Really dumb questions (from beginner)

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Really dumb questions (from beginner)

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Really dumb questions (from beginner)

dodger posted 02-10-99 06:29 PM ET
I've played lots of real time strategy games, but I'm having trouble understanding alpha centarui:
1) Some of my bases have "inefficiencies" -- the energy part is in the red -- how can I fix this?
2) Am I supposed to move workers around from base to base? Will that solve inneficiencies? Why do I have 7 yellow faces (people) at one base, and only 2 at another?
3) About the Farms, Mines, Solar panels & Forests -- when I build one of these, and
then look inside my base, I don't see the blue, red or green balls on those squares - -
arent they supposed to be creating minerals, nutrietns or energy in those squares?
What's the practical difference between, let's say, a gold ball "energy surplus" and a solar panel on a square? Why does one show up in the "nearby base resources" screen and the other not?
4) How close to a base does a resource have to be to be useful to that base?
5) How close to a base does a farm/solar panel/mine have to be to be useful to that
base?
thanks

Prerogative posted 02-10-99 06:40 PM ET
Okay, Dodger, first of all, SMAC is a TBS (Turn-Based Strategy) not an RTS. There are NO similarities between the two. So don't even think of comparing them.
My advice, however, is to read the manual/datalinks early. But I'll answer:
1)
Inefficency is created by, you guessed it, inefficency. To increase efficency change your goverment (social) choices at the social engineering screen. Ones with higher efficency levels increase your efficency. The higher your effiency the less money you will lose to inefficency.
2)
Quite frankly, you can't. Your cities grow in this game. This depends on how many nutrients each base generates. Over time, a city with ample nutrients will grow to be very large. These faces represent a growth, the number-flag by each base also represents the number of people in a base. I'll explain the value of that a bit later.
3) Solar Panels, Forests, Boreholes, Mines, Farms etc. all increase the amount of energy/nutrients/minerals generated. However, each citizen (face, represents 10,000 colonists) can harvest one square. The computer automatically chooses the best squares in your city radius to use. Improvements themselves do not harvest minerals/nutrients/energy, they merely increase the amount of minerals/nutrients/energy being harvested.
4)
Age old rules of TBS. Generally speaking, two squares horizontal or vertical from the base and one square diagonal. When you look at the base in the base screen there should be a minimap showing all available squares which can be used.
5)
Same as above.
Good luck, hope to see you one day in this SMAC-ey good world
~CEO Prerogative
Audrey Two posted 02-10-99 07:01 PM ET
Little addenda to Prerogative's excellent answer:
1) Inefficiency is wasted "energy" (money). The further a base is from your headquarters, the more money is lost to inefficency-- since the base is far away from the Boss, there's more bribery, bureaucracy, goofing off, etc. Some factions have more or less inefficiency, and some social choices have more or less inefficiency (e.g. "Green" has less inefficiency, "Police State" has more).
2) If you really want to move workers from one base to another, you can, but it costs something. Have the high-pop base build a colony pod (that reduces the builder's population by one). Send that pod to the low-pop base, and hit "B"-- the colony pod goes away, and the base it's in gets another point of population.
3) You can manually change where workers work-- click on a "used" space on the base control screen to unassign the worker, and click on an "unused" space to assign an idle worker. Or click on the "base" space to tell the governor to reassign all the workers as best he can-- this is useful if you've built improvements that aren't being used.
Prerogative posted 02-10-99 07:14 PM ET
Oh yes, forgot about the thing with the HQ, heh. It's just been along time since I've ever really thought about the standard TBS rules.
And the colony pod moving thing is rather hard to pull off early on. And although I'm not so sure about SMAC, I know there's usually a limit to how many times you can boost a city's pop in this way.
I've never done that myself, not even in Civ II or Civ I. I've always had a very compact style expanding. And besides, two cities of size 1 produce more than one city of size 2.
dodger posted 02-10-99 07:49 PM ET
Thanks for the prompt replies. Is it just me, or is this game much more sophisticated than RTS games?
Prerogative posted 02-10-99 08:02 PM ET
RTSes are child's play vs. a TBS, Dodger
As I said, they're worlds apart. And in my personal opinion, I find TBSes alot more enjoyable.
MoSe posted 02-11-99 06:01 AM ET
What, Prerogative,
didn't you ever fond useful to disband a 1-sized ill-placed conquered city? (Sometimes I even make them starve).
