28-07-2001 04:12									#1
	Planned - Socialism has no future on Chiron? Remove this text

From ideological perspective. Planned and Thought Control are only two social choices not supported by any SMAC or SMACX factions. Aliens distant appeal into human factions operating with Planned is hardly worth mentioning.

Have you ever heard these words?

"Your society's willingness to share its prosperity equally among even
its lowliest members sets an example we should all follow, I commend you."

I haven't. But there they are.


From practical perspective. +2 Growth is a very nice bonus and +1 Industry adds to the consept of fundamental production. Giving a nice overall boost to Planned economies.

But the -2 Efficiency is rampant! Especially because most rewards Planned holds for nations with expansive strategy, both colonizing and conquering. Growth bonus is much more important for small, less developed cities which tend to be abundant in such empires. Having non-scientifical/economical perspective one has to expand to overcome the more developed and build-centered factions and in such strategy the Planned can't sustain itself because of bureaucratic inefficiency associated in such regime.


This leaves little room for practical application of Planned.

I believe Planned is only useful when rushing for Population Boom and you must really need it in order to sacrifise that much efficiency. And what are you going to do with that disordered population growing rapidly every turn?

Also, the Planned might get useful when you reach Cybernetic and get that +2 extra efficiency, it's enough efficiency to run Planned without suffering intolerable loss of energy. But when you reach Cybernetic why not to take Free Market? You get -3 Police anyway and +2 Planet compensates some of Free Market's penalty and rewards are far more considerable. And what about Green? Get a +4 Planet bonus and say no to conventional warfare.


So I'm asking you for opinion. I've tried tweaking Planned by adding +1 Mineral and/or turning -2 penalty into Economy(-1 energy per base). But this doesn't work well with Hive

...interesting note: In Civ2 Communism, closest equivalent to Planned eliminated corruption and waste all together.

	28-07-2001 05:39									#2
	Inflate your Upload Space

Yang because of his immunity to inefficiency can run Planned without consequence.

Also specialists aren't affected by efficiency, so anyone pursuing a heavy specialist strategy might find Planned useful, especially due to its industrial and growth bonuses.

	28-07-2001 13:55									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Or you could just use the growth and industry to make probe teams, and steal your tech advances. I'm playing a Domai game, and when I went to planned I was very very impressed at how easy it became to put together a large empire quickly, and grab a bunch of projects. And with enough probe teams, you never have to research again!

Indra

	29-07-2001 00:06									#4
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Actually, efficiency is important for two reasons - losses due to distance from home base and an increased b-drones. So, if you keep your empire just at the first b-warning (which increases as you increase efficiency with Demo, Knowledge or Cybernetic), Planned really has no downside. So it makes sense to run Planned as your preferred SE choice, especially in combination with Demo, to grow those bases rapidly.

If, however, you practice ICS, efficiency concerns will become paramount making it impractical to run Planned except for short periods of time.

Ned

	29-07-2001 07:19									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

More population means more production and energy, hence growth is important. What will I do with so many, inefficient people? Maintain a larger army and build more units faster when attacked. Build Energy Banks, Network Node and Secret Projects faster. Get more votes in the Council. It may be also be a pain to deal with the multiplying drones but that's why I play the PKs.

The -2 efficiency of Planned is a pain but this is offset by Democracy and Children's Creche to an overall +2. The energy loss between +4 and +2 efficiency isn't that great. Plan your social engineering and infrastructure properly and Planned is useful. Better still, this forms the population boom you mention.

	30-07-2001 02:58									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Yang because of his immunity to inefficiency can run Planned without consequence.

As one of the topic of the day between your friends is of course...SMAC. Having talked to a friend of mine, a frantic SMACer, as all of us here. He confirmed my doubts about playing Yang with Planned-PoliceState combination.

First of all Yang gets no inefficiency, nice. But what about the efficiency, it's zero, and that's really bad with big empires and even with smaller ones. And both growth and industry, PoliceState and Planned support huge empires strategy and Yang's Perimeter defenses make it even more easy. But the poor efficiency and especially the b-drones associated with such regime, not to even mention both economy and technology unfriendly -2 Economy, which makes a real difference in the beginning and when playing huge empires with relatively small cities due to poor technology and constant expansion

Summary: b-drones are Pain beyond expression and PoliceState can only do that much good, -2 Economy and inefficiency of large empire are rampant for economy/technology.


