What happen when two cities are built close to each other?

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Strategies and Tactics
  What happen when two cities are built close to each other?

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   What happen when two cities are built close to each other?

mael posted 06-04-99 04:32 AM ET
Do they share resources? or are totally independent => meaning no penalty?
iak posted 06-04-99 06:32 AM ET
Each square can only be used by one worker or supply crawler at a time regardless of where the worker/crawler comes from. So each base will have less squares to use (shared squares can only be used by one of the bases). Squares in use by other bases (or in other faction's territory) will appear dimmed in the window that shows the production radius.
Fjorxc the Maniac posted 06-04-99 10:42 AM ET
And that's a favorite tactic of the AI, building cities with barely one square between them, causing me no shortness of annoyance when I conquer them... dastards.

Fjorxc the Maniac
Unwashed Village Idiot,
Wanderer,
CWALer,
8th Canadian Faction of Humanity.
Gixxer posted 06-04-99 11:10 AM ET
A little overlap doesn't affect either base too bad. I often use this tactic to share a mineral bonus square. While one base is building facilities the other can concentrate on growth or science.
The AI does this pretty harshly in the Monsoon Jungle, but it does make it easy to take over most of these bases. Once one base is liberated, an elite infantry or any speeder can move, attack and retreat back into the conquered base in one turn. The first base usually suffers several turns of hunger though.
laurens posted 06-04-99 11:17 AM ET
Try not to do that.
Apart from the advantage of getting maximum resources from forests towards the endgame, you make good, and fast, targets for planet busters cleansing scheme.
laurens posted 06-04-99 11:18 AM ET
sorry, typo error from last mail...
Apart from not having the advantage of getting maximum resources from forests towards the endgame, you make good, and fast, targets for planet busters cleansing scheme.
icosahedron posted 06-04-99 01:56 PM ET
Like most game decisions, this one is conditional. Sometimes it is better to put two bases close to one another, though only rarely is it justifiably better to have them separated by only one square unless that is a diagonal separation.
The most obvious case is when just starting out with UoP. You want to get that research cranking quickly, to make sure you get Secrets of the Human Brain. More generally, having a tight, twin-city core to your empire can be very comforting in the early game.
- icosahedron
Gixxer posted 06-04-99 02:17 PM ET
laurens-In my games, factions will possess planet busters, but no one actually hucks any of them. I'll keep one, for retaliation purposes, but no one will make the first move.
Will AI factions take the initiative? or have I just been lucky?
BTW what exactly is an icosahedron?
Eris posted 06-04-99 02:58 PM ET
If you do find yourself needing to overlap cities a bit, try to stagger them so the base squares aren't directly in the same "row" or "column" of grid squares. If you're only overlapping by 1-2 squares, it's generally fine. Any more than that is like gouging your eyes out before trying to paint a picture: it's possible, but painful and prone to bad results.
I /do/ wish the AI was... I guess I mostly mean 'pickier' rather than 'smarter' about city placement. They overlap when I don't think it's really necessary (that is, not to get a special square and not because they're squeezed in somewhere small), and they have a tendency to overlap by a LOT more than I think is a good idea... and let's not get started about how they choose where to stick seabases. (In the middle of deep ocean that can't be improved... what a BRILLIANT idea! Why didn't /I/ think of that? ) But the logic's pretty tricky as it is, so I'm not complaining; /most/ of their decisions make sense. Still, particularly for some factions, taking over these ill-begotten sprawls of humanity does become an annoyance.
Unless it's the Hive. For some reason, I truly love taking over Hive cities, with an absolute passion, no matter how difficult they are to manage afterwards (and sometimes I give them away anyhow).
sandworm posted 06-04-99 02:59 PM ET
icosahedron,
a twenty sided 3D structure e.g., the 20-sided AD&D die, if you remember AD&D,

a lot of sports "domes" are halves or smaller portions of icosahedral "spheres" (but they're not spherical, they're icosahedral),
most virus "shells" are also icosahedral, which is way more than you wanted or needed to know, BTW icosahedron, the virus thing was not intended as a flame.
Gixxer posted 06-04-99 03:14 PM ET
Oh, icosahe-DRON, no such thing as too much information. Thanks sandworm.
swimjakes posted 06-04-99 03:38 PM ET
What is an AI?
