Workforce? What’s the point?

[Warped]

A S HAB would have even greater diminishing returns.

The numbers have been posted by Gregorovitch, post your own if you like.

[Geonis]

A S HAB would have even greater diminishing returns.

The numbers have been posted by Gregorovitch, post your own if you like.

Spoiler

Show

Code: Select all

Hour	S.Chips 	Earn/H	Cash on hand
1	59		5.9	2.9
2	62		6.2	6.1
3	65		6.5	9.6
4	68		6.8	13.4
5	71		7.1	17.5
6	74		7.4	21.9
7	77		7.7	26.6
8	80		8	31.6
9	83		8.3	36.9
10	86		8.6	42.5
11	89		8.9	48.4
12	92		9.2	54.6
13	95		9.5	61.1
14	98		9.8	67.9
15	101		10.1	75
16	104		10.4	82.4
17	107		10.7	90.1
18	110		11	98.1
19	113		11.3	106.4
20	116		11.6	115

Spoiler

Show

Code: Select all

Hour	Smart Chips	Habs	WF	Earn/Hr	Cash on hand
1	59				5.9	2.9
2	62				6.2	6.1
3	65				6.5	9.6
4	68				6.8	13.4
5	71				7.1	17.5
6	74				7.4	21.9
7	77				7.7	26.6
8	79		1	40	7.922	0
9	82			100	8.255	5.255
10	85			160	8.588	10.843
11	88			220	8.921	16.764
12	91			280	9.254	23.018
13	94			340	9.587	29.605
14	97			400	9.92	36.525
15	100			460	10.253	43.778
16	103			520	10.586	51.364
17	106			580	10.919	59.283
18	109			640	11.252	67.535
19	112			700	11.585	76.12
20	115			760	11.918	85.038

Done.

I even used his math to show how a habitat can be more profitable if you invest into it correctly.

[grapedog]

A S HAB would have even greater diminishing returns.

The numbers have been posted by Gregorovitch, post your own if you like.

I literally just posted numbers.

I'm done here though, not going to keep banging my head into the wall. It's your game, if you want to make less money, don't build habs. Enjoy your game.

[strask412]

I'm done here though, not going to keep banging my head into the wall. It's your game, if you want to make less money, don't build habs. Enjoy your game.

What??!@? No! This thread has been EPIC! The Drama! The Action! (Edit: And spreadsheets!) What will I read if you leave us?!

[shealladh]

I'm done here though, not going to keep banging my head into the wall. It's your game, if you want to make less money, don't build habs. Enjoy your game.

What??!@? No! This thread has been EPIC! The Drama! The Action! (Edit: And spreadsheets!) What will I read if you leave us?!

beats most movie releases atm, they're so lack luster, this however is 9/10. (1 point loss as not to fan the trolls )

[Warped]

Done.

I even used his math to show how a habitat can be more profitable if you invest into it correctly.

You are not reinvesting the profitssss as they come in, once again we are not comparing apples, or I am misreading the data. What was your capital, what do the columns mean, are they decimals of a factory?

What you posted does not even come close to what I am speculating, where is the factory count for a start, when did the money become available to buy new factories.

Gregorovitch's data show much more information about the scenario.

[spankahontis]

There's been a lot of bogus maths in this thread, not to mention unnecessary mud slinging, but the discussion would be moot if the game were properly documented.

That's all we need. Proper documentation. Adding a page to the wiki that says Module X has effect Y. Now, for sure, there are going to be more complex versions of the above, but the point stands - Egosoft please tell us how things work so that we can use them (rather than argue about them).

Each Module should be documented on the Wiki with the Math behind it, for those to formularise their argument.
But yeah, this is getting a bit salty.

[pref]

Gregorovitch's data show much more information about the scenario.

Gregorovitch just cripples his hab plex with a bad decision, builds it with 16 less prod modules. Obviously that will result in his hab plex catching up much later.
On top of that the numbers are off regarding build costs and income.

Check it with the complex calc tool, no reason to just guess the numbers. You can see it for your exact situation then, build costs, income per hour and all the necessary data to decide if it's worth it for your specific situation.

