Three questions for you pros
 

1. Is it worth it to build those Climate Control facilities to improve a planet's condition? It seems the effect on a planet's condition isn't that drastic on population growth, and those Climate Control facilties takes a LONG time to improve conditions. Do you have more net gain if you just plop down like a mineral mining facility instead of wasting years of time waiting for condition to slowly improve? Not pursuing that avenue of research represents a saving in RP too.

2. The Natural Merchants trait seems to me to not worth the 1000 points it costs. Even if it is made into 500 points only it is still easily 'fixed' by simply spending 3 turns per system to build a spaceport. What am I missing?

3. Is it just me or do other people only concentrate on researching a few 'paths' for weapons too? It seems many of the weapons aren't powerful enough or flexible enough to compete with the good old Cap Ship Missiles, Anti Proton Beams, Depleted Uranium weapon at early game, etc. This seems particularly true for me for fighters/troops weapon as 1 or 2 of those appear to be far better than the rest. (I heard Range doesn't matter for troops weapon?)

Thanks.

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

1. Later in the game YES, about mid way. Thay do improve the planet value and thus improve production and mineral resources gathered IIRC.

2. Its not really. In fact most players do not use it. It is easy and cheap to build a space port.

3. Most concentrate on their area of confort research. Physics 2, Poloron Beams, Fleet and ship Training, Combat support, mines, and so on. They are really tride and true habits forged by experience.

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

Neither does rate of fire. Only damage at range one matters for troop weapons.

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

True, its filed under the subject of things that makes you say WTF?

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

For competitive multiplayer...

1. No
2. 1000 is too much. 500 seems good to me. (I still wouldn't take it at that price, but others would).
3. Yes, but what weapons get researched does vary from player to player.

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

The advantage it brings is to systems on the front line. If you lose a spaceport planet, all the income from that system is wasted. If you have Natural Merchants, you continue to earn that income. Though if you have a front-line system producing so much that you'd miss it if it weren't there and you leave it undefended, then you deserve to lose the income. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

Well, I guess I'm going to disagree with a few statements here, but that's not unusual for me. I'm certainly not the best player around but I'm above average, I think.

So, here is my take:

(1) Most difficult of your questions. Climate control facilities need to be built according to your game outlook. Further defined, it takes a pretty good player, in my opinion, to determine when they will be useful and when it is too long of an investiment. In full-tech games, you need to determine (as soon as you can) if the game looks like it will be a long one or not. If you can forecast that, then you can make the decision. There lies the need for experience. Most recently, in a full-tech game, I assumed the game would be decided quickly, so I opted NOT to spent time building climate control facs. About 40 turns in, I decided it would be a longer game and I needed to spend time building a few of those facs (1 or 2) each turn for a "return investment" for the future. I won the game as the first planets "turned". I was lucky I had enough planets to expand with because if I needed those converted planets before that, I would have been late in making the decision to convert them much earlier in the game. I made my decision to convert atmospheres based on the ability to sustain my growth and resources as it pertained to my ability to sustain my fleet and increase my ship count. When I was fairly confident of my borders, I had at least one climate control fac in build every turn. At my height, I had around 4 building those facs. The key is, though, being able to predict your ability to be able to realize their benefit in 20 turns. (or 24 turns, approximately, considering build time for the fac itself). There is no hard rule here...it take experience to make that decision. In my most recent game, I think I was a bit late. NOW, in a game that ISN'T full-tech, it becomes even more of a difficult decision as you have to be able to forecast a future need, spend the research points, and be able to sustain an empire's ability to mount a good defense (while those facs are maturing) OR keep up a good offense as they mature. This need for climate control facs is one of those items I think separates the men from the boys. I don't have an iron-clad rule that I can tell you about.

(2) Don't underestimate the value of Natural Merchant. I'm not saying I take it every game. What I AM saying is that it deserves consideration...even at 1,000 points. Yes, one can analyze its usefulness quite a bit. Yes, one can build a Space Port in 3 turns. BUT, I think, it's very difficult to cast aside the following benefits from having Natural Merchant:

(a) Those that are building Space Ports lose 3 turns of resources in each system they expand to;
(b) Those who require a Space Port have one less fac in every system that could be producing something else;
(c) Those who need a Space Port in every system lose resources in its build;
(d) If you have ever been expanding at your empire's limit of resources and found you need some resource production quite quickly, it's quite handy knowing you can land on a new planet in a new system and realize a resource benefit 3 turns sooner.
(e) Also nice, is knowing that your system will produce resources (etc.) in the event you are invaded. Nothing quite so upsetting as watching an invading fleet walk into one of your systems and attack the very planet that you have your Space Port on. In the current Anklebiters game, I am a Natural Merchant and its nice to know I will never need to worry about losing the sole planet that does the "Space Port" buisness.
In closing, I reiterate...don't automatically discard the option of Natural Merchant. Decide what kind of game it will be and if, for example, it looks to be a game of lots of systems to expand to, I'd consider it.

(3)Again, depending on the game, your weapons research can certainly follow quite a singular path. In my experience, in a normal game, DUCs are quite useful for quite a long period of time. This, of course is dependant on the game start...for example:
(a) If you are in a game with 1 starting homeworld, getting DUC IV or DUC V is usefull for quite a while.
(b) If, on the other hand, you have a 5-planet start, it's quite likely you might be able to skip a lot of DUC research and go straight to PPBs. This kind of decision is also dependent on the number of players and expected proximity. In closing, it's safe to say, I think, that DUCs and PPBs will be the focus of a lot of players. Again, this depends on the game and whether or not you are playing a special race. In a regular game, for example, with one starting homeworld, CAP 2's are expensive and sure top be shortlived in usefulness considering the ease in getting PDs.

There is no safe and sure rule on any of these answers (and decisions). Hopefully, I've given you something to think about. And, of course, it's likely Fyron will disagree with me (as he does a lot http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif). His knowledge is extensive. However, he has yet to play me in a game...(and I, him)...so I don't know his skill level. He is not a rated player, so, it's difficult to predict his ability in an actual game. Translated, it means his expected disagreement might sound good on paper but until I see what his abiltiy is in a game, he only posesses the ability to post facts, stats, and rules. What I've tried to give you is based on experience of what works and what doesn't based on games I've played and what I've seen players do.

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

Well spoken Slynky. Very well thought out. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

Thanks for all the replies.

You are kidding? So that small rocket pod that fires only once in 30 turns is much better than the Ground Cannon III or small Anti-Proton? This doesn't make the most sense. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Re: Three questions for you pros
 

Run some combat simulations or test games... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif