Maximizing supply crawlers' value for secret projects

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Strategies and Tactics
  Maximizing supply crawlers' value for secret projects

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Maximizing supply crawlers' value for secret projects

VictorK posted 05-24-99 07:06 AM ET
I have mentioned this before in the support and troubleshooting forum, but since this isn't really a bug, it could be considered a strategy. When you change the industry rating in social engineering, the amount of minerals "stocked" in a supply crawler also changes accordingly (the amount "stocked" in a supply crawler is equal to the cost of building it under the current society model). So before you assign a supply crawler to a SP (or unit prototype), you can maximize its value by minimizing your industry rating (i.e. set to power and switch away from positive industry modifiers), and if you switch back in the same turn you can even get the full upheavel refund. For example, to build a cost 600 SP, if you are at planned/wealth/eudaimonic (+4 industry) you only need supply crawlers worth 180 minerals to build it. (The modified cost is 360 minerals, and switching temporarily from +4 industry to -2 doubles your supply crawlers' value.)
As a side note (this may be obvious to many players already): once you can build supply crawlers you should never designate a base to building a SP unless you've accumulated enough supply crawlers around it (so that the SP can be completed within one or a few turns), and assign supply crawlers to the SP only in the last turn. This is obvious since supply crawlers can convoy resources before they are assigned to the SP, while minerals in the production box can't. Also, a supply crawler can convoy resources even after expending all its movement points.
Gixxer posted 05-24-99 09:08 AM ET
Yea, but when you lower your industry rating to improve the number of "stored" minerals in crawlers, the cost of building the SP goes up as well. Does this even accomplish anything?
ApcJK posted 05-24-99 11:14 AM ET
Yes it does. I hope you understand what i mean now:
At 0 industry before anything: 0/600.
At +4 industry: 0/360.
At +4 supply crawler 180 (300 originally).
At -2 supply crawler 360.
At -2 supply crawler contributes 360/720.
And after switching back to +4 360/360 minerals. So the amount of minerals already gone into production doesn't change.
Gixxer posted 05-24-99 03:17 PM ET
Now I'm confused even further. I thought that improving your industry rating decreases the amount of minerals needed to complete a project (Special, unit or facility) by 10% for each point industry is rated.
Say a special project takes 300 minerals to complete and a supply crawler takes 30 minerals to build. 10 crawlers could complete this in one turn.
If the industry is changed to +1, then the same project would take 270 minerals, but each crawler would now be hauling 27 minerals.
Same goes the other way except it takes 330 to complete and each crawler is carrying 33.
10 crawlers each time. This is how I thought it worked. What am I missing, I still don't see the advantage.
Plato90s posted 05-24-99 03:47 PM ET
The bug is that the minerals invested in a SP stays the same regardless of industry rating. So you start with these assumptions:
1) Each crawler costs 40 minerals in 0 industry.
2) The SP costs 600 minerals to build.
First, you set it up with industry +4. That supply crawler now costs only 24 minerals to build [40 - 40% bonus = 24]. Stockpile 9 of these.
Now, if you move those 9 crawlers into the SP building city, your progress is [24*9=216] / [600*0.6 = 360]. 216/360 makes the project 60% complete.
But if you switch to industry 0, then each crawler is worth 40 minerals, and the SP now costs 600 minerals to complete.
Move those 9 crawlers into the city, and the progress is 360/600 = 60% complete.
Here's the fun part..... Switch the industry rating back to +4. The SP now costs only 360 minerals to build. Since Social Engineering change won't alter the amount of minerals already invested, you still have 360 minerals in the SP. Now, your SP has 360/360 = complete. You just picked up 144 bonus minerals.
Gixxer posted 05-24-99 04:23 PM ET
Ahhh, Now I see...
So, it would be wise to increase the industry rating for a turn just before hurrying a SP. Right? (disregarding the upheaval cost)
I appreciate the explaination Plato90.
Victor posted 05-24-99 06:03 PM ET
I am not VictorK.
This is an industrial loophole which Yin correctly identified in a list of bugs he sent to FIRAXIS. Yes, it is a bug, which if used would be considered a cheat.
VictorK posted 05-25-99 06:32 AM ET
It is not a bug. A bug is something that does not work the way the designers/programmers want it; in this case it works exactly the way the designers want it, just that they don't know that it can be abused. It is a design oversight or "feature", not a bug. However, there are other design oversights that I'm sure many players have been using them liberally as well (for example, as I mentioned above, a supply crawler can convoy resources before it is assigned to a SP).
Also, I don't know how this could be considered a cheat in a logical sense. Any time a player wants to make society changes (that involve the industry rating) when building a SP, he may have accidentally taken advantage of this "feature". It would be illogical to say that if it is unintentional it is allowed, but if it is abused it is a "cheat". To logically define it as a "cheat", a self-imposed rule must be defined based on game situation, not player intention. The only reasonable rule I can think of is to ban the upheavel refund in this situation, but the player can still use it if he makes the society changes in two turns. It would be unreasonable to ban the player from making any society changes (that involve the industry rating) whenever a SP is under construction. If we cannot logically define it as a "cheat", we can only accept it as a valid "strategy". Any solution?
Zoetrope posted 05-25-99 06:46 AM ET
Where in the dictionary does it say that bugs exist only in the implementation?
If the design's faulty, that's also a bug.
(Wish more programmers realised that!)
jimmytrick posted 05-25-99 08:15 AM ET
We should all feel free to enjoy playing around with these types of things in Single Play.
Can we agree that it would be cheating to do this in MP?
VictorK posted 05-25-99 08:54 AM ET
The question is, what would be cheating? You can't define cheating based on player intention, you can only define cheating based on what the player actually does. The only reasonable restriction that can be self-imposed is to ban the upheavel refund when using this "feature", but the player can still take advantage of it by making the society changes in two turns. It doesn't really matter whether it is single-player or multi-player.
icosahedron posted 05-25-99 11:59 AM ET
It's cheating. The design flaw is the use of absolute numbers of minerals invested rather than fractional completion of a project.
- icosahedron
Porkmonger posted 05-25-99 02:25 PM ET
Is it cheating? how much money does it cost to switch your SE like four times? I bet you could _buy_ the secret project with that money and the minerals gained from teh supply crawlers.
VictorK posted 05-26-99 01:37 AM ET
Still, nobody has answered my question, so perhaps I shall rephrase it more clearly: if this is cheating, then precisely what player actions would constitute cheating?
Moreover, I don't think this should be considered a cheat, really. The game was definitely designed to work this way, and it doesn't become a cheat just because it can be abused. As I have said above, there are other design oversights or "features" that many players have been using liberally, and they are not considered cheats. For example, the use of armored probe teams to defend bases.
Another example, which I have mentioned above but I would like to elaborate more on it, is that supply crawlers can be used to convoy resources and then assigned to a SP. I am sure that many players have done this, and this is not considered a cheat. However, I don't think this was the original design intention, since the computer players never do it, and it requires too much micromanagement to take full advantage of it, yet it can be a huge advantage. I think they meant that the supply crawler can either convoy resources or build secret projects, but they have overlooked the issues that arise when both can be done by all the same unit. It is one of the reasons why the UoP is indeed the best faction in single-player transcend. You get Industrial Automation earlier than others, and you get bonus minerals at no cost. I guess many players who have trouble playing the UoP at transcend do not use supply crawlers as much as they should. Base population isn't that important until the point where you have population boom in most of your bases, but then when you have population boom in your bases, you're already way ahead of the computer players (in research, at least).
VictorK posted 05-26-99 01:54 AM ET
Porkmonger: It costs nothing. The game allows you to get the full upheavel refund, unless you consider it a cheat and ban yourself from certain actions. If you ban yourself from getting the full upheavel refund, at transcend you need 80 energy to switch the society back and forth in one category in two turns. Assume you switch from Wealth to Power, and your IND rating changes from +1 to -2, then you cash in supply crawlers and switch back the next turn. For a cost 400 SP (cost 360 at IND+1), you gain 90 minerals with the switch (270->360). With 80 energy, you can buy only 20 minerals for a SP. And you can complete more than one SPs in one turn.