[strask412]

Gregorovitch just cripples his hab plex with a bad decision, builds it with 16 less prod modules. Obviously that will result in his hab plex catching up much later.

Emphasis mine.

You just made me realize something that I think is important. We've all been debating the wrong question in this thread.

I think even people who show disdain for habitats could agree that if you had, say, 35,639 claytronics factories and wanted +20% production, increasing your claytronics factory count to 42,767 (at a cost of 128,702,597,760 credits, and increasing income by 6,308,565,120 credits per hour), is a less good solution than building the required 28,897 Paranid L Domes to provide the workforce (at a cost of only 38,804,509,832 credits and increasing income by 11,707,285,809 credits per hour).

Right? because if the numbers get large enough, habitats win.

But even habitat-lovers will agree (and have already done so in this thread) that if you only have a single factory, a habitat is a bad choice.

So the real question is as follows: How many factories should you build before starting on habitats?

[pref]

So the real question is as follows: How many factories should you build before starting on habitats?

I wrote the exact same thing a few pages back, it comes down to how many prod modules you have, whats the hourly income for the prod modules you build, whats the max efficiency for those prod modules, what is the build cost for the plex, is it a self sustaining complex etc.

It also has a subjective element in border cases, with low enough sum income/h on your prod modules and low enough build cost: how quick you want a return on the investment.

On top of that you don't need to have the optimal amount of workforce for max production right now - i'm getting the impression that what matters is how much your already built habs are filled, regardless of the optimal headcount.
This might be a bug though.

Anyway there is no golden number, just a "golden function" which has the above params i mentioned in the first line.


The real shame is that the complex calculator is not integrated into the game. It was near mandatory in every X game so far i played - we shouldn't have resort to the same 3rd party tool since the last 5 or how many entries in the series.

[Gregorovitch]

Gregorovitch's data show much more information about the scenario.

Gregorovitch just cripples his hab plex with a bad decision, builds it with 16 less prod modules. Obviously that will result in his hab plex catching up much later.

No, that is not correct. The scenario I posted was an exactly equal starting position, both sides having exactly equal starting capital. That means it is an precisely accurate reflection of the RoI from both options.

Furthermore this result will always be the same no matter what starting position you choose so long as the starting positions are equal in monetary terms. You will always lose by investing in hab BPs. By a lot.

[strask412]

Furthermore this result will always be the same no matter what starting position you choose so long as the starting positions are equal in monetary terms. You will always lose by investing in hab BPs. By a lot.

I selected a starting point with 35,639 Claytronics factories for both sides (viewtopic.php?f=146&t=412141&start=105#p4830653). Does your statement work for that case?

[Gregorovitch]

A S HAB would have even greater diminishing returns.

The numbers have been posted by Gregorovitch, post your own if you like.

Spoiler

Show

Code: Select all

Hour	S.Chips 	Earn/H	Cash on hand
1	59		5.9	2.9
2	62		6.2	6.1
3	65		6.5	9.6
4	68		6.8	13.4
5	71		7.1	17.5
6	74		7.4	21.9
7	77		7.7	26.6
8	80		8	31.6
9	83		8.3	36.9
10	86		8.6	42.5
11	89		8.9	48.4
12	92		9.2	54.6
13	95		9.5	61.1
14	98		9.8	67.9
15	101		10.1	75
16	104		10.4	82.4
17	107		10.7	90.1
18	110		11	98.1
19	113		11.3	106.4
20	116		11.6	115

Spoiler

Show

Code: Select all

Hour	Smart Chips	Habs	WF	Earn/Hr	Cash on hand
1	59				5.9	2.9
2	62				6.2	6.1
3	65				6.5	9.6
4	68				6.8	13.4
5	71				7.1	17.5
6	74				7.4	21.9
7	77				7.7	26.6
8	79		1	40	7.922	0
9	82			100	8.255	5.255
10	85			160	8.588	10.843
11	88			220	8.921	16.764
12	91			280	9.254	23.018
13	94			340	9.587	29.605
14	97			400	9.92	36.525
15	100			460	10.253	43.778
16	103			520	10.586	51.364
17	106			580	10.919	59.283
18	109			640	11.252	67.535
19	112			700	11.585	76.12
20	115			760	11.918	85.038

Done.

