Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Solar winds...worth this rd?

2

Comments

  • Without solasrs, 10 pps at this point is definitely powerless if they're not terra
  • people in alliance chats already asking for solars cause they are powerless....if you raised so many pp you are powerless already...GG
  • Doesnt hurt to get solars 24 hrs early really
  • I had 3 people yell at me at hr 49 they were powerless....
  • I am one of those 3
  • That's insane.
  • I was powerless at 50 hours for a couple ticks. Thought 10 pps was enough for newbie, also I'm a newb
  • At least i aint no noob who starts with 40 pps
  • edited May 2014
    I think I have 16 now that I have some research I don't really pay attention to building my shite kingdoms
  • I built 8 more to fill in as I train my power hungry tanks and build more land.
  • Fuck Solars..

    Get WarpGate!
  • Who cares my VI has 60k power on 2 fusions s Bwahaha
  • edited May 2014
    This is actually fairly simple math guys. Assuming you don't have enough money to keep up both nanos and solars all the time. Running solars consistently if much more advantageous than nanos under most assumptions.

    Let's go with an average kingdom in a normal round. Umm, how about fw since it has no power bonus. To run shields might need 10% nuclear pp. So this round we'll say you need 5% (more if you want to shield your probes like you really probably should). This is with solars. Without solars we would have (5%*(1+0.5 (solars) +0.5 (power res))/(1+0.5( power res))=5%*1.33=6.7% pp that you need without solars.
    Normal looking SoB maybe 20% resi, 22% barracks 26.3% SM, 6.7% npp 10% TC and 15% pf. Here we have 46.3% of our land in income buildings. So Nanos is worth 10% extra income or 0.1*46.3=4.63% of our land. 0.35*sector nw per 24 hours. This is 4.63/0.35 or 13.2% land per nw in cost

    Solars: Difference here is 1.7% land for income buildings. Cost is 0.125* sector nw per 24 hours. This is 1.7/0.125=13.6% land per nw in cost. A bit more effective than nanos.

    In this example solars are more cost effective. Now this round it is well worth-while to shield your probes until you get probe armor so in reality you should probably want more than 5% power plants to do so.
  • The only wildcard is bcarts coding. Recently, nanos were more like 17% bonus I think.
  • or the mutant explosion round where losses were really like 80% lol
  • Haha, nano's were more than 10%? Sometimes you never know with bcart
  • Just like the additive bonuses. Since when should a planet type bonus that says you get an extra 25% income for mount only give a kingdom 18.5% more income from star mines and residences?
  • nanos give around 18%
  • Anyone have any data on that? I don't think I've seen my income ever change like that with vs without nanos.
  • calc it yourself
  • IF you calc it, I'll call you 'big guy' from then on.
  • I read like 2 posts in this one... however... yes, Solars are worth it. Cheap, and allows more planets for income
  • Solars.....I have no input...that is all
  • BINARY get your whore ass on aim
  • Excluding mysti and volc. its still worth it.
  • Fuck Solars!!

    Nanos > WarpGate > Solars
  • Sector weapons > nanos
  • Hoarding billions of sector funds > sector weapons
  • Stealing money from hoarder sectors > hoarding
Sign In or Register to comment.