Playing in a SMACX game with AI Domai included I can agree with Black Sunrise. Domai and Planned make good friends, but harden the -2 Research penalty...probing has it's downsides, nothing to compare the upsides though

quote: ...Planned really has no downside.

The Efficiency, right? Even without b-drones limit it affects each and ever city unincluding capital

ICS....yeah , enlighten me master

quote: Democracy and Children's Creche to an overall +2. The energy loss between +4 and +2 efficiency isn't that great

After updates, Children's Creche gives you +1 Efficiency and with the voice of experience...it isn't very much, actually the effect is pathetic.


In any case, Ned and warmachine gave some hope to Planned economics, good points. Still...I feel somewhat insecured about the sustainability of Planned in comparison to Green and Free Market...

	30-07-2001 05:44									#7
	Suffering from ads?

I would think Planned is probably one of the most widely used SE choices simply because most factions require it to pop boom and it's typically easier to change to Demo/Planned than orchestrate a golden age. It's downside, - 2 efficeincy, is also easily countered by running its natural partner Demo, wheras if your running Wealth you pretty much have to live with the -2 Morale unless your willing to run Fundamentalism to reduce that to only -1 Morale (probably worth it if your building units). Another example of this would be if you were running Power you'd have to run Planned to lower your -2 industry to -1. Throw in the inherint faction modifiers and I could go on for days about the different modifications, but I'm sure you get my point-- Planned and Demo are two peas in a pod, while Planned ran alone or Demo ran alone just don't seem to be worth it.

	30-07-2001 05:55									#8
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Planned economics can also be regarded as a means to an end. The problem with large populations and high productivity is eco-damage. High growth then becomes a liability and it's necessary to go Green. I consider Planned as the means to nurture your empire during its infancy and Green as maturation. After all. Marx and Lenin understood the need for industrialisation but never knew it might have an environmental impact.

	30-07-2001 08:27									#9
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Marx and Lenin understood the need for industrialisation but never knew it might have an environmental impact.

And I'm sure they never thought mindworms would come popping in masses to kick down the socialism on Chiron Mindworms are the enemy of the people as much as the evil, greedy, unjust working man oppressive capitalist pigs

I guess I simply like to raise a question about Planned, because I'm an obsessed neurotic control freek who fears the flow of free capita and mindworm praising eco-terrorist, too much CTP2 for me

Anyway. I really appreciate the participation of one of the finest minds on forums After all this, I'm starting to think Planned might actually work for the new world....certainly didn't for the old one. Keep on posting those arguments.

	30-07-2001 12:34									#10
	Full PM-box? Change here!

EtheMind, From reading your reply, I see you really understand the central problem with 0 efficiency: b-drones. However, If you stay just below the "second" b-warning, b-drones are no real problem for Yang due to his high police rating running running Police Atate. At +2 police, he could have three police units quelling 6 drones. If he has no super-drones, which would be caused by going above the second b-warning on Transcend, Yang should be able to GA all his bases to size 12 (+1 Yang, +2 Planned, +2 Creche, +2 GA) without adding a signal rec commons, holo or research hospital! All he would have to do would be to set pysch to get 24 pysch per base. (The 24 pysch convert 6 drones to talents. The police units convert the remaining six drones to contents.) However, realistically, to get that much pysch, Yang still may have to build some psych-enhancing facilities first, such as tree farms and hybrid forests.

Since the only way Yang can pop boom is through the use of GA, Yang MUST stay below the second b-warning, or get the HGP.

Even though Green's +2 efficiency would ordinarily allow 50% more bases before the second b-warning level, Yang, I believe stays at 0 efficiency when running Police State.

Also, Green is not normally a setting Yang can stay in permanently due to its growth penalty.

From an economics point of view, the only way Yang can get to that fabled +2 econ is to GA will running FM (Eudaimonia is way too late) and Wealth. Yang would be able to GA only if he held his base number to below the second b-warning so as to avoid super-drones. Also, due to a lack of police, the practical limit for a GA pop boom is base size 8 because one has to quell 50% of drones using only facilities. It appears that the combo of a Rec. Commons, Holo, and Research Hospital quells only 4 drones when the first four are content or talents. (The Rec. Commons effect reduces from 2 to 1.)

