Powerplay Faction: Denton Patreus Patreus Pledgers - Organise
- Thread starter Commander Starcloak
- Start date
- Status
The CC yield of Olokulu is not as good as Apalok.
Yes, but only a few.
And if we want expand later in this direcktion we have to fly always the long distance to Apalok station for goods.
Edit:
in my opinion it counts not only the profit. Also the distance to station and possible trading profit with other controled systems.
Thats why Tsim Binba is running . Just think a bit on our Commanders.
I am not telling to prepare or expand to systems lets say under 50.
But may be i am wrong. Im just a noob with some thoughs.
And if we want expand later in this direcktion we have to fly always the long distance to Apalok station for goods.
Edit:
in my opinion it counts not only the profit. Also the distance to station and possible trading profit with other controled systems.
Thats why Tsim Binba is running . Just think a bit on our Commanders.
I am not telling to prepare or expand to systems lets say under 50.
But may be i am wrong. Im just a noob with some thoughs.
Last edited:
The distance is only a LY or two also. Not worth splitting hairs over that to me, but eh, just my opinion.
We do consider station distance when looking at systems - but CC yield is more important to us, and we consider anything above 3000Ls distance from star to be unreasonable - at 2200Ls or so, Apalok's station could be closer, but we didn't deem it unreasonable.
Last bit of maths from me, my head is hurting
http://i57.tinypic.com/117y1aw.png
Here is the break even points for the number of systems for a given average system income.
This is when you will have 0 CC to expand with, this doesn't take into account fortification or undermining income increases and decreases
I'm sure Cmdr Fergus from Lavigny's forces won't mind me borrowing this handy illustration of why we at Senator Patreus' strategic advisory are putting the brakes on this cycle and telling our commanders to take our Expansion and Prep slow and steady. Don't worry - we're not losing power - we're doing this in order to create a more precision approach and secure Senator Patreus' power by only going after a few carefully selected systems per cycle. We still want to expand, just steadily and only into the systems we want.
Remember, Senator Patreus says:
Last edited:
Last edited:
Well, i just pushed Beta Caeli and Paesi over Fuelum.
Lets the comanders decide. If Apalok dont rise in 24 hours over Cuchua i will go for Olokulu.
Apalok is only 3CC over Olokulu.
Time is money.
Lets the comanders decide. If Apalok dont rise in 24 hours over Cuchua i will go for Olokulu.
Apalok is only 3CC over Olokulu.
Time is money.
Does this mean, we work for the senator, or he works for us ?
I know in the past and the presence the voted leaders are thinking we have to work for them.
No I certainly don't mind you using them and I envy the position your Power is currently in.
We have been expanding at a terrific rate, but that has now been rewarded with us going bankrupt next cycle or the one after, and most of our players time is spent fighting preparation wars with our own members.
I don't believe there are 5th column elements involved, just merit grinders, most whom I have found in game thought getting more merits was helping our Power, and they genuinely didn't understand most of the game concepts.
Its the 4th week, it will be interesting to see how many defections there will be after they shiny new toys are available.
Yes, I think we can all expect a certain amount of defections that week.
Thanks for letting me repost - I just wanted to illustrate to our people exactly why we are suddenly advocating a more "slow and steady" approach going forwards. It's about careful selection and the importance of fortification now.
Yes, unfortunately your power falling into turmoil is inevitable now - you can't control your merit farmers who are just going to foist more Prep and Expansion on you. We're having the same issue - the merit farmers farmed one system in particular for two cycles in a row, and now they're Expanding it. Note to Patreus commanders - STOP EXPANDING LP 940-115.
Well Whiterose signs most of his posts "Patreus Prevails!". It's just his thing. I prefer something more along the lines of "For the honour of the Senator!".
If you mean "Control. Command. Consolidate." it has nothing to do with working. They're guidelines for commanders. It's saying "we can command through control and consolidation", encouraging commanders to focus on consolidation and securing control in order for us to be in a commanding position. It's an awareness-raising poster.
Yep. Fortification. Honestly, with the new changes to Powerplay, we cannot stress enough how important Fortification is. This is our number one priority from now on, Commanders, every cycle. We want to knock out the Fortification every time. Because now it takes a lot more effort before a system is Fortified. The threshholds have been set higher by FD in the recent update.
We need commanders on Fortification way more than we need commanders on Prep right now.
We need commanders on Fortification way more than we need commanders on Prep right now.
Is there merit to being somewhat savvy about fortification? FD said they did this for things to be more tactical... consider this:
Parsi is currently under threat. Undermine trigger is 8400ish, fortify trigger is 3400ish.
Meanwhile, CF 464 is already fortified. Fortify trigger was 5000ish (more than Parsi), but the undermine trigger is 46,000. If that system was going to be threatened, we'd see it coming well and truly before it was close to being threatened.
We're in a bit of a race on Parsi now, with the undermine trigger close to being hit, and the system still a ways off being fortified. If we'd fortified that rather than CF 464
- We wouldn't have been in this position
- Parsi being under threat has happened over the course of a few days, not overnight. If this were CF 464, they'd only be 20% of the way there, and we'd have plenty of time to get the 5000 merits up for fortification if needed.
tl;dr I think we also need to prioritise which systems to fortify.
Might I suggest the following as a list to fortify (until further notice)
Parsi, LTT 47, Wangal, Lao Zi, Turbacobo, Guguroro, Smei Tsu, HIP 117865, Turir
This list is just based off which systems have low (=~ 10,000 or less) PP to undermine. It takes no consideration of cost to fortify...
Smei Tsu will cost 8000 to fortify, and 7000 to undermine, but will cost us 161 instead of 22 if we don't. This is a difficult system for us. Meanwhile Wangal will cost a similar amount if undermined, but only has a fortify cost of 2000. This is another pretty important factor to consider.
We should also consider this for systems to attack. If there's a cheap undermine target, that is more expensive to be fortified, we could target that to get some opposition off our back.
Last edited:
Yes. That's a good idea. We believed that all Fortification would get done, that's why we hadn't before set a priority list for Fortification, however, it couldn't hurt to have a contingency plan, and it's possible that not all players - the ones who aren't getting the info on the forums or the reddit - are aware that FD has upped the Fortification requirements.
I'll get back with a Fortitifaction Priorities list shortly.
- Status