Gixxer posted 05-26-99 09:06 AM ET
So if this is considered "Cheating", then whould you consider these cheating as well:
Forcing base growth by building colony pods in an existing base?
Or
Switching unit support to pact brothers bases?
I do the first up to the limit before the appropriate facility is built (Hab Complex, Dome), then I do it some more. To do so any further would be "cheating".
I do the second when a pact brother's "Back is against the wall". Again, any further would be "cheating".
Series II posted 05-26-99 10:07 AM ET
I think that I have read in these threads that you can use supply crawlers to harvest special squares that are in the 'wilderness'.
I understand how to move energy, food and minerals using a supply crawler from one city to another, but do not know how you 'harvest' wilderness special squares.
Can this be done?
On a seperate note: Cheating... As long as you are playing with yourself (?) you make the rules. The computer cheats big time. I see no reason to not use some enhancements for my benefit.
Now if you are in multi-play each player should be playing with the same rules.
marc420w posted 05-26-99 05:41 PM ET
Two notes...
You harvest squares in the wilderness by moving the supply crawler there and pressing "o".
It would seem to me, that the fix to the original problem in the discussion is to change the upheaval costs. One, you shouldn't get a refund. And two, if you do two changes at once, it costs a lot more than one change. So to me the second change in the same year should cost the inflated cost.
It would seem to make a lot of sense for the upheaval cost to skyrocket when a government keeps switching from one SE model to another several times a year.
In a multiplayer game, the rules are whatever everyone agrees to. In singleplayer its up to you. Personally, things that make it even easier to beat the AI take the fun out of the game, so I tend not to use them.
Gixxer posted 05-27-99 12:54 PM ET
Series II
You may be referring to fact that when you make an improvement in a forest square it will add 5 minerals to the production of the base if inside the production radius. If it's not in a base radius, 5 minerals will go to the Formers base who "harvested" the forest.
Series II posted 05-27-99 01:33 PM ET
Marc420 anwsered it. Using the 'o' command will allow a supply crawler to 'harvest' resources.
Two other supply crawler questions. I do not seem to be able to do CRTL+SHIFT+M or CRTL+SHIFT+F to do Farm+Solar+road and Farm+mine+road. DO these commands work in version 3?
Second, i drilled a borehole last night. The squares surrounding the borehole were moist before the borehole and after they were rainy. Anyone else seen this?
Series II posted 05-27-99 02:12 PM ET
Sorry, I got confused. That last post is about formers and should have been in another forum.
I'm so sorry. Please don't flame me. I'll give you all (23) my energy credits and all my new techs (0)....
(Do I souond like the computer when you have killed it's last defender in it's last city and you have 6 units ready to move in.)
presence posted 05-27-99 10:50 PM ET
The social engineering/supply crawler combination is one of the most ingenous loophole manipulations that I've seen yet in this game, and I must say that I like the idea. I try to remain as opportunistic as possible in this game - 'cheating' without the computer knowing it is a form of art to me at this point.
VictorK posted 05-28-99 12:50 AM ET
When I play the game I try to be "honest", even against computer players (even though they aren't)... That is, if I've found loopholes in the game that can be manipulated, then I'll try to define a set of restrictions and then abide by it. For example, before v3 the game allowed boreholes to be built in adjacent squares, but I didn't do it (the rule: don't build a borehole when an adjacent former is building it). In this case, I can't think of a satisfactory rule that would disallow and only disallow this "cheat" in all circumstances, except for banning the upheavel refund. This would especially be a problem in multi-player, since if players have to agree on a set of rules, what is it precisely? If no rules based on strict actions are defined, a player could say (to both himself and other players), "I don't intend to cheat, I really have my own reason for switching society back and forth, and the SP is just 'accidentally' completed".