This is why I suggested that ICS is not advisable for Yang. I take ICS to mean that one builds large numbers of bases and simply ignore b-warnings. With Yang, this can only mean no GA, which to Yang means no Pop Boom.

Ned

	30-07-2001 17:29									#11
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I can tell you that I truly understand the b-drone problem. If there's something in SMACX I really do understand it's probably this. Yang has some sufficient means to sustain control in the early game. But the -2 Economy and not so economy friendly overall strategy of Yang makes it pretty hard to support facilities, even when closing mid-game.

I haven't even dreamed of having Hive with GA's before the late game and some major concentration into build strategies. I doubt if Free Market is way to go with Yang until very late game. Hive has relatively small amounts of economic resources to pour into those expensive high tech facilities, which are also pain to research at Hive, and not any easier to steal since he gets no probe bonuses...I'd still go for tech probing. The inherent penalty makes running FreeMarket very expensive and it seems to me it's better to go guns blazing against the wealthy ones. And take by force what you can't achieve in any other means.

I could agree with you reasoning to limit the number of bases for the sake of b-drone threat, not to even mention the inefficiency.
But I find it very interesting you are suggesting more constructive overall strategy for Hive and developing sophisticated theories to state your arguments. Is it any good to try and achieve all that peacefully when playing dictatorian faction?

	30-07-2001 18:21									#12
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Agreed, Yang is "poor." His strength is in Police. I have argued before here that Yang's best early tech is Intellectual Integrity so that he can use police to quell drones rather than expensive holo's and research hospitals.

However, Tree Farms and Hybrid Forests are absolutely required of all factions for other reasons. You might want to read my post on Eco-damage formula revised to find out why.

Ned

	30-07-2001 18:36									#13
	Put an end to popups!

Even for non-Yang factions, Planned has its place in the scheme of things. On a tech beeline for IndAuto, Planned is a very early SE option. The switch won't be painful as the inefficiency will not be an issue with so few bases at that stage of the game. Early on, food surpluses are few and minerals are scarce: both growth and industry bonuses make a tremendous difference. Helps build those next CP's more quickly and get up to 8-10 bases. By that point, Demo should be available, too.

FM is also available early, but I find it hard to use pre-HGP/ VW (or at least building some rec commons), and the payoff is best after lifting of restrictions. So planned is a good "getting off the ground" SE choice for anyone.

	31-07-2001 00:57									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Not that I'm a big Yang lover, but I DO see his strength in the ICS scheme of things. I think what may or may not be over looked is that he can run Police State/Planned/Wealth for a +3 industry. Not to mention the +3 Growth! I think the real threat of Yang is that he's capable of taking these SE choices and churning out crawlers cheap to pump up his production even further. At some point he can switch out of Wealth and start building a massive army simply because he has so many base that support so many free units. Granted he's going to have to build each one as opposed to building the shell and upgrading it, but still. A +3 industry rating also shaves quite a few turns off projects, especially the early projects, provided that he can get the tech to build them.

	31-07-2001 02:29									#15
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: However, Tree Farms and Hybrid Forests are absolutely required of all factions for other reasons.

I'd say these two facilities give the most important boost for your empire, especially if you choose all Forest terraforming strategy which has its benefits. I'll look for that eco-damage thread, but I know TreeFarms+HybridForests are suppose to minimize the eco-damage.

I agree Earwicker with your opinions and with all others who brought up those same reasons. Planned is definitely at its best in the early game combined with Democracy to give you that boost in Growth. After all, these fundamental areas of production, growth and industry determine much more than you'd think. A wise leader can harness the advantages when playing Hive, or Free Drones. I've played Yang to late game and in the end the science/economy starts to kick in if you invest wisely. I succeeded to get past Consciousness at tech in the mid-game when playing Hive...well, in fact I was in war with him

Nice thing when playing Yang is that CN project is a sure thing unless you really mess things up. Actually you can almost add that +2 Land Morale into Social settings whenever you choose to play him. And as said, Yang has easier time with projects. But on the opposite, more wealthy nations can always rush build projects and have much more chance to come up with the tech sooner than poor Yang

	31-07-2001 05:12									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Planned economies, just like in real life, are excellent for small societies, and fail miserably when attempted on a huge scale.

