Supply crawlers, need some opinions

[Yitzi]

Well I don't think 6/0.5/0 is any worse than 0/6/6 that Boreholes give.

Once you add in engineers and crawlers, 6/0/0 crawled is probably more of a problem than 0/6/6 (which can't be crawled).

You can down condensors to 5/0.5/0 but then that makes raised solar even weaker against Forest/Borehole or all Forest strategy.

Not by that much, as raised solar doesn't use that many condensers.

Not saying that 5/0.5/0 Condensors are bad - if you keep sats and specialists as-is that's ok.  But raised solar isn't superior in the mid-game.  Only late-game does it become superior because of the extra nutrients.

It has a nutrient advantage throughout the game, except for after hybrid forest and before enrichers (which, depending on the tech path you take, may be very little time or even nothing, and pre-enrichers condensers wouldn't be nerfed anyway.)  The nutrient advantage doesn't translate to as much before transcendi, but engineers are pretty good too.  Though moving planetary economics somewhat later (say, requiring environmental economics and PSA, with environmental economics requiring adaptive economics and ecological engineering) would be a good idea in order to make it far less likely to get hybrid forest long before enrichers.

I'd take 56M/56E of Forest/Borehole over 12M/75E with raised solar.

That's 4 boreholes to get 56/56 in 20 squares, meaning it's 12 nutrients lower.  So it's actually 48/56/56 against at least 60/12/75 (+1 per condenser, I'm not sure how many condensers you're assuming).  And that's with hybrid forest and no enrichers; if enrichers come at around the same time as hybrid forest, you're looking at +20 to nutrients for the raised solar part.

The other problem with raised solar is that the former time is orders of magnitude higher.

True, which is why it needs to be substantially stronger.  Which I think it is, pre-hybrid forest or post-enrichers (which implies engineers).

Also if echelons doubled, this would put 3k solars up to 8E.  At 8E, it would be a more difficult decision whether to crawl nutrients or energy.

It would not, however, help as much with making "work the square" a superior option to either.

It would also make raised solar plateaus something worth making.  Right now it's a lot less former time to drill an off-base borehole and crawl that.

I don't think crawlable solar plateaus need to be something worth making...

[Nexii]

It's not just due to Hybrid Forest or Enrichers that raised farm/solar isn't viable until very late game.  It's because you're population limited until Hab Domes, so all those nutrients that theoretically make farm/solar look better than forest/borehole go to waste.  It only takes 28N to feed 14 population (or 40N for 20, with hab limits modded).  So you have plenty of nutrients anyways even without even considering satellites.  Assuming a pop cap of 20 regardless, you're losing 40M to gain 20E, which isn't a good tradeoff rate.  40M is powerful even midgame since you can invest that in formers/crawlers to get more energy.  At worst you can stockpile energy and run more labs.  I estimate that raised solar needs at least 2E more per square to be competitive with Hybrid/Borehole strategy.

Now you could put Hybrid later, which would make it so the Forest strategy gets ~15 less N/E.  The N is less concerning as you can get satellites or even crawl a condensor.  I think even then Condensor/Borehole/Forest wins out pretty easily. Pretty much solar just doesn't compare with Boreholes for energy production.  It needs to make a lot more.  The other issue with Hybrid later game is that it makes ecodamage very difficult to control.  Raised solar pollutes a lot also without Hybrid Forest available, and arguably suffers more since the former time is higher.  Although I've seen in rush runs that Hybrid is often skipped anyways due to the high mineral cost.

Far as crawling to get engineers/specialists.  I believe these are only worth it when limited by space and in SSCs, but I may be wrong.  5E versus 3E/3M, it would seem that specialists aren't quite as strong as workers unless in a SSC.  The thing is that you don't save any former time with specialists as the condensor has to go elsewhere, plus you're paying 30M per crawler (~10 per specialist).  Working a Condensor is slightly better than crawling it also (1/2M,1E if at +2 ECON).

Why shouldn't crawlable solar plateaus be worthwhile?  Not sure I understand the reason, you could say the same for mines or any other improvement.  Everything should be viable in given situations, this leads to more strategies.  It's hard to argue that solar plateaus weren't intended

[Yitzi]

It's not just due to Hybrid Forest or Enrichers that raised farm/solar isn't viable until very late game.  It's because you're population limited until Hab Domes, so all those nutrients that theoretically make farm/solar look better than forest/borehole go to waste.

If you're not pop booming, they let you grow substantially faster.  (If you are pop booming, they go to waste, but pop booming should be fairly difficult and cost enough to not always be worth it.  Maybe I should add the ability to change the threshold at which pop boom occurs; making it require +9 GROWTH and boosting Eudaimonic to +3 could make it a late-game ability only.)