That way you can "move" the entire settlement. In the long run the "cherry" placement will pay back for the delay in development.
And, whith the proper wonders and luxury rate, "we love you" condition starts from 3-sized cities. So you MUST take some settlers out of your big metropolis (if you don't have them around already) and help news get fast to size 3. I usually directly build with 3 settlers.
I still have to master how golden age works in SMAC, seems you have no warnings or indicators for that (some of my bases do boost whitout a single talent...[?????]). Next step in my to-do's list.
I used to teach MS Office's applications, maybe we could put up such a service for SMAC?
Saluti
MariOne
grunthex posted 02-11-99 06:05 AM ET
Speaking of disbanding bases, I noticed what to me was a small error tonight. I had the tutorial messages on, got the message about where to build a new base, but it said something like:
NONE has just built a Colony Pod, blah blah, build here, press B, blah blah. Just seems like it shoulda stuck the old city name instead of none.
Ender4000 posted 02-11-99 07:04 AM ET
If you have a good production city sometimes you can't keep it growing because you have just enough nutrients coming in. If you shuttle people from a good nutrient city via the colony pods you can make that good production city grow. I know you can just terraform so that it can grow better but sometimes this isn't worth it. And sometimes you'd rather have the minerals for a good 'wonder' building city.
Its also useful to do to make sure you don't lose advance bases. Getting them up to pop 2 with 2 units in them quickly can make them live a lot longer. Nothing worse than losing a city when you still have defenders in it.
cousLee posted 02-11-99 08:39 AM ET
for great mineral production bases, i use supply crawlers on nutrient bonus squares to boost population.
Prerogative posted 02-11-99 09:21 AM ET
Well, MoSe, y'see, I have a very strange way of expanding to get the maximum efficency out of my people. I use the collective force of my compact and small cities to get alot more done than you metropolis denziens. And the way it works is actually suprisingly logical. (9 cities size 1 harvest 18 squares vs. a 1 city size 9 harvesting 10)
So anyway, I tend not to cherry pick things until later in the game (when my collective cities are becoming quite large) and this includes cities. Because with even one city in bad terrain, I can use a former to build a condensor, or plant some forests. And then, even if unaided, that single city can turn into nine. Which can do alot more than if I had cherry-picked it into the "upper-class" lots and had let it grow into a super-city.
..And now my style will really pay off in SMAC due to the insane terraforming powers and the ability to use satellites
Chris Pine FIRAXIS posted 02-11-99 10:19 AM ET
Actually, to see exactly which squares are in the base radius, there is an option in the map preferences to show it. I always play with it on.
MoSe posted 02-11-99 12:30 PM ET
"You can't reach enlightment through doctrine..." where did I read it?
Maybe I'll not be rushing to buy SMAC, now that I've received a brand new gift:
playing CivII Prerogative's style!
Have to figure out new priorities, new growth curves, new infrastrucutre needs, costs and overhead to plan, new army distribution balancing support & industry, to make it really viable.... oh please tell me everything about it!! Oh, no please, don't tell me nothing! Push the harsh management to the extreme and you'll find the secret garden, the promised land!
I'm shocked. Challenge. New food for the mind.
Worshipful
Aamikus, President of the Romans.
PS: if you doubt: not the slightest trace of sarcasm in my words. True!
JaimeWolf posted 02-11-99 04:52 PM ET
9 size 1 cities gives you almost twice the production of 1 size 9 city, sure ... but how do you build anything bigger than scout units? The best production I can think of for a size 1 city is 8 minerals (at least early in the game) - 2 from home base and 6 from a borehole. Anything else you can do?
James
DHE_X2 posted 02-11-99 05:00 PM ET
Recycling tanks and nessus mining stations.
To the Newbie: Inefficiency can also be solved by building a Childrens Creche(available with ethical calculus) in an inefficient base.
~DHE, spread the knowledge
Robert Casteline posted 02-11-99 05:09 PM ET
also remember that if u do pick where u specifically want your people to "cultivate", they will be moved if enemy units come into their squares. so after an attack, check quick to make sure the person u had sitting on the obelisk isn't now scraping seaweed out of the middle of the ocean.
Audrey Two posted 02-11-99 07:56 PM ET
Prerogative sez: "9 cities size 1 harvest 18 squares vs. a 1 city size 9 harvesting 10"
But it's not quite that clean. In "Civ", you were dead right-- which led to the "Mongol Horde" strategy, lots of little teeny cities in despotism. So for Civ II, Brian (can I call you Brian?) added a twist: after you build a certain number of cities, you start getting extra "angry" citizens. This rule stayed in (not at *all* a sequel) SMAC(*).