Gixxer posted 06-04-99 03:57 PM ET
Artificial Intelligence
Eris posted 06-04-99 04:22 PM ET
Which, as used, is somewhat a misnomer, but it sounds so much /cooler/ than 'decision tree with limited branches', doesn't it?
<pedantic-mode>
Humans have a decision tree, albeit generally one accessed fully subconsciously, as well, but their trees 'grow' -- er, usually -- as they gain experience and they have the fuzzy logic and adaptability that let them deal with totally unknown situations and 'match' them with things a computer would likely miss as 'similar' to base their decision on. That's why AI is, at the present time, always going to inevitably be inferior to human intelligences on the average and over a period of time for anything like a strategy game; they have only as much 'intelligence' as was explicitly put in them and they can't really 'learn'. Hence, it's not /precisely/ true intelligence, but only a nitpicker (like me) who really wanted to leave work about 2 hours ago (like me), in part because she's been sick for a week (like me) would have bothered pointing this out.
</pedantic-mode>
What that says about people like me who can't seem to beat the AI at certain levels of certain strategy games, I'm not sure.
LocustOfChiron posted 06-04-99 08:04 PM ET
But would we really want the AI to be as able to learn as a human? Then who knows what would happen? Maybe they would take over the world! Or maybe we would all get our asses whipped at SMAC? :-)
Oleg Leschoff posted 06-05-99 10:48 AM ET
How about ICS? Powerful thing.
Maybe it's somewhat less effective in SMAC because tile's terrain type does not affect it's production when city is built there.
But building cities at 2 squares between each other is a good strategy for the next reasons.
1. A great expansion rate. Much less turns to go with colony pod to target tile.
2. Much more effecient terrain resources usage. Very helps when you start on not very big island.
3. In the beginning, cities grows slow, so you won't experience troubles (that is, you will have to create specialists) for very long time. By the time when you will, you will probably be far ahead everyone else in population, science and economy.
4. When terrain is arid or moist it's better to plant forest there and build tree farm and hybrid forest (it also increases economy and psych, so you will need it anyway), except case when this tile is above 2000 meters (in this case, you maybe will prefer to have solar collector there). But when the majority of tiles are with forests, you will get a really trouble with ecodamage (on high difficulty levels). But with dense built cities you won't experience this, because each city won't get so much resources. And along with this, all tiles will be used.
laurens posted 06-05-99 12:32 PM ET
To Gixxer:
Wow... u must really be lucky. Are u playing at Transcend? And try to play the game till the later stages (2400 onwards).
That Yang guy did this to me twice - broke the brotherhood/sisterhood and treated me 5 to 6 planet busters on the same turn.
Zoetrope posted 06-08-99 10:39 AM ET
Oleg, are you sure about the base tile's terrain type having no effect?
Special resources in base squares do apply: I built a base on an energy bonus square and produced six credits per turn there.
DilithiumDad posted 06-08-99 10:54 AM ET
Base square bonuses are retained, and you can build a farm or solar collector and then a base on top of that --forest doesn't work.
I always try to put boreholes in an overlap square --this allows me to swap it between bases to encourage a SP or prototype or to avoid ecodamage.
Also, I build early bases with overlap for the reasons mentioned (less time in transit) but then I spread them out more later.
What about the Planetary Transit System? This totally alters the way you need to lay out bases. You need to be able to get 6 nutrients to feed your 3 population --sometimtes with one of the 3 being a doctor or empath. After I get the PTS, I always terraform first, them move in a colony pod. Presto! An instantly thriving colony. The PTS is one of my favorite projects, especially for the Hive where you have an early population advantage and a late penalty (no Democracy/Planned/Creche +6 growth population booms).
icosahedron posted 06-08-99 01:15 PM ET
sandworm, thanks for the assist.
An icosahedron is the most highly faceted of the Platonic solids (tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron, icosahedron). It has 20 equilateral triangular faces. It
is the most symmetric possible volumetric shape (most rotational axes of symmetry) short of the sphere.
- icosahedron
Gixxer posted 06-10-99 09:29 AM ET
laurens:
I played one game on Transcend, but mostly play on Thinker.
Also, I keep track on who is building them and sabatage the production of the PB, or attack the base. The AI will usually switch production to a defender. A few do get completed, but never actually launched. I guess I am lucky, or have to adjust to transcend.
Sorry it took so long to respond, I've been outta town.
icosahedron:
I loved geometry!
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: What happen when two cities are built close to each other?
mael	posted 06-04-99 04:32 AM ET Do they share resources? or are totally independent => meaning no penalty?
iak	posted 06-04-99 06:32 AM ET Each square can only be used by one worker or supply crawler at a time regardless of where the worker/crawler comes from. So each base will have less squares to use (shared squares can only be used by one of the bases). Squares in use by other bases (or in other faction's territory) will appear dimmed in the window that shows the production radius.
Fjorxc the Maniac	posted 06-04-99 10:42 AM ET And that's a favorite tactic of the AI, building cities with barely one square between them, causing me no shortness of annoyance when I conquer them... dastards. Fjorxc the Maniac Unwashed Village Idiot, Wanderer, CWALer, 8th Canadian Faction of Humanity.
Gixxer	posted 06-04-99 11:10 AM ET A little overlap doesn't affect either base too bad. I often use this tactic to share a mineral bonus square. While one base is building facilities the other can concentrate on growth or science. The AI does this pretty harshly in the Monsoon Jungle, but it does make it easy to take over most of these bases. Once one base is liberated, an elite infantry or any speeder can move, attack and retreat back into the conquered base in one turn. The first base usually suffers several turns of hunger though.
laurens	posted 06-04-99 11:17 AM ET Try not to do that. Apart from the advantage of getting maximum resources from forests towards the endgame, you make good, and fast, targets for planet busters cleansing scheme.
laurens	posted 06-04-99 11:18 AM ET sorry, typo error from last mail... Apart from not having the advantage of getting maximum resources from forests towards the endgame, you make good, and fast, targets for planet busters cleansing scheme.
icosahedron	posted 06-04-99 01:56 PM ET Like most game decisions, this one is conditional. Sometimes it is better to put two bases close to one another, though only rarely is it justifiably better to have them separated by only one square unless that is a diagonal separation. The most obvious case is when just starting out with UoP. You want to get that research cranking quickly, to make sure you get Secrets of the Human Brain. More generally, having a tight, twin-city core to your empire can be very comforting in the early game. - icosahedron
Gixxer	posted 06-04-99 02:17 PM ET laurens-In my games, factions will possess planet busters, but no one actually hucks any of them. I'll keep one, for retaliation purposes, but no one will make the first move. Will AI factions take the initiative? or have I just been lucky? BTW what exactly is an icosahedron?
Eris	posted 06-04-99 02:58 PM ET If you do find yourself needing to overlap cities a bit, try to stagger them so the base squares aren't directly in the same "row" or "column" of grid squares. If you're only overlapping by 1-2 squares, it's generally fine. Any more than that is like gouging your eyes out before trying to paint a picture: it's possible, but painful and prone to bad results. I /do/ wish the AI was... I guess I mostly mean 'pickier' rather than 'smarter' about city placement. They overlap when I don't think it's really necessary (that is, not to get a special square and not because they're squeezed in somewhere small), and they have a tendency to overlap by a LOT more than I think is a good idea... and let's not get started about how they choose where to stick seabases. (In the middle of deep ocean that can't be improved... what a BRILLIANT idea! Why didn't /I/ think of that? ) But the logic's pretty tricky as it is, so I'm not complaining; /most/ of their decisions make sense. Still, particularly for some factions, taking over these ill-begotten sprawls of humanity does become an annoyance. Unless it's the Hive. For some reason, I truly love taking over Hive cities, with an absolute passion, no matter how difficult they are to manage afterwards (and sometimes I give them away anyhow).
sandworm	posted 06-04-99 02:59 PM ET icosahedron, a twenty sided 3D structure e.g., the 20-sided AD&D die, if you remember AD&D, a lot of sports "domes" are halves or smaller portions of icosahedral "spheres" (but they're not spherical, they're icosahedral), most virus "shells" are also icosahedral, which is way more than you wanted or needed to know, BTW icosahedron, the virus thing was not intended as a flame.
Gixxer	posted 06-04-99 03:14 PM ET Oh, icosahe-DRON, no such thing as too much information. Thanks sandworm.
swimjakes	posted 06-04-99 03:38 PM ET What is an AI?