40M is powerful even midgame since you can invest that in formers/crawlers to get more energy.

Well, assuming crawlers aren't nerfed.

Now you could put Hybrid later, which would make it so the Forest strategy gets ~15 less N/E.  The N is less concerning as you can get satellites or even crawl a condensor.

Of course, if crawlers are limited and satellites easier to knock down than put up...

Pretty much solar just doesn't compare with Boreholes for energy production.  It needs to make a lot more.

With a few mirrors (ecodamage-heavy, but less than boreholes) and raise land, it can be fairly comparable.  But the real feature is going to be that it can be combined with nutrient production; I'm fairly certain the reason you're finding it underpowered is that you're pop booming all the time so nutrients don't matter as long as you have a +2 surplus.

I do, though, plan to (when I do resources) add in the ability to add a flat bonus to solar.

The other issue with Hybrid later game is that it makes ecodamage very difficult to control.  Raised solar pollutes a lot also without Hybrid Forest available

Not that badly; assuming a tree farm and centauri preserve it takes 4 worked solars to produce the equivalent of 1 mineral in ecodamage (worked mirrors are 3.5 times as much, but that's still a bit less than 1 mineral.)

Far as crawling to get engineers/specialists.  I believe these are only worth it when limited by space and in SSCs, but I may be wrong.  5E versus 3E/3M, it would seem that specialists aren't quite as strong as workers unless in a SSC.  The thing is that you don't save any former time with specialists as the condensor has to go elsewhere, plus you're paying 30M per crawler (~10 per specialist).  Working a Condensor is slightly better than crawling it also (1/2M,1E if at +2 ECON).

I'd agree that you shouldn't be crawling the solar squares, only the condensers (you don't save former time, but you do get energy from the specialists...and if you don't have max population yet then that's definitely better.)

Why shouldn't crawlable solar plateaus be worthwhile?  Not sure I understand the reason, you could say the same for mines or any other improvement.  Everything should be viable in given situations, this leads to more strategies.  It's hard to argue that solar plateaus weren't intended

Crawled mines also shouldn't be worthwhile, except for on rocky squares (which are limited.)

The problem at hand is that while allowing mass crawling (not to be confused with a limited amount of crawling, which does enrich the game) does lead to more terraforming strategies, it tends to cut down on the relevance of base management strategies because it bypasses all the stuff associated with population (mainly growth/nutrient acquisition and drone control).

[Nexii]

Yea I meant limited crawling of solar plateaus.  As in a few crawlers per base, it should be an option versus minerals or nutrients.

If pop booming is removed what I've found is the nutrients curve gets very steep...it's +10/N per worker.  So at 10 size that's 100N per worker, meaning you would need huge nutrient output to even grow by 1 size.  The nutrient increase curve would need to be flattened (or even eliminated) if pop booming was removed.  Otherwise, your only option to grow is to make more cities.  Tactics like using size 2 cities to pool pods into a big city with multipliers would make PTS mandatory.  Similarly CV would need an update.  And at larger base sizes, you could make it so a base could grow more than one size per turn (in the case of really high nutrients, enough to exceed the cost more than once).

[Yitzi]

Yea I meant limited crawling of solar plateaus.  As in a few crawlers per base, it should be an option versus minerals or nutrients.

That actually can be done; if you're only crawling a few squares, you can put a lot more mirrors per solar panel.  Of course, that is very former-intensive...but earlier in the game it's already fairly viable as compared to minerals or nutrients, and later in the game former time becomes cheaper as your production increases.

If pop booming is removed what I've found is the nutrients curve gets very steep...it's +10/N per worker.

No, it's +(10-GROWTH) N per citizen to grow 1.  10 size requires 100 N for 1 at +0 GROWTH; if +6 GROWTH doesn't result in pop booming it'll still cut that by 60%.

Keep in mind also that past the early midgame, your nutrients gained will be proportional to your workers; with no specialists (probably requires substantial energy to psych) and +3 nutrients per square, if you have a creche and are running Dem/Market you should grow every 6 turns or so.  At +6 GROWTH with farms and enrichers (4 nutrients per square), you'd end up growing 2/3 as fast as if you were pop booming.  Of course, if you're only producing 3 nutrients per square, that would be cut down somewhat, but you'd still grow at a decent rate.

[Nexii]

Planned-GA booming would also be an option for +8 GROW (though requires very high PSY allocation).   

