contact
September 15, 2019, 02:21:39 PM

Author Topic: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?  (Read 1688 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bizmuth Helm

  • Member
  • Posts: 235
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #15 on: April 26, 2011, 04:00:30 AM »
Ahh, the power supply debate. This one goes back and forth as people try to justify their own personal choice of generation.
A "cold" planet(or more accurately a "distant planet", typically anything beyond slot 10) usually provides feeble ssat energy output, making them a less than desireable energy source, due primarily to their vulnerability to attack which is agrivated by their "ship" status and therefore DSP value(Which is reason enough for 30%+ of the population to target them) coupled with the large numbers of them necessary to be of any value energywise.

That being said even the lowest powered sats produce far more bang for the buck once your other energy sources get beyond level 16 or so, due to the fact that they dont have an escalating price structure. your first sat costs the same as your 1000000th sat not so with SA's and Npp's

Here is a rule to live by if you intend to build lots of sats. Enjoy them while you can because its not a matter of if, but when they will be destroyed, and you can generally replace three or four sets of them for the price of your next SA upgrade, Just take my word for it, dont bother rebuilding them the same day they get wiped, or the next for that matter. Best to wait a few days then rebuild.

Solar Arrays are the best power source lots of money can buy. They are secure and they dont deplete any resource production. There isnt much more you can say about them except that unless you are building just as many Npp levels as SA levels, it generally only takes two more SA levels to out produce everything all your NPP levels are producing albeit at 10 times(or more) the cost. An aspect to consider when field spots are in short supply.

With high enough Energy tech levels researched, NPP,s actually outperform SA's for power vs cost With this caveat, you will need one extra level of Hydro. synth. to feed it.

It all boils down to this, you have to do the math for yourself. You have to decide what you are comfortable with. I will tell you this however, you will never have a problem with running out of fields on a 290 field planet. build as much of everything as you desire. Build 30+ levels of SA and 18 or 20 levels or Npp. It wont matter. Build 15 levels of shipyards and 6 levels of foundry Build 12 levels of capital and 12 levels of research lab. Build 7 or 8 levels of missle silo and if someone hits your sats Nuke the crap out of them. Just dont build more warehouses than you can fill in a day or you will be asking to be attacked. Build Hercs and get that stuff of world and keep it off.

If you are reading this you should take a break and rest your eyes now.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline INAPPROPRIATE

  • Member
  • Posts: 440
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #16 on: April 26, 2011, 04:22:44 PM »
Okay the Hydrogen production on the planet is currently this 284 an hour for level 8 with no miners in the hydrogen mine. If I up grade it to level 9 I'll get an additional 67 an hour consuming 82 energy an hour. Satellites only produce 7 energy an hour(no I haven't bought any it seems to be a waste of resources for such little power). From my experience with colonies finding planets with 290+ fields is very difficult. As for the planets temperature its -92 C to -52 C.

No I do not have a geologist at the moment I'm kind of hesitant to invest money into a game I've done it in the past and the game turns out to be a money pit. But that was with another company so I might spend a few bucks in the future. I am a noob still and the mines are in the 20's (aside from hydrogen). I've got decent defenses built on the planet.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline the enforcer

  • Member
  • Posts: 2782
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #17 on: April 26, 2011, 09:30:52 PM »
Quote from: "INAPPROPRIATE"
Okay the Hydrogen production on the planet is currently this 284 an hour for level 8 with no miners in the hydrogen mine. If I up grade it to level 9 I'll get an additional 67 an hour consuming 82 energy an hour. Satellites only produce 7 energy an hour(no I haven't bought any it seems to be a waste of resources for such little power). From my experience with colonies finding planets with 290+ fields is very difficult. As for the planets temperature its -92 C to -52 C.

No I do not have a geologist at the moment I'm kind of hesitant to invest money into a game I've done it in the past and the game turns out to be a money pit. But that was with another company so I might spend a few bucks in the future. I am a noob still and the mines are in the 20's (aside from hydrogen). I've got decent defenses built on the planet.

i would say to invest in ore+2-3 levels over crystal and sa until lvl 20's and then turn to hydro.  8-)
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline SGS 6

  • Member
  • Posts: 1476
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #18 on: April 27, 2011, 01:21:17 AM »
Just to toss out some numbers:
(using uni 2 mine values by the way)
----------------
All planets have level 24 hydro with maxed out droids.

Warm planet (35 max temp)
Hydrogen/hr produced 9545
Energy Usage 4728
Power source - NPP 15 at energy tech 14, currently operating at 80%
Energy produced 4892
Hydro consumed 502

Net hydrogen: 9043/hr

Cold planet (-53 max temp)
Hydrogen/hr produced 10933
Energy Usage 4728
Power source - NPP 15 at energy tech 14, currently operating at 80%
Energy produced 4892
Hydro consumed 502

Net hydrogen: 10431/hr

So all else being equal.. the "cold planet" bonus equals only a fraction of the cost of operation of the nuclear plant.
Obviously you have to account for the construction costs, but keep this in mind:
You don't need massive defenses to protect the nuclear plant.
You never need to replace the nuclear plant.
Energy tech upgrades affect ALL of your planets (increase nuclear energy output by ~10-15% per level, hydro consumption is unchanged), so the investment in research is only partially spent on each planet.

