"Development Level >>"? Figuring out what all these numbers do.
- Thread starter Ian Doncaster
- Start date
... and to get a working refinery with no obstructing industrial interference (I made sure the system I selected had no volcanic activity on the planet with the primary port) again, I have to build another Coriolis port. Then the supporting infrastructure. Woohoo. So excited. (Not really)
I don't know if it helps but witnessing how you build all this stuff kinda inspires me...
Personally I'm waiting with any T3 stuff until the Panther Clipper comes out. Not sure I want to build a third Coriolis either before the PC is here.
Are you sure volcanic adds industrial econ influence? I think this is not the case.
Colony overrides for industrial are - according to patch notes - Gas Giant, Rocky Ice, Icy and "has geologicals".
The only thing "volcanism" does is boosting the extraction primary link.
Imho volcanism = industrial was the erroneus patch. Which is a good thing, because the less industrial, the better.
There's very little difference between "has volcanism" and "has geologicals". If you get one you're basically bound to have the other (assuming the planet is landable, which I presume is why the distinction exists).
My reply would basically be what Ned says. It technically is "has geologicals", I've just been simplifying it to volcanism because if a landable planet has that, it has geo signals. Otherwise there would be a lot more unusable planets forced into industrial because they have volcanic activity on a non-landable surface. But you're unlikely to specialize a non-landable into refinery because it is simply not possible unless a space-based refinery structure is added (and I don't expect there to be because none exist in the game, to my knowledge).
... but still, "geologicals = industry" is pretty dumb. It doesn't seem particularly logical to me either, at least not while it is forced instead of an available boost/starter bonus if you specialize the station that way (which would in my view be the better way to do planetary influences, instead of hardlocked aspects).
I don't know if I would call it inspiring considering the amount of mental suffering it involves as a non-hauler. I'm equally uncertain whether I'd buy the PC instead of having Frontier add some non-hauling ways to contribute to build projects like blasting pirates sky-high (or into the void, if you will). Plus I currently have a lot more free time than I would ordinarily have.
Last edited:
Céramic composites lost.
They're showing an orbital port, not the previous surface port.
Is there a reference for which goods are made by each type of economy market, and which goods are in demand for each type of economy market? I'm curious about all commodities, but especially platinum.
Also, is the price paid in a market based on BGS only, or can building certain installations in a colony impact a price? For instance, could I build facilities that raise the price of platinum in my system?
Also, is the price paid in a market based on BGS only, or can building certain installations in a colony impact a price? For instance, could I build facilities that raise the price of platinum in my system?
I made a T1 colony-economy surface port on the other HMC planet in my refinery system, next to a T2 high-tech settlement. The market turns out to be a mishmash of everything, further confirming that mixed economies don't do many things well. Yes, will have to keep high-tech and industry in separate solar systems in order to get muon imagers and the like.
Surface port's influence overview:
The surface port's market:
Surface port's influence overview:
The surface port's market:
Last edited:
We would do better with McDonald's franchises.
It's a nice idea to think an economy that can survive all apoclypses would be great. In-game mechanics make monochrome better.
Would appreciate any advice people have. I have a system with one rocky moon which has 2 surface and 1 orbital slot, and 3 HMC planets with up to 5 surface slots and 2 orbital slots around 1100 LY's out from Sol. To get the best refinery volume and product mix for further colonization, which planet should I put a refinery hub on the surface and a coriolis in orbit on? The rocky moon or one of he HMC's? Or will just building a coriolis on the first rocky moon orbital slot give me a good refinery economy by default without needing to build a refinery? The original colonization outpost was military. I don't plan to have any other economies in this system. There are other undeveloped ringed gas giants and icy planets in the system as well.
Use the Rocky for the coriolis, 1 refinery hub and one tier 1 port on the surface (for cmm and ceramics).
Then you can build further refinery hubs on the other planets, each will have a small but positive impact on your refinery supply.
One Coriolis and one refinery hub on a rocky is better than a Coriolis and 6 refinery hubs on a HMC (from my own experience).
I am going to supply some exact numbers today, or tomorrow, as in how much influence a refinery hub has, how much is a boosted one, the planetary inf. etc.
Then you can build further refinery hubs on the other planets, each will have a small but positive impact on your refinery supply.
One Coriolis and one refinery hub on a rocky is better than a Coriolis and 6 refinery hubs on a HMC (from my own experience).
I am going to supply some exact numbers today, or tomorrow, as in how much influence a refinery hub has, how much is a boosted one, the planetary inf. etc.
Last edited:
Can this be confirmed?
It seems that every asset on the surface (hubs, not ports) sends an extra 0.2 planetary influence to the orbital starport.
Say we have planet with 6 hubs and a port on the surface. The Starport in orbit will have the usual planetary influence (as the ground port)+ 1.2 extra.
Or , if we have a 3 slot planet with 2 hubs and a ground port, the Starport in orbit will have an extra 0.4 planetary influence compared to the ground port.
It seems that every asset on the surface (hubs, not ports) sends an extra 0.2 planetary influence to the orbital starport.
Say we have planet with 6 hubs and a port on the surface. The Starport in orbit will have the usual planetary influence (as the ground port)+ 1.2 extra.
Or , if we have a 3 slot planet with 2 hubs and a ground port, the Starport in orbit will have an extra 0.4 planetary influence compared to the ground port.
It's not the hubs. It's the ground ports passing it on to the starport via their strong links.
If that was the case,then how do you explain the differences? Those 2 examples are real cases from my system.
Why one Coriolis has only 0.4 extra planetary influence, and the other 1.2 extra planetary influence?
EDIT: I just realized it might be something else. The 1.2 extra could be actually 0.4*3. As in 3 times the planetary influence(extraction): 1 for HMC, 2 for geologicals and 3 for pristine resources.
On the other hand, the 0.4 (refinery) could be beacause it's only one single trait : the rocky planet.
So this would mean that the orbital gets an extra 0.4 per planetary influence compared to the ground port.
Why one Coriolis has only 0.4 extra planetary influence, and the other 1.2 extra planetary influence?
EDIT: I just realized it might be something else. The 1.2 extra could be actually 0.4*3. As in 3 times the planetary influence(extraction): 1 for HMC, 2 for geologicals and 3 for pristine resources.
On the other hand, the 0.4 (refinery) could be beacause it's only one single trait : the rocky planet.
So this would mean that the orbital gets an extra 0.4 per planetary influence compared to the ground port.
Last edited:
Post the full economy figures from the journal and all the details of the bodies and system, so any possible boosts/reductions can be accounted for.