Planetary Datalinks Free Ride. - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Strategies and Tactics
  Planetary Datalinks Free Ride.

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Planetary Datalinks Free Ride.

Jo Beare posted 05-06-99 08:55 PM ET
The Planetary Datalinks SP seems, at first glance, to be a waist of time. I'm sure that this is common belief, since there is not much reference to it in the forum.
I have adopted a strategy to exploit this SP to the fullest. Once the Planetary Datalinks is complete, the object to shift your reseach resouces into other areas.
First, I scrap all research facilties and use the energy to hurry the building of more useful facilities(Tree Farms and Hab Complexes). Then I go to social engineering and put labs at 0%, economy at 60-70%, and psych at 30-40%. Just enough psych to push a majority of the cities to Golden Age.
When you recieve techs via the Planetary Datalinks, trade, sell, or just give the tech to the factions that don't have it. The object here is to keep all of the factions as close in technology to each other as possible.
Try to keep the playing field level for as long as possible. Sooner or later one or two factions will start to pull away from the rest. At this point rebuild researh facilities and adjust social engineering accordingly. example(Economy 40%, Psych 30%, Labs 30%)
I've completed one game utilizing this stategy and transceded in the year 2414 with a score of 482%. Could have been a lot better.

Smeagol posted 05-06-99 09:03 PM ET
Personally I prefer to get as far ahead in tech as I possibly can, so the Planetary Datalinks is just something I build so that no one else (Miriam!) can get it. I wouldn't want Yang coming at me with Planet Busters too long before I can build orbital defense pods, and I certainly wouldn't want the Spartans or Believers coming at me with equal or superior weapons. But I guess it depends on your playing style-- I play the more "peaceful, builder" factions, with free market, so I need to stay ahead in tech.
Plato90s posted 05-06-99 09:48 PM ET
Now that I've played SMAC for a couple of months, it seems that I inevitably fall into certain goals. The most pressing one is the race for Self-Aware Machines. The need for Orbital Defense Pods is almost obsessive.
It's just damn annoying how early the PlanetBuster can become available.
Smeagol posted 05-06-99 10:09 PM ET
Plato-- It's almost ridiculous how early you can get planet busters, but I'm usually the first to get them by a long run. Should I be building them early just to threaten other factions with? I've never been PBed and have only used them for fun in cheat mode to see what they do. What kind of an impact does having them (but not using them) have on diplomacy?
Travathian posted 05-07-99 12:32 AM ET
Bad news, one, you're going to get enviromental damage at all bases, and the more you PB, the more you get. In my current game, I am just PB the hell out of Miriam, Yang, and Diedre. I now have 30+ eco damage at each base. Plus the fact that nobody will talk me, and they are all vendetta. Oh darn =(
Smeagol posted 05-07-99 02:10 AM ET
I don't mean use PBs, just make a few and keep them. I'm wondering how the AI reacts to this.
drunkenkatori posted 05-07-99 04:25 AM ET
If you have and hold PBs, pressed factions might preemptively strike you. It's a fairly natural reaction. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to "launch on warning", so there is no reason to not do it if you feel you are in dire straits. It's not clear how you can settle into a balance of "mutually assured destruction".
drunkenkatori posted 05-07-99 04:25 AM ET
If you have and hold PBs, pressed factions might preemptively strike you. It's a fairly natural reaction. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to "launch on warning", so there is no reason to not do it if you feel you are in dire straits. It's not clear how you can settle into a balance of "mutually assured destruction".
Urban Ranger posted 05-07-99 08:21 AM ET
That seems to be one of the things missing: right now, even if you hold PBs, you cannot launch them at the bases, or at least the factions, that launch them at you.
Urban Ranger posted 05-07-99 08:25 AM ET
I would not recommend dismantling research facilities in favour of other structures for most of them provide additional benefits. For example, the Research Hospital stops plagues (if you don't hve the Human Genome Project) and the Biology Lab can give you a beneficial random event.
Another point to bear in mind is inefficiency. The greater the difference between your econ and lab setting, the greater the inefficiency, to reflect "diminishing of returns."
Urban Ranger posted 05-07-99 08:27 AM ET
Also, network nodes function as virtual theaters if you have the Virtual World SP.
Smeagol posted 05-07-99 12:55 PM ET
Personally I think missiles and PBs should come later in the game than orbital spaceflight-- give them infinite range, but make them cost a great deal more minerals. That way they would have infinite range, which is more realistic, but everyone would have their defenses up already and they wouldn't unbalance the game as much as I believe they do.
Lloyd posted 05-07-99 11:08 PM ET
Separation between Labs and Economy doesn't just cause inefficiency, it also wastes the potential value of the Energy Bank/Network Node et al improvements, which lowers the overall effect of a faction's total energy output. This was true back in CivII--although I didn't need an "inefficiency" penalty as a further discouragement, it makes me even more reluctant to depart from the 50/50 split.