So I think it more or less balances. If you've got a lot of teeny cities, you eventually need to either (a) station a lot of extra peacekeeping units, or (b) build anti-drone improvements. Either way, it means you can't just build a zillion cities and forget about them.
Of course, you can still play the "lots of little cities" strategy, and (I assume) win with it-- it's just no longer a clear world-beater, the way it was in CivI.
--A2
(*): Credit Where It's Due Dept.: Shouldn't we abbreviate the game as "SMAC(aBRD)"? (That's pronounced "Smack a Bird"... maybe I should post it on the dictionary thread.)
weregamer posted 02-11-99 08:35 PM ET
Also, in SMACaBRD, there is an additional efficiency penalty based on the number of bases, when you have a really large number of bases. These two things together explicitly push the "mongol horde" strategy from a positive rules-rape into a negative one.
Prerogative posted 02-11-99 09:09 PM ET
Well, of course, every style has its drawbacks. But let me elaborate, for the interested.
To pull it off in SMAC, I go for heavy Police State politics and anything to boost my iron fist rule. I tend to play Morgan, so the effects I could've been getting by going Democracy are balanced, plus a Police State nullifies the anti-support Morgan problem. (although I do try and get a Democracy when I can afford to do so.)
Anyway, in SMAC I think my style is even MORE effective. Supply Crawlers can reroute production, remember? So each little "cell" of nine cities can now redirect all of their production to one of their own, and then those 18 squares of harvest become a force to be reckoned with.
And this is doubly effective, because once those size one cities grow again, the whole mineral bid jumps another 9 or 18 points.
If you would like to know, this is my basic strategy. I am no "Mongol Hoarder" because I am NOT a mad expanionist, and I'm not just going teeny-cities, I also build them very close together, for other benefiets (such as defense.) So take a look, I know most of my weak points, but hey, good idea to know thy enemy, right?
First, I get atleast one partial 9-City "cell" up and running. With my capital, in all hope, winding up as the core. If unrest becomes a problem I switch to a Police State and teach those drones a lesson.
Next I interconnect roads and start planting forests at positions where they'll be able to grow in the right places.
If I have time, I set up a Sensor Array net along with the city-cell, so that my poor early defense can get a big boost.
Then, I race for Supply Crawlers. They make things TREMENDOUSLY easier for me in SMAC
Once I have Supply Crawlers, I allocate all my resources to the core, and start expansion again.
At this point I try to swtich to a Democracy (if possible) or, if I'm feeling really lucky, a Free Market (with my style a Free Market gives insane energy supremecy.) And tune up Psych if Drones are getting unruly or Research if I'm lagging behind.
And at this point, since this is SMAC and not a Starcraft Build Order, things tend to just go the way things do. I do try to keep up my building style, and lean hard to try and get to Non-Lethal Methods, to quell those annoying drones.
There are plenty of other weaknesses, and other benefiets, for this city-cell style of mine. But, at the request of MoSe, I'll leave them be.
..Now if only I had enough money to buy the real game, argh
dodger posted 02-11-99 09:25 PM ET
New Question:
I'm having trouble understanding the Social Engineering screen -- When I go up and down, clicking on the various buttons on the right under "SOCIETY", and the values to the right change, Am I prioritizing between them? Am I allowed only one choice/button press as a prioritiy (e.g. I have to choose either Support OR Morale, OR Police State) OR am I moving things is a list, saying Morale is #1, Industry is #2, etc? (if so, where is that list of priorities displayed in that order?)
Audrey Two posted 02-11-99 10:13 PM ET
Dodger asks about social engineering choices.
It's actually pretty straightforward. Now, I don't have my manual handy, so I may get these figures wrong, but the idea is the same...
At any given time, you choose one type of "politics", one "economy", one "goal", and one "future society". There are four choices for each of these(*). The first choice is always "plain vanilla"-- no bonuses or penalties. Every other choice has some good and some bad.
Suppose you choose "Planned" economics. If I recall correctly, underneath the "Planned" button are:
* Green icons for 2 x growth and 1 x industry
* Red icons for 2 x efficiency
Green is good, red is bad. So, if you change economy from the "Simple" (the plain type) to "Planned", your growth rating will go up by two, industry will go up by one, and efficiency will go down by two.
