Official Social Engineering: Green 40/10/50 or FM 40/20/40.

Lemmy · March 11, 2003, 18:13

This poll will last 4 days

Our current situation is
Demcratic, Free Market, Knowledge
40/20/40

Net Income: 853 ec

Research Breaktrough: 3 turns / 1222.8 points/turn

10 Bases in Golden Age (Too many to name)
0 Bases rioting

Under Green 40/10/50 this would be:
Net Income: 580 ec

Research Breaktrough: 3 turns / 1166.4 points/turn

2 Bases in Golden Age (UNPD and Crystalis)
0 Rioting.

Other changes
Society changes:
Economy 0 (was +2)
Efficiency +4 (was +2)
Police +1 (was -4)
Growth 0 (was +2)
Planet +2 (was -3)

I chose for 10 Psych instead of 0 as polled before, because 3 bases (Antioch, Deus Ex Machina and UN Marine Institute) would be rioting under 50/0/50. There also was a preference of science over credits, so it became 40/10/50 instead of 50/10/40.

edit: added research points/turn

MrWhereItsAt · March 11, 2003, 18:25

FM as we are. This will help us prepare the soldiers and military equipment we need to take on Yang. We may need to drop into Green or something when we attack (although hopefully not), so let's just stay as we are and reassess this when leaving FM may actually be an ADVANTAGE instead of a needless hindrance.

Cedayon · March 11, 2003, 18:25

It should come as no surprise that I'm voting FM. More energy per turn, more bases in golden age, no difference in reserach speed (in the turn sense, not sure lab points-wise), in # of rioting bases, or in ecological damage.

Btw, is some provision going to be made for TKG's vote?

Lemmy · March 11, 2003, 18:27

We just received word from the

front that TKG is voting for FM, 1 vote will be manually added to FM at the end of the poll

MrWhereItsAt · March 11, 2003, 23:20

PS Thanks Lemmy - you'll notice I was the first to vote this time.

GeneralTacticus · March 12, 2003, 02:25

FM as is, of course. As I said last time, no need to scrap a perfectly good system in favour of one which is clearly ineferior in every aspect (and the attack on Yang should not be a concern; we have Egregion, remember?).

Jamski · March 12, 2003, 03:54

GREEN!

-Jam

GeneralTacticus · March 12, 2003, 04:24

Now, once again: Would somebody on the Green side liek to give ana rgument as to why we should give up a few lab points, a lot of money, and a lot of GAs for no apparent benefit?

Jamski · March 12, 2003, 04:32

Do you want game or RP reasons?

-Jam

GeneralTacticus · March 12, 2003, 04:34

Game ones would be nice, but either will do. Just pelase try to avoid making arguments that have already been shot down or are now irrelevant (like Drogue did the last time this was polled).

Jamski · March 12, 2003, 04:39

Quote:

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Now, once again: Would somebody on the Green side liek to give ana rgument as to why we should give up a few lab points, a lot of money, and a lot of GAs for no apparent benefit?

Benefits of Green : Better Police rating, better Planet rating, better Efficiency rating.

I'd say its not "...for no apparent benefit..." and this is without the RP reasons.

-Jam

GeneralTacticus · March 12, 2003, 04:43

But the point is that none of these extra ratings are of any help to us. We don't need police (we do better with 20% Psych and no police), we don't need a higher Planet rating (we don't pollute in the first place), and we don't need a higher efficiency rating (it produces signifcantly less than we have right now).

Lemmy · March 12, 2003, 06:22

Quote:

We don't need police

There is no urgent need, but there is definitely a use for it. We could send out military outside our border without the civil unrest that it casuses.

We don't need all those credits under FM either, we also don't need those golden ages.

Saying "we don't need it", isn't really an argument IMO.

GeneralTacticus · March 12, 2003, 06:33

When I say 'we don't need it' wrt this, I'm saying that they aren't worth giving up everything else. Police is the only thing that Green offers over FM atm, and the problem of unrest form overseas deployment will be solved soon enough anyway.

Jamski · March 12, 2003, 06:38

Quote:

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
...Police is the only thing that Green offers over FM...

What about the fact we can kick ass in psy-combat? Or pollute less, or have distant bases contributing more to our faction? Governers of bases with high inefficiency should be voting Green, just for the sake of the people they represent. Part of the job of a province governor is to make his province as good as possible - this means low inefficency.

Go Green!

-Jam

GeneralTacticus · March 12, 2003, 06:57

Quote:

What about the fact we can kick ass in psy-combat?

