Psych allocation

[pblur]

I find that I almost never put any energy into psych; it just rarely seems to pay off to me. Do any of you have particular times or strategies where you routinely put some percent into psych? Or some way of thinking about it which makes it seem more useful?

[Buster's Uncle]

I always, when my early bases warrant it and thereafter, put in 40%, then the minimum to economy that'll break slightly over even, and the rest to science - surprisingly less cash-flow problems that way than you'd expect.  Planetpearls aplenty, when you have explorers everywhere.

[Iranon]

Golden ages.
They allow population booms for factions that can't get them otherwise (doesn't work in default SMAC due to a bug). Sometimes golden ages mostly pay for the psych expenditure (usually by hitting +2 economy when that's difficult/impossible otherwise)

[Buster's Uncle]

^This too.  More psych, more golden.^

[DrazharLn]

I put money into it for golden ages. I think it's worth it because golden ages are a huge boost.

[Aureustgo]

Psych is usually necessary to run Free Market economics. About 20% gets the drones in order but varies with your efficiency and buildings present. Pop booms are a waste of time unless you are fooling around, so golden ages are probably not worth the bother. Psych can also be temporarily helpful (and by this I mean, 1-2 turns) to get a city's drone issues addressed under heavy inefficiency, where any other response risks shrinking the city or losing units.

[Misanthrope]

...to get a city's drone issues addressed under heavy inefficiency, where any other response risks shrinking the city or losing units.

That's actually one of my nastiest and most effective tools... dun wanna cooperate? Fine, you starve! 
Assign psych workers (doctors, thinkers, etc.) to keep the base from rioting while the population shrinks to a more manageable size... with the 'starving' notification popping up at the end of each turn, it's easy to see when things have cooled off.


Far's Psych allocation in general, if there's TOO MANY bases that are having a problem with that or if there's a pending change to the Social Engineering model, it can help to ease the transition.  That aside, I've always been a fan of letting base facilities take care of the citizens... as a bonus, most psych-boost come with other benefits, and the Rec Commons are generally pretty negligible for cost+upkeep.
My opinion.

[Geo]

...to get a city's drone issues addressed under heavy inefficiency, where any other response risks shrinking the city or losing units.

That's actually one of my nastiest and most effective tools... dun wanna cooperate? Fine, you starve! 

That's soooo Frank Herbert-style... (the Jesus Incident, Lazarus Effect, and Ascencion Factor).

[Aureustgo]

That's actually one of my nastiest and most effective tools... dun wanna cooperate? Fine, you starve! 

I agree. But, I believe as you point out, this posture - in the wake of an explorer or conquer strategy - can hit a lot of cities. And, well, those cities can be pretty small in the first place so the starving comes at a steep price - losing pop from 2 to 1, or 3 to 2, is a large percentage decrease in production and energy creation. This is why, in my view, the HGP is so special for almost all factions, and should be prioritized (see faction Profile threads).

[Misanthrope]

...can hit a lot of cities. And, well, those cities can be pretty small in the first place so the starving comes at a steep price - losing pop from 2 to 1, or 3 to 2, is a large percentage...

Woah. =0.o= -!

Okay, at THAT Level, it's a problem.  The setting (and factions) I tend to use and the facilities I prioritize in getting bases setup and running, even WCS, I'm running into that sort of problem when populations grow OVER four, and even that's pretty rare.  Typically if I'm running a military campaign with high production and units away from their bases, it'll happen between five and six pop, but generally, my bases don't run into problems that require such a drastic solution until we're looking at populations of 7+


Should mention too, I'm all about expansion. *Insert Colony Pod emoji here*
Early in the game, if a base is over two, it's making a colony pod, or scheduled to make a pod. It's a bit of a burden since that slows things down at the critical stage of being right out the gate, but in the long run, having a mass of smaller bases REALLY helps in just about every possible way.  As they grow, your faction's power expands exponentially.  This strategy is harder with the Gaians or the Consciousness, but even then, totally possible.
Oh yeah, and it spares the need to bother with psych allocation until later on.


Geo -   Mmnnn... Possibly?  I had to look up who that was (Dune, duh) and his views.  Yeah, kind, sorta, a bit, but not entirely.  I'd have to do more research to get something more closely aligned, so for now SW:xu's Alderanian policies hampered by post- Empire authoritarianism is kinda my approach.  IDK.   Limited info because the whole subject throughout history is toxic enough to make me wanna cry.  I have such a poisoned view of government... Frank Herbert was so very right about that, IMO.

Power attracts pathological personalities.
-Yeah, him.

Those that crave power are stereotypically the LEAST fit to wield it.
-Me



But yes, for bases in SMAC(x)...

Don't make me destroy you.
-Darth Vader, Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back

NOW GET BACK TO WORK!
-Regional Manager Vader, Attack of the Phantom Past, Auralnauts