I would hope that the planet-induced economies don't actually eat any resources since they are 'free' - but we'll see what FDev decides.Interesting. So the "unintended" change that was reverted is going to be actually deliberated, improved and polished upon? That makes sense (and certainly gives raise to a few conspiracy theories). I wonder how the problem of imports eating up exports is dealt with (if at all).
"Development Level >>"? Figuring out what all these numbers do.
- Thread starter Ian Doncaster
- Start date
Hopefully we'll be able to turn off selected links and planet-induced economies, or everything will turn into a giant pile of slush that eats itself.
Whoa.
forums.frontier.co.uk
Elite Dangerous | Trailblazers Update 3 - Wednesday April 30
This is awesome news, thank you FDEV! :-) Both PP and Colonization updates? And GOOD stuff? Very nice :-)
Good advice, or at least be careful what you build. I presume predetermined non-Colony economy orbitals and ground ports are still okay.
Russian Cosmonauts are well represented. So are the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo astronauts.
Tricky to say
There's no intrinsic Agricultural bigger than an Odyssey settlement (low production, partial output only) so you have to use a Colony baseline and take the planetary influence.
The only planet types which support Agricultural hybridise it with at least one other type and every other economy consumes Agri exports.
So it all depends on what the balance of strong links, weak links and planetary influence is, and whether there's a prioritised cap on it or it's just purely additive.
I wouldn't rely on that. They might not pick up planetary influence but since Asteroid Bases (which only come in "intrinsic economy" variety) are mentioned in the links section, I don't think it's safe to assume they won't pick up strong/weak links.
It's going to be so much easier to build a watering hole deep in the black.
Like, for example, if we want a space refinery with L pads, we'll just have to look for a landable Rocky planet that has the main port in orbit.
With 71,000 commodities we could have that up and running. Obviously, more will have to be invested for a larger supply.
The thing is, now (or at the beginning, back when it was working), to build a basic space refinery, we needed at least 84,000 commodities (coriolis+small asset+refinery hub).
Like, for example, if we want a space refinery with L pads, we'll just have to look for a landable Rocky planet that has the main port in orbit.
With 71,000 commodities we could have that up and running. Obviously, more will have to be invested for a larger supply.
The thing is, now (or at the beginning, back when it was working), to build a basic space refinery, we needed at least 84,000 commodities (coriolis+small asset+refinery hub).
Yup, for example the DW3 people setup a 150 system chain in preparation for the DW3 event early next year. That's approximately 2,250 LY (probably much more) or 4-5 carrier jumps. To get further you'll have to build up some single outpost systems into full fledged refineries at the very least. And that's a LOT of material to haul.
And yet another heads up.
forums.frontier.co.uk
Elite Dangerous | Trailblazers Update 3 | Now Live!
So question: If planet A has several Extraction supports, and Planet B has refinery supports and an orbital port, The strong link for the orbital is the refinery, and a weak link with the extraction support. Will that mean there is now a supply of extraction commodities at Planet B's orbital...
Well, I already had that, my Orbis has 4 economies
View attachment 427473
Still doesn't explain clearly if they will consume each other.
I think the key word is "proportional" so I think it would depend on how strongly represented each influence is
Nice infographic as well:
This, together with
makes it look like each body will have a "boss" port that receives all the influences / links (note nothing is supporting the Tier 1 port orbiting Body 1).
So later-built or lower tier ports could have uninfluenced economies, except for colony ecos influenced by the planet type. With a downside that building supporting facilities will have no effect on them, and they will be permanently fixed?
Unless other unstated and un-diagrammed factors are in play of course.
Oh good! I missed that.
Can't happen soon enough! I thought I was going to have to spend months boosting the influence of the one non-Anarchy faction in my system (and then win a control conflict) so that I could actually get enough security to carry on building my Orbis.
Well yeah, but why would you place 2 ports in orbit around the same planet?
Actually, on a huge ringed Icy world with geologicals, if we do 2 orbitals, a Coriois, and a t1 Civilian Outpost, plus some refinery hubs on the surface, we will end up with a Refinery Coriolis and a small t1 port with an industrial/hi-tech/extraction economy. Maybe.
Actually, on a huge ringed Icy world with geologicals, if we do 2 orbitals, a Coriois, and a t1 Civilian Outpost, plus some refinery hubs on the surface, we will end up with a Refinery Coriolis and a small t1 port with an industrial/hi-tech/extraction economy. Maybe.
I actually assumed
Fleming: Alexander, discoverer of penicillin
Scott: of the Antarctic
Moore: Gordon, Intel, of the eponymous law
But if all these here bugfixes happen on Wednesday I'll be paying for names anyway, it would only be fair!
As far as I can tell this would work the same for (e.g.) a Tier 1 outpost orbiting a body with a T3 surface port on it? Body 2 in the diagram has a surface port receiving influence from orbit, and the priority language doesn't distinguish ground and surface ports, only mentioning tier and chronology.
Also: