Administrative Strain

Administrative Strain (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire

Message

franklin1000 -> Administrative Strain (11/2/2020 5:44:20 AM)
Where do you find Administrative Strain in the reports? How important is Administrative Strain to placing new zones?

sillygoy -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/2/2020 8:42:35 AM)
Each zone has its own Administrative Strain rating. You can find it by clicking on a zone's "Ir/Regular Zone" button in the bottom panel when you have a hex selected. Assets more than 6 hexes away from a city generate administrative strain for its parent zone. Administrative strain is relative to the productivity of the asset and the size of the zone's city. So a level 1 recycling center 8 hexes away from a Minor City (level 4) will not generate as much administrative strain as when the settlement is just a Village (level 1). In the former case, it is actually rather tolerable, but in the latter case, it is debilitating (over 30%, last time it happened to me). Administrative strain is a flat production penalty to public assets as far as I know. 10% administrative strain means 10% less food, water, IP, metals, logistical points, etc. for that zone's government-run buildings.

Malevolence -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/2/2020 9:05:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: franklin1000 How important is Administrative Strain to placing new zones? At the moment, the best technique (IMO) is to ignore administration strain and bull through and overwhelm it. Don't be eager to optimize in this game. If you simply pile on, you can't really lose.

eddieballgame -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/2/2020 10:21:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Malevolence quote: ORIGINAL: franklin1000 How important is Administrative Strain to placing new zones? At the moment, the best technique (IMO) is to ignore administration strain and bull through and overwhelm it. Don't be eager to optimize in this game. If you simply pile on, you can't really lose. I concur, based on what little I know about it. I have found it not to be as...scary in the bulk of my games. That said, I tend to play on smaller planets.

DTurtle -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/3/2020 8:08:43 AM)
Admin strain is deadly. Always keep it below 10% as then no penalty is applied. It is a straight negative modifier for all production! So if you don't watch out for it you can easily push it up to 50% or more in large zones. Just ask Clux in our MP game - he didn't watch out for it, and had his second largest city sitting at 70%. I don't want to know how much IP, BP, etc were lost due to that strain - remember the costs of production are still applied, you just don't get any benefit. There is no real penalty for having a few small zones scattered about here and there for things like a truck station or similar.

franklin1000 -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/3/2020 9:48:53 AM)
I thought small zones a good thing vs a couple big ones

Clux -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/3/2020 3:05:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DTurtle Admin strain is deadly. Always keep it below 10% as then no penalty is applied. It is a straight negative modifier for all production! So if you don't watch out for it you can easily push it up to 50% or more in large zones. Just ask Clux in our MP game - he didn't watch out for it, and had his second largest city sitting at 70%. I don't want to know how much IP, BP, etc were lost due to that strain - remember the costs of production are still applied, you just don't get any benefit. There is no real penalty for having a few small zones scattered about here and there for things like a truck station or similar. Yep, I had to make several smaller zones to get it under 20%, I went from getting 200-300 IP per turn to over 2000 thanks to that

Malevolence -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/3/2020 4:02:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DTurtle Admin strain is deadly. Always keep it below 10% as then no penalty is applied. Looking at the tree and ignoring the forest. I recommend you assess the total cost of ownership of a zone. It’s not just a question of admin strain, it’s a question of added issues you assume with another zone.

DTurtle -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/3/2020 4:38:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Malevolence Looking at the tree and ignoring the forest. I recommend you assess the total cost of ownership of a zone. It’s not just a question of admin strain, it’s a question of added issues you assume with another zone. Well, added costs like additional chances to get events and move the profile to where I want it? Additional zones to place clone centers, and other free assets in? What are the costs of having a zone with a few thousand people, a single truck station or supply station and maybe a mine or two?

