Wie sieht der ideale DEVELOPMENT PLAN aus

[Oliver Guinnes]

Es heißt ja in den verschiedensten Berichten, dass die Development Pläne und ihr geschickte Einsatz zentral bei der Steuerung der KI und der Plantenenentwicklung sind. Habt ihr schon Erfahrung damit? Wenn ja dann lasst all die andern Galaxienbezwinger an eurem Wissen teilhaben und beschreibt hier für welche Planetentypen (Resourcen, Lage, Rassen, Entwicklungsstand) welcher Plan in eurer Sichtweise geignet ist!

:drink:

[Timme]

Persöhnlich habe ich zwar noch nicht sehr viele Spiele auf dem Buckel, aber in meinem letzten mit den Raas lief es ganz gut, wenn ich Coresysteme hauptsächlich Forschen und Schiffe bauen lasse, während Mineral Rich überraschenderweise Minen bauen, hohe Biodiversität baut Farmen, Frontier Militär und Verteidigung,
und der Rest bekommt eine gesunde Mischung, oder wird spezialisiert, kleine, arme Planeten sind recht gute Forschungszentren und Systemsitze.

Und sobald man der AI das Kolonialsieren überläßt, expandiert man dermaßen unkontolliert, dass ich eh alles den Vizekönigen überlasse, die Schiffe sammeln sich schon von selbst in der Reserve.

[Oliver Guinnes]

Liebe MOOer,

ich versuch nochmal diesen meine Fragenthread wiederzubeleben. Mich interessiert wirklcih wie ihr, wenn überhaupt, eure Devpläne für die verschiedenenen Planetentypen (Core, Minreral Rich, New, Unrest, Starving ...) gestaltet. Vielleicht mit den Angaben welche Vorgaben ihr für die verschiedenen Prioritäten Primary, Secondary und Tertiary macht. Genaus würde mich interessieren, ob ihr bei einem Planeten meist nur mit einem DevPlan arbeitet oder auch mal mit zweien, und wenn letzteres zutrifft unter welchen Bedingungen ihr dieses kombiniert. Achja, eine Rassenangabe wäre vielleicht auch noch hilfreich.

Danke!

:drink:

[Bismarck]

Nach welchen Gesichtspunkten werden die Planeten beurteilt?
Muss ich für alle verschiedenen einen planen und kann ich auch mehrere Prioritäten für eine Art vergeben (z.B.: Front - Verteidigung und ...)?

[Golwar]

Ich halte es mit dem Verfasser dieses Beitrages aus dem IG-Forum, das so ziemlich alle Fragen zu dem Thema Planetklassifikationen und Dev-Pläne abhandelt:


I've gone through and surveyed my planets and come to some pretty firm conclusions about how the game decides which classifications to use on which planet.

The algorithm works like this: the game has two slots to fill. It has a list of classification groups and it works it's way down this list trying to put the planet into each group in turn. Once it's filled the first slot with a classification from the highest priority group it could make a match with, it continues down the list until it can fill the second spot. Then it quits. In general it will choose only one classification from each group, but will skip picking one from that group if the planet simply doesn't fit. (There are two notable exceptions to this, explained below.)

At the very top of the list are the emergency classifications. This will always be listed first, if they apply.
Unrest
Starving
Ravaged?
Beseiged?

When they apply should be pretty obvious. However it appears that two classifications from this list can appear at once, so it's an exception in this regard. That is, a planet can be marked as both Unrest and Starving , although I haven't seen that myself. I haven't actually caught Ravaged or Beseiged either, so perhaps someone can confirm there existance.

Next are the "new" classifications:
New
Newly Conquered
Newly Acquired


The new classification will last for 15 turns, as reported by numerous posters. Again, the game will only chose one of these.

The next category is almost always present in one of the slots unless the planet is new and undergoing a crises. It will always choose one of these if a slot is available to put it in:
Core
Primary
Secondary
Frontier

This category is another minor exception in that the game will ALWAYS find one of these classifications to apply to a planet, if the slot is available. Exactly how it determines what is a core planet versus a secondary planet isn't known to me but frontier seems to be tied to it's proximity to enemy borders (as it should be.)

Again, the game will always pick one of these for a planet if there is a slot to put it in.

Now, all planets get one of the above Core/Primary/Secondary/Frontier classifications so that leaves the possibility of only one other classifcation appearing on the Planet screen. Now the AI looks at the mineral richness of the planet.
Mineral Rich
Mineral Poor


If the planet is rich or very rich, it classifies the planet as Mineral Rich and if it's poor, it uses the Mineral Poor. If the mineral content is average, it chooses not to use this classification at all and moves on down the list.

Next is the biodiversity choices:
High Biodiversity
Low Biodiversity

If the planet is diverse or very diverse it becomes "high" otherwise if it's similar or homogeneous it becomes low biodiversity. If the biodiversity on the planet is hetereogeneous, we go to the next category looking for a match.

Now we get to the size classifications:
Small
Large


This is an easy one; I don't know the exact numbers at which it classifies a planet as Small or Large but I'd guess it's <5 for small or >8 or 9 for large. In reality it doesn't matter much because, as you can see the planet has to be not in an emergency, not new, neither mineral rich nor poor, and neither low or high biodiversity before this classification will even show up.

After all that, if we still need to fill that last slot, we go for the ring classifications.

Paradise
Sweat Spot
Green Ring
Yellow Ring
Red Ring


These are easy to figure out... but one interesting fact about this classification is that it uses the dominant species on the planet to make the classification. Also interesting about this one is that the game should always be able to pick one no matter what to make sure that the last slot is always filled. So, even if the planet is average in mineral content, biodiversity and size, you can always pick a classification with regards to it's "ring."

Hopefully this enlightens more than it confuses but obviously it could use some more detail in some places. Please note that although there are other classifications listed under the dev plan screen, I haven't seen them in play.

Also, I have seen the No Class classification, but never for more than one turn.

I'd also like to make a few conclusions that come from this information.... one is that the classification system is useless for making dev plans. Only All Planets and the two shown on the planet screen for that planet apply. If you don't beleive me look at this thread. Read down a few and you'll see Czaroc put this issue to bed (at least in my mind.)

Why is it useless? Well, I guess that's just an opinion but it seems obvious from the way it makes it's choices. The system seems to think that it's more important to designate a planet as mineral poor than high bio... what does mineral poor tell you about a planet? It tells you not to build mines there, but it doesn't give you a clue as to what you SHOULD build there. It might be high bio, but that classification will never show, it's effectively masked by the poor mineral content.

So... what I've been doing is making four player defined dev plans:
Mine - Manufacture - Mine
Manufacture - Mine - Manufacture
Research - Trade - Research
Farm - Research - Farm


I also define All Planets as:
Infrastructure - Trade - Planetary Defense
and New as:
Military - Government - Manufacture
(These aren't set in stone, either.)

Then, whenever I get a new planet, I changed the second classification to one of the four above player defined classifications. I could also define unrest or starving, but usually it's best to deal with those planets in unrest yourself in my experience. This type of plan usually gets me where I'm going, YMMV.