SMAC: Pollution formula strangeness.
Jason McCullough
Started a new game with the gains, figuring that if I was green the
entire game, I'd never receive a point of pollution. According to the
formula in advanced topics, a Planet value of 3 should result in one
term as (3 - 3) = 0, thereby driving the entire ecology result to
zero.
Doesn't work this way. A planet value of 3 will still result in
pollution. Am I missing something? Is there any way to get a
coherent explanation of pollution?
To respond by email, remove "blort" from the front of my email
address.
blort...@ou.edu
Jason McCullough
".....to identify Flavor Flav as a clown with a clock is to lose sight
of Public Enemy's goal to inspire, entertain and educate."
(from www.public-enemy.com)
Paul James
Jason McCullough wrote in message <36d0549...@ounews.ou.edu>...
>
>Started a new game with the gains, figuring that if I was green the
>entire game, I'd never receive a point of pollution. According to the
>formula in advanced topics, a Planet value of 3 should result in one
>term as (3 - 3) = 0, thereby driving the entire ecology result to
>zero.
>
>Doesn't work this way. A planet value of 3 will still result in
>pollution. Am I missing something? Is there any way to get a
>coherent explanation of pollution?
>
>
think having a Planet rating of 3 reduces eco-damage from _terraforming_ to
zero. This mneas you could for eaxmple surround a sea colony with kelp farms
and tidal harnesses and have no damage. However you can also get eco-damage
from mineral production e.g. you could have a base surrounded by fungus
(with all the techs so that it is producing lots of minerals) and all the
mineral increasing facilities/projects and get a high eco-damage rating.
Paul
Kyle Nishioka
: Jason McCullough wrote in message <36d0549...@ounews.ou.edu>...
In concepts.txt, the Planet rating in figured into the final calculation
of "Ecology%", which is the Eco-damage we see on the city screen. The
only explanation I can think of that explains the discrepancy is that the
formula is wrong and there is some variation of it in the actual code.
--
Kyle
nk...@hawaii.edu
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
#include <blue_ribbon>
Brian Reynolds
of the formula, your ecology rating is always between -3 and +2, so
the best you can achieve is "3 - 2 = 1". The +3 is still effective in
other areas, such as mindworm capture.
Brian Reynolds
Alpha Centauri Designer
FIRAXIS Games
Daniel and Sheri Kirkwood
>
>A clarification of the ecology "3 - 3 = 0" formula... for the purposes
>of the formula, your ecology rating is always between -3 and +2, so
>the best you can achieve is "3 - 2 = 1". The +3 is still effective in
>other areas, such as mindworm capture.
>
>Brian Reynolds
>Alpha Centauri Designer
>FIRAXIS Games
>
overall efficiency rating of +5 (one more than needed for
"PARADIGM ECONOMY!", whatever that means) and Children's
Creches in all my bases, and was still getting something
like 15% lost to inefficiency in my most remote bases.
Is this supposed to happen?
Daniel
Jon Nunn
to energy and research with no penalaties. There doesn't
seem to be any benifit for being +5 economy, and there
also doesn't appear to be any advantages in being +4 planet
over +3; +2 seems better for advancing existing mindworms
to more advanced stages while +3 is better if you want to
capture more mindworms.
Jon Nunn
Programmer Analyst
Friends Don't Let Friends Do Cobol
http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/users/nunnacl/personal.html
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Tom Chick
Kirkwood) wrote:
>On a similar subject, what about inefficiency? I had an
>overall efficiency rating of +5 (one more than needed for
>"PARADIGM ECONOMY!", whatever that means) and Children's
>Creches in all my bases, and was still getting something
>like 15% lost to inefficiency in my most remote bases.
>
>Is this supposed to happen?
Daniel,
My understanding is that efficiency is a factor of how closely your
bases have to be located to avoid the penalty. If you look at the
formula (I think it's in the online help under Advanced Concepts),
you'll see that you can never completely remove the penalty, just
relax its distance restrictions. Even Paradigm Economies lose energy
from far flung bases.
Also, I believe you'll note that with a high efficiency you can divide
spending unevenly between Labs and Economy without as great a penalty.
The cost of unrest for switching Social Engineering is also reduced.
-Tom Chick
*** ***
*** No .sig for me, thank you. ***
*** ***
Tom Chick
wrote:
>there
>also doesn't appear to be any advantages in being +4 planet
>over +3; +2 seems better for advancing existing mindworms
>to more advanced stages while +3 is better if you want to
>capture more mindworms.
Your Planet bonus translates directly into a percentage bonus in Psi
Combat. +2 Planet = +20%, +3 Planet = +30%, and +4 Planet = +40%.