I think CV would need a nerf also.  Making it effectively +9 on top of the immunities to Power/TC (Likely choices with not needing the +GROWTH) is too much

Overall it might be positive changes.  N gets diminished when all you need is that +2 to boom.  I think in practice though farm/solar takes way too much former time & raise costs to ever create it.  At 32 former turns/sq that's 640 former turns/base.  So to fully terraform a base within 50 turns requires 13 formers, or ~8 super formers.  8 super formers are around 320 minerals by default.  Whereas a forest/borehole strat only needs ~2 super formers per base.  All those minerals into formers is what makes raised solar not so practical.  For the differential (~240 minerals), one could have two major multiplier facilities like Fusion Lab and Genejack in the base instead.  Then there's the 64 E/sq for top elevation raising - meaning 1280E to raise a full base which is several times the cost of the formers.  I guess I'm trying to say the game is long over before raised farm/solar can be realized, the more I think on it.  It might be the most optimal use of land but realistically it's not a good growth investment.  Only post Hab-domes and after you've made all those multiplier facilities, and with trade commerce, would farm/solar be worth it.  Giving it some edge in hitting 14/20 pop faster than otherwise helps some, but I think with satellites and +6/+8 GROW booms you'd be fine.  If you can get a pop increase every other turn with all Forests and a bit of Condensor crawling that's good enough.

[Yitzi]

Planned-GA booming would also be an option for +8 GROW (though requires very high PSY allocation).

True (assuming Dem as well).

I think CV would need a nerf also.  Making it effectively +9 on top of the immunities to Power/TC (Likely choices with not needing the +GROWTH) is too much

Personally, I think all projects past the early game need a nerf in terms of vastly increased cost.  Still, perhaps cloning vats should be set to simply give a certain (settable in alphax) GROWTH; if you want it to give pop boom, that can be set high enough to pop boom no matter what other penalties are there).  (Personally, I think 9 needed to pop boom, and 6 given by cloning vats, would work well; that way, cloning vats means you can pop boom fairly easily but it's not automatic.)

Overall it might be positive changes.  N gets diminished when all you need is that +2 to boom.  I think in practice though farm/solar takes way too much former time & raise costs to ever create it.  At 32 former turns/sq that's 640 former turns/base.  So to fully terraform a base within 50 turns requires 13 formers, or ~8 super formers.  8 super formers are around 320 minerals by default.  Whereas a forest/borehole strat only needs ~2 super formers per base.  All those minerals into formers is what makes raised solar not so practical.

It's a far bigger investment...but the reward is also quite a bit bigger.

For the differential (~240 minerals), one could have two major multiplier facilities like Fusion Lab and Genejack in the base instead.

You'd probably be getting all the major multipliers by the time it reaches population 20 anyway.  It's probably more productive to see what you get for that 240 minerals, and what you get is:
-1 extra nutrient per square, plus 4 on the ones that would be boreholes and 1 on the condensers.  Assuming 4 boreholes and 5 condensers (your value of 32 per square means that half the squares are condensers or mirrors, so I'm assuming a 50/50 split), that's 20+16+5=41 more nutrients per turn.
-You lose 1.5 minerals per square, and 5.5 on boreholes (0.5 more on condensers because you'll be crawling them), so that's 48.5 minerals per turn better for the forest/borehole.
-Assuming each mirror has 6 solars around it, you gain 2 energy per square, plus 6 for each mirror, minus 4 for each borehole, so that's 40+30-16=54 more energy per turn.
-And because you're crawling the condensers, that's 5 extra engineers for another 25 energy.

So you don't get the same level of production, and have to spend a substantial amount, but you get far more nutrients and energy.  Meaning that depending on your priorities, you might use one or the other or (more likely) have a mixed strategy.

Then there's the 64 E/sq for top elevation raising - meaning 1280E to raise a full base which is several times the cost of the formers.  I guess I'm trying to say the game is long over before raised farm/solar can be realized, the more I think on it.

Yeah, this really is best for games that have been modded to have a realistic chance of not being over until the top of the tech tree.

but I think with satellites and +6/+8 GROW booms you'd be fine.  If you can get a pop increase every other turn with all Forests and a bit of Condensor crawling that's good enough.

Yeah, I favor nerfing satellites by making them substantially easier to knock down than put up, and sky hydroponics labs to substantially later in the game.  I also favor (to get back to the original topic) fairly significant limits on condensers, so a bit of condenser crawling would be all you'd get; assuming 1/5 of your worked squares are boreholes rather than forest and you crawl all you can, you'd need +7 GROWTH (read: golden age under planned) to grow every other turn.  Which of course would cut into your research capability significantly.