A plus, but not a big one.

Quote:

Or pollute less,

Can't have less pollution than zero.

Quote:

or have distant bases contributing more to our faction?

Counterproductive, since it takes energy away from the abses that can best use it.

Quote:

Governers of bases with high inefficiency should be voting Green, just for the sake of the people they represent.

Why? They benefit more from increases in overall income, not regional income.

Quote:

Part of the job of a province governor is to make his province as good as possible - this means low inefficency.

Yes - but if they promote their own region's interests at the expense of those of everyone else, they're not doing their duty.

Cedayon · March 12, 2003, 08:37

The Police rating: with Egregion and 20% psych there's no real difference, particularly when we get enough mag tube squares that we can ship new units to Egregion immediately for rehoming and then send them where they need to go.

The Efficiency rating:
-It would give us more flexibility in SE spending, but 40/40 works just fine (plenty of rushing cash and plenty of lab points).
-It would reduce the number of beuracracy based drones by some amount, though I think the extra psych spending in our current system outweighs that significantly.
-If we were to expand a *LOT* more the extra efficiency would definately help in the "actually-getting-some-energy-out-of-far-away-bases" matter... but I think we're about done except for a few bases on the north end of the continent. +2 Econ gives us a great deal more energy than the +2 Effic probably ever will.

The Planet rating:
-Should we start to pollute (and, believe me, we *will* if we build Gennies in places like DEM, without major worker restructuring), this would heavily reduce the amount of ED that would actually take place. Under FM our ED could get well into the *hundreds* if a base went into the high 70s-low 80s mineral range. This is avoidable, however, by simply not building Gennies and/or being careful with worker/crawler assignments.
-Psi-combat: this is probably the most unmitigated advantage I can think of that Green would give. We'd fight better in Psi, no question. However, with the Amp up and the ability to build lots and lots of units and Fusion reactor tech and... etc... we can own the native life just fine as it is if they get uncooperative.

Thank you, folks, for presenting game-based arguments for Green. Regrettably, they do not stack up to the hundreds of ec's/turn and 8 more GA's we get under FM.

Lemmy · March 12, 2003, 08:39

Whatever the Governors priority (region or faction) is, it isn't mentioned in the constitution, so saying that it is or isn't their duty to vote in favor of efficiency would be an opinion, not fact.

Jamski · March 12, 2003, 08:54

It was indeed an opinion. But it was mine so it was a good opinion.

-Jam

Kirov · March 12, 2003, 15:19

Green of course. There are things more important than money, especially those earned by few big cheese.

Cedayon · March 12, 2003, 16:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Kirov
Green of course. There are things more important than money, especially those earned by few big cheese.

I don't care who earns it, as long as I get to spend it!

Kirov · March 12, 2003, 16:59

I always knew you're one of THEM

Cedayon · March 12, 2003, 17:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Kirov
I always knew you're one of THEM

Nah, I'm just the DIA. DIA's like to spend money

... well, except Voltaire, but there's a reason he didn't win

moomin · March 12, 2003, 20:24

FM. I was toying with the idea of voting green just to throw a monkey wrench into to smmoth progress to victory, but that'd be so immature... And for RL reasons as well, of course. Who wants to end up like Somalia!?

Kirov · March 12, 2003, 21:59

Quote:

Originally posted by moomin
FM. I was toying with the idea of voting green just to throw a monkey wrench into to smmoth progress to victory, but that'd be so immature... And for RL reasons as well, of course. Who wants to end up like Somalia!?

Somalia runs Green!?

moomin · March 13, 2003, 17:42

Greener than Poland, for sure. Dead bodies and starvation is the ultimate in Green, after all.

Kirov · March 14, 2003, 10:21

And I have always thought the ultimate goal of Green are the reigns of squirrels...

moomin · March 14, 2003, 13:10

Nah. More like cockroaches. Green is inherently antihuman, so it attracts losers from all over the political spectrum - spolied brats who ended up vegans because they thought talking Disney animals where cute, former socialist that can no longer peddle their ideology now that its corpse stinks to high heaven... Anything, as long as you can express your loathing for those who are more successful. That's Green.

Kirov · March 14, 2003, 13:46

I think that being fond of those Disney animals is one of the best reasons of becoming a vegan I've ever heard... Go Green!

Lemmy · March 14, 2003, 15:11

/me wonders where all the green voters went
There were a lot more green votes in the previous poll.