Boreholes, condensors, etc...does anyone actually use them?

Here's my "back-of-the-envelope" calculation for a 4x4 energy park. S = Solar Collector, E = Echelon Mirror. I assume that Collectors and Mirrors generate 1 Energy per tile.

Checkerboard:

E S E S
S E S E
E S E S
S E S E

produces

1 3 1 2
3 1 4 1
1 4 1 3
2 1 3 1

a total of 32.

Alternating rows:

E S E S
E S E S
E S E S
E S E S

produces

1 4 1 2
1 6 1 3
1 6 1 3
1 4 1 2

a total of 38.

I'll comment more tomorrow.
 
Hmm, can you? It seems intuitive that every mirror (ideally) boosting 4 collectors is better than each boosting 2, but maybe I'm just tired. Are you talking nonsquare shapes?

E = echelon mirror; S = solar collector

.......
...EEEEEEEEE....
...SSSSSSSS....
...EEEEEEEEE....
,,,SSSSSSSS....
...EEEEEEEEE....
........

Edit: Petek beat me to it.

Each solar collector is surrounded by 6 echelon mirrors, so it collects the energy for elevation + 6, i.e. for 0-1000, 7; for 1000-2000, 8; for 2000-3000, 9; for 3000+, 10.

Each echelon mirror collects the energy for elevation, i.e. 1, 2, 3 or 4.

Since there are equal numbers of solar collectors and echelon mirrors, this averages to 4, 5, 6 or 7 (for the infinite case).
 
Yup, you guys are right. I completely failed to realize or forgot that diagonals count for adjacency as well. It should push the expected per tile yields for a realistic energy farm up to ~6 from ~5.4, which with a quick back of the envelope should mean that it'll be very close FOP wise pre-fusion, though still dominated post. I'll work up more detailed numbers later.

edit: Okay, so a 5x5 energy farm starting with the Sunny Mesa costs 2027 credits, or 81 per tile, producing 152 energy/turn. The cost goes down to 1387 if you can surround the entire thing with bases before starting, though I can't imagine anyone would ever be able to do that. Since a 5x5 is about as big as you can plausibly afford on standard sized maps, this should make a good baseline. Since there's no point in comparing with specialists thanks to the cap, I'll only compare land vs sea.

Land costs 312 terraforming turns for raising, and 180 for the improvements, plus 750 minerals of crawlers and 2027/1387 energy. You need 38 shelf tiles to match that, needing 152 terraforming turns, 1900 minerals worth of trawlers, and a 80 mineral facility. Canceling out, land vs sea yields 340 terraforming turns + 2027/1387 energy vs. 1230 minerals.

Post fusion, trawler cost goes down to 1140, changing it to 340 terraforming turns + 2027/1387 energy vs. 470 minerals.

I did have another thought though, where you only raise a 3x3 square in the center of the 5x5 farm. The outer ring would be raised to 2000m+ without any expenditure from you either in terraforming turns or cash. Efficiency declines of course, with output falling to 136e/turn, but costs fall to 120 terraformer turns and 756/628 energy for raising land. You'd only need 34 shelf tiles to match that, so prefusion, the comparison goes to 164 terraforming turns and 756/628 energy vs 1030 minerals, clearly favoring land. Post fusion, of course that last goes down to 350 minerals. Hell, you can go even further and only raise the center of the Sunny Mesa (amazingly, this seems to work for just as well for any random tile over 1000m) for just 24 terraforming turns and 125 credits and get a 5x5 with a 3000m center, surrounded by a ring of 2000m and then with a ring of 1000m, producing 112 e/turn when fully developed, driving the prefusion comparison to 92 terraforming turns and 125 credits vs 730 minerals, with the latter going down to 170 post fusion.

