Are land bases better than seabases?

[Sprayber]

I have heard various views on this so I wanted to see what you guys, and ladies thought of it. I play aquatic factions more often than I do land based ones. I usually build around 7 to 9 seabases first and then the rest are land bases scattered around the map. I like finding large continents that are devoid of other factions and turning them into mine. Most of the time I build 2 or 3 seabases then my first land base, then the rest of my seabases and then concentrate on land bases. I have noticed that the AI doesn't really play the Pirates so well. Haven't tried playing against the Pirates on the higher levels though. So what is you opionion on aquatic factions? Do they do well in multiplay?

[Skanderbeg]

They have both their advantages and disadvantages.

Land bases are easier to defend and have better mineral income, sea bases are better in growth and energy.

Seabases must be good defended especially before DAP, cause an attacker ship (with 4 or more move points) can come out of the nothing, and seabases couldn't be protected by sensors excecpt there is some land nearby.

So, when playing not the pirates, building sea bases or not depends on the game. When pirates are among the AI factions, and I get the WP, I will enlarge my continent by terraforming instead of going to sea.

But it other cases, I will generally build two or three seabases in safe places, especially in inland seas if possible, as sience/energy bases.

And I like to send my warships on visits to AI's isolated seabases.

"Steelborn, Starborn"

[Blake]

For memory a sea colony pod costs 70 minerals and a colony pod 30, the sea colony pod costs 40 more BUT comes with a free pressure dome which costs alot more than 40. Even if you consider the pressure dome to be just a recycling tank it's still break even with fission, and saves you a rush buy. (BUT it's cheaper to rush buy a rec tanks than the last 30 of a sea pod)
Once you get fusion it's like a rec tanks for 10 extra minerals.

One strategy I've used a little is to build a sea base next to an un-inhabited island then build a former and an infantry transport (cheaper than foil, especially with Clean, and works just as well). The former plants a little forest and maybe a sensor then raises the seabase out of the sea, I then place some more bases on or around the island and mine/borehole it, making a thriving island fortress.

[Sikander]

It is usually the case that a sea base contains some land, and almost all of my land bases contain some sea. Thus economically, there needn't be all that much difference between the two, though obviously land bases will tend to have the better of the mineral production and crawler maximized production, while sea bases tend to have a nice supply of high food / high energy squares.

As far as everything else is concerned, the sea base is not as good as the land base except it cannot be attacked prior to ship techs being researched (an advantage that only the Pirates can take advantage of usually). They are more trouble to defend (big time), and can't take advantage of roads and such, which requires a host of more expensive ship and air based units.

In the late game a sea shelf square's production is dwarfed by that of any land square (properly terraformed to produce 6 food), and using a trawler one can only exploit the square for half of it's potential. Playing for maximal production, one would raise land so as to completely eliminate sea squares and replace them with crawlered farm / condensor / soil enrichers, and grow your bases sky high with transcendi.

The truly useful thing about sea bases is the ability to use them to reach your enemies or to serve as early warning airbases. For this they are great, and I almost always surround my home continent with some. They aren't that hard to defend when they are stacked full of copters and interceptors, and the AI doesn't seem to have any answer to this but blockheaded attrition.

[Sikander]

That's a very interesting idea, and economical to boot as raising terrain is cheaper within your base radius. I'll have to remember it when I play the Pirates next time.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

I have to admit my preference is almost always land bases in the beginning of the game. Despite the fact that you get an effective boost of a free pressure dome (rec tanks), the ability to pump out pods faster and set bases and formers to work quicker seems to be more important than sea bases. As a consequence you normally can set almost twice as many bases vs. attempting a sea base approach. Remember each pod set gets you that all important free 10 mins so quicker pod generation nets you greater turn advantage via the 10 free mins. This is probably my biggest issue with the pirate faction, they expand slowly in the first 50 years vs. standard factions. OTOH they do have built in security of knowing they are realistically the only ones on the high seas at this point and do not have to worry about rover runs etc. Also once they get cooking they can be a monster with loads of energy coming their way in the mid game.