I almost always go Planned at the beginning of the game. I can hardly notice the inefficiency at that point, and the extra expansion has implications for the far future. Planned becomes less and less viable as time goes on for two reasons:

1) The efficincy begins to hit when you start getting big. After a while you could be losing about 1/3 of your energy to inefficiency, not a good thing.

2) There is an oppurtunity cost for running Planned over Market. Once your empire is big enough to sustain a healhy economy, I recommend going Market. I usually make the switch right after building the Planetary Energy Grids. That seems to be about the right time for it.


Personally, I've never used Planned to force a pop-boom, except when playing as Aki or Sven. I find that it is more economical to simply run Democracy +Golden Age +Creches. People seem to think that diverting 20% for your energy into psych to get the Golden Age is a big deal, but it really isn't. The +1 economy bonus that Golden Ages greatly defray the costs, and if your empire is big enough, you'll actually be getting more money than when you weren't paying for psych! Compare this to the hamstringing effect Planned has on large economies, and it's just no contest, especially when you take Market into consideration.

Planned is one of those SE choices that empires eventually outgrow (I consider Wealth to be the other one, which is usually replaced by Knowledge arounf the mid game). The growth bonus can be gotten from other sources, and the industry bonus is a big deal when you're hauling in several hundered ec's a turn.

In fact, I strongly suggest that you edit your alphax.txt so that the Progenitors don't have Planned as an aggenda anymore. Otherwise, they just suck in the mid-game.

On the other hand, if you are running the all specialist approach, Planned is easily the best peacetime economy you can run.

	31-07-2001 06:03									#17
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Just a quick note and question:

Ethemind: The Ecodamage article of Ned's (and Blake's and Fitz's) is Top-Ed in the strategy section, or rather, a link to it has a home there. Its a great and straightforward article.

Question: Planned for all-specialist peacetime economy? Explain? I've not really followed the details well, but that sounds interesting...I never make it to ALL specialists, but end up with about half my bases as all-specialists...perhaps inefficient.

-Smack

	31-07-2001 08:09									#18
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Planned economies, just like in real life, are excellent for small societies, and fail miserably when attempted on a huge scale.

I think you have a point in that. But I guess it's a question of opinion to some degree. I'd say running Planned economies succesfully would require high tech and very developed command structure. Planned Economy is very complex system and if you go down and slain the upper class of society and replace it with soviets(workers from middle and lower classes) and think you can run Economics which require the complete integration of State and Economy into one superorganism...think again. That was just one of the errors of socialists.

	31-07-2001 09:07									#19
	Inflate your Upload Space

Ah goodie, we return to the topic of socialism! Well, as a native of the USA, I've no experience really with socialism on a nation-scale, though I've worked for organisations that are 'socialist' on a small scale. I have a question for ye Europeans: Do you view 'Modern Socialism' as Socialism, or something else? I've never quite understood where socialism ends and communism begins, in the modern definition. Isn't it possible to have a democratic socialist state? Would you consider that 'Planned Economics?'

When I think of some of the political parties of France or Denmark (am woefully out of touch with Europolitics though), I think 'Ah, now there is real socialism!'. Governments that tax heavily but support the populace evenly. This kind of idea is really frowned upon in the USA. I suppose it's our idea of freedom. Personally, I'd rather go the way of Denmark and have 50% income tax in exchange for very little poverty, free university, great medical care, etc.. but, I believe there are more U.S. citizens along the 'Libertarian' bent than the socialist one. They believe in totally minimizing government as much as possible. To me, that's silly. True, you get rid of buearocracy, but at the cost of community. I think it's completely naive. The only reason people can afford to consider government a waste is by their affluence, won, and provided by that government. How embarrasing.

-Smack

	31-07-2001 10:59									#20
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Smack Question: Planned for all-specialist peacetime economy? Explain? I've not really followed the details well, but that sounds interesting...I never make it to ALL specialists, but end up with about half my bases as all-specialists...perhaps inefficient. -Smack

I only have limited experience with the all specialist approach, but I find the idea intriguing. There's a thread somewhere in the archives that details the approach.

Basically, the idea is to crawl in enough nutrients so that every citizen can be either an engineer or a thinker. This has several advantages...

1) You gain significantly more lab and economy points each turn, even when taking into account the loss of commerce. I didn't beleive it at first either, but it's true.

