 |
Candidates listed alphabetically:
This poll is closed. |
| Cedayon |
   |
10 |
66.67% |
| Voltaire |
   |
4 |
26.67% |
| Write-in |
   |
0 |
0% |
| Abstain/Xenobanana! |
   |
1 |
6.67% |
| Total: |
15 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
Cedayon
|
|
Since our Holy Emperor TKG ( ) can't run for DIA this term, I'm offering to take care of the office 
I'll keep this short: In addition to the normal duties of determining placement and naming of bases (there may not be many new ones at this point, though) and rubberstamping approving/rejecting rush requests and all that, I'll compile data on all our crawlers, formers, and crawlable squares to (hopefully) bring more coordination to our terraforming and resource collection efforts. This will be important when we get a mag tube network going, since crawlers and formers will have fairly easy (<= 1 turn) access to almost all of our land territory.
I'm sure Voltaire can do the job just fine too, so it's more a matter of how active he and I will be. Of course, you all are who decide what's important, so please ask any questions you may have 
edit- I should add that I'm not normally able to attend turnchats because my University is... nah, I'll be nice... in any case, I can't usually be on IRC. For the particular month of March, I expect to be IRC-available (ie at home) for the Saturdays of the 8th, the 15th, and the 29th, which is 3 out of the 4 or 5 total turnchats for the term.
Last edited by Cedayon on 26-02-2003 at 21:37
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Cedayon
|
|
Well, it seems we don't agree as much as I thought. I'm more of the opinion that ec's, beyond a certain reserve, exist to be spent for the betterment of the Faction.
You're on to something when you say there may be "better uses" for the money, but there's only so much one can pour into psych before the returns are less than one would get by investing ecs into the rushing psych buildings ("psych buildings" meaning rec commons, tree farms, etc, and network nodes since we have the VW). Diverting econ spending to labs is probably more worthwhile, but ultimately we need to back up our technological advancement with production and rush-funding to keep our infrastructure up to speed with our new techs.
On another note:
quote: We should save our money for when it really matters, not waste it on every little thing because a governor feels that he/she cannot wait a few turns more for something. | I agree that money should never be "wasted", but we generally take care to avoid actually spending money more money than would generate minerals (ie never allow more than 10 min overrun), so in theory there's no actual "waste", per se.
As for "every little thing", well, we aren't rushing *everything*, particularly in the high-production bases, and typically restrict ourselves to the relatively-inexpensive facility rushes (well, except for TKG ).
Then there's "a governor feels that he/she cannot wait a few turns more for something."... hmm, I agree that some moderation is in order here, but I think you're missing the point of at least some of these rushes... for example, how long should the people in Cyclops and Twin Peaks have to wait for network nodes? They don't have excessive mineral production (partly due to no boreholes and a lack of all-that-many crawlers), and they've got a lot of stuff to get to. Rushing cash gets them along and speeds up infrastructure (and general) growth by a great deal.
To go back to the beginning of the quote, "We should save our money for when it really matters", I ask: how much? and what for? ... I definately agree we need a fairly large reserve of ecs to deal with emergencies (flash-upgrades and rushes, etc) and to be ready for large overhauls of our units (ie when we get clean reactors)... but what do we do with the rest? Sit on it, slowing the growth of bases that can't do much production on their own (I'm thinking sea bases and new/low min land bases here)? We don't gain interest on the stuff, you know, and there's always an "Energy Crash" event around the corner... (edit- I forgot to mention the rushing of SP's to avoid losing the race with another faction... in this case I say that we're pulling away enough tech-wise that a serious race is less and less likely, and that we have the production and crawlers to instabuild SP's with very little if any rushing cash)
In any event, I do plan to (if elected) do some careful analysis on our energy production and rushing habits, as well as poll what kind of reserve we should maintain and what kind of rushes to allow as a general policy.
