"Development Level >>"? Figuring out what all these numbers do.
- Thread starter Ian Doncaster
- Start date
Build order shouldn't matter. I normally err towards building ports first before building any other facilities, but in the current build there's no issues that would make it a necessity. Surface port for Refinery economy will still get CMM even if built after your Coriolis.
I don't think it's as simple as this, I've seen a lot of planets that fit that criteria without any surface sites available at all. I suspect there's no 100% reliable algorithm since there's cases where practically identical binary bodies will have significantly different orbital/surface sites available.
My initial "0.3" was incorrect there, I meant to say 0.03. I also noted that it must be landable, I have never seen a body that is landable with 0 slots. Are there any that you can point to?
Edit: Just looked through my logs for some examples myself, did find a few with 0 slots! That being said, my intention with my words was to convey a higher chance of having more slots beyond a threshold of Earth Masses, not that there couldn't be less than 4 slots on planets of that size.
Last edited:
My experience with these is they're generally bodies close to the star, eg metal-rich bodies, but I'm not sure what the criteria for no build options is. My guess is temperature, however I've made no observations across several systems to provide estimates of where/at what heat the game stops allowing you to place stuff on a surface. Or whether it is just "distance to sun" (this would be easiest to judge with a large/giant star at the end of its life cycle).
Pru Euq PC-D d12-81 is a pretty good example of what you're seeing. There's 3 high mass landable bodies with no slots, followed immediately by one more with 6. The distances from the class K star is 41LS for the furthest uninhabitable body -> 70.4LS for the habitable one.
Temperatures:
- (Body 3) 693K-1,354K
- (Body 4) 701K-1,369K
- (Body 5) 534K-1,043K
- (Habitable Body 6) 407K-795K
I'm willing to bet that the threshold might be the maximum or average temperature, there's another body at 1,008K max that isn't habitable.
Last edited:
I would think that the number of build slots, or any for that matter, would take into account multiple things like body composition, surface temperature, gravity, ... But I may be giving FDev way to much credit here.
Different settlements on a single planet have different security levels.
What decides the security level? For instance, a Medium agricultural settlement has High security here, while the smaller Tourist ones are medium security. Is it random, or does it depend on the owning faction of each settlement?
What decides the security level? For instance, a Medium agricultural settlement has High security here, while the smaller Tourist ones are medium security. Is it random, or does it depend on the owning faction of each settlement?
Might be random (or hard enough to tell the cause of, to effectively be so). I have four refinery hubs owned by the same (system controlling) faction and some have half a shield, others a full. No security level (eg medium to low) between the constructions. Doubtful it’s a layout difference since there is only one for refinery hubs.
Edited: pressed too quickly 
I have a question that nags me. It concerns situations where I want to limit the effect of a planetary economy influence.
Suppose I have an icy planet (Industrial influence assuming no other modifiers or other strong / weak links). And I put three refineries on the surface plus a Coriolis in orbit.
So the Corliolis will get 3x Refinery influence from the refineries, plus the influence from the planet, resulting in a mixed Refinery/Industrial economy.
Now, assume I put a surface outpost. Will this lead to a "double whammy" effect where the land based outpost is also influenced by the planet, and ultimately transferring additional Industrial influence to the Corliolis? Because that appears to be the case at least according to the UI in my system. I have two stations with similar configurations, and the Industrial influence from the one with the planetary outpost is much much larger - having removed from the calculations the effect from some weak links that I have in my actual system.
If so, on planets with "unwanted" economic influence it might be best to avoid outposts or ports (despite the beneficial effect that the additional population would give).
Thoughts?
I have a question that nags me. It concerns situations where I want to limit the effect of a planetary economy influence.
Suppose I have an icy planet (Industrial influence assuming no other modifiers or other strong / weak links). And I put three refineries on the surface plus a Coriolis in orbit.
So the Corliolis will get 3x Refinery influence from the refineries, plus the influence from the planet, resulting in a mixed Refinery/Industrial economy.
Now, assume I put a surface outpost. Will this lead to a "double whammy" effect where the land based outpost is also influenced by the planet, and ultimately transferring additional Industrial influence to the Corliolis? Because that appears to be the case at least according to the UI in my system. I have two stations with similar configurations, and the Industrial influence from the one with the planetary outpost is much much larger - having removed from the calculations the effect from some weak links that I have in my actual system.