You can click on all the buttons; the changes won't take effect until you click "ok", so you can change your mind before it goes through. This is useful because you can choose options that offset each others' weaknesses-- for example, since "Planned" economics has a -2 efficency penalty, you might combine it with "Democratic" politics, which has a +2 efficiency bonus.
The panel on the right side of the screen shows you what your scores will be, in all the basic attributes (police, support, planet, etc.), if you use the social engineering settings you've just chosen. This also takes into account other things that may affect the scores-- e.g. all factions start with some bonus or penalty, and some secret projects may have an effect.
Does that help?
--A2

(*) That is, there are four choices in the game for each SE setting. You won't see all of them. First of all, you need to research the right technology for any choices beyond the plain-vanilla ones to be available--for example, I don't think you can choose "Fundamentalist" until after you've learned "Secrets of the Human Brain". (You won't see any "Future Society" choices for a while.) And second, every faction is barred from making one social engineering choice-- for example, the Peacekeepers can never choose "Police State" politics, so that button will never show up for them.
Max posted 02-12-99 01:06 PM ET
Is there any such thing as a city with too much population? The reason I'm asking is because perhaps some players may wish to avoid the trouble-some drone riots. (No, the retail of SMAC have not appeared yet & cannot test this theory out).
Is there any way of manually stopping population growth, just to avoid drone riots? Would anyone recommand this playing style?
Prerogative posted 02-12-99 08:03 PM ET
No, Max.
Another one of those TBS rules-'o-thumb is, that when a city's population exceeds the number of squares it can use, all additional citizens become Specialists. So in the case of SMAC, they would, by default, become Doctors. In this manner, cities which grow to be grossly large would actually have LESS Drones, and more Talents, than smaller ones.
Audrey Two posted 02-12-99 08:04 PM ET
Max "Is there any way of manually stopping population growth, just to avoid drone riots?"
Yup... Just cut back on food production until the nutrient tank readout (upper left corner of the base screen) says "Growth: stagnant". That means the city is producing exactly enough food to feed its citizens. If there's no excess food, the city won't grow.
You can tweak the food production by, for example,
* Pulling workers off of food-production squares
* Re-terraforming to cut back on food production (e.g. building mines)
* Using supply crawlers to ship excess food to other cities
--A2
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: Really dumb questions (from beginner)
dodger	posted 02-10-99 06:29 PM ET I've played lots of real time strategy games, but I'm having trouble understanding alpha centarui: 1) Some of my bases have "inefficiencies" -- the energy part is in the red -- how can I fix this? 2) Am I supposed to move workers around from base to base? Will that solve inneficiencies? Why do I have 7 yellow faces (people) at one base, and only 2 at another? 3) About the Farms, Mines, Solar panels & Forests -- when I build one of these, and then look inside my base, I don't see the blue, red or green balls on those squares - - arent they supposed to be creating minerals, nutrietns or energy in those squares? What's the practical difference between, let's say, a gold ball "energy surplus" and a solar panel on a square? Why does one show up in the "nearby base resources" screen and the other not? 4) How close to a base does a resource have to be to be useful to that base? 5) How close to a base does a farm/solar panel/mine have to be to be useful to that base? thanks
Prerogative	posted 02-10-99 06:40 PM ET Okay, Dodger, first of all, SMAC is a TBS (Turn-Based Strategy) not an RTS. There are NO similarities between the two. So don't even think of comparing them. My advice, however, is to read the manual/datalinks early. But I'll answer: 1) Inefficency is created by, you guessed it, inefficency. To increase efficency change your goverment (social) choices at the social engineering screen. Ones with higher efficency levels increase your efficency. The higher your effiency the less money you will lose to inefficency. 2) Quite frankly, you can't. Your cities grow in this game. This depends on how many nutrients each base generates. Over time, a city with ample nutrients will grow to be very large. These faces represent a growth, the number-flag by each base also represents the number of people in a base. I'll explain the value of that a bit later. 3) Solar Panels, Forests, Boreholes, Mines, Farms etc. all increase the amount of energy/nutrients/minerals generated. However, each citizen (face, represents 10,000 colonists) can harvest one square. The computer automatically chooses the best squares in your city radius to use. Improvements themselves do not harvest minerals/nutrients/energy, they merely increase the amount of minerals/nutrients/energy being harvested. 4) Age old rules of TBS. Generally speaking, two squares horizontal or vertical from the base and one square diagonal. When you look at the base in the base screen there should be a minimap showing all available squares which can be used. 5) Same as above. Good luck, hope to see you one day in this SMAC-ey good world ~CEO Prerogative
Audrey Two	posted 02-10-99 07:01 PM ET Little addenda to Prerogative's excellent answer: 1) Inefficiency is wasted "energy" (money). The further a base is from your headquarters, the more money is lost to inefficency-- since the base is far away from the Boss, there's more bribery, bureaucracy, goofing off, etc. Some factions have more or less inefficiency, and some social choices have more or less inefficiency (e.g. "Green" has less inefficiency, "Police State" has more). 2) If you really want to move workers from one base to another, you can, but it costs something. Have the high-pop base build a colony pod (that reduces the builder's population by one). Send that pod to the low-pop base, and hit "B"-- the colony pod goes away, and the base it's in gets another point of population. 3) You can manually change where workers work-- click on a "used" space on the base control screen to unassign the worker, and click on an "unused" space to assign an idle worker. Or click on the "base" space to tell the governor to reassign all the workers as best he can-- this is useful if you've built improvements that aren't being used.
