EMH2006

[quote who="eatingburger" reply="26" id="3524080"] that said, mario cart rules [/quote] Well that we can agree ^^ Regarding the numbers in spreadsheet the major point is not if he got the numbers right as even adjusted the effect is clear. We got one faction with a one time bonus on settlement + minor long term bonuses and another with major long term bonuses. The game is limited in expansion and claims grow exponentially in costs so all other things the same the

[quote who="eatingburger" reply="23" id="3524072"] Quoting EMH2006, reply 20 Ah how about you just lower your standards to a correlation study instead of an experiment and see that playing 20 games as robotic and 20 as scientists will net you a much bigger win rate for scientists. (Even you who seem to have a strong preference f

Well, sometimes I get water if prices are high. But that's a luxury. And yes it is very rare for me to need to build any raw goods. I do it if the raw good prices are high sometimes. (mostly not as it is in my interest to let the raw goods be high as it means the factory output of my opponents is terrible.) Ofcourse if farms are high for offworld I go farms. I think thats the most raw goods resource i get. Sometimes if water/oxygen/food all are high due to high colony growth and if i need

[quote who="eatingburger" reply="19" id="3524057"] i forgot that i was an ameboa or fungus, capable of creating identical clones through mitosis, with which to test the balance of competitive videogames. [/quote] Ah how about you just lower your standards to a correlation study instead of an experiment and see that playing 20 games as robotic and 20 as scientists will net you a much bigger win rate for scientists. (Even you who seem to have a strong preference for robotic

Well even in the stock market world if a company has more cash than liabilities the stock value tends to atleast follow the cash-liabilites value. (the logic being that this cash is left for the shareholder no matter what happened. Other assets than cash are more fickle as it is always a question if book value is the true asset value) And most of the time stock prices are actually much more, especially for growth driven investments. Ofcourse this would only kick in if you are actu

I did a triangle yesterday just to test for this discussion and i clicked on the factories and hoovered them and it said 50% bonus - perhaps this was bug with the interface and it did give 100% in reality. I agree with you however it should be 100% as all are adjacent to 2. That is why the triangle shape is superior to everything else and why this is what I always aim for. But in any case as I noted it does not refute or change my argument on the scientists running ahead - it just sligh

3 steel does not get 100% bonus. 1 steel gets 100% bonus and the 2 others get 50% bonus in ideal placement (triangle). I also tought it would give 100 to each but I tried it in game and it seemed to only output 50% even if adjacent 2 to other steel in a triangle formation and only the last in the triangle seemed to output 100%. Thats 1 for 1 for one steel and 0,75 for 1 in the other cases for a total of 2,5 steel for 3 iron. (feel free to test in game and anyhow even if it was 3 steel i

Very true statement. Buying a stock at 5 then it goes to say 50 means you earned 45000 or basically 2 such buys are superior to one off world shipment. (around 80k or under that) Instead of needing 5000000 you need 50000. Or one single off world launch. Heck just capture another persons off world for 60 seconds. (unless they goon of course.) I think this is a skill i need to develop for this game as I currently do the very cookie cutter off world stuff. The perfect moment to do this if

3 steel is viable unless opponent goes scavanger. You just need to upgrade fast. I prefer 2 steel myself and 1 alu. I know alu is going to be in demand early as everyone require it to expand. ofcourse 1 min into the game you diversify into other stuff. (Power, carbon, glass or chemicals are good often, or food etc in a tigt debt game since you would care more the debt early from no food oxygen etc.

But to answer your question: Identify his strenght and use his size as a weakness. If he is not diversified look if power is costly and take out his power. If he is mass steel underground his iron, drive up iron price. instead of having a hughe surpluss he is now gaining that much more losses due to his size. If he is diversified go for one chain high in price and do not diversify. Since your one of many and not in lead and smaller than him he is probably not looking at your production. Thus

Main catch up mechanism in ffa is the fact everyone not winning has incentive to cripple the guy who is winning.

[quote who="eatingburger" reply="3" id="3523864"] Let us compare four players opening: #1: ROBOTIC: Squats immediately on four iron (+160 iron). Buys out aluminum while it's cheap with the 2k, and drops three steel, producing 3/sec. *TOTAL: 3xSteel (3/tick). #2: SCIENTIFIC: Drops by a delta-3 iron, with a juicy aluminum nearby. Drops two steel, one aluminum mine (alumnium's pricey!). *TOTAL: 2xSteel (1.

I really like the idea of some effects other than just increased consumption once a colony grows. Also it seems this community is very good as there is s lot of good feedback already :) (Including this post above)

[quote who="eatingburger" reply="1" id="3523846"] 1. Scientists gain a 2 for 1 tile advantage claim by planting on top of a resource with a resource building of that resource type. No they don't. A 3-cube raw resource produces 2 units/tick, thus feeding two industries. In that case scientists only 1.5:1. In the case that the raw resource is cheap on the market, scientists gain no advantage. Only in the case that a player bui

The way I see it teamers are the real "problem" for ranked play. 1v1 is ofcourse not a problem. Only one buyout. 2v2 3v3 etc would cause some problems as it is not easy to judge how one player plays if ranking is only based on how the team does. If one goes for buyout rank ourder that would cause problems by players doing it on purpose in a order to reduce other good players rank to avoid playing them in future and could be abused. If one also just have a single team

Hi I have played the game quite a bit now and in recent times won 5 in a row. I really like the game! I am not an expert by any means but here is my own opinion to why scientists are superior vs all but a game where everyone else starts as scavanager since that forces the scientists to go for carbon and even then it is a tight race. 1. Scientists gain a 2 for 1 tile advantage claim by planting on top of a resource with a resource building of that resource type. 2. Scientist

+1 to an option for time limited games ending with highest networth.

So if I understand this correctly if you have scientific buildings then buyout a scientific player you can still gain the adjacency bonus as both have the same building type?

Goon squades on off worlds compleatly counters black market anyhow and is the first thing i set up at that point. I think however having an end game unit is fine and the whole game is designed around this "off world trading" so I think it is suiting for the game to in many cases end with trading back to the home world. Also if we look at this from a math perspective - I dont know how long the off world timer is but let us say 60 seconds as an example for 40-70k of money that is around 1

A lot of good comments. I will just add that if you drive up the food cost so he cant sell offworld - would not that player simply sell on this world ^^