Speaking of cheating, how about this, which I have just discovered: whenever you complete production in a base with the build queue empty, you are essentially "cheating" (see my other post in the troubleshooting forum). So almost everyone who has played this game must have cheated.
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: Maximizing supply crawlers' value for secret projects
VictorK	posted 05-24-99 07:06 AM ET I have mentioned this before in the support and troubleshooting forum, but since this isn't really a bug, it could be considered a strategy. When you change the industry rating in social engineering, the amount of minerals "stocked" in a supply crawler also changes accordingly (the amount "stocked" in a supply crawler is equal to the cost of building it under the current society model). So before you assign a supply crawler to a SP (or unit prototype), you can maximize its value by minimizing your industry rating (i.e. set to power and switch away from positive industry modifiers), and if you switch back in the same turn you can even get the full upheavel refund. For example, to build a cost 600 SP, if you are at planned/wealth/eudaimonic (+4 industry) you only need supply crawlers worth 180 minerals to build it. (The modified cost is 360 minerals, and switching temporarily from +4 industry to -2 doubles your supply crawlers' value.) As a side note (this may be obvious to many players already): once you can build supply crawlers you should never designate a base to building a SP unless you've accumulated enough supply crawlers around it (so that the SP can be completed within one or a few turns), and assign supply crawlers to the SP only in the last turn. This is obvious since supply crawlers can convoy resources before they are assigned to the SP, while minerals in the production box can't. Also, a supply crawler can convoy resources even after expending all its movement points.
Gixxer	posted 05-24-99 09:08 AM ET Yea, but when you lower your industry rating to improve the number of "stored" minerals in crawlers, the cost of building the SP goes up as well. Does this even accomplish anything?
ApcJK	posted 05-24-99 11:14 AM ET Yes it does. I hope you understand what i mean now: At 0 industry before anything: 0/600. At +4 industry: 0/360. At +4 supply crawler 180 (300 originally). At -2 supply crawler 360. At -2 supply crawler contributes 360/720. And after switching back to +4 360/360 minerals. So the amount of minerals already gone into production doesn't change.
Gixxer	posted 05-24-99 03:17 PM ET Now I'm confused even further. I thought that improving your industry rating decreases the amount of minerals needed to complete a project (Special, unit or facility) by 10% for each point industry is rated. Say a special project takes 300 minerals to complete and a supply crawler takes 30 minerals to build. 10 crawlers could complete this in one turn. If the industry is changed to +1, then the same project would take 270 minerals, but each crawler would now be hauling 27 minerals. Same goes the other way except it takes 330 to complete and each crawler is carrying 33. 10 crawlers each time. This is how I thought it worked. What am I missing, I still don't see the advantage.
Plato90s	posted 05-24-99 03:47 PM ET The bug is that the minerals invested in a SP stays the same regardless of industry rating. So you start with these assumptions: 1) Each crawler costs 40 minerals in 0 industry. 2) The SP costs 600 minerals to build. First, you set it up with industry +4. That supply crawler now costs only 24 minerals to build [40 - 40% bonus = 24]. Stockpile 9 of these. Now, if you move those 9 crawlers into the SP building city, your progress is [249=216] / [6000.6 = 360]. 216/360 makes the project 60% complete. But if you switch to industry 0, then each crawler is worth 40 minerals, and the SP now costs 600 minerals to complete. Move those 9 crawlers into the city, and the progress is 360/600 = 60% complete. Here's the fun part..... Switch the industry rating back to +4. The SP now costs only 360 minerals to build. Since Social Engineering change won't alter the amount of minerals already invested, you still have 360 minerals in the SP. Now, your SP has 360/360 = complete. You just picked up 144 bonus minerals.
Gixxer	posted 05-24-99 04:23 PM ET Ahhh, Now I see... So, it would be wise to increase the industry rating for a turn just before hurrying a SP. Right? (disregarding the upheaval cost) I appreciate the explaination Plato90.
Victor	posted 05-24-99 06:03 PM ET I am not VictorK. This is an industrial loophole which Yin correctly identified in a list of bugs he sent to FIRAXIS. Yes, it is a bug, which if used would be considered a cheat.