This is all up to alternate interpretation of course, but my conclusion is that the main determinants would be 1) how valuable land is (deriving from map size and how close enemies spawn) , 2) just how long a can land energy farm plausibly or beneficially be fully set up barring finishing raising the tiles before Fusion, and 3) whether or not your maximal multiplier base was going to build a thermocline transducer anyway. If (2) is "not long" and (3) is "yes", sea is clearly dominant. Otherwise, it gets a lot trickier.
 
I tend to play momentum style, so I am not sure what the proper builder strategy. I think Vel suggests raising land to completely surround a patch of ocean. Then those ocean squares are protected from enemy naval forces. One advantage of the tidal harness/themocline inducer/trawler strategy is that it quickly hits its full potential with the first tidal harness and trawler, while an energy park requires more upfront investment.

If one pursues a podbooming strategy, it might be more efficient to use the extra citizens for other uses than creating specialists, e.g. working boreholes, mines and forests.
 
If one pursues a podbooming strategy, it might be more efficient to use the extra citizens for other uses than creating specialists, e.g. working boreholes, mines and forests.

Well, the thought is that if you are pod-booming, then you likely are pushing populations higher than your techlevel is intended to support, and thus you likely lack the drone control necessary to use the citizens as workers. But yes, using condensor farms to feed borehole workers is always a winning strategy.

One advantage of the tidal harness/themocline inducer/trawler strategy is that it quickly hits its full potential with the first tidal harness and trawler, while an energy park requires more upfront investment.

I was thinking about that. Certainly, breaking up the trawler strat into its discrete steps is easy, but the complex interactions of the land energy farm make them difficult to compare in the process of being constructed.

So I decided to assume an ultimate goal of a 5x5 energy park and compare it to equivalent energy trawling each step of the way.

The creation of a 5x5 can be essentially broken down into 61 discrete steps that change the park's output. That would be the creation of a collector/assigning a crawler (15 steps), creating a mirror (10 steps), assigning a crawler to each mirror (10 steps), lifting the center tile to 3000m+ which also lifts the 8 surrounding tiles to 2000m+ and the further surrounding 16 tiles to 1000+m (2 steps), lifting the 8 surrounding to 3000m+ which would also lift the 16 outer tiles to 2000m+ (8 steps), and finally finishing lifting the outer 16 tiles to 3000m+ (16 steps).

I'm not sure the order these 61 steps should be taken in to maximize yields and minimize expenditure along the way, so I just started at the closest edge and then tried for a compromise with maximizing yields and minimizing former backtracking, then made a chart comparing that to trawlers, with resources expended on the x axis, and energy/turn on the y. It might not be the most efficient path but it should be close.

I would be interested in what people suggest for the variables, and how they might change based on the specifics of the game.
 

Attachments

The second strategy allows you to increase the clean mineral limit (= the number of minerals a base can produce without incurring eco-damage) of all your bases. Here's a brief description of how to go about this:

1. In one base raise your mineral output (crawl mines, for example) to around 40. This should produce a fungal pop within a few turns. ......

3. Each pop raises the clean mineral limit in all bases by one.

Erm :eek: .....

Spoiler :


Wave bye bye to all my improvements :aargh: :cry:
 
Do you mean a former returning to a square or do you mean a terraforming improvement supplemented (e.g. solar collector replaced by echelon mirror)?

Both, or rather I assumed the latter would not pay off so did none. That might not be true, but if there are any benefits, it pretty much has to be marginal.
 
One advantage of specialists vs energy parks is the lack of energy lost to inefficiency (except for the HQ). Another is the ability to select energy or labs without loss due to running less than paradigm (+4) efficiency. I tend to prefer them for the Hive for these reasons.

One advantage of crawling energy is that you are not limited to 16 selectable specialists. If you are crawling energy to a SSC you have no worries, the more the merrier.

Forest is a very efficient terraform for either nuts or energy if you have more land than former time and have hybrid forests. It makes good sense to just forest everything and build crawlers until you've filled the available space, coming back and going over the park later to maximize your returns.
 
Back
Top Bottom