If so, on planets with "unwanted" economic influence it might be best to avoid outposts or ports (despite the beneficial effect that the additional population would give).
Thoughts?
Last edited:
Based on my findings, yes this is exactly what will happen. The Surface Port gains the planetary modifiers, then passes it up to the Orbital, where the Orbital gains that modifier again from the planet.Edited: pressed too quickly
I have a question that nags me. It concerns situations where I want to limit the effect of a planetary economy influence.
Suppose I have an icy planet (Industrial influence assuming no other modifiers or other strong / weak links). And I put three refineries on the surface plus a Coriolis in orbit.
View attachment 430840
So the Corliolis will get 3x Refinery influence from the refineries, plus the influence from the planet, resulting in a mixed Refinery/Industrial economy.
Now, assume I put a surface outpost. Will this lead to a "double whammy" effect where the land based outpost is also influenced by the planet, and ultimately transferring additional Industrial influence to the Corliolis? Because that appears to be the case at least according to the UI in my system. I have two stations with similar configurations, and the Industrial influence from the one with the planetary outpost is much much larger - having removed from the calculations the effect from some weak links that I have in my actual system.
View attachment 430841
If so, on planets with "unwanted" economic influence it might be best to avoid outposts or ports (despite the beneficial effect that the additional population would give).
Thoughts?
Further evidence from an existing build where I didn't get much choice post-U3 -
Planetary surface port has 1.45 industrial from geological signals (planetary + 1 weak link, thanks Frontier), passed it on to Coriolis which ended up with 2.25 industrial. Don't do it (but more importantly just don't build refineries on ice worlds). You might be able to keep some of the bulk goods but most likely most of the refinery will be lost to the arbitrary application of planet influence anyway. The coriolis in question on my end has steel and titanium as colonization-related exports even if a few other refinery ones "survived". Although for said orbital, going from 1.45 ind to 2.25 ind also didn't change that. I got a bit luckier with the planetary port having polymers and liquid oxygen on top of the CMM composites I built it for.
Planetary surface port has 1.45 industrial from geological signals (planetary + 1 weak link, thanks Frontier), passed it on to Coriolis which ended up with 2.25 industrial. Don't do it (but more importantly just don't build refineries on ice worlds). You might be able to keep some of the bulk goods but most likely most of the refinery will be lost to the arbitrary application of planet influence anyway. The coriolis in question on my end has steel and titanium as colonization-related exports even if a few other refinery ones "survived". Although for said orbital, going from 1.45 ind to 2.25 ind also didn't change that. I got a bit luckier with the planetary port having polymers and liquid oxygen on top of the CMM composites I built it for.
Thanks for confirming, on the plus side this effect can also used to boost wanted influences (Rocky world for a refinery for example).
The system in question was started before the changes so it is what it is. TBH I don't mind even if the station has a mixed assortment of goods, at least it gives some variety to the galaxy =)
The system in question was started before the changes so it is what it is. TBH I don't mind even if the station has a mixed assortment of goods, at least it gives some variety to the galaxy =)
Same here, system with all icy bodies and 3 refineris ,coriolis,ground port built before patch.
Thinking of converting it to full industry.
Ok so I'm currently stuck trying to figure out the best way to build a high tech economy for an orbital with large pads.
I just can't work out which body to orbit. All the gas giants or stars being something else with it, as too do the ELW and AW, but then if I aim for a body with bios and geo signals (which boost high tech) I'll get a mix of 2 to 4 economies...
I know the best thing is to just stick with an outpost! But I've a friend who's very broken up about that!
Anyone have any advice?
I just can't work out which body to orbit. All the gas giants or stars being something else with it, as too do the ELW and AW, but then if I aim for a body with bios and geo signals (which boost high tech) I'll get a mix of 2 to 4 economies...
I know the best thing is to just stick with an outpost! But I've a friend who's very broken up about that!
Anyone have any advice?
Best bet is just throwing a Coriolis over an Ammonia World. If that's not available, Coriolis over an HMC with a good amount of research settlements/HT hubs, maybe with an extra HT outpost in the same orbit for the bonus 0.4 from that. Avoid Geo/Bio signals if at all possible.
I'm building out an HT system at Pru Euq HQ-E c25-9 if you want to see how I'm doing it.
Agreed - Tourism isn't a good combination with HT (nothing is) but it's less bad than most. If you can find an AW with multiple orbital slots then extra HT installations in those should keep your exports mostly intact.