posted 08-11-99 03:03 PM ET            

---

What level are you playing? I think that game doesn't let you starve a base to extinction on the bottom 1 or 2 levels. I know on higher levels, the game warns that you're about the build a colony pod and do you want to disband the base or delay production.

akathisia-every time someone leaves for ACOL, I get closer to becoming Ultimate Supreme Vet

posted 08-11-99 07:57 PM ET            

---

Give the base to a faction you intend to attack.

But this shouldn't be necessary.

As akathisia asked: what difficulty level are you playing?

posted 08-12-99 12:07 AM ET            

---

Hydroponic Sats && (Pop Boom | | Cloning Vats) == No get riddo base;

!UN_Charter | | (base.GiveTo(Miriam) + terraform(PLANT_FUNGUS)) | | (probe(base, GENETIC_PLAGUE, FRAME_YANG) == DIDNT_GET_CAUGHT) | | (terraform(SPLASH) && !base.PressureDome) == Get riddo base;

(If anyone doesn't understand C let me know.)

posted 08-12-99 12:32 PM ET            

---

Man, some really ingenious ways to destroy bases without penalty. Why haven't I thought of any of these? Oh yeah, now I know, because I never actually want to destroy any bases. All bases should be good for something. So long as you can at least break even on all the resources. In my experience (and I've played plenty of T games) you can terreform/build any city into a producer with the exception of the sea base in totally blue sea that the AI loves to make. But even -those- cities can be important. In the game I'm playing currently I have one of those that has gone back and forth a couple of times with my foes. It has two minerals to use to build things and one fungus square that helps a bit. All the rest of the squares are 1 nutrient 1 energy. But it's stretegically important. When they own it, they launch sutained air attacks on my good bases, when I have it I can luanch onto theirs. It's also stretegic to me launching an all out assault on Yang and Deidre. As it would be to them to if the AI knew how to launch a sustained asault.

The main thing with those "crappy" enemy cities you take is to be patient and attentive to their needs. Now if you don't enjoy all that micromanagement that it will need like I do, well.....

posted 08-13-99 12:14 PM ET            

---

Who wants a bunch of little bases crammed together? Your bureaucracy penalties mount, while your meager territory is divided amongst a bunch of little bases.

Keep one, chuck the rest. Overlapping bases: who needs 'em!? (The AI just loves to cram sea bases together.)

THAT'S why it's useful to sometimes get rid of a base ... (you should have seen what Miriam did to Freshwater Sea ... it looked more like the Ganges!)

posted 08-13-99 01:56 PM ET            

---

>>Who wants a bunch of little bases crammed together? Your bureaucracy penalties mount, while your meager territory is divided amongst a bunch of little bases.

I think the reason for having a bunch of little bases crammed together is a combination of drone problems, efficient use of resources, and golden ages.

Take a look at the uranium flags for example.
At the beginning of the games, esp for builders, it is MUCH more efficient to build one city every 2 squares. It takes WAY too long to use many of those specialty squares with few bases. Same goes for the jungle.
Then throw in the easier ability to have +energy per base (+1 econ) vs per square (+2 econ), and you see why it is worthwhile to have lots of close small bases. (also making it easier on the ai to manage).
On top of this, compare drone problems.
10 small bases have much less drone problems,
even with buerocrasy drones, then 2 large bases. Maybe still handleable, but not as easily for the AI.
Also compare the uranium flats with all forest and one or two boreholes per city.
They generate energy and units like mad, yet generate almost no pollution compared to the same area with just 2 cities using up all of the resources.
I think pollution needs to be considered on a density pattern not just quantity.
10 bases generating the same minerals in the same space as one/two bases should have the same pollution problems. But the percents dont add up the same way. Population in one base adds a lot to the pollution probs, even though you can have the same pop in the same number of squares, yet the ICS version gets NO population pollution added.

posted 08-14-99 12:49 PM ET            

---

Yes LenS, you point out something that I was just takeing for granted; but most important. You rarely ever will actually use all of those base squares. In fact, I only come close with my original 5-10 cities. All those bases I capture will rarely even use half of their alloted base squares. So overlapping becomes a (dare I say it) good thing. And as LenS points out, on specialty square it may just the way to go (actually, I never considerd crowding bases I build like this, I will have to try it).

So long as the base is giveing me energy and minerals I -always- want to keep it. Now I admit, when I build my own bases I love to try and find the perfect placements to make the best use of squares; but whe it comes to conquering, I gladly take what the AI gives me.