Prerogative	posted 02-10-99 07:14 PM ET Oh yes, forgot about the thing with the HQ, heh. It's just been along time since I've ever really thought about the standard TBS rules. And the colony pod moving thing is rather hard to pull off early on. And although I'm not so sure about SMAC, I know there's usually a limit to how many times you can boost a city's pop in this way. I've never done that myself, not even in Civ II or Civ I. I've always had a very compact style expanding. And besides, two cities of size 1 produce more than one city of size 2.
dodger	posted 02-10-99 07:49 PM ET Thanks for the prompt replies. Is it just me, or is this game much more sophisticated than RTS games?
Prerogative	posted 02-10-99 08:02 PM ET RTSes are child's play vs. a TBS, Dodger As I said, they're worlds apart. And in my personal opinion, I find TBSes alot more enjoyable.
MoSe	posted 02-11-99 06:01 AM ET What, Prerogative, didn't you ever fond useful to disband a 1-sized ill-placed conquered city? (Sometimes I even make them starve). That way you can "move" the entire settlement. In the long run the "cherry" placement will pay back for the delay in development. And, whith the proper wonders and luxury rate, "we love you" condition starts from 3-sized cities. So you MUST take some settlers out of your big metropolis (if you don't have them around already) and help news get fast to size 3. I usually directly build with 3 settlers. I still have to master how golden age works in SMAC, seems you have no warnings or indicators for that (some of my bases do boost whitout a single talent...[?????]). Next step in my to-do's list. I used to teach MS Office's applications, maybe we could put up such a service for SMAC? Saluti MariOne
grunthex	posted 02-11-99 06:05 AM ET Speaking of disbanding bases, I noticed what to me was a small error tonight. I had the tutorial messages on, got the message about where to build a new base, but it said something like: NONE has just built a Colony Pod, blah blah, build here, press B, blah blah. Just seems like it shoulda stuck the old city name instead of none.
Ender4000	posted 02-11-99 07:04 AM ET If you have a good production city sometimes you can't keep it growing because you have just enough nutrients coming in. If you shuttle people from a good nutrient city via the colony pods you can make that good production city grow. I know you can just terraform so that it can grow better but sometimes this isn't worth it. And sometimes you'd rather have the minerals for a good 'wonder' building city. Its also useful to do to make sure you don't lose advance bases. Getting them up to pop 2 with 2 units in them quickly can make them live a lot longer. Nothing worse than losing a city when you still have defenders in it.
cousLee	posted 02-11-99 08:39 AM ET for great mineral production bases, i use supply crawlers on nutrient bonus squares to boost population.
Prerogative	posted 02-11-99 09:21 AM ET Well, MoSe, y'see, I have a very strange way of expanding to get the maximum efficency out of my people. I use the collective force of my compact and small cities to get alot more done than you metropolis denziens. And the way it works is actually suprisingly logical. (9 cities size 1 harvest 18 squares vs. a 1 city size 9 harvesting 10) So anyway, I tend not to cherry pick things until later in the game (when my collective cities are becoming quite large) and this includes cities. Because with even one city in bad terrain, I can use a former to build a condensor, or plant some forests. And then, even if unaided, that single city can turn into nine. Which can do alot more than if I had cherry-picked it into the "upper-class" lots and had let it grow into a super-city. ..And now my style will really pay off in SMAC due to the insane terraforming powers and the ability to use satellites
Chris Pine FIRAXIS	posted 02-11-99 10:19 AM ET Actually, to see exactly which squares are in the base radius, there is an option in the map preferences to show it. I always play with it on.
