| 1 |
Alternatively, i also think the recovery and offshore economy of the con-eco-ZK could be approximated via something that has about the same investment payback, but isn't self-defending, too cloakable, or mobile. So, flowing from that approach:
|
1 |
Alternatively, i also think the recovery and offshore economy of the con-eco-ZK could be approximated via something that has about the same investment payback, but isn't self-defending, too cloakable, or mobile. So, flowing from that approach:
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
- The basic investment shouldn't be that huge to build on a +2 basic income
|
3 |
- The basic investment shouldn't be that huge to build on a +2 basic income
|
| 4 |
- It should be strictly worse than overdrive
|
4 |
- It should be strictly worse than overdrive
|
| 5 |
- As a rule of thumb, it should not return more than (old caretaker: 0.3 / 220) = 0.00136363636 per metal invested
|
5 |
- As a rule of thumb, it should not return more than (old caretaker: 0.3 / 220) = 0.00136363636 per metal invested
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
Let's say we want a device that produces +1 metal. At the desired efficiency, its total cost should be around 733 metal. Let's round this up for a full 800.
|
7 |
Let's say we want a device that produces +1 metal. At the desired efficiency, its total cost should be around 733 metal. Let's round this up for a full 800.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
Let's assume the thing also consists of two modules - one that produces energy, and one that produces metal by converting energy, like the good old metalmakor. If we divide this in half, then we have 400m of an energy source, 400m of a +1 metalmakor, and a requirement that the metalmakor not be more efficient than overdrive in any practical situation.
|
9 |
Let's assume the thing also consists of two modules - one that produces energy, and one that produces metal by converting energy, like the good old metalmakor. If we divide this in half, then we have 400m of an energy source, 400m of a +1 metalmakor, and a requirement that the metalmakor not be more efficient than overdrive in any practical situation.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
We
achieve
the
latter
by
assuming
that
the
energy
source
has
the
maximum
available
efficiency
-
because
in
a
non-intended
scenario,
this
is
what
a
thriving
player
would
use
to
try
to
use
it
instead
of
overdrive
anyway.
The
most
cost-efficient
energy
source
in
ZK
is
the
advanced
geo,
costing
1500
metal
(
accounting
for
morph)
and
producing
+100
energy,
for
a
ratio
of
0.
0666(
6)
.
A
400
metal
share
in
an
advgeo
project
will
give
us
26.
666(
6)
metal
to
spend
on
the
metal
maker.
We
can
round
this
down
to
25
to
compensate
for
having
rounded
up
to
800
earlier
and
for
a
nice
numerical
match
with
basic
geo.
|
11 |
We
achieve
the
latter
by
assuming
that
the
energy
source
has
the
maximum
available
efficiency
-
because
in
a
non-intended
scenario,
this
is
what
a
thriving
player
would
use
to
try
to
use
it
instead
of
overdrive
anyway.
The
most
cost-efficient
energy
source
in
ZK
is
the
advanced
geo,
costing
1500
metal
(
accounting
for
morph)
and
producing
+100
energy,
for
a
ratio
of
0.
0666(
6)
.
A
400
metal
share
in
an
advgeo
project
will
give
us
26.
666(
6)
energy
to
spend
on
the
metal
maker.
We
can
round
this
down
to
25
to
compensate
for
having
rounded
up
to
800
earlier
and
for
a
nice
numerical
match
with
basic
geo.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
So, in summary:
|
13 |
So, in summary:
|
| 14 |
- 400 cost metal maker
|
14 |
- 400 cost metal maker
|
| 15 |
- Drains 25 energy, which costs you ~400 metal to obtain
|
15 |
- Drains 25 energy, which costs you ~400 metal to obtain
|
| 16 |
- Generates 1 metal
|
16 |
- Generates 1 metal
|
| 17 |
- Pays back under optimal conditions in 800 seconds = 13.3333333333 minutes
|
17 |
- Pays back under optimal conditions in 800 seconds = 13.3333333333 minutes
|
| 18 |
- Lower efficiency with less cheap energy
|
18 |
- Lower efficiency with less cheap energy
|
| 19 |
- energy component cost with 21 tidal generators: 735m, total project cost 1135m, payback time: 1135s (18.91 minutes)
|
19 |
- energy component cost with 21 tidal generators: 735m, total project cost 1135m, payback time: 1135s (18.91 minutes)
|
| 20 |
- energy component cost with (25/35) share of a fusion: 714m, total project cost per makor: 1114m, payback time: 1114s ( 18.5666666667 minutes)
|
20 |
- energy component cost with (25/35) share of a fusion: 714m, total project cost per makor: 1114m, payback time: 1114s ( 18.5666666667 minutes)
|
| 21 |
- energy component cost with (25/225) share of a singu: 445m, total project cost per makor: 885m, payback time: 885s ( 14.75m)
|
21 |
- energy component cost with (25/225) share of a singu: 445m, total project cost per makor: 885m, payback time: 885s ( 14.75m)
|
| 22 |
- Static, cannot be cloaked
|
22 |
- Static, cannot be cloaked
|
| 23 |
- Large footprint
|
23 |
- Large footprint
|
| 24 |
- Probably not worth having in the game anyway, tbh
|
24 |
- Probably not worth having in the game anyway, tbh
|
| 25 |
- An energy-based makor means that players who had their singus shinied actually will be punished by higher energy costs, so maybe flat +1 for a 1000m is preferable
|
25 |
- An energy-based makor means that players who had their singus shinied actually will be punished by higher energy costs, so maybe flat +1 for a 1000m is preferable
|
| 26 |
- do you really want it with those numbers, really?
|
26 |
- do you really want it with those numbers, really?
|
Please re-enable self-sufficient metal production