VictorK	posted 05-25-99 06:32 AM ET It is not a bug. A bug is something that does not work the way the designers/programmers want it; in this case it works exactly the way the designers want it, just that they don't know that it can be abused. It is a design oversight or "feature", not a bug. However, there are other design oversights that I'm sure many players have been using them liberally as well (for example, as I mentioned above, a supply crawler can convoy resources before it is assigned to a SP). Also, I don't know how this could be considered a cheat in a logical sense. Any time a player wants to make society changes (that involve the industry rating) when building a SP, he may have accidentally taken advantage of this "feature". It would be illogical to say that if it is unintentional it is allowed, but if it is abused it is a "cheat". To logically define it as a "cheat", a self-imposed rule must be defined based on game situation, not player intention. The only reasonable rule I can think of is to ban the upheavel refund in this situation, but the player can still use it if he makes the society changes in two turns. It would be unreasonable to ban the player from making any society changes (that involve the industry rating) whenever a SP is under construction. If we cannot logically define it as a "cheat", we can only accept it as a valid "strategy". Any solution?
Zoetrope	posted 05-25-99 06:46 AM ET Where in the dictionary does it say that bugs exist only in the implementation? If the design's faulty, that's also a bug. (Wish more programmers realised that!)
jimmytrick	posted 05-25-99 08:15 AM ET We should all feel free to enjoy playing around with these types of things in Single Play. Can we agree that it would be cheating to do this in MP?
VictorK	posted 05-25-99 08:54 AM ET The question is, what would be cheating? You can't define cheating based on player intention, you can only define cheating based on what the player actually does. The only reasonable restriction that can be self-imposed is to ban the upheavel refund when using this "feature", but the player can still take advantage of it by making the society changes in two turns. It doesn't really matter whether it is single-player or multi-player.
icosahedron	posted 05-25-99 11:59 AM ET It's cheating. The design flaw is the use of absolute numbers of minerals invested rather than fractional completion of a project. - icosahedron
Porkmonger	posted 05-25-99 02:25 PM ET Is it cheating? how much money does it cost to switch your SE like four times? I bet you could _buy_ the secret project with that money and the minerals gained from teh supply crawlers.
VictorK	posted 05-26-99 01:37 AM ET Still, nobody has answered my question, so perhaps I shall rephrase it more clearly: if this is cheating, then precisely what player actions would constitute cheating? Moreover, I don't think this should be considered a cheat, really. The game was definitely designed to work this way, and it doesn't become a cheat just because it can be abused. As I have said above, there are other design oversights or "features" that many players have been using liberally, and they are not considered cheats. For example, the use of armored probe teams to defend bases. Another example, which I have mentioned above but I would like to elaborate more on it, is that supply crawlers can be used to convoy resources and then assigned to a SP. I am sure that many players have done this, and this is not considered a cheat. However, I don't think this was the original design intention, since the computer players never do it, and it requires too much micromanagement to take full advantage of it, yet it can be a huge advantage. I think they meant that the supply crawler can either convoy resources or build secret projects, but they have overlooked the issues that arise when both can be done by all the same unit. It is one of the reasons why the UoP is indeed the best faction in single-player transcend. You get Industrial Automation earlier than others, and you get bonus minerals at no cost. I guess many players who have trouble playing the UoP at transcend do not use supply crawlers as much as they should. Base population isn't that important until the point where you have population boom in most of your bases, but then when you have population boom in your bases, you're already way ahead of the computer players (in research, at least).
VictorK	posted 05-26-99 01:54 AM ET Porkmonger: It costs nothing. The game allows you to get the full upheavel refund, unless you consider it a cheat and ban yourself from certain actions. If you ban yourself from getting the full upheavel refund, at transcend you need 80 energy to switch the society back and forth in one category in two turns. Assume you switch from Wealth to Power, and your IND rating changes from +1 to -2, then you cash in supply crawlers and switch back the next turn. For a cost 400 SP (cost 360 at IND+1), you gain 90 minerals with the switch (270->360). With 80 energy, you can buy only 20 minerals for a SP. And you can complete more than one SPs in one turn.