2) Specialists are not affected by inefficiency. They always produce their full alloment of points, regardless of how far away they are from HQ.

3) Drones are a complete and total non-issue with this approach. You will not need rec commons, and you will not pay anything for psych.


The disadvantages...

1) You are extremely reliant on your crawlers. If they die, so does the base.

2) Mineral output will be weak. This can be offset by using crawlers, but see disadvantage #1

3) Setting this up is a major PIA

Anyways, you can see why Planned is the best economy with this approach. Planned gives you +2 growth and +1 Industry. Compare it to ...

Free Market. Since you have no workers, the +2 economy is almost worthless. The Planet penalty makes you vulnerable to native attacks. At least the police penalty is meaningless.

Green: The efficiency bonus is immaterail here. The Planet bonus might be useful if you are being pestered bu Dee or Cha. The growth hit makes pop-booms impossible.


I haven't tried going for the all specialist empire yet, though I'll give it a try sometime soon. I have found that the idea works well on a smaller scale. When running Market and creating my air force, I set up one all specialist base somewhere in the core of my empire and re-home all of my jets there (ugrding them with clean reactors, of course). No more pacifism, and I didn't have to use any punishment spheres!

This is also a good approach for bases that are far away from your headquarters.

	31-07-2001 17:56									#21
	Got spare money?

Smack, Socialism? In a word: Bureaucracy. The bureaucrat decides everything from whether you get a benefit to the price of tea. Just as in the game, the price of Socialism is inefficiency. However, it does permit the goverment to focus society on one common goal.

Students of whether Socialism ultimately is better for mankind ought to study the late Roman Empire. In many ways the collapse of that great empire was caused by its high cost welfare state.

Regardless, Planned in the game is an excellent SE choice for small empires. Some say that this means that Planned is not good late in the game. However, it is if you deliberately keep your empire within the b-warning limits, for example, by giving captured bases back your submissives.

Ned

	31-07-2001 21:03									#22
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Hmm, you guys go to FM much later than I do. With Morgan, (to cite an extreme example) I go to FM as soon as I have the tech and maybe a couple of rec commons. Of course, he can't run Planned. In theory I'd do the same with Lal, but I haven't tested that yet. I don't wait for restriction-lifting with any market-capable faction, since the biggest percentage advantage is in the very early game when you are using unterraformed land (1 energy instead of 0 is a very large % improvement ), and when you are using forests (2 energy instead of 1 for 100%). If you're already getting 2 or 3 energy from the average square an additional 1 matters much less.

I've come to see Planned as serving three or four purposes:
- a very short preliminary state to FM.
- an economic SE for factions that can't run FM. These factions (Gaians, Hive, Cult) have advantages that compensate for their inability to run Market.
- a wartime SE, not just to prevent drones from absent military units, but also to allow police units in recently conquered bases. In this case, not being able to run FM is one of the costs of the war.
- I can see how Planned would be good for a pure-specialist colony, but I've never done this myself.

I don't like the way FM is so much better than Planned in peacetime. Combined with the advantages of Democracy for builders, this means that Democracy/FM is clearly (IMHO ) the best peacetime SE choice for 10 of the factions through most of the game, which is, IMHO, boring. So one of my goals in my variants is to balance this a bit. Easier said than done.

Edit: incomplete sentence finished

	01-08-2001 04:42									#23
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Tokamak:

quote: Anyways, you can see why Planned is the best economy with this approach. Planned gives you +2 growth and +1 Industry. Compare it to ... Free Market. Since you have no workers, the +2 economy is almost worthless. The Planet penalty makes you vulnerable to native attacks. At least the police penalty is meaningless. Green: The efficiency bonus is immaterail here. The Planet bonus might be useful if you are being pestered bu Dee or Cha. The growth hit makes pop-booms impossible.

Thanks Tokamak, I do remember that it's pretty painful to be running FM and then put a crawler on that nice forest just b/c you need an all-specialist base. The loss of energy using crawlers (as you at least need some for food and mins) under FM is a major pain. It's in that 50/50, all-specialist bases/non-specialist bases where this becomes debatable, as well as the Green option. I'm seeing now that it's probably best to go with one or two specialst bases under FM or Green or whatnot, or go all the way and run Planned with (probably fewer) all-specialist bases. As it's fairly enjoyable to run a smaller empire anyways, I'm going to try this in my next game (or maybe my current PBEM).