Based on that - and trying to keep my construction costs for power as low as possible - I have been using nuclear to power my hydro plants. I discovered (probably nowhere near first) that in terms of energy, Solar = Ore + Crystal of the same level. So my planets are set up that way. I have enough solar to power the ore and crystal, and run the hydro off the nuclear. And all but two of my planets are in slots 13-15....
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »
Uni 1: retired, formerly Silver Gate Squadron
Uni 2: Sheridan Starkiller, Leader of the Shadows (Shadows)
http://http://wiki.playstarfleet.com/index.php/Shadows_(Shadows)

Offline Aaria.moon

  • Member
  • Posts: 2463
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #19 on: April 27, 2011, 03:11:36 AM »
You can still build massive defenses if you use all sats though. Even half the cost of the solar array and nuclear plants can get you a good defense.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »
HONEYBEE MALES: DURING COPULATION THEIR BODY EXPLODES APART LIKE GRENADE; GENITALIA HAS HOOKS AND SPINES AND IT WEDGES INTO FEMALE AND SEALS HER OPENING.

Offline INAPPROPRIATE

  • Member
  • Posts: 440
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #20 on: April 27, 2011, 03:19:27 AM »
Yeah I'm going to keep it for the reasons above. Satellites are great until you start to get attacked them you've got replace them and the cost of taking that short cut really can start to build.

Satellites seem to be good investments short term and when you're not getting attacked but when you are getting attacked you're throwing resources down the drain. Thanks for the advice.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline yrx

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #21 on: May 17, 2011, 03:44:46 AM »
YOU KEEP THAT PLANET!

Warm planets are "better" if you need a lot of ore or crystal fast.  You can power them by Helios pretty well... but the Helios cannot be protected.

Cold planets are crappy for solar satelites.  However, the solar array on the planet works the same, as does the nuclear power plant.  PLUS: Hydrogen synthesizers put out more hydro per level on cold planets.  On the coldest planet, helios satellites still work... BUT they only put out about 1/10 what they would on the hottest planet.  That means you'll want to invest more in power sources on the ground for a while.

Cold planets are ideal if you are planning to turtle, or to use a lot of ships.  Also, never forget, the Nuclear Power Plant is the only power source that you can improve with energy tech.  Around Energy Tech level twelve, (If you for some reason desire to research that...) the nuclear power plant begins to outperform even the solar array.  At the really high levels, that makes NPP the power source of choice.  You'll get more power per field, and on a cold planet, the hydro output will make up for the hydro you spend to keep it running.  Think of all the mines you can fit on it too!
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline Victor Doom

  • Member
  • Posts: 1710
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #22 on: May 17, 2011, 03:52:23 AM »
:twisted: That's a keeper planet and usually one that I like to look for... A cold/High Field planet... You won't start seeing a big difference in hydro production until your synthesisor gets level 21+... the wiki has a chart to explain temp/level variants....

 The Method I like to use when building up a planet for awhile is stick to pure solar arrays and nukes... it's going to take time to build up good mine levels and a good defensive matrix... once the planet matures and has a good defensive matrix launch some helios and bring the % setting down on the nuke plant... leave the nuke plant in place in case you get crashed for whatever reason...

 You have a good planet there and I would consider that a keeper..
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »
"Meeting me might have been the most devastating and traumatic focal point of your entire life... For me... It was Tuesday..."

Offline vanvely

  • Member
  • Posts: 443
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #23 on: May 28, 2011, 07:31:26 AM »
A cold high-fielder is also my ideal choice. In a lot of Helio-vs-NPP debates, you see someone putting forth a scenario. For example: to power this particular setup, you need X number of Helios with level Y solar array and level Z NPP...etc.

That particular scenario might sound pretty good for the Helios, but what about your next level of upgrades? While X amount of Helios might be reasonably low-risk, and reasonable to replace if destroyed, what about the next level of mines?

With every mine upgrade, you need to increase the size of your defense, and should you be attacked, you are faced with an increased cost to rebuild not only the sats, but also 30% of that ever-expanding defense. That 30% rebuild will cost more and more.

So although the upfront cost/energy for Helios remains constant, this ratio actually does increase. The more you have, the more you have to lose. Think of it as a SA where the cost/energy remains constant, but every time you are crashed, your SA resets to level 0 and you have to start over...and every time you level up, people are more likely to attack you.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »

Offline Bizmuth Helm

  • Member
  • Posts: 235
    • View Profile
Re: A cold planet with a lot of feilds?
« Reply #24 on: May 28, 2011, 08:27:48 AM »
I have been working with power vs fields issues in several unis, and yes the first best solution is get a good field planet first. After that I have found that whether you build SAs or Npps, when they get to the point where they are producing significant amounts of power, the next level is quite expensive. I have noticed this however if I build a nuke level for every two array levels they both seem to offer about the same increase in power for roughly the same amount of res.(well ore and crystal any way) That is around 29 sa and 16npp both provide similar increases in power production for the same price. So you can get say 1125more power for 6.4m ore and 2.6M crystal from your sa, then get another 1317 from your nuke for another  6.0m ore and 2.4M crystal (and dont forget 1.2M hydro. The hydro expense is always a factor to consider), rather than simply buying another level of sa and getting 1269 more power, but paying 9.5M ore and 3.8M crystal. This way you can just switch back and forth and you get two or three similar increases for similar prices, rather than taking that big resource hit on each and every power increase you buy, when you only use a single power supply type. Back to the hydro side of it energy tech levels increase efficiency the power output stays the same it just takes less hydro with each level of energy tech. keep in mind a single hydro level will generally increase production more than all the hydro your npps use at 100% so there is an easy out to the hydro aspect, and when you have a surplus of ore you can start dialing back the npp and enjoy the added output of that extra hydro level.

I am sure someone will have issue with some aspects of this and thats ok its all just food for thought.
« Last Edit: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM by Guest »