MoSe	posted 02-11-99 12:30 PM ET "You can't reach enlightment through doctrine..." where did I read it? Maybe I'll not be rushing to buy SMAC, now that I've received a brand new gift: playing CivII Prerogative's style! Have to figure out new priorities, new growth curves, new infrastrucutre needs, costs and overhead to plan, new army distribution balancing support & industry, to make it really viable.... oh please tell me everything about it!! Oh, no please, don't tell me nothing! Push the harsh management to the extreme and you'll find the secret garden, the promised land! I'm shocked. Challenge. New food for the mind. Worshipful Aamikus, President of the Romans. PS: if you doubt: not the slightest trace of sarcasm in my words. True!
JaimeWolf	posted 02-11-99 04:52 PM ET 9 size 1 cities gives you almost twice the production of 1 size 9 city, sure ... but how do you build anything bigger than scout units? The best production I can think of for a size 1 city is 8 minerals (at least early in the game) - 2 from home base and 6 from a borehole. Anything else you can do? James
DHE_X2	posted 02-11-99 05:00 PM ET Recycling tanks and nessus mining stations. To the Newbie: Inefficiency can also be solved by building a Childrens Creche(available with ethical calculus) in an inefficient base. ~DHE, spread the knowledge
Robert Casteline	posted 02-11-99 05:09 PM ET also remember that if u do pick where u specifically want your people to "cultivate", they will be moved if enemy units come into their squares. so after an attack, check quick to make sure the person u had sitting on the obelisk isn't now scraping seaweed out of the middle of the ocean.
Audrey Two	posted 02-11-99 07:56 PM ET Prerogative sez: "9 cities size 1 harvest 18 squares vs. a 1 city size 9 harvesting 10" But it's not quite that clean. In "Civ", you were dead right-- which led to the "Mongol Horde" strategy, lots of little teeny cities in despotism. So for Civ II, Brian (can I call you Brian?) added a twist: after you build a certain number of cities, you start getting extra "angry" citizens. This rule stayed in (not at all a sequel) SMAC(). So I think it more or less balances. If you've got a lot of teeny cities, you eventually need to either (a) station a lot of extra peacekeeping units, or (b) build anti-drone improvements. Either way, it means you can't just build a zillion cities and forget about them. Of course, you can still play the "lots of little cities" strategy, and (I assume) win with it-- it's just no longer a clear world-beater, the way it was in CivI. --A2 (): Credit Where It's Due Dept.: Shouldn't we abbreviate the game as "SMAC(aBRD)"? (That's pronounced "Smack a Bird"... maybe I should post it on the dictionary thread.)
weregamer	posted 02-11-99 08:35 PM ET Also, in SMACaBRD, there is an additional efficiency penalty based on the number of bases, when you have a really large number of bases. These two things together explicitly push the "mongol horde" strategy from a positive rules-rape into a negative one.