I even used his math to show how a habitat can be more profitable if you invest into it correctly.

These numbers prove my point exactly from a different starting position. That's why I thought you posting them for. It doesn't matter which way you look at these numbers the no-hab option is producing a far higher RoI. This is because the cost of the hab BP scuppers the hab version investment potential.

In this case, starting with a large complex with 60 smart chips fabs each, the right thing to do in both versions is to build a second complex, say at hour 7, so as to increase the expansion rate from 3 to 6. This is because in both versions over the 20 hours they are accumulating cash which they can't re-invest on account of the three-module-per-hour restriction thereby artificially restricting growth and therefore hiding the true RoI. That's why I chose to start from scratch on a new complex in my example. It avoids this complexity.

It should be obvious, though, that the no-hab version has mountains of cash available to re-invest that the hab version doesn't have from hour 8 onwards. Which of course will accelerate the no-hab player's wealth over the horizon when suitably re-invested.

Your figures demonstrate clearly that there is never, ever, a good time to drop 20m on a hab BP.

[pref]

No, that is not correct. The scenario I posted was an exactly equal starting position, both sides having exactly equal starting capital. That means it is an precisely accurate reflection of the RoI from both options.

Furthermore this result will always be the same no matter what starting position you choose so long as the starting positions are equal in monetary terms. You will always lose by investing in hab BPs. By a lot.

Have you checked the complexes i linked in my reply?
As i recall going with your example the hab version full build cost was 20m less then the non hab with near equal end product output - calculating with 125% efficiency, plus it had higher income/h and lower resource consumption.

If you assume a fixed budget, that would mean adding more prod modules resulting in way higher output then the non hab version, not building it with 16 less.

[Geonis]

These numbers prove my point exactly from a different starting position. That's why I thought you posting them for. It doesn't matter which way you look at these numbers the no-hab option is producing a far higher RoI. This is because the cost of the hab BP scuppers the hab version investment potential.

In this case, starting with a large complex with 60 smart chips fabs each, the right thing to do in both versions is to build a second complex, say at hour 7, so as to increase the expansion rate from 3 to 6. This is because in both versions over the 20 hours they are accumulating cash which they can't re-invest on account of the three-module-per-hour restriction thereby artificially restricting growth and therefore hiding the true RoI. That's why I chose to start from scratch on a new complex in my example. It avoids this complexity.

It should be obvious, though, that the no-hab version has mountains of cash available to re-invest that the hab version doesn't have from hour 8 onwards. Which of course will accelerate the no-hab player's wealth over the horizon.

Your figures demonstrate clearly that there is never, ever, a good time to drop 20m on a hab BP.

Already thought of this counter point and did the math to that end as well.

With constantly reinvesting into other stations, you will end up with more viable habitat build options.

Code: Select all

Habitats	Cost per Habit
1		24722626
2		12972626
3		9055959
4		7097626
5		5922626
10		3572626
15		2789293
25		2162626
50		1692626
100		1457626

*Used L Argon Habitat as a base.

The blueprint cost impact decreases as the more viable habitat builds increases. (You can still get the BP for free, worth mentioning. The longer you play them more likely it is to happen with reasonable effort.)

This chart is the one L Argon habitat module based off a smartchip complex. So contrast it against the hourly profits of 100k.

Code: Select all

Hour	Workfroce	Profits
1	40		16982
2	100		42456
3	160		67930
4	220		93404
5	280		118877
6	340		144351
7	400		169825
8	460		195299
9	520		220772
10	580		246246
11	640		271720
12	700		297193
13	760		322667
14	820		348141
15	880		373615
16	940		399088
17	1000		424562

*This chart uses purchasing Food/Medicine, so won't affect build time restrictions. Also, the actual .22 efficiency multiplier for smart chips

Taking these two data sets, we can see that the increase profits will eventually hit a point where the initial cost are offset by the increased long term revenue gains. Eventually, you will hit this point with your approach if expansion is maintained, market saturation isn't hit.

If we consider market saturation, expansion isn't infinite and we have to look at production efficiency, which habitats are favored.

I do agree purchasing the blueprint too early is bad.