How cost effective is a con swarm

Page of 3 (57 records)

sort

Kyubey

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

a conswarm makes .15 m per con(140 m cheapest)
thats 933 m per 1 m/s

to determine the cost efficiency of a singu, m/m/s you would use the calculation:
y=(((x^2-1)*4)-((x-1)^2-1)*4))*17.7/m

where:
x=od factor
m=metal per mex

when y=933.3 it is more cost effective for you to build a con then a singu to increase m income

what this actualy means:
on a map with mex that make 2m/s each

this means at around 1250% od it is no longer benificial to build singu
(if you are looking at overall income, or playing 1v1)

at around 2650% od it is no longer profitable to build singu
(if you are looking at just your own income)[divide evrything by 2]

intresting facts:
number of mex dose not effect % at all (though you will need to build more singu to od them all)

conclusion:
after reaching 1250%+ od, ecowhores should imediately switch to conspam, for more income, at less cost.

+0 / -0

Antelope

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

Interesting math.

Reminds me of an old BA FFA strategy on island FFA maps:
In early game the only source of income for seabase strategy is tidal generators and metal makers. Some maps had very low tidal income, to the point where sea cons generated more energy + metal AND had more HP AND had free buildpower AND were mobile.

It was not uncommon in these situations for a player to simply spam T1 ship cons until they could afford to start making T2. At this point, Fusion + Moho Metal Maker spam became much more cost efficient.

+0 / -0

Kyubey

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

:P its even worse in zk, since the eco is logarithmic

+0 / -0

Klon

11 years ago

common sense tells me that a 4000 metal singu makes 20 metal per second just for the guy building it. 4000 metal in cons make like 30x0.2=6 metal

+0 / -0

Kyubey

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

:D obviously klon you're not a mathematician
your common sense is... well... common

i allways knew conspam>singu spam
but i didnt know it happened so early

+0 / -0

[Er0]Godde

11 years ago

Something is wrong dabadab.

1 Singu overdriving 1 mex gives 657% which is 13.15 metal from overdrive on that mex.

2 Singus overdriving 1 mex gives 965% which is 19.33 metal from overdrive on that mex.

The second singu gives 19.33 - 13.15 = 6.18 metal which is more than:
3920 metal worth of cloaky cons which gives 4.2 income
3960 metal worth of nanos which gives 5.4 income.

+0 / -0

[Er0]Godde

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

At three Singus on one 2mex, Singu is still better than cloaky cons. 1203% OD which is 24.08 metal.

24.08 - 19.33 = 4.75

Nanos gives more income than that though.

+0 / -0

Kyubey

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

o i c where i phailed...
y=(((x^2-1)*4)-((x-1)^2-1)*4))*17.7/m

ill go fix it...
im an idiot, i really should test things that i write...
i lost bits all over the place XD cursed brackets!!!
all fixed now, checked, tested, and acurate (if you do the math, the % i gave are +/- 20%)

for a nano, its 980% od before you should start building them

+0 / -0

xponen

11 years ago

how do you get that equations???

super magical!

+0 / -0

Kyubey

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

((x^2-1)*4)=e cost to od to x (in the manual)
((x^2-1)*4)-((x-1)^2-1)*4)=e cost to increase od by 100%
*17.7=the cost of 1 e produced by singu in terms of metal

(((x^2-1)*4)-((x-1)^2-1)*4))*17.7=the cost to increase od by 100% in terms of metal(if you use singu)

(((x^2-1)*4)-((x-1)^2-1)*4))*17.7/m=the amount it costs to increase your income by 1 metal using od

933=metal/metal of cloaky con
733=metal/metal of nanolathe

put in metal/metal into y, solve for x, you is done!

you get od value to get %=(x-1)*100

+0 / -0

[V]sheep

11 years ago

one more thread where we need nicer math representation.

Have a look there http://mathjax.com/

+0 / -0

Kyubey

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

i could show you my scribble sheet
i wrote all of the calculations for this in the bottom left corner XD
this is comparitavely neat

+0 / -0

[pikts]wolas

11 years ago

There is no worse game in zk when eco is made with nanos.

+0 / -0

Anarchid

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

I think Clams had the best cost/income ratio of all other construction units except Caretakers and Commanders.

Caretakers are amazing for ecowhoring, but block space and are much more fragile compared to Clams.

(clam actually has lower income per-cost, but unlike shieldy and cloaky cons, doesn't eat into your overdrive energy, and you can hide them underwater)

+0 / -0

GoogleFrog

11 years ago

I wouldn't call that 'so low'. 3 singu per mex is a lot.

Also Necros don't drain energy and Rectors can be turned off.

+0 / -0

Anarchid

11 years ago
(edited 11 years ago)

quote:
Also Necros don't drain energy

They do while charging up the shield, i think? Of course, that's hardly relevant once shield is up to full power and your conblob isn't being shot.

+0 / -0

GoogleFrog

11 years ago

Nope.

+0 / -0

Kyubey

11 years ago

actualy its only 2 singu per mex, and even after 1 1/2 it becomes fairly cost effective...

+0 / -0

MrPingu

11 years ago

We need LaTeX support on the forums!

+0 / -0

NeonSturm

11 years ago

quote:
@[EXPLETIVE_REDACTED]> after reaching 1250%+ od, ecowhores should imediately switch to conspam, for more income, at less cost.

Isn't it more cost effective to OD a mex with 3m/s+ than a mex 0.5m/s- ?

ALSO: If you spam bubblebot-cons, they help keeping your shield charged (as long as it is below 900).
Shouldn't even eco-whores consider this advantage because allys may spam less shields in favor to eco?

Even if the shield has to block sniper shots (1500dmg gross), it can fall temporary below 900 (bubblecon's limit) and take use of it.

If you make mobile eco, it can dodge det, etc.
And because mobile doesn't go into OD, the e will be spent to other players, increasing their OD while helping them to not lose all e income to a steamroll-disaster

+0 / -0

Page of 3 (57 records)

Forum index > General discussion > Strategy and tips >