Prerogative	posted 02-11-99 09:09 PM ET Well, of course, every style has its drawbacks. But let me elaborate, for the interested. To pull it off in SMAC, I go for heavy Police State politics and anything to boost my iron fist rule. I tend to play Morgan, so the effects I could've been getting by going Democracy are balanced, plus a Police State nullifies the anti-support Morgan problem. (although I do try and get a Democracy when I can afford to do so.) Anyway, in SMAC I think my style is even MORE effective. Supply Crawlers can reroute production, remember? So each little "cell" of nine cities can now redirect all of their production to one of their own, and then those 18 squares of harvest become a force to be reckoned with. And this is doubly effective, because once those size one cities grow again, the whole mineral bid jumps another 9 or 18 points. If you would like to know, this is my basic strategy. I am no "Mongol Hoarder" because I am NOT a mad expanionist, and I'm not just going teeny-cities, I also build them very close together, for other benefiets (such as defense.) So take a look, I know most of my weak points, but hey, good idea to know thy enemy, right? First, I get atleast one partial 9-City "cell" up and running. With my capital, in all hope, winding up as the core. If unrest becomes a problem I switch to a Police State and teach those drones a lesson. Next I interconnect roads and start planting forests at positions where they'll be able to grow in the right places. If I have time, I set up a Sensor Array net along with the city-cell, so that my poor early defense can get a big boost. Then, I race for Supply Crawlers. They make things TREMENDOUSLY easier for me in SMAC Once I have Supply Crawlers, I allocate all my resources to the core, and start expansion again. At this point I try to swtich to a Democracy (if possible) or, if I'm feeling really lucky, a Free Market (with my style a Free Market gives insane energy supremecy.) And tune up Psych if Drones are getting unruly or Research if I'm lagging behind. And at this point, since this is SMAC and not a Starcraft Build Order, things tend to just go the way things do. I do try to keep up my building style, and lean hard to try and get to Non-Lethal Methods, to quell those annoying drones. There are plenty of other weaknesses, and other benefiets, for this city-cell style of mine. But, at the request of MoSe, I'll leave them be. ..Now if only I had enough money to buy the real game, argh
dodger	posted 02-11-99 09:25 PM ET New Question: I'm having trouble understanding the Social Engineering screen -- When I go up and down, clicking on the various buttons on the right under "SOCIETY", and the values to the right change, Am I prioritizing between them? Am I allowed only one choice/button press as a prioritiy (e.g. I have to choose either Support OR Morale, OR Police State) OR am I moving things is a list, saying Morale is #1, Industry is #2, etc? (if so, where is that list of priorities displayed in that order?)
Audrey Two	posted 02-11-99 10:13 PM ET Dodger asks about social engineering choices. It's actually pretty straightforward. Now, I don't have my manual handy, so I may get these figures wrong, but the idea is the same... At any given time, you choose one type of "politics", one "economy", one "goal", and one "future society". There are four choices for each of these(). The first choice is always "plain vanilla"-- no bonuses or penalties. Every other choice has some good and some bad. Suppose you choose "Planned" economics. If I recall correctly, underneath the "Planned" button are: Green icons for 2 x growth and 1 x industry * Red icons for 2 x efficiency Green is good, red is bad. So, if you change economy from the "Simple" (the plain type) to "Planned", your growth rating will go up by two, industry will go up by one, and efficiency will go down by two. You can click on all the buttons; the changes won't take effect until you click "ok", so you can change your mind before it goes through. This is useful because you can choose options that offset each others' weaknesses-- for example, since "Planned" economics has a -2 efficency penalty, you might combine it with "Democratic" politics, which has a +2 efficiency bonus. The panel on the right side of the screen shows you what your scores will be, in all the basic attributes (police, support, planet, etc.), if you use the social engineering settings you've just chosen. This also takes into account other things that may affect the scores-- e.g. all factions start with some bonus or penalty, and some secret projects may have an effect. Does that help? --A2 (*) That is, there are four choices in the game for each SE setting. You won't see all of them. First of all, you need to research the right technology for any choices beyond the plain-vanilla ones to be available--for example, I don't think you can choose "Fundamentalist" until after you've learned "Secrets of the Human Brain". (You won't see any "Future Society" choices for a while.) And second, every faction is barred from making one social engineering choice-- for example, the Peacekeepers can never choose "Police State" politics, so that button will never show up for them.
Max	posted 02-12-99 01:06 PM ET Is there any such thing as a city with too much population? The reason I'm asking is because perhaps some players may wish to avoid the trouble-some drone riots. (No, the retail of SMAC have not appeared yet & cannot test this theory out). Is there any way of manually stopping population growth, just to avoid drone riots? Would anyone recommand this playing style?
Prerogative	posted 02-12-99 08:03 PM ET No, Max. Another one of those TBS rules-'o-thumb is, that when a city's population exceeds the number of squares it can use, all additional citizens become Specialists. So in the case of SMAC, they would, by default, become Doctors. In this manner, cities which grow to be grossly large would actually have LESS Drones, and more Talents, than smaller ones.
Audrey Two	posted 02-12-99 08:04 PM ET Max "Is there any way of manually stopping population growth, just to avoid drone riots?" Yup... Just cut back on food production until the nutrient tank readout (upper left corner of the base screen) says "Growth: stagnant". That means the city is producing exactly enough food to feed its citizens. If there's no excess food, the city won't grow. You can tweak the food production by, for example, * Pulling workers off of food-production squares * Re-terraforming to cut back on food production (e.g. building mines) * Using supply crawlers to ship excess food to other cities --A2