And the BGS states. Imho these are most important for the happiness.
"Development Level >>"? Figuring out what all these numbers do.
- Thread starter Ian Doncaster
- Start date
Yes certainly. I built an industrial outpost first, finished before the 6th March (I got a small payment and I think it was pop 4000). Then I built a military outpost and then a commercial outpost before the 13th. Currently building my first surface settlement (Industrial)
Currently Boom!
Is there any general belief yet if placement of facilities in a system have a bearing on the desired economic outcome of a Coriolis or Orbis?
ie: Are facilities associated by planet or lumped together in system?
ie: When building my coriolis I better place it over the specific planet with associated facilities?
ie: Are facilities associated by planet or lumped together in system?
ie: When building my coriolis I better place it over the specific planet with associated facilities?
Still somewhat inconclusive. But if you're not wanting to build a system specifically to research the issue, it would probably make sense to go for same-body placements.
I have a system that will soon have 12 facilities. Heavily tech and industrial, with a smattering of agric, security, and commercial. No big orbital stns like corriolis yet.
For experimental purpose I am happy to place it:
a) over the ideal planet
b) over non ideal planet
c) over a non-developed planet
d) orbiting the sun.
Any preference?
For experimental purpose I am happy to place it:
a) over the ideal planet
b) over non ideal planet
c) over a non-developed planet
d) orbiting the sun.
Any preference?
Selfishly I'd say D orbiting the sun since that's where I placed my Coriolis but I don't have as many other facilities yet (only 4 installations). Then I could know what to expect or how to go about building other facilities.
In reality I think any of them would be a good place from a purely informational standpoint. Maybe a little less for A since quite a few people have done something like that I think. Adding more data, especially how a heavy facility built system changes a new station, I think is valuable and helps add to the picture of what the interactions do and how they affect each other.
I'd also like to offer a thank you for not only sharing details but being willing to choose a placement that helps others and the investigation of how the systems works.
I choose a different approch to analyse.
Using Cdr Nowski´s Tool, I re-created three different (OK, low Population ~ 10-50K) existing FDev generated systems by entering the Amount, Size and Type of Stations/Settlements, Hubs etc. I found in the Sysmap.
In FDev-Systems the settlements & hubs are scattered in a wild mix throughout the system with no clear logic behind, yet the markets show goods according to general System-Stats.
Exception: Outposts with specific designation, e.g. if you have a mil-outpost in a Agri/Refinery system you also get weapons, the other outpost (industrial) has a focus on machinery etc. Both Outposts in that example had no specific surface stations on body they orbit.
Population, Security Level and Eco matched the tool.
Using Cdr Nowski´s Tool, I re-created three different (OK, low Population ~ 10-50K) existing FDev generated systems by entering the Amount, Size and Type of Stations/Settlements, Hubs etc. I found in the Sysmap.
In FDev-Systems the settlements & hubs are scattered in a wild mix throughout the system with no clear logic behind, yet the markets show goods according to general System-Stats.
Exception: Outposts with specific designation, e.g. if you have a mil-outpost in a Agri/Refinery system you also get weapons, the other outpost (industrial) has a focus on machinery etc. Both Outposts in that example had no specific surface stations on body they orbit.
Population, Security Level and Eco matched the tool.
True, though in Frontier-created systems the order of addition is generally different too:
- orbital dockables first (with their full economies)
- then planetary ports and Horizons hubs
- then orbital installations
- then finally Odyssey settlements
and at no stage did the previously-added stuff change types. So reverse-engineering from that gets trickier.
(And we can perhaps handwave that in a lot of Frontier-created systems there might be further "hidden" settlements and ports on non-landable planets - the usual "Agricultural Orbis over an ELW" pattern, etc - which there aren't assets created for yet)
Yup, there's no rhyme or reason to NPC systems when viewed in the context of the colonization update. Put simply we're pioneers for well-built systems, because up until now Humanity's been rather terrible at it.
I'm sorry did I miss somewhere where the community actually figured out how to flip a colony economy? I've been trying everything and nothing works. No matter how many hubs I build on the same body, nothing ever "flips". Every single facility only has the economic influence of its own economy, never mixed.
Just a theory, but may hold water. You may need more population! If a facility isn't being worked then it obviously wouldn't be exerting economy pressure.
Last edited:
that sounds about right, as soon as I finished my Asteroid-Station , Population jumped from ~10500 to 30550 and the economy switched from Colony to Extraction/Colony, low sec - fits with the predictions
System Map
so quite pleased with the results
edit : the Asteroid-Base is in the Ring (metalrich) of the Waterworld - a splendid view if you leave through the slot
Attachments
Last edited:
I've seen some systems with an orbital around a gas giant, seemingly not affected by the installations on the gas giant's moons. For me, I'd like to see the impact if the orbital is placed around one of the gas giants moons, with multiple moons having installations. that way we can see which installations affect it's economy, what the range is, if its only the moon it orbits.
Well astroid stations have extraction economy by default so I'm not sure that really leads to the population influence.
Ideal. If you want a Coriolis, place it at the body with the most possible building slots on planet and in Orbit. 3 are good 5 or more are better. Plus system entry distance should also be good. Like below 50k Ls.
We have enough placements that are shyte.
According to Nowski's tool, hubs only influence system economy, not local economy. We don't know yet how that works with actual economy.
can you link this tool?
might be, although prior to the Astro I build 2 mining installations and an extraction-hub plus some supportive installations (mil, agri, science, sat) to have a balanced developement. Primary was a civilian Outpost (Vesta)
edit: I almost forgot - prior to Astro being finished the sysstas showed Colony/Extraction, so yeszhe astros influence as an extraction unit did turn that around, I think
Last edited: