Bug or...?
 

In one of my PBW games I was able to get a large population of oxygen breathers (I'm none), so obviously I used them to colonize oxygen planets.

In order to accelerate population growth I'd been moving people around from my crowded to empty planets. Now here's where things start to get odd... I noticed that in some cases I'd removed all the oxygen breathers from oxygen planets, leaving only 1 or 2 million none breathers. What then happened was the computer started treating these planets as domed colonies http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif Now I have funky planets with 18/3 facilities.

Is this supposed to happen or is it a bug? If it's a bug is there any way to fix this problem other than abandoning and recolonizing the planets?

Re: Bug or...?
 

From what I understand this is supposed to happen. It reverts to a domed colony when you pull the oxygen breathers off.

Re: Bug or...?
 

That is the way the game works and is supposd to work. Don't worry about it.

If you think about it, there is no other way the game could handle without making population handling *much* more complicatd.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages to generate your own code.

Re: Bug or...?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I noticed that in some cases I'd removed all the oxygen breathers from oxygen planets, leaving only 1 or 2 million none breathers. What then happened was the computer started treating these planets as domed colonies Now I have funky planets with 18/3 facilities.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you mean you already had none-breathers on your planet and it wasn't a domed colony? That is a bug, the only way not to have a domed colony is to have only one type of breathers on the planet.

Re: Bug or...?
 

I see your point Lemmy. I guess it depends if the none- breathers were there before the oxys were removed. (IE was it a mixed race colony or did the none-breathers arrive as the oxys left.)

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M&gt;M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages to generate your own code.

Re: Bug or...?
 

Doh! Stupid me... Now I finally think (and hope) I see what LemmyM was saying. So even if the planet started out as a oxygen-undomed planet, by adding none-breathers that automatically made the planet a domed colony right?

Hmmm...does this mean that all I'd have to do to make the planet undomed would be to pull the none breathers off the planet...?

Re: Bug or...?
 

As long as there is at least 1M oxybreathers, and zero non-oxy-breathers, the planet will be undomed.

Re: Bug or...?
 

Funny why the none-breathers would get hurt in an oxygen atmosphere!

Re: Bug or...?
 

A similar kind of thing happens when you 'assimilate' a race that has Advanced Storage Techniques (AST). For instance, a huge world with correct atmosphere will support 25 fac's for standard races and 30 fac's for AST's. If you capture the planet (or the race), you can keep all 30 fac's and upgrade them IIRC. However, if you scrap any, you won't be able to build more up to the 30 - only to the 25 fac's.

BTW, thats why I frequently play AST - 5 more fac's on huge, 4 on large, etc is quite a boost when you're talking about production levels....

Re: Bug or...?
 

Phew...thank god. Glad to hear there's a way to correct this.

I do wish the game handled population differently... It would be better if one could have partially domed colonies based on the percentage of colonists who don't breathe that atmosphere type.

Re: Bug or...?
 

Someone else posted a very good idea on this a while back. I don't remember all of it but basically the idea was instead of facilities per planet size, it was facilities per amount of population. Eg. after you grew or transported another 100 mil(or whatever the number was) in population, you could build another facilitiy. And then a planet had different pop limits based on whether or not the people had to live in domes.

At least I think that was it. Maybe I mangled that badly. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Geoschmo

Re: Bug or...?
 

There is an entry in Settings.txt, I believe, that specifies "population per facility".

It was intended to be used to specify fow many facilities could be run by the population available.
One problem is in deciding which facilities would be operated, and it is a tough one. Do they run the spaceport? probably, but what if it is a backup (two in one system?) Is the Radioactives collider more important than the Organics farm?

In any case, it has not been implemented in SE4, yet.

Re: Bug or...?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CW:
Funny why the none-breathers would get hurt in an oxygen atmosphere!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Probably just as funny as why obligate anaerobic bacteria get hurt in an oxygen atmosphere, although I personally fail to see the humor in it.

Re: Bug or...?
 

oops, that went wrong...well, nothing to add really, problem solved in 10 hours or so...could be better i think http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

i like that idea Geo mentioned, maybe for SE:V ??



[This message has been edited by LemmyM (edited 14 September 2001).]

Re: Bug or...?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by suicide_junkie:
There is an entry in Settings.txt, I believe, that specifies "population per facility".

It was intended to be used to specify fow many facilities could be run by the population available.
One problem is in deciding which facilities would be operated, and it is a tough one. Do they run the spaceport? probably, but what if it is a backup (two in one system?) Is the Radioactives collider more important than the Organics farm?

In any case, it has not been implemented in SE4, yet.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Right, I know about that. But this was different I think. In this idea you actually couldn't build another facility unless you had the population.

Of course I could hav eimagined the whole thing. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Geo

Re: Bug or...?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
Right, I know about that. But this was different I think. In this idea you actually couldn't build another facility unless you had the population.

Of course I could hav eimagined the whole thing. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Geo

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you didn't imagine it, i also remember someone mentioning it in a thread, but i also can't remember who posted it.

or we both imagined it, could be a conspiracy....hmm, better call Mr. Mulder to get to the bottom of this.

Re: Bug or...?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Right, I know about that. But this was different I think. In this idea you actually couldn't build another facility unless you had the population. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Just wondering: how would a reduction in population affect the facilities? You would tend to run into the same problem.