Lloyd
Urban Ranger posted 05-07-99 11:46 PM ET
I agree that PBs should come later, and costs a lot more to build. Perhaps they even need special facilities, say, Nuclear Processing Plants, for construction. This, coupled with the ability to destroy specific facilities with cruise missiles, makes it almost livable with PBs. Right now they are just too much of a cheap kill.
G e o r g e r i f i c posted 05-08-99 01:48 AM ET
Never tried this in SMAC, but I did with the Great Library back in Civ2. I found that it was often faster just to build lots of bases and research them myself (I get impatient on techs). Of course, with up to 6 others, it could work really nicely.
Lloyd posted 05-08-99 03:25 AM ET
The Great Library was important to grab in CivII just to prevent someone else from getting it--since PD requires 3 other instead of 2 other, it's not that big a deal to me, and it's available at a time when the Nexus and other goodies are more important.
Question: Does anyone else find that the Merchant Exchange is like the Colossus in CivII, i.e. the Secret Project that keeps the AI busy while you build the good stuff...?
Lloyd
Bad Explanation posted 05-10-99 02:08 AM ET
Seems like PBs coming before ODPs is intended to mirror Earth's arms race. Because everybody's so good at outwitting the AI, it never really works like this, but I be the game designers had this kind of progression in mind:
People develop nukes, use 'em for awhile without noticing the horrible effect it's having on the environment, then by the time a defense is finally invented, there's a pretty big ecological problem going on.
I imagine it *could* work that way in Multiplayer games, if you had particularly vicious opponents. After all, if one guy starts PBing you, are you just gonna sit there? (as opposed to the AI, who seem to use it sparingly, a human player is much more likely to go for wanton carnage)
Plato90s posted 05-10-99 08:02 AM ET
The early availability of the PlanetBuster wouldn't be so annoying if not for the unlimited range cheat.
The first generation of nuclear weapons had to be delivered by bombers. If you were able to keep enemy bombers out, you could keep your core cities safe. It wasn't until the development of the ICBM that there was no defense. The "teleporting missle" bug in SMAC, however, means that all PBs are ICBMs by default.
Now, I'd be much more in favor of restructure the PB to cause far less damage and creating an ICBM unit which can launch from anywhere and land anywhere [much like current AI PBs] which is available later. So the PB would be more of a tactical nuke while the ICBM is a strategic nuke.
No doubt the programmers throught that it would be possible to keep the enemy AI's PBs away from your core cities prior to the development of ODPs, but the teleport bug makes it impossible.
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Planetary Datalinks Free Ride.
Jo Beare	posted 05-06-99 08:55 PM ET The Planetary Datalinks SP seems, at first glance, to be a waist of time. I'm sure that this is common belief, since there is not much reference to it in the forum. I have adopted a strategy to exploit this SP to the fullest. Once the Planetary Datalinks is complete, the object to shift your reseach resouces into other areas. First, I scrap all research facilties and use the energy to hurry the building of more useful facilities(Tree Farms and Hab Complexes). Then I go to social engineering and put labs at 0%, economy at 60-70%, and psych at 30-40%. Just enough psych to push a majority of the cities to Golden Age. When you recieve techs via the Planetary Datalinks, trade, sell, or just give the tech to the factions that don't have it. The object here is to keep all of the factions as close in technology to each other as possible. Try to keep the playing field level for as long as possible. Sooner or later one or two factions will start to pull away from the rest. At this point rebuild researh facilities and adjust social engineering accordingly. example(Economy 40%, Psych 30%, Labs 30%) I've completed one game utilizing this stategy and transceded in the year 2414 with a score of 482%. Could have been a lot better.
Smeagol	posted 05-06-99 09:03 PM ET Personally I prefer to get as far ahead in tech as I possibly can, so the Planetary Datalinks is just something I build so that no one else (Miriam!) can get it. I wouldn't want Yang coming at me with Planet Busters too long before I can build orbital defense pods, and I certainly wouldn't want the Spartans or Believers coming at me with equal or superior weapons. But I guess it depends on your playing style-- I play the more "peaceful, builder" factions, with free market, so I need to stay ahead in tech.
Plato90s	posted 05-06-99 09:48 PM ET Now that I've played SMAC for a couple of months, it seems that I inevitably fall into certain goals. The most pressing one is the race for Self-Aware Machines. The need for Orbital Defense Pods is almost obsessive. It's just damn annoying how early the PlanetBuster can become available.
Smeagol	posted 05-06-99 10:09 PM ET Plato-- It's almost ridiculous how early you can get planet busters, but I'm usually the first to get them by a long run. Should I be building them early just to threaten other factions with? I've never been PBed and have only used them for fun in cheat mode to see what they do. What kind of an impact does having them (but not using them) have on diplomacy?
