all the time once I've discovered Centauri Psi - once I have the Dream Twister, I start churning out Psi Rovers or Tanks with Soporific Gas Pods, plus possibly Wave to remove any Trance abilities. A +4 Planet rating, plus the gas pods and the Elite rating (get the Cyborg Factiory & Command Nexus too of course) and nothing can stand in the way of your Empathi!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Notes on ISC:
Early game, base-stacking has numerous benefits. First and most importantly, it enables you to get around those early game resource restrictions of 2n each as a maximum. This can be most clearly seen with any faction that builds a base+rec. tanks, and Morgan, who can get utterly obscene amounts of energy from base squares, regardless of available techs. In short, early game base squares rock!
Also, packing your bases close together reduces inefficiency due to distance from HQ.
If you pursue the ISC strategy with a vengeance in the early game, then by the time you run out of room to expand, you've got a tech position that enables you to rapidly put infrastructure in all those bases, turning them into sterling production centers across the board.
The end result then, is:
1) LOTS of bases = LOTS of production centers
2) A resonably efficient empire, given a mid-game relocation of HQ to a centralized base
3) Good infrastructure, allowing you to take advantage of the fact that psych sees its greatest impact in well-developed bases.
In all, if you're looking for a way to surge to a position of dominance, ISC is a hugely useful tool!
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:14
|
|
Vel and Sik, I question ICS, if the concept is meant to include a large number of bases closely spaced. True, such a structure is faster to build, and less inefficient, but ultimately there is a problem with bureaucracy drones that can not easily be dismissed.
First look at the below table. You see that regardless of difficulty level, you accumulate extra drones by an average of two per extra base. The bases that receive the extra drones are somewhat random, and could be in a base build a critical SP. That drone may cause a riot that cannot be fixed by adding a facility due to the fact that you are building an SP. If you use a worker, you may enough food production so that you lose population. This has happened to me.
As well, the bureaucracy drones can also prevent GA, which when combined with Wealth, is one of the best SE choices available. It allows fabulous economy and industry, and avoids the negative police of FM. Also, it can prevent Aki and Sven from pop booming. GA + Demo + Planned + Creche is the only way Aki and Sven can pop boom before Eudaimonia.
Here's the table counting bureaucracy drones on a standard map.
code:
Transcend
B's over 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Drones 1 4 6 8 10 12
Thinker
B's over 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Drones 1 2 4 7 9 10 11 13 16
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WhiteElephants
|
|
Toledo Ohio
Mar 2000
time: 00:14
|
|
Ned -- Hmm... your chart is quite a bit off and... and I don't know what else to say because I'm unsure as to how you got your numbers.
You only get one extra drone for every base past the limit mark. In other words, one base over six (the seventh base) you get one beuracracy drone, then a total of two extra drones (or +1 more drone) after the next base (the eigth base) is laid. The additional drones are not cummualtive. Meaning, you don't get one for the first base after six, and the two for the second base after six for a total of three. In this example you'd only have two total beuracracy drones.
Last edited by WhiteElephants on 19-06-2001 at 07:32
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Drone Problems:
Two flavors of conversation here, SP and MP. In SP, by the mid-game, no matter how many bases you have, drones should be essentially a non-issue. This is due to the fact that the AI can't seem to get it together well enough to launch a full-scale invasion, allowing you to make use of specialist terraforming techniques, creating specialists as you go and eliminating any chance for drones to crop up.
In MP games, it's a bit of a different story for two reasons. First and most important to consider is the fact that humans can and do launch cunning invasions, and snipe crawlers, and a whole host of other stuff that the AI never does.
In most cases, that will serve as it's own limiting factor for the number of bases you can build. I can't recall any MP games where I've had more than 15 or so bases running (but even then, they were pretty closely stacked together).
On bases with sudden drone problems that you're building an SP in:
Haven't had this happen in a while because when I'm building an SP at a base, I'm generally shuffling crawlers to the target base, so the SP gets built 1-2 turns after it is begun (these are non-upgraded crawlers btw). If it DID happen though, my initial response would likely be to shift crawlers around to boost nutrient production, then pull workers off to create psych specialists until I solved the drone problem that way. It'd only have to stay like that for a turn or two (until the completion of the SP....then I could put a more permanent solution in place).
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mark13
|
 |
Northampton, England
Sep 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
PH - there was me thinking you were a +2 economy junkie 
The fact is that as has been outlined above, you can't specify a single area which is most important. For me, efficiency, economy and research are all key areas, not forgetting growth - but the fact is that every settings has its use. Pop booming, +2 economy, and +4 efficiency are all crucial at various points in the game, and you simply can't outline a single area more important than the rest of them.
On the subject of ICSing, it can be a devastatingly effective strategy - though it can get messy for a while in the mid-game. Gathering nutrients to grow your bases can be impractical before Hydroponic Labs, without some serious terraforming (which again, costs resources). Though the small number of squares to work can often land you in mineral problems early on, this is offset by the sheer number of production centres you have, as outlined above.
Of course, there is also the question of territorial advantage. Quite often in MP, you will need all the territory you can get, basically to expand your sphere of influence. You need to fight in MP, and a closely packed, but efficient empire will often lose out to a less efficient empire, but with more territory. This is due to a number of factors:
- PBs (this is often a factor in MP games, and in more than one circumstance I have dropped/been on the receiving end of a PB which can change the game)
- Warmongering generally. In many circumstances, air units have very limited range, without a base in the thick of the action. It is often simply not practical both to defend, and launch an assault from, a paked empire.
Of course, in MP, it often comes down to circumstance. Forget detailed analysis of the exact production figures, forget using 15 formers to construct massive energy parks - at the end of the day it comes down to tactical & (to a lesser extent) strategic decisions, based purely on circumstance. My personal opinion is that a packed spacing simply doesn't give you the flexiblity I would like in my empire.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-06-2001 17:41
|