Ned:

quote: Students of whether Socialism ultimately is better for mankind ought to study the late Roman Empire. In many ways the collapse of that great empire was caused by its high cost welfare state.

Yeah, they were actually too liberal a state (esp. in religion) to survive, but I'd have to say it was Diocletian and later, Constantine who really started the fall by moving the capital/instituting more than one caesar/instituting more than one capital. Socialism is probably one ideal I'll hold onto, practical or not.

Basil, I play Morgan the same way, but with the others, FM isn't as early for me, for one reason or another.

-Smack

	01-08-2001 07:46									#24
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Do you view 'Modern Socialism' as Socialism, or something else? I've never quite understood where socialism ends and communism begins, in the modern definition. Isn't it possible to have a democratic socialist state? Would you consider that 'Planned Economics?'

Socialism sunk bad after USSR was dissolved. But it's actually rising up quite impressively which is just very understandable. In very different form though. "Modern" Socialists absolutely condemn Soviet Party Dictatorship. They have more intrest towards Democracy or even Anarchy. Who do you think those protesters outside G7 conventions are? Socialists and Environmentalists.

During the last decades of USSR. The party elite got completely separated from the people, who were suppose to run the society at the first place. They lived in luxury and ignorance just as like the western upper class. It was very interesting scheme, as, in socialism you're suppose to have very society integrated equal goverment. For example there were different shops and apartments for people, the army, and for the party in USSR. And guess which of them sold some cheap imported vegetables and which of them had fashion by Giorgio Armani. Soviet Union was one of the most strict class societies in the history, and that's not how it was suppose to go.

In a classical sense Communism is the final stage of development in the history of societies. Classes seize to exist, and so does the goverment/police institution the purpose of which was to support the upper class. Socialism is the phase before the Communism.

quote: I think 'Ah, now there is real socialism!'. Governments that tax heavily but support the populace evenly.

Well, at least, they tax heavily, I can tell you that As a citizen of former semi-market economy. NOTE:Finland was not, I repeat NOT, the part of Socialist Block. We simply integrated these economies and happened to achieve the place among the top welfare nations within a few decades...hups!
But, rest assured, we are going for full Free Market these days. Power to the rich, down with the poor people. Must be their fault right? Anyway, several welfare nations of Europe have problems sustaining that system because of unemployment, as one of the reasons. In Finland the lower class is bigger than in decades, and upper class is getting richer than ever

quote: I've come to see Planned as serving three or four purposes: - a very short preliminary state to FM...

Marx would turn over in his grave


And yes, the game itself?

Keep debating while were talking of history, politics and definition.

	01-08-2001 08:07									#25
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Sounds to me like at least ye Finns think of Socialism as a sort of proto-communism. I always thought of them as pretty separate, but I think I've been incorrect in my use of the word. When you say 'members of the Socialist Block' I would have said 'Communist Block' to distinguish between a sort of mass-community-totalitarian-egalitarian government system with no tolerances really, for other systems, and modern socialism, which I suppose would have Engles turning in his grave too. Welfare states...ugh. But I suppose it's the condition of the people to take advantage of a socialist state. Thanks for the clarification Ethemind.

-Smack

	01-08-2001 08:12									#26
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Basil I don't like the way FM is so much better than Planned in peacetime. Combined with the advantages of Democracy for builders, this means that Democracy/FM is clearly (IMHO ) the best peacetime SE choice for 10 of the factions through most of the game, which is, IMHO, boring. So one of my goals in my variants is to balance this a bit. Easier said than done.

Yes, I know what you mean. But the thing about FM is that it is insidiously addictive. If you don't switch out into Planned for periods, you'll be mashed in MP or an SP compare game by someone who does. FM produces amazing amounts of energy, but little growth - running Planned for just around dozen turns can double the size of all your bases, radically changing the picture when you switch back into FM.

Alternatively, once the infrastructure and pop are in, you'll get mashed by someone running Demo/Green/Knowledge because with that kind of efficiency you can run a serious research setting to grab the Ascent ...

I'm not sure it's quite that straightforward?

