1 Topic by Noir (edited by Noir 28-Feb-2011 12:51:07)

  • Noir
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 5,338
  • Tag points: 14

Topic: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

Hey gang, heres is a little note to help you bankers out there to think correctly on the true costs of units.

I have gotten a lot of criticism over my defences in my time of IC, alot of players pointing out it takes no skill to grow if you do not build defences etc.
People think i might only be able to play in times of peace, or simply forget defences etc, there is however a great deal of reason behind my choices.

I am using my population banker empire as MW as a numerical example in this case, and will use some math to prove my point.

I will analyse the case of soliders as standing defence for a banker, this is a purely economic debate, so please dont come with statements such as "ill raid ur ass tongue"!

When building a solider most people will analyze the cost of it as 100 gc up front, and 1 upkeep each tick until death...

However when adding another unit to your fleet, you increase your own networth, thus reducing your science and next income
Here I will quantify said effect, both in a cost per unit per turn (upkeep) cost, and as an upfront lump sum.


The empire we use for example is as follows:

1423440 nw
+4316939 gross income
46% eco and welfare science
10% race science bonus

If we start with the cost per tick:

We assume that the banker will build say 200k additional soliders

The lump sum cost of this is 20 million cash, and an aditional 200k pr tick upkeep cost

However, if we calculate the 200k increase in nw, this will reduce the science from 46% to 42%
This will reduce the income of the banker to 4083635, an income loss of 233k

If we then also calculate that instead of spending 20 million cash on soliders we could have invested them into science

With 10% race science bonus this investment would bring our sciences to 49%
This would in turn increase our gross income to 4496170, an increase of 412k

Adding in the 1 gc pr tick upkeep of a solider, this means that the cost of the solider per turn adds up to 3,06 gc/turn
Thus adding the extra 200k soliders has a per turn cost of 600k gc



If we instead want to calculate the cost of the soliders into a lump sum cost, we do as follows.

Aswell as the cost of building the soliders, we calculate how much we would have to invest into science to compensate for the increase in nw, and the increase in upkeep to maintain the same net income.

In this case we need to increase the science to 49% to compensate the 200k upkeep per tick, and aswell we need to fund science to compensate for the increased nw.

In this case the costs ends up as 20 million in unit cost, and required funding of 41 milllion. Note that the cost of science is over twice the cost of the unit itself.

Total lump sum cost of the 200k soliders is 61 million cash, making the cost per solider 306 instead of the 100 players normally consider.


Summed up, a solider has (in this case)

Either an upkeep of 3
Or a price of 300

Has anyone grasped the point yet?

Units are expensive!

Please ask questions and debate


http://bildr.no/image/833725.jpeg

LORD HELP OREGON

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Rin
  • Rin
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 7,907
  • Tag points: 21

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

i will raid ur ass

<parrot> there is also the odd  possibility that tryme is an idiot
<KT> possibility?
<genesis> tryme is a bit of an idiot
<Torqez> bit?

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,944
  • Tag points: 16

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

200k soldiers is also 200k food a tick and empire's large size increases construction costs by 20%

I recently calculated that compared to some other players in my fam i save 2,5m gc a day only with the upkeep. If u add the science loss, empire size and food cost and price of construction it's many millions saved...

How do u calculate your fleet needed? I usualy ask my agent opper, 2nd pax and top attacker their fleet and adapt mine in order they could not be able to nuke, OH me without 1/2 fail. For the ground that my top attacker cant take more than 4-5 plts at a time. If i have ennemies infils I adapt on them. Being active enough should leave me time to adapt in case of attack

'Success! The realm of Genesis has been reduced to dust! Our forces are leaving the planet though, as it is scheduled for demolition to make way for a new hyperspace bypass.'

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Amar
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 637

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

Interesting point, so soldiers cost much more than at first seems but that still does not give you a reason to neglect your defence. With the high costs of soldiers, what would you recommond for defence then?

a.k.a Vladimir & Ariana
<Amar> are you a fail attacker that gives up quick or die hard hc attacker to the core???
<ThaMadDog> nither
<ThaMadDog> i'm a bitch that [BLAM] you while your asleep and rapes your bankers
*No "F" bombs in your signature. -Arby3

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 11,986
  • Tag points: 10

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

if you don't have enough solds, you'll be raided and lose all your income/infra anyway. they are a necessity, you want to make it as hard as possible for an attacker to take lots of planets. and for smaller attackers to even take any planets. you have to balance the need for defences and how much it affects your income, same can be said for lasers, a high laser count means you are better protected but can make it harder to keep you ratios where you want them.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 1,060
  • Tag points: 17

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

in expophase in a large family it's often wise not to have any fleet...

most bankers can get raided with their fleet as well... there are two possibilities, gamble with the chance of getting raided, but with more income and faster growth, or defend ur ass.

I'm quite sure at this size Noir posted, it's wise to have some defence. Though any jumped attacker at this point can beat 200k soldiers. He has attacking bonus + plus he can get a bonus from science for his war business. You'll only be slowing him down so your own attackers can get those planets back from with more ease.

This forum is stupid.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,611
  • Tag points: 19

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

Ultimately the amount of defence a banker needs to make depends on his attackers ability to keep threats miles away. Most of my bankers have average to below average defence, however appropriate op defence as I keep all threats 6-7 camaar ticks away from them. Attacking from this distance discourages many, many when your 1-3 camaar ticks from their bankers and if things go hectic ripping ass

- Cloud

"I Cannot Awake From This Nightmare As Long As You Exist..."