Travathian	posted 05-07-99 12:32 AM ET Bad news, one, you're going to get enviromental damage at all bases, and the more you PB, the more you get. In my current game, I am just PB the hell out of Miriam, Yang, and Diedre. I now have 30+ eco damage at each base. Plus the fact that nobody will talk me, and they are all vendetta. Oh darn =(
Smeagol	posted 05-07-99 02:10 AM ET I don't mean use PBs, just make a few and keep them. I'm wondering how the AI reacts to this.
drunkenkatori	posted 05-07-99 04:25 AM ET If you have and hold PBs, pressed factions might preemptively strike you. It's a fairly natural reaction. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to "launch on warning", so there is no reason to not do it if you feel you are in dire straits. It's not clear how you can settle into a balance of "mutually assured destruction".
drunkenkatori	posted 05-07-99 04:25 AM ET If you have and hold PBs, pressed factions might preemptively strike you. It's a fairly natural reaction. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to "launch on warning", so there is no reason to not do it if you feel you are in dire straits. It's not clear how you can settle into a balance of "mutually assured destruction".
Urban Ranger	posted 05-07-99 08:21 AM ET That seems to be one of the things missing: right now, even if you hold PBs, you cannot launch them at the bases, or at least the factions, that launch them at you.
Urban Ranger	posted 05-07-99 08:25 AM ET I would not recommend dismantling research facilities in favour of other structures for most of them provide additional benefits. For example, the Research Hospital stops plagues (if you don't hve the Human Genome Project) and the Biology Lab can give you a beneficial random event. Another point to bear in mind is inefficiency. The greater the difference between your econ and lab setting, the greater the inefficiency, to reflect "diminishing of returns."
Urban Ranger	posted 05-07-99 08:27 AM ET Also, network nodes function as virtual theaters if you have the Virtual World SP.
Smeagol	posted 05-07-99 12:55 PM ET Personally I think missiles and PBs should come later in the game than orbital spaceflight-- give them infinite range, but make them cost a great deal more minerals. That way they would have infinite range, which is more realistic, but everyone would have their defenses up already and they wouldn't unbalance the game as much as I believe they do.
Lloyd	posted 05-07-99 11:08 PM ET Separation between Labs and Economy doesn't just cause inefficiency, it also wastes the potential value of the Energy Bank/Network Node et al improvements, which lowers the overall effect of a faction's total energy output. This was true back in CivII--although I didn't need an "inefficiency" penalty as a further discouragement, it makes me even more reluctant to depart from the 50/50 split. Lloyd
Urban Ranger	posted 05-07-99 11:46 PM ET I agree that PBs should come later, and costs a lot more to build. Perhaps they even need special facilities, say, Nuclear Processing Plants, for construction. This, coupled with the ability to destroy specific facilities with cruise missiles, makes it almost livable with PBs. Right now they are just too much of a cheap kill.
G e o r g e r i f i c	posted 05-08-99 01:48 AM ET Never tried this in SMAC, but I did with the Great Library back in Civ2. I found that it was often faster just to build lots of bases and research them myself (I get impatient on techs). Of course, with up to 6 others, it could work really nicely.
Lloyd	posted 05-08-99 03:25 AM ET The Great Library was important to grab in CivII just to prevent someone else from getting it--since PD requires 3 other instead of 2 other, it's not that big a deal to me, and it's available at a time when the Nexus and other goodies are more important. Question: Does anyone else find that the Merchant Exchange is like the Colossus in CivII, i.e. the Secret Project that keeps the AI busy while you build the good stuff...? Lloyd
Bad Explanation	posted 05-10-99 02:08 AM ET Seems like PBs coming before ODPs is intended to mirror Earth's arms race. Because everybody's so good at outwitting the AI, it never really works like this, but I be the game designers had this kind of progression in mind: People develop nukes, use 'em for awhile without noticing the horrible effect it's having on the environment, then by the time a defense is finally invented, there's a pretty big ecological problem going on. I imagine it could work that way in Multiplayer games, if you had particularly vicious opponents. After all, if one guy starts PBing you, are you just gonna sit there? (as opposed to the AI, who seem to use it sparingly, a human player is much more likely to go for wanton carnage)
Plato90s	posted 05-10-99 08:02 AM ET The early availability of the PlanetBuster wouldn't be so annoying if not for the unlimited range cheat. The first generation of nuclear weapons had to be delivered by bombers. If you were able to keep enemy bombers out, you could keep your core cities safe. It wasn't until the development of the ICBM that there was no defense. The "teleporting missle" bug in SMAC, however, means that all PBs are ICBMs by default. Now, I'd be much more in favor of restructure the PB to cause far less damage and creating an ICBM unit which can launch from anywhere and land anywhere [much like current AI PBs] which is available later. So the PB would be more of a tactical nuke while the ICBM is a strategic nuke. No doubt the programmers throught that it would be possible to keep the enemy AI's PBs away from your core cities prior to the development of ODPs, but the teleport bug makes it impossible.