[Geo]

..., and sky hydroponics labs to substantially later in the game....

Any progress on being able to construct Nexus Stations and Solar Power sats before Sky Farms?

[Yitzi]

..., and sky hydroponics labs to substantially later in the game....

Any progress on being able to construct Nexus Stations and Solar Power sats before Sky Farms?

It was always possible by modding the tech tree to put satellites at different techs; the only thing missing was that it wouldn't display properly, and that was fixed, I think in one of the 2.4s.

[Geo]

I see.
Please refresh my memory, what was the display problem?
Not showing extra minerals/energy in bases? No new dots in the orbital screen? Something else?

[Yitzi]

If nobody had yet learned the tech for sky hydroponics labs, it would display "orbital capability not yet achieved" or something like that (I forget the exact phrasing) instead of the full display; I changed it so that's removed by the tech for any satellite rather than just sky hydroponics labs.

[Geo]

Ah, that rings a bell. Thanks.

[smith]

I used to think about this stuff extensively long ago, before Yitzi graced smac community and expressed interest in doing something about these issues, so here are my 2 cents.
I've only skimmed through this thread, so sorry if someone already had the same ideas ( I saw parts of my proposed solutions mentioned ).
They should also be a lot easier to implement then some more complex systems discussed above.

Crawlers:

Make them cost one mineral in support ( logistics in real life are costly as well ):
- It will make the early game crawler spam on forest a lot less powerfull.
- It'll still be viable to build a few to put them on forest for one mineral and move them on mines after ecological engineering, remote special resources wiil be still great.
- It will give an incentive to build roads to their destination in advance and not to send them too far away, especially in early game.
- Later the clear reactor comes, but at this point crawlers are at a competition with workers.

Make scrapping them work just like any other unit. Instead give them lets say 3 + (reactor) resource units crawl capacity when shifting resources between bases:
( They can transport up to 7 resources from remote tiles, then why only two already gathered ones between bases ?)
- You can still easily cooperatively rush projects and other infrastructure, but it'll happen at some cost and without extreeme cheese of having it completed within a single turn.
- Make project change waste 25% of resources - free change is an exploit and 50% is too much penalty for being just a bit slower than competition ( you can tie it with difficulty setting ).

Pop booming:

- Make popboom possible at +10 growth ( planned, demo, creeche, eadaimonia, golden age ).
- Clonning Vats give +2 growth, give Hive +2 growth - if early popboom is not possible, than this one more growth isn't such a huge difference, and late game popbooming wil allow this faction to live up to its name.

The rest of the game was not designed with such a huge development speed spike, these two mechanics give at the end of the first century in the hands of an experienced player.
I am convinced that with these two fixes and tech stagnation, research curve will be just fine and for sure you should try to nerf crawlers and popboom first before messing with rersearch...

[Nexii]

Personally I think pop boom is a fine mechanic.  If you're in builder mode you should grow significantly faster than in war mode.  It's more an issue of tech speed in the later game.  I do make hitting +6 harder (modded SE set), and put the CV as a late rather than midgame SP.

Project to project at 25% penalty can be done since Yitzi's last patch. 

Another way to reduce crawler power is to mod Convoy resource penalty (1 or 2 work okay).  They are then diminished early but are better later in the game.  I found that with nerfing crawlers and CMs, it was necessary to reduce early game building costs.  While the late game is definitely too fast, the early game is also definitely way too slow

[smith]

As Yitzi argued even without popboom huge +growth allow fast population growth, but not popboom for 10 turns than switch SE to whatever you want kind of fast.
You should have to run pro growth SE settings for some extended period of timie to be able gain significant pop advantage over non builders.
Popboom is fine but it should be late game stuff, early to midgame it trivialises the gameplay imo.

The point of the nerfs is to make mid/late game techs and other developments last longer, if you reduce costs, than you'll negate crawl nerf.
It'll put you on more equal foot with AI but preserve midgame rapid development acceleration.

How does conwoy penalty works ? I can't find description of this feature, does it simply reduce amount of crawled resources by a value ?
Then it's similar to having support cost and ok by me ( I would still prefer supply cost instead though ).
Add an option to change an amount of resources shipped by a convoy between bases and apply the same convoy penalty to it. Make crawlers scrapping like a regular unit and we are set.

Project crawlers scrapping for 100% resources is bad, it allows you to effectively build the project before you have the tech and then make it appear the moment you get it.
I would also make it impossible to start the same project in more than one base - it's another exploit that allows you to start to build a project before you have the tech.

Is changing alphax.txt values safe for my saves ?