	01-08-2001 12:54									#27
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Misotu Yes, I know what you mean. But the thing about FM is that it is insidiously addictive. If you don't switch out into Planned for periods, you'll be mashed in MP or an SP compare game by someone who does. FM produces amazing amounts of energy, but little growth - running Planned for just around dozen turns can double the size of all your bases, radically changing the picture when you switch back into FM.

I thought you could get that growth through a FM Golden Age? Or is that not good enough, in MP? (I know it's good enough in SP, but of course that doesn't mean anything. Though if it's not, Morgan's up the creek as a MP choice... which wouldn't surprise me.)

quote: Originally posted by Misotu Alternatively, once the infrastructure and pop are in, you'll get mashed by someone running Demo/Green/Knowledge because with that kind of efficiency you can run a serious research setting to grab the Ascent ...

Ah... I think I see what you mean... there comes a point where you've built everything you'll need, so you just run for research with minimal money? It's interesting to see that the game can develop that way - all the games I've been in have been decided before that point .

	01-08-2001 18:21									#28
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: I thought you could get that growth through a FM Golden Age? Or is that not good enough, in MP?

Well, you know how the game goes. I've found that sometimes GA growth is fine, sometimes not. It depends on the combination of circumstances - PKs with two (preferably more) good pacts, mostly coastal bases and good energy focus should be able to do it if the map is smallish so numbers of bases are limited, giving fewer, well-developed bases which can reach GA more easily.

Like you, I often go into FM very early - pretty much as soon as I have the tech and the 40 credits for the switch. I'm playing one game at the moment where I'm paying the price for taking the FM approach Lovely results early on, but now I'm waaay behind on pop, tech, you name it ...

You're right, Morgan is a tough MP choice unless you can team up.

quote: Ah... I think I see what you mean... there comes a point where you've built everything you'll need, so you just run for research with minimal money? It's interesting to see that the game can develop that way - all the games I've been in have been decided before that point .

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant - I'm thinking 10-0-90 or even 0-0-100. This is where Green really makes sense! I've seen this (and used it myself) many times in MP - and not so late in the game, either. The games I'm thinking of were over by 2175-2200. I've mostly seen it on the tourny map, which is four islands and tends to encourage more of a builder approach since the rover rush is hard to do. Alternatively, I've also used it for short bursts just to hit that one key tech I desperately need - maybe Fusion, or (ahem) the tech for orbital defence pods

I'm not really disagreeing with you - especially not for SP where you can obviously get away with a lot more and it's tempting to just sit back in FM and watch the cash roll in - but I have found in MP that I switch SE settings quite a lot.

	01-08-2001 19:43									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Now here's an interesting setting for Planned. Demo, Planned, Power, Eudaimonia. Demo cancels Planned's inefficiency. Power cancels Eudaimonia's negative morale. You get +2 econ and +3 industry, +5 with Domai. A really powerful combination. Ned

	02-08-2001 01:28									#30
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Sounds to me like at least ye Finns think of Socialism as a sort of proto-communism. I always thought of them as pretty separate

In a classic theories of Marx, Engels and Lenin. The socialism was a phase before the final stage, the Communism. But when talking of politics. Communism and Socialism are often too distinct consepts.

quote: But the thing about FM is that it is insidiously addictive.

It is. Just look at that Science/Economy boost and your soul is lost to the wealth forever. It brings some serious drawbacks, which is a good thing. But they can be overcome. When I started playing SMAC, I never used FM, or even thought of that. But now, it's one of my most usual SE choices.
The idea of playing Planned and FM after one another in order to periodically boost Growth is interesting strategy. There's no character behind that one though, I mean, Ideology.

quote: Lovely results early on, but now I'm waaay behind on pop, tech, you name it ...

I've experienced the exactly same phenomenon with FM, and very often. Sure I'm wealthy and my Economy and Science are boosting, but it isn't enough. I've had games in Trancendi where I've got every single project. My selections always were Democracy/Green/Knowledge/usually Eudaimonic. And everything went so damn well! But I always have some problems with FM, it gives you great overall wealth but I feel that it isn't in any way superior system to Green. In fact, when I used to play Planned, I got just as many(or more) projects when I'm playing with FM. I don't think the choice is very self evident at all taking the native warfare and industry/growth in consideration.

Nice Ned. Works only with small empires though, but within them...a good overall strategy, I'm sure.