Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

Which is the better research Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
I've been experiment around with both and I'm quite impressed with making all your planets out to max.
I haven't investigated into the research cost tho.
What are you alls preferences?

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

I actually have both. I am converting planets and am building 2 ringworlds and a Sphere world !!

I actually declared "Peace" with the rest of the races so that I could finnish building the worlds before I finnished off the other races.

Now I just have to wait till friend gets back from vacation so we can can continue the game.

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

Both.

However, this will require two, very extenensive research, investment paths.
Stellar Manipulations and Planet Utilization.

The game you are playing, the other players must be very patent, to allow you this much time http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

In the game I'm playing now I had already developed ringworlds and was running out of things to research.That's when I researched up to atmospheric conditioners.
It just looked to me that it should be developed before ringworld as it affects so much more of your empire.
I mean like in the case of a large gas planet.It normally only has slots for 5 facilities but after the atmospheric conditioner does it's thing it goes to 25 facilites. You convert 5 of these and you've made a ringworld(equivilant).

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

Agreed dbt1949, and there is that good feeling when accomplished your first Ring World, or converted your first Atmosphere http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

I have never built a ring or sphere world. I have this old savegame lying around that I quit when I reached the 'I know I can win' point, maybe I'll move it forward just to see what a RW or SW look like. (they have to be built on a sector w/ a star, right ?)

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thats it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

.9 Ring Worlds & Sphere Worlds
4.9.1 To Build a Ring worlds (or Sphere worlds) you need to:
4.9.1.1 Research Stellar Manipulation to level 5 for Ringworlds (level 8 for Sphereworlds) and Base Construction to level 3. (Quikngruvn)
4.9.1.2. build on a star.
4.9.1.3. create a Space yard ship (a ship that contains a shipyard component)
4.9.1.4. take the space yard ship to the star you want to build your world on.
4.9.1.5 start building STARBASES containing the components you need for the Ring/Sphere world.
4.9.1.6 once you have all necessary components, build go to the component activation icon to activate the construct - all the built star bases and components will disappear and you will have a ring/sphere world there instead.
4.9.2 NOTE: to speed construction (it takes awhile) you can construct bases housing more shipyards. (Taz-in-Space)
4.9.3 Ring- and sphereworlds count as both a star, and not a star. They count as not-a-star for purposes of planet building, solar panels, and star destroyers. They count as a star for purposes of building new stars (i.e.: you can't). (Suicide Junkie)
4.9.4 Ringworlds and sphereworlds are made using your default planet type and atmosphere. they are simply extra huge planets and must be colonized before you can use them.
4.9.5 To build a Ringworld you need 5 bases full with cables and 5 bases full with plating, and one placement base, ie 11 bases.
For a Sphereworld that is 10 plating bases and 10 cable bases and 1 placement base, i e 21 bases.

(FAQ)

[ June 16, 2003, 19:13: Message edited by: JLS ]

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

I've often (almost always) acquired a complete set of all the atmostphere-type-breathing populations before I get atmosphere converters, so they become unnecessary, unless you're in a game where some breather types are unavailable or non-existant, which is the case in a couple of my games where I haven't got far enough to research atmos converters anyway.

PvK

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think you are right. i'm currenly in the process of converting my 22 systems with the help of athmospheric converters and building ringworlds at the same time. I wish though that i had researched athmospheric convertors sooner.
Seeing a huge planet going from domed to "undomed" is quite an experience.
Depending on the size of your empire, this can have quite an impact

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

They are both valuable. Do both of them. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Or, just go rampaging through AI territory and end the game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Of course, capturing alien populations often eliminates the need for atmosphere converters (as PvK alluded to).

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">True but if you have a large empire and you're not at war with anyone, they are a valid option. If you do have other breathers lying around, then it's cheaper to move the pop.

I have actually moved some pop around and converted some 30 ish planets (from 302 total) like this before i started building athmospheric converters.

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

Still, nothing beats system after system of 100% oxy worlds, sparkling in in the sun http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

It is truly beautiful. *sniff*

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

One of the beauty of Proportions is that you simply can not capture enough aliens to fill all
your Domed Planets. Even after conquering Homeworlds, the shipping time can be prohibitive. Thus, you MUST research and build Atmospheric converters ! I like it.

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So do most mods. Try P&N or FQM Deluxe for other mods with better storage values. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is called Replicant Centers. Sure, only +1-4 mil per turn, but that is a huge amount in Proportions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ June 17, 2003, 19:27: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

It is called Replicant Centers. Sure, only +1-4 mil per turn, but that is a huge amount in Proportions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif [/QB][/quote]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But you must be one of the despicable soulless body snatchers http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif I resent one and every organic manipulation races. Temporal is the only decent race trait ! (IMHO of course http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ) Occasionally I play Crystalline, but Organic send shievers down my spine. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

What is so bad about Organic race trait?

You know, I bet you'll have tons of fun playing Adamant Mod (when it is done), as there will be plenty of those organic races to smite. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

In a PBW game I'm in I now have 75 breathable planets in my 6 colonized systems and 6 ringworlds.
Even the tiny moons have breathable atmosphere now!
And I'm not even in any of the top two positions.
I wen't with atm conv first and then started building my ringworlds.

Now off to conquer the rest of the galaxy!

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

Well, nothing conscious of course. But every time I read the description of Space Parasite, all the old memories of Alien, Alien II and other sci-fi. horrors come to mind. I just can't force myself to play such a race. Basically, it is a very Bad Press http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

Proportions seems like a fun mod but isn't play generally slow. I mean if it takes so long to travel and build pop, the games should Last longer right?
Also, i'm not sure if i like that culture thingie that takes so long to build (don't know the exact name). I know it's main purpose is to emphasize the importance of the homeworld but i think that importance is bit overdone.

Otherwise it seems fun especially since planets have more cargo capability so more planetary defenses can be build.
I think i will try this mod when my current solo game is over.

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

Still, nothing beats system after system of 100% oxy worlds, sparkling in in the sun [Big Grin]

It is truly beautiful. *sniff* <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pfft I prefer gas http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif Love those gaseous anomalies LOL

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nothing, that is, except system after system of sparkling 100% oxy worlds, each one with a spanking enormous ringworld in the middle of it=-)

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

Why bother with ringworlds if you can have sphereworlds? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Good point! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Because ringworld picture is so much better looking then sphereworld (it sucks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif ) And since at this stage you don't really care about winning anymore, aesthetics is the only criteria that matters http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

So switch the images around. It will do nothing to hinder MP games (as long as you just change the BMPs, not the data files). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Because it takes far less resources to build. After i have those ringworlds, they will produce enough resources to allow me to build sphereworlds. But for now, i'll stick with ringworlds until i have so much resources, i'll drown in them http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

I'm actually working on that: every system has a system shield, all asteroid fields are in the process of being converted to planets ( 6 planet creators flying around ), ringworlds are being constructed (only 4-5 at a time because of the cost) and athmospheric converters (also only 3 systems at a time are converted because of the resource drain)

Anyway, i don't think i will complete everything because i think the AI will soon turn on me.
Luckily because of trade, they will loose a lot of trade too when they go at war with me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Atmospheric conditioners or ringworlds?
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Because ringworld picture is so much better looking then sphereworld (it sucks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif ) And since at this stage you don't really care about winning anymore, aesthetics is the only criteria that matters http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thats so right, to bad you have to build this ugly sphereworlds and not the beautiful ringsworlds, but the eingsworlds are just to small http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif , and you shouldnt switch the bmps as they do not fit to each other ... in my oppionion.

Hello Btw...