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Noir
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 5,338
  • Tag points: 14

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

Well this also means that sometimes it might be better to lose a planet or two than having a large army

LORD HELP OREGON

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Mace
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 655
  • Tag points: 5

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

After Beta 3 I posted my strategy and my fleet size. Everyone was amazed at the puny state of my fleet. Based on my income and others' fleets with similar gross income, mine was hundreds of thousands of units too small. The upshot was a good net income. And a round winning NW jump for the family.

I have generally adopted a small fleet strategy, opting for lower NW and rank than would be appropriate for my income. If banking as Pop/TO then any shaving off NW will lead to better science in economy and welfare == more income. If CF banking, then cheaper construction costs and better economy mount too.

Ulltimately fleet size is circumstance-based. At war the cost to protect infra and planets usually is justified - though not if  it means neglecting funds for the attackers to actually go win the war.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Rin
  • Rin
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 7,907
  • Tag points: 21

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

back in the days infiltrate didnt work, now it does so you will have ur ass raided.

<parrot> there is also the odd  possibility that tryme is an idiot
<KT> possibility?
<genesis> tryme is a bit of an idiot
<Torqez> bit?

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Noir
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 5,338
  • Tag points: 14

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

Not necesarily Parrot, and the point is often that if a gang of attackers wanna raid you it doesnt matter if you have 100k soliders or 300k soliders...

Also, by the time they figure out you might upgrade it, cause that kind of raid very rarely comes completely out of the blue

LORD HELP OREGON

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 6,734
  • Tag points: 34

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

This the argument that OOC and I had with attackers and new banker a couple rounds ago. He was trying to keep jumping his soldiers for protection. We were trying to explain to him why it wasn't worth it.

Modestus Experitus

Arby: A very strict mod, reminds me of a fat redneck who drives a truck around all day with a beer in one hand. I hated this guy at the start, however, I played a round in PW with him where he went as an anonymous player. Our fam got smashed up and everyone pretty much left. Arby stayed around and helped out the remaining family. At the end of the round he revealed himself.... My views on him have changed since. Your a good guy.....

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 184

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

as mace said its situational. If you get rolled cause you didn't have enough fleet than obviously your gamble didn't work. If IC was just about econ then yeah its easy to say fleet is a waste of money tongue.

Smirnoff

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Noir
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 5,338
  • Tag points: 14

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

The part where its situational is really my point aswell. How many times have you been completely raped without being able to see it comming, like in a war?

LORD HELP OREGON

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 6,734
  • Tag points: 34

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

Banker defense is about fleet, and luck. If you get suprise war, even 500k soldiers wont save you. Any good attacker will jump fleet enough to raid you. If you think you need 500k soldiers for defense, odds are you are either ubernoob, or have planet size worth defending with that many.

Modestus Experitus

Arby: A very strict mod, reminds me of a fat redneck who drives a truck around all day with a beer in one hand. I hated this guy at the start, however, I played a round in PW with him where he went as an anonymous player. Our fam got smashed up and everyone pretty much left. Arby stayed around and helped out the remaining family. At the end of the round he revealed himself.... My views on him have changed since. Your a good guy.....

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

16 Reply by Render

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

its easy, portal in core systems only and OB, dont portal in risky shares and dont OB, your main fleet keep it always half figs than soldiers, 1k soldiers 500figs for 1 planet, so 10 planets you have 10k soldiers 5k figs, your income wont be great but you'll never be raided in core. Your advantage, an attacker wont expect a banker being fig strong, your disadvantage, the income.

Still this is an example, normally with 10 planets you must have close to 0 fleet, but getting ready for a war you can have a good hint of the fleet you need to be well defended, according to your planet size.

Still you have the option of a poor defense and a strong economy, but that really depends on your attackers skill and activity, no point in doing loads of cash for noob attackers that let the enemy portal in shares and 1tickers

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Rin
  • Rin
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 7,907
  • Tag points: 21

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

news just in noir was raided in pw.

disregard this thread.

el oh el oh el oh el

<parrot> there is also the odd  possibility that tryme is an idiot
<KT> possibility?
<genesis> tryme is a bit of an idiot
<Torqez> bit?

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 1,023
  • Tag points: 5

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

if you want to slow down a raid you need to build fig and more lasers

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,498
  • Tag points: 12

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

um kenpachi...

that only works if Artic is attacking you. lol

EmuHatPacket!
Parrot> he isn't a pickle
Parrot> or in the army
Lexuzis> wtf?
Parrot> fing liar

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,498
  • Tag points: 12

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

usually you are screwed either way if your attackers are nubs and they have killed most of your ground.

i know as an attacker i never stop sending figs in, because you never know when someone will surprise you and recall stat figs, even bankers....

and with attacker race and science bonus, plus the overwhelming difference of fig counts between a well funded fleet admiral and an average banker... the attacker can still send 40 raiding fleets and beat the banker everytime. especailly if they are dumb enough to not deportal shares.


and at any rate, a smart FA will make plenty of units to not only send enough raiding fleets until they run out of morale... but to also protect key portals from their enemy Camaar(s) when your fleet is out on a raid.

EmuHatPacket!
Parrot> he isn't a pickle
Parrot> or in the army
Lexuzis> wtf?
Parrot> fing liar

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,498
  • Tag points: 12

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

in fact, all that will do is get ur figs run yet again. unless you stat them on each individual planet.

EmuHatPacket!
Parrot> he isn't a pickle
Parrot> or in the army
Lexuzis> wtf?
Parrot> fing liar

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Noir
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 5,338
  • Tag points: 14

Re: The futile exercise of banker defence, An economic perspective

Overall i just want to remind people that the intention of this wasnt to say dont have defences, but to enlighten the mathematicly challenged about the real cost of units wink. This helps to illustrate the  value of attackers managing to remove threats, and the value of the ability to correctly assess the current threat-level at any point in a round.

LORD HELP OREGON

0 Dislike 0 Post Points