If you allowed the facilities to keep operating, then players would ship all their population around to max out facilities, and then leave the small planets with 1M very productive people.

Re: Bug or...?
 

Here is one way you could handle it.

Example:

each facility that produces a resource requires 5 million people (or break it up however else you want)

essential facilities that MUST recieve full work loads or don't work regardless require 1mil people.

special things can use whatever you want them to be and if they generate a bonus or something else that can be modified in a quantifiable way then just use the same basic method as described below and use 5mil per or set them as "essential" facilites that either run or don't at 1mil per.
-----------------------
The planet in question has 8 facility slots
3 of which are used with essentials (space port, space dock, and something else)

These take up 1mil each so 3mil altogether.

The total population of the planet is 10mil outa a total of 20 mil.

So we have a total of 10-3 = 7 mil population to use.

We then build 5 mineral thingies so 5x5 = 25 mil needed to operate them at designed efficiency.

UHOH we won't have enough to run them all even at max planet pop. Lets see what that means.

at current levels we have 7 mil people to run 5 facilities that need 5mil each... Lets do it like this.

5mil people per facility is 100% efficiency but we only have 1.4 mil per facility (7/5= 1.4) and 1.4 is 28% outa the 100% that 5mil represents. So then we say that each of these 5 mineral facilities is running at 28% efficiency and thus only generates 28% of what they normally would after all other planet bonuses are applied.

Alter the numbers for higher population level and you get 20-3= 17mil for use or 3.4 per facility so 68% efficiency when this planets pop is maxed.

To cap that. Because I just know all of you are too stupid to catch that the first time through... or is it that I am so confusing... ah well. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

First subtract pop needed by "Essential facilities"

Next look at number of resource facilities you have that need 5 each and break up the remaining population into equal little chunks and find out what percentage of the required to operate number each of these little chunks is and there is your operating value.
--------------
Leftovers are unemployed or you could put in some other little bonus level on each facility like 5mil for 100% and a bonus 5% for every mil over that or just ignore it and assume the pop bonus for high level pops is doing that.
--------------
Why I suggest straight values of 5mil for ALL resource facilites v 5 mil for mining and farming and then maybe 3 mil for research etc, is for simplicity. If you do that you start running into problems of dividing it up and needing 5mil for larger ones and 3mil for smaller ones and the number you have to spread around is 3.4... so do you break up the extra .4 on each of the researchers or what? It just makes it more complicated and to tell you the truth I just don't like it.


------------------

Re: Bug or...?
 

The oxygen breathers were there first. In other words it started as a undomed colony. Then none breathers got added (probably due to some cargo transfering I was doing). Then all the oxygen breathers got removed, leaving 1 or 2 million none breathers and the planet became a domed colony http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif

While it makes perfect sense that the planet become a domed colony, I don't see how my none breathers could have been there in the first place without a dome. Well at least I get my facilities.

Re: Bug or...?
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cyrien:
Here is one way you could handle it.

Example:

each facility that produces a resource requires 5 million people (or break it up however else you want)

essential facilities that MUST recieve full work loads or don't work regardless require 1mil people.

special things can use whatever you want them to be and if they generate a bonus or something else that can be modified in a quantifiable way then just use the same basic method as described below and use 5mil per or set them as "essential" facilites that either run or don't at 1mil per.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

so what you're saying is:

efficiency = workers / workers needed
workers = total population - essential workers
workers needed = total workers - essential workers

the 5 mil per facility for simplicity isn't needed, just look at the total workers and workers that are needed to operate all facilities.

in your example :
25m are needed, you only have 7m
7/25 * 100% = 28% efficiency
if you would add one facilitiy which needed 3m workers you would get
7/28 * 100% = 25% efficiency

Re: Bug or...?
 

Well, it would definately make the Planet Conditions more important, especially in the early game (better conditions = quicker reproduction). But it would also slow down early game expansion a _LOT_! You probably couldn't afford to build anything on that first colony until it was about half full of ppl; or, you could start building on the second colony right away, but you wouldn't be able to afford the maintenance on any ships until you _stopped_ building on it!

Re: Bug or...?
 

Yah like that.

And I am a History major not a math major so I was pretty proud just do what I did. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

I am sure there are better ways to do it and easy ways to diversify it but math isn't my strong point. :P

I actually like the idea of a slowed down start game... and if you thought about it you could easily transport large amounts of pop from the home planet to fill out the basic levels the first few startup colonies without breaking into the production their too much... so not so great a slow down.

Besides I never really have problems with resources in SEIV... and normally my races have 80% to 50% resource harvesting with lowered intel and maybe slightly increased research though I prefer 100% as a base rather than increasing it... otherwise it makes the game too easy.

I would actually really enjoy seeing a population modifier like this... and with the settings file you could make the amounts needed to run each variable and set it to 0 if you didn't like the option. Easy enough. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

Re: Bug or...?
 

Actually, my main concern is what happens when you have insufficient population to run the "essential facilities", or those which cannot run at partial efficiency.

-What does 50% eff. mean for a resupply depot?
-How do you use your 1M people when you've got 2 or more essential facilities?
Sometimes the resupply depot might be more important than the spaceport!

Re: Bug or...?
 

You could possible have it as a list of settings in the settings file as to what is more important can bet set there or within the game itself as an option to list the priority of the different essentials. Via the Empire Manager or whatever that options thingy is.

[This message has been edited by Cyrien (edited 15 September 2001).]