Gixxer	posted 05-26-99 09:06 AM ET So if this is considered "Cheating", then whould you consider these cheating as well: Forcing base growth by building colony pods in an existing base? Or Switching unit support to pact brothers bases? I do the first up to the limit before the appropriate facility is built (Hab Complex, Dome), then I do it some more. To do so any further would be "cheating". I do the second when a pact brother's "Back is against the wall". Again, any further would be "cheating".
Series II	posted 05-26-99 10:07 AM ET I think that I have read in these threads that you can use supply crawlers to harvest special squares that are in the 'wilderness'. I understand how to move energy, food and minerals using a supply crawler from one city to another, but do not know how you 'harvest' wilderness special squares. Can this be done? On a seperate note: Cheating... As long as you are playing with yourself (?) you make the rules. The computer cheats big time. I see no reason to not use some enhancements for my benefit. Now if you are in multi-play each player should be playing with the same rules.
marc420w	posted 05-26-99 05:41 PM ET Two notes... You harvest squares in the wilderness by moving the supply crawler there and pressing "o". It would seem to me, that the fix to the original problem in the discussion is to change the upheaval costs. One, you shouldn't get a refund. And two, if you do two changes at once, it costs a lot more than one change. So to me the second change in the same year should cost the inflated cost. It would seem to make a lot of sense for the upheaval cost to skyrocket when a government keeps switching from one SE model to another several times a year. In a multiplayer game, the rules are whatever everyone agrees to. In singleplayer its up to you. Personally, things that make it even easier to beat the AI take the fun out of the game, so I tend not to use them.
Gixxer	posted 05-27-99 12:54 PM ET Series II You may be referring to fact that when you make an improvement in a forest square it will add 5 minerals to the production of the base if inside the production radius. If it's not in a base radius, 5 minerals will go to the Formers base who "harvested" the forest.
Series II	posted 05-27-99 01:33 PM ET Marc420 anwsered it. Using the 'o' command will allow a supply crawler to 'harvest' resources. Two other supply crawler questions. I do not seem to be able to do CRTL+SHIFT+M or CRTL+SHIFT+F to do Farm+Solar+road and Farm+mine+road. DO these commands work in version 3? Second, i drilled a borehole last night. The squares surrounding the borehole were moist before the borehole and after they were rainy. Anyone else seen this?
Series II	posted 05-27-99 02:12 PM ET Sorry, I got confused. That last post is about formers and should have been in another forum. I'm so sorry. Please don't flame me. I'll give you all (23) my energy credits and all my new techs (0).... (Do I souond like the computer when you have killed it's last defender in it's last city and you have 6 units ready to move in.)
presence	posted 05-27-99 10:50 PM ET The social engineering/supply crawler combination is one of the most ingenous loophole manipulations that I've seen yet in this game, and I must say that I like the idea. I try to remain as opportunistic as possible in this game - 'cheating' without the computer knowing it is a form of art to me at this point.
VictorK	posted 05-28-99 12:50 AM ET When I play the game I try to be "honest", even against computer players (even though they aren't)... That is, if I've found loopholes in the game that can be manipulated, then I'll try to define a set of restrictions and then abide by it. For example, before v3 the game allowed boreholes to be built in adjacent squares, but I didn't do it (the rule: don't build a borehole when an adjacent former is building it). In this case, I can't think of a satisfactory rule that would disallow and only disallow this "cheat" in all circumstances, except for banning the upheavel refund. This would especially be a problem in multi-player, since if players have to agree on a set of rules, what is it precisely? If no rules based on strict actions are defined, a player could say (to both himself and other players), "I don't intend to cheat, I really have my own reason for switching society back and forth, and the SP is just 'accidentally' completed". Speaking of cheating, how about this, which I have just discovered: whenever you complete production in a base with the build queue empty, you are essentially "cheating" (see my other post in the troubleshooting forum). So almost everyone who has played this game must have cheated.