Normally, only after I have taken care of my continental expansion do I look towards sea bases. OTOH as Sikander indicates coastal bases offer the best of both worlds. For that reason these tend to be the emphasis of my initial colony builds unless I find a rich area to set bases such as the Jungle or Mt. planet or a number of specials. Upon advent of fusion the natural progression is to start foil pods as they start to become the bargain. This normally should be coincidental with the completion of my continental expansion.

[Skanderbeg]

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe on 02-13-2001 08:56 AM This is probably my biggest issue with the pirate faction, they expand slowly in the first 50 years vs. standard factions.

Is this really true? Im not exactly sure, but I have they feeling the Pirates have a very fast expansion from earliest game on. You're right they need longer to build their sea colony pods, but:

1. The Pirates can found their second base in turn one or at least turn two (4 movepoints of the sea colony pod), where a land based faction needs 4 to 5 turns.

2. Because of the inherent pressure dom/rec tank, the sea bases can immediatly begin produce another colony pod.

3. Again, the new sea colony pods can establish a base within on or at least two turns, where the land colony pod need 4 or 5 to move and put down the base.
Together with point 1 count 8 to 10 turns advantage.

So all this gives turn advantage in spreading for the Pirates against land factions.
But the Pirates have a disadvantage in base development against land factions: The high cost of the sea former relative to the land former delays the further development of the base.
[This message has been edited by Skanderbeg (edited February 13, 2001).]

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

OK one last try. This about the umpteenth time I'm writing this message.

Skand,

Good points on move and impact on turn advantage. Most of my base spacing is 3 square spacing so bases are in place and set in 4 turns worst case many times 2 if a river or road is in place.

As for turn adavantage let me crunch some math and try to illustrate my point. All by memory so take it with a grain of salt. I have been known to be wrong.

Sea base newly formed

Free 10 mins
Free nutrients = 2 at size 1, 1 at size 2
Mins = 3 at size 1, 4 at size 2 assumes coastals
Nuts required for size 2 = 24
Mins required for sea pod = 60

Case 1 First build garrison then sea pod
turn 1 - garrison Nuts in tank =2
turn 2 start sea pod nuts =4
Turn 12 mins = 22 nuts = 24 size 2 starting turn 13
Turn 13 mins/turn at 4 mins at 26 Nuts in tank 1
turn 14 30 mins 2nuts
turn 15 34 mins 3n
turn 16 38m/4n
....
turn 22 58 m/10 nuts
turn 23 62 mins/11 nuts sea pod produced moved and base created

Land base - Rolling rainy
Free 10 mins initial
Free Nuts = 2 at size 1, 1 at size 2
Mins = 2 at size 1, 4 at size 2

NUts reqd for size 2 = 20
Mins reqd for colony pod = 30

Case former first, then garrrison, the colony pod
Turn 1 - 12 mins towards former, 2 nuts in tank
Turn 2 - 14m/4n
Turn 3 - 16m/6n
Turn 4 - 18m/8n
Turn 5 - 20m/10n
Turn 6 - 2m/12 n - former complete and moved to forest site
Turn 7 - 4m /14n begin forest complet in 4 turns
8 - 6m /16n
9 - 8m /18n
10 - 10m/20n size 2 next turn and garrison complete/forest complete
11- 4m/1n
12- 8m/2n
13- 12m/3n
14- 16m/4n
.......
17- 28m/7n
18- 32m/8n new colony pod
4 turns to get in place base set at turn 22

So what I see here is in the same time frame you have produced a sea base and a garrison while the landlubbers produce and set a colony pod, a former and a garrison in approximately the same time frame. But the picture gets worse for the salty dogs when considering the next pod:

Sea base
Turn 23 3 mins/11nuts
24 6m/13n
25 9m/15n
26 12m/17n
27 15m/19n
28 18m/21n
29 20m/23n
30 23m/25n size 2 next turn
31 27m/2n
......
39 59m/10n
40 63m/11n sea pod built and set

Land base
turn 19 2m/10n
20 4m/12n
....
24 12m/20 nuts size 2 next turn
25 16m/1 nut
...
29 32mins/5 nuts colony pod produced and moved one square & 3 turns to move into place and st by turn 32.