Malevolence -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/4/2020 12:58:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DTurtle Well, added costs like additional chances to get events and move the profile to where I want it? Additional zones to place clone centers, and other free assets in? What are the costs of having a zone with a few thousand people, a single truck station or supply station and maybe a mine or two? It's not simply the apples to apples comparison of building wide-many or tall-few zones. Zones are the principal object of the minigames that are outside of combat. Fewer political officials in your regime means influence/eliminate impacts a greater percentage of the whole regime's leadership. Eliminating disagreeable political factions is simple; more so if done in one or few zones. Concentrate effort and power in the smallest possible geographical area during purges. I begin to drive political opponents to zero (0) relations on turn 1. Every next zone opens you up to added simultaneous adverse event/issues. Events are triggered by zone, not by regime. Cults, corporations, insurgents, disasters, etc. The game disproportionately favors small maps and fewer zones. Most asset upgrades do not increase admin strain because they are at range zero. Late game, with advanced tech, it becomes even more prudent to build inside the city. For example, fewer zones means fewer cities to fortify and reinforce. Asset logistics within zones is instant and conducted without the use of truck/rail points. More zones means that more logistics points are used to deliver goods between zones. The artifact installations cannot be stacked, but they only impact their own zone. The bonuses are therefore, in the aggregate, better used in a tall-few zones strategy. I am not suggesting using one zone, but I am suggesting a very prudent and circumspect assessment. Administrative strain is not the most important (or only) evaluation criteria. Aside, many may see significant differences between single player (pve) and multiplayer (pvp) games. In my opinion, multiplayer certainly makes combat more fun, but otherwise the planet map (size, geography, starting position, etc.) sets the most important opportunities for players. More broadly, environmental conditions that are randomly decided before the game begins have the most impact (all other things being equal--if this is your first wargame and Frank Chadwick is your opponent, then best of luck regardless of the environment). As an analogy, I don't suggest you bring your sniper strategy to the knife fight in the pitch-black closet.

Nachtjager -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/4/2020 2:40:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Malevolence Every next zone opens you up to added simultaneous adverse event/issues. Events are triggered by zone, not by regime. Cults, corporations, insurgents, disasters, etc. The game disproportionately favors small maps and fewer zones. Yeah I'm going to have to disagree here. With the current clunky way the game handles strategic warfare/asset damage big maps and dispersed industry are absolutely your friend. There are currently zero (0) methods in the game to protect your cities/assets from damage if there is combat in the hex. Working with missiles and rockets, you have some options as you can try and keep enemy forces outside of a 7 hex zone which is the maximum range of optimized heavy missiles. On smaller maps, and particularly with the tight spawns between majors, you'll just never have the space or time to get the breathing room you need. I've never played with nukes but they seem actively unfun because it's all the asset damage but with infinite range, turning a fun wargame into a slog of who can delete their enemy's economy the fastest. Another major bottleneck in this game is population. High level assets require ridiculously huge numbers of workers. Dispersing your population over several zones increases your natural growth and really turbo-charges it if you can put cloning facilities in several of them. In a multiplayer game where my opponent and myself ended up dividing the territory of a large map 60/40 for them and 50/50 on population, I was gaining about 50k new pops per turn on natural growth. If we just kept playing simcity instead of going to war, we probably could have covered the planet in industrial powerhouse cities.

Malevolence -> RE: Administrative Strain (11/6/2020 7:33:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nachtjager Yeah I'm going to have to disagree here. With the current clunky way the game handles strategic warfare/asset damage big maps and dispersed industry are absolutely your friend. There are currently zero (0) methods in the game to protect your cities/assets from damage if there is combat in the hex. Working with missiles and rockets, you have some options as you can try and keep enemy forces outside of a 7 hex zone which is the maximum range of optimized heavy missiles. On smaller maps, and particularly with the tight spawns between majors, you'll just never have the space or time to get the breathing room you need. I've never played with nukes but they seem actively unfun because it's all the asset damage but with infinite range, turning a fun wargame into a slog of who can delete their enemy's economy the fastest. I must admit, in dozens of games, I have never had any of my cities threatened by anything but insurgents. I tend to press the offense with many brigades. I've never formed a unit above brigade, but I have used an entire brigade stacked in one hex--which is a risk/vulnerability to your above comments. The real overpower play (IMO) is that a player can effectively move from distance into contact and attack with more than enough AP. I hold with small forces and strike with stacks. If it were up to me, units would not be permitted to attack on the same turn as a move.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.015625