Anyway, I've gone on long enough, thanks for providing an issue to discuss 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Voltaire
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Aug 2001 time: 22:26
|
|
quote: You're on to something when you say there may be "better uses" for the money, but there's only so much one can pour into psych before the returns are less than one would get by investing ecs into the rushing psych buildings ("psych buildings" meaning rec commons, tree farms, etc, and network nodes since we have the VW). Diverting econ spending to labs is probably more worthwhile, but ultimately we need to back up our technological advancement with production and rush-funding to keep our infrastructure up to speed with our new techs. |
To clarify I was simply using the increase in psych as an example for what could be done with the funds rather than rushing facilities. Another alternative I would propose and possibly approve given further consideration would be an overhaul of the military by upgrading our defensive units, using our funds for that would free up governors to concentrate on developing the infrastructure of the region rather than spending time continuously building newer military units.
quote: I agree that money should never be "wasted", but we generally take care to avoid actually spending money more money than would generate minerals (ie never allow more than 10 min overrun), so in theory there's no actual "waste", per se. |
Waste was perhaps too strong a word, rather I believe more funding should be diverted towards for example completing facilities from scratch versus hurrying the completion of a facility due to be constructed in 2 to 3 turns. This could be better justified given that in the case of the hurrying completion of a facility due to construction there is no justifiable reason why a governor cannot wait one or two turns for the facility to be completed (unless we are dealing with some special circumstance here such as a drone riot, mind worm attack, etc.).
quote: As for "every little thing", well, we aren't rushing *everything*, particularly in the high-production bases, and typically restrict ourselves to the relatively-inexpensive facility rushes (well, except for TKG). |
I would question the necessity of the relatively inexpensive facility rushes, as stated I believe that they are unjustified in the industrially developed bases, as for the less developed bases than in order to speed up the production of the infrastructure of the base in question such a rush could have a purpose.
quote: Then there's "a governor feels that he/she cannot wait a few turns more for something."... hmm, I agree that some moderation is in order here, but I think you're missing the point of at least some of these rushes... for example, how long should the people in Cyclops and Twin Peaks have to wait for network nodes? They don't have excessive mineral production (partly due to no boreholes and a lack of all-that-many crawlers), and they've got a lot of stuff to get to. Rushing cash gets them along and speeds up infrastructure (and general) growth by a great deal. |
Sorry I clarified my position on the rushes for industrially undeveloped bases. Though as stated I am opposed to the rushes of facilities in industrially stronger bases which can afford to wait a few turns.
quote: To go back to the beginning of the quote, "We should save our money for when it really matters", I ask: how much? and what for? ... I definately agree we need a fairly large reserve of ecs to deal with emergencies (flash-upgrades and rushes, etc) and to be ready for large overhauls of our units (ie when we get clean reactors)... but what do we do with the rest? Sit on it, slowing the growth of bases that can't do much production on their own (I'm thinking sea bases and new/low min land bases here)? We don't gain interest on the stuff, you know, and there's always an "Energy Crash" event around the corner... (edit- I forgot to mention the rushing of SP's to avoid losing the race with another faction... in this case I say that we're pulling away enough tech-wise that a serious race is less and less likely, and that we have the production and crawlers to instabuild SP's with very little if any rushing cash) |
How much you ask, I would feel comfortable with our reserves being somewhere in the 10,000-15,000 energy credits. This would leave sufficient funds for more rush requests, and our reserves would still be large enough to at any moment be used for emergencies (as you’ve aforementioned). I should state that I’m not saying that I will not approve all rush request, rather that I think TKG’s administration was too lax in its policies of approving all rush requests (and furthermore ordering general rush requests for the Twin Sea region when I myself did not request any rushes). Of course we should use our reserves to develop the industrially weak bases, but I say we can afford to spend less on rushes for the developed bases and thought this increase our energy reserves to substantial levels. (OCC, we can even consider victory by conquering the energy markets if we keep our budget balanced and allow for some savings).
quote: In any event, I do plan to (if elected) do some careful analysis on our energy production and rushing habits, as well as poll what kind of reserve we should maintain and what kind of rushes to allow as a general policy. |
I agree fully with my fellow candidate in this regards, the past administration has too often taken it upon themselves to dictate policy without consultation from the people. I believe we can expect considerably more polls in the upcoming future no matter who is elected.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Maniac
|
 |
Gent, Belgium
Jul 1999 time: 06:26
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Voltaire
Sorry I clarified my position on the rushes for industrially undeveloped bases. Though as stated I am opposed to the rushes of facilities in industrially stronger bases which can afford to wait a few turns. |
That would be punishing the good governors and rewarding the bad. I believe we should heavily fund newly found regions, Solaris in other words, but after a certain period they should be self-sufficient; and their "allowance" should be proportional to the 'economy', 'labs' and minerals they contribute to our faction. This will make the strong bases stronger and the weak, when comparing, weaker, but I think it makes sense, both gametechnically and RL, to create several super-prosperous bases, the economic and innovative engines of our faction, instead of all similar but mediocre bases.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26. Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|