Gixxer	posted 06-04-99 03:57 PM ET Artificial Intelligence
Eris	posted 06-04-99 04:22 PM ET Which, as used, is somewhat a misnomer, but it sounds so much /cooler/ than 'decision tree with limited branches', doesn't it? <pedantic-mode> Humans have a decision tree, albeit generally one accessed fully subconsciously, as well, but their trees 'grow' -- er, usually -- as they gain experience and they have the fuzzy logic and adaptability that let them deal with totally unknown situations and 'match' them with things a computer would likely miss as 'similar' to base their decision on. That's why AI is, at the present time, always going to inevitably be inferior to human intelligences on the average and over a period of time for anything like a strategy game; they have only as much 'intelligence' as was explicitly put in them and they can't really 'learn'. Hence, it's not /precisely/ true intelligence, but only a nitpicker (like me) who really wanted to leave work about 2 hours ago (like me), in part because she's been sick for a week (like me) would have bothered pointing this out. </pedantic-mode> What that says about people like me who can't seem to beat the AI at certain levels of certain strategy games, I'm not sure.
LocustOfChiron	posted 06-04-99 08:04 PM ET But would we really want the AI to be as able to learn as a human? Then who knows what would happen? Maybe they would take over the world! Or maybe we would all get our asses whipped at SMAC? :-)
Oleg Leschoff	posted 06-05-99 10:48 AM ET How about ICS? Powerful thing. Maybe it's somewhat less effective in SMAC because tile's terrain type does not affect it's production when city is built there. But building cities at 2 squares between each other is a good strategy for the next reasons. 1. A great expansion rate. Much less turns to go with colony pod to target tile. 2. Much more effecient terrain resources usage. Very helps when you start on not very big island. 3. In the beginning, cities grows slow, so you won't experience troubles (that is, you will have to create specialists) for very long time. By the time when you will, you will probably be far ahead everyone else in population, science and economy. 4. When terrain is arid or moist it's better to plant forest there and build tree farm and hybrid forest (it also increases economy and psych, so you will need it anyway), except case when this tile is above 2000 meters (in this case, you maybe will prefer to have solar collector there). But when the majority of tiles are with forests, you will get a really trouble with ecodamage (on high difficulty levels). But with dense built cities you won't experience this, because each city won't get so much resources. And along with this, all tiles will be used.
laurens	posted 06-05-99 12:32 PM ET To Gixxer: Wow... u must really be lucky. Are u playing at Transcend? And try to play the game till the later stages (2400 onwards). That Yang guy did this to me twice - broke the brotherhood/sisterhood and treated me 5 to 6 planet busters on the same turn.
Zoetrope	posted 06-08-99 10:39 AM ET Oleg, are you sure about the base tile's terrain type having no effect? Special resources in base squares do apply: I built a base on an energy bonus square and produced six credits per turn there.
DilithiumDad	posted 06-08-99 10:54 AM ET Base square bonuses are retained, and you can build a farm or solar collector and then a base on top of that --forest doesn't work. I always try to put boreholes in an overlap square --this allows me to swap it between bases to encourage a SP or prototype or to avoid ecodamage. Also, I build early bases with overlap for the reasons mentioned (less time in transit) but then I spread them out more later. What about the Planetary Transit System? This totally alters the way you need to lay out bases. You need to be able to get 6 nutrients to feed your 3 population --sometimtes with one of the 3 being a doctor or empath. After I get the PTS, I always terraform first, them move in a colony pod. Presto! An instantly thriving colony. The PTS is one of my favorite projects, especially for the Hive where you have an early population advantage and a late penalty (no Democracy/Planned/Creche +6 growth population booms).
icosahedron	posted 06-08-99 01:15 PM ET sandworm, thanks for the assist. An icosahedron is the most highly faceted of the Platonic solids (tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron, icosahedron). It has 20 equilateral triangular faces. It is the most symmetric possible volumetric shape (most rotational axes of symmetry) short of the sphere. - icosahedron
Gixxer	posted 06-10-99 09:29 AM ET laurens: I played one game on Transcend, but mostly play on Thinker. Also, I keep track on who is building them and sabatage the production of the PB, or attack the base. The AI will usually switch production to a defender. A few do get completed, but never actually launched. I guess I am lucky, or have to adjust to transcend. Sorry it took so long to respond, I've been outta town. icosahedron: I loved geometry!