You've saved 8 full turns on the second pod. You've got formers to boot all in all it looks to me like land bases tend to spread quicker.

I do believe there is a time when the sea formers and the cheap t-forming they do as well as cheapend unit costs upon fusion really make the pirates a pull ahead faction but for out of the blocks I think they have some issues in contrast to most land factions save perhaps Santi.

Jus my thoughts albeit written over and over again thanks to my crappy internet connection.

Og


[This message has been edited by Ogie Oglethorpe (edited February 14, 2001).]

[Skanderbeg]

I understand now why I think sea bases are faster, and You think land bases are faster:

As You pointed out, for the first time (with base spacing of 3) it takes nearly the same time.

But You would begin producing the next colony pod in the same base which has just build one. My approach is not so ICS-like, I would let the new-found base build another colony pod, but the first base would start building troops or infrastructure.

All in all, it seems to make not much difference.
You have, in nearly the same number of turns, a landbase with former against a sea base with pressure dome. I see little advantage for the land base, because it would need less time to build the rec tanks for the land base than to build the sea former for the sea base, and the land bases former starts earlier with his duty.
On the other hand, with my playing stile including the credo "Every base needs a pressure dome!", building a pressure dome instead of a recycling tank, the sea base comes in advantage.

[Blake]

I admit I never use sea cities except for the free pressure dome or if I want to colonise a distant island (to improve that strategy send a sea former and a transport foil/w former to the island, saving the new base several builds).

Eventually all my sea cities get raised, for the simple reason there is no easy way to move a garrison to a sea city. (and the other reason, my formers get bored!)

[Lefty Scaevola]

Once you have fusen colony pods, rover & foil pods cost the same, forty minerals, and the sea pod still has pressure dome & recycling, and you can put plasma steel armor on it for no additional cost.

[Iskandar Reza]

way out of the subject matter, but has anyone ever noticed that an impact penetrator cost the same as a gun penetrator?

[Earwicker]

[resurrecting an old thread because of some sea base issues I've been having]

The most useful thing about seabases is that their base radius in water squares extends further than land bases. In recent games I've been driven mad by hard-bought pet factions building dinky seabases up against my coastal bases, robbing them of production. What's the point of having a sea farm and thermocline if Domai or Sven (the worst culprits by far) horn in on your goodies? Eventually they get uppity about my insistence to hand them over, and who wants to keep piles of sealurks waiting around to unmake those empty size-1's? (We need another line on the diplomacy screen to provide the available response: "Don't make me kick your tail again!")

A good idea is to use some preventative medicine: plop down a couple of seabases in strategic locations (offshore of your science base, occupying a narrow sea area), filling in your area of control so it is much harder for other factions to squeeze in a new sea base.

Ironically, sea colony pods have their most substantial benefits in the early game, when it is most difficult to build them. Although low producers in terms of minerals, they have an easy time getting a lot of (restricted) 2-0-2 squares, good for growth and income without a lot of terraforming effort. Adding to the mobility question (quicker to get a new base into position) is the fact that a foil unit will never be rejected when trying to move across fungus like a colony pod sometimes is. Sure, it slows you down, but you are least make some progress. The flip side of the movement question is that land colony pods are easier to escort: a 10-mineral 1-1-1 (monolithed to hardened or disciplined) is a heck of a lot easier to come by than a green foil unit.

[Earwicker]

quote: Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola on 04-12-2001 04:08 PM Once you have fusen colony pods, rover & foil pods cost the same, forty minerals, and the sea pod still has pressure dome & recycling, and you can put plasma steel armor on it for no additional cost.

Good point. But armor or no armor, I'm still hesitant to send my new citizens off without an escort that can fight back. The best thing about fusion power is that it drastically reduces the cost of a needlejet colony pod. While still quite pricey, the ability to form a new base 23 squares away within two turns (or 11 squares with no vulnerability in transit) is well worth it.