IG1: Interspecies imbalance – Zee’s response (Part 2)

Response to Liar ‘s article “Interracial Imbalance and Injustice“.

4. Playing at a difficult level, to my knowledge, the tax revenue is only half that of normal. Thus, the financial resources are quite scarce, so in my opinion it is very useful to curb trade. At the admiral level, I developed the commercial center first (then the bunker, the heavy tank, and the barracks) and packed a commercial center-commercial port-bank combination on each planet. When my newly colonized planets were still relatively unpopular, there was a period when my income was about. one third came from trade (about 100 thousand trade revenues per day, 200 thousand tax revenues). In addition, of course, it is just as important to maintain morale so that it can keep tax suppression and above 90% tax morale. This requires one of each morale building, plus a second police station of approx. 10-15 thousand inhabitants and a third somewhere around 30 thousand inhabitants. The fourth police is already ineffective, I noticed. For me, until about the first 2-3 months of the last level, money was the main constraint, but since then it has been just enough, and arms production capacity has become a bottleneck. From a spacecraft and equipment factory, I can easily produce as much as 20-30 thousand, but from a weapon, even with a capacity of over 40 thousand, I can’t produce as much as I would like. So it is advisable to pack an arms factory on every planet, even the smallest ones.

5. For the sake of the largest possible taxable population, it is advisable to always keep growth around the maximum, and since I have not seen the rules of this described anywhere, I will share what I chess out pretty slowly based on my experience. First, the population is growing every 6 hours, with a maximum of 74 people. Of the three types of capacity, food is important only to the extent that it is above the population by any amount. Once you have that, it certainly won’t hold back growth. Housing and hospital capacity is really important and tricky. Of this, it always matters less. So if e.g. There are 60,000 hospital beds on the planet and 90,000 homes, then the hospital limit will determine the rate of growth. If there are more than one hospital location, then the number of apartments is decisive and the other is completely irrelevant. Population growth is optimal when the utilization of the smaller capacity, which functions as a barrier, is approx. 50-60%. If there is too much space (and thus low occupancy) or too little (and thus high occupancy), the rate of growth will fall. A planet of 45,000, for example, can grow at its maximum rate with 85,000 hospital beds and 90,000 residences. Small and medium houses are therefore useful, they can be used to fine-tune the capacity limit. The same is the case with alien planets, only there is no precise control due to the lack of small and medium houses, so sometimes it is not possible to keep occupancy in the ideal range, which causes growth to inevitably fall back to around 69-70. Plus, as I wrote in the previous article, there is an approx. 80,000 invisible barrier. Even if you increase the capacity, the growth will slow down as if it were still around 80,000.

6. I don’t think it’s worth spending on the following, because it’s just a waste of money:

→ the hunters are too weak, they are not worth the goods, and they do not have a missile jammer, which is unpleasant if the opponent has multi-headed missiles
→ for air defense before the development of the meson cannon: it is preferable to build bunkers (which will reduce the loss of population due to the attack from 33% to 8%) and to use the immediate recapture tactic, except perhaps for the most important central planets
→ for space bases: with 5 meson cannons and a planetary shield v2, a full-fledged Dargslan fleet can be fired smoothly, making them redundant, and even if you have space bases, missiles fired at them often crash into cannons, which is pretty disadvantageous.