Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

"Anyhow CF banking is definitely better than pop banking, but it doesn't produce as much."

surely the whole point of banking is to make the most money...so how can CF be better while not making as much money?

im backkk smile

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

CF money though it may not make as much money, it's more 'consistent' and slightly less vulnerable.

Pop Banking relies heavily on either someone producing food for you or on the market. if you're relying on food from the market is at about 0.25-0.4 you're not making much money then are you, because you're spending anywhere from 1/3-1/2 of the money your making on food.

With pop banking, you're also going to want to 'maximize' production, so you're not going to want to build research centres, as they're interfere with your to %. However, you still want that tasty econ bonus, so you'll be investing X amount of money into your research, most people do about 2-4 ticks of their daily income.

Plus, you're highly vulnerable to ops, such as hypnotize and e storms as well as nukes. That will destroy your pop base and ruin your income. Whereas, CF baking is only vulnerable to nukes.

So, in reality, though you may be making more money, you're also spending more. Since you're a banker, it's your bottom line that counts. So, With CF banking you're not worried about any building percentages, so you can build RC's and Hydro's for some food. Since, you're not spending your money on anything, your bottom line is larger than pop banking.

Kadaj

Death is not to be mourned
It's meant to be savored

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

In a larger, war torn galaxy, pop banking, though fun, is quite vulnerable. I honestly don't recommend pop banking to anyone, unless they're well experienced at pop banking. Not a role for a newbie, that's for sure ^.^

Kadaj

Death is not to be mourned
It's meant to be savored

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

how are you supposed to get more skill into it then? overnight? ffs, anyone can try, they wont win the first time, not the second time but the thrid time you will get it just right and forever be marked a target to people that know you tongue.

Not many people know this, but I own the first radio in Springfield. Not much on the air then, just Edison reciting the alphabet over and over. "A" he'd say; then "B." "C" would usually follow...

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

cf banking is at least idiot proof, anyone can do it.

Kadaj

Death is not to be mourned
It's meant to be savored

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

Deadringers [B2K] 6655 wrote:

"Anyhow CF banking is definitely better than pop banking, but it doesn't produce as much."

surely the whole point of banking is to make the most money...so how can CF be better while not making as much money?

Nah, the reason I say it's better is because it's the safest and easiest to protect. Pop banking is about how much space and population you have. It produces the most but can be a hassle to manage. Whether it be food prices or ops or nukes or raids. Pop banking is dangerous =p

But sooooooo needed for a big fam big_smile

Sex without the e is still SX!

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

lmao

a good cf/to banker with alot of planets can surely outproduce a pop banker smile

cfr. 17m net last round with 666 planets and average ob of 350%

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

Night - our pop banker was 700% ob on 220 planets and making 27m net  after food tongue

So lets halve the buildings, and triple the planets.... that would put him at 50m, conservatively


tongue

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

and that to think that food prices were fairly high last round in my opinion! y

Elrohir
"Abstract art is the product of the untalented, sold by the unprincipled to the utterly bewildered.."

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

like i said if your active pop is good... if your not then CF is best.... lazy pieces of crap.

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

You guys are all calculating basically end of round incomes IE whether pop bankers or cf bankers have more income by the end of the round. Undoubtedly, a good active, well supported pop banker will have more by the end of the round than a similarly supported/active cf banker. However, this is really not that useful. The most important question is: who produces more net income throughout the entire round? More specifically, what is (total income - [upkeep etc. of course]) - (total money spent on buildings, food, etc.) over the course of the round? This figure shows you how the true value of the banker to the family. This would account for some less tangible factors such as vulnerability (if pop gets blasted, total income would go down over the round obviously).

I don't know the answer to this question, but I would think it favors CF bankers because they get off to quick starts. Ultimately though, the raw banking power of pop bankers may end up making more money throughout the whole round.

37 (edited by windowsME 19-Oct-2008 08:39:17)

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

Imperial - he was at 20m+ half way through the round and never got opped wink

Meaning he was even further ahead of said cf bankers

38 (edited by LiGhTGuNs 19-Oct-2008 11:01:59)

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

Matlab Simulation as posted above, now for 60 days. No units included:
CF banking:
net income 14 Mill GC / tick
total GC generated in round: 13 billion

POP banking:
net income: 35 Mill GC / tick
total GC generated in round 39 billion (this still includes GC invested in RC)
total research points: 0.3 billion; meaning 98% on Welfare, contruct and Econ...

~Attacking is a Skill~
~Defending is an Art~

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

lol. granted that's a simulation, but it seems pretty definitive

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

The huge NW inflation of pop banking is veeeeery problematic in a fam that isn't as active as it should be. sad

[I wish I could obey forum rules]

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

100% CFs! <3

Who am I?

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

When talking about vulnerability and the fact that in order to win round the fam should have pop banker, nobody has mentioned the fact that this is a fam game and top contender fam can make the pop banker huge in order to make pop killing a hard task even for a Pax during a war.

Just imagine giving one third of fam

43 (edited by LiGhTGuNs 27-Nov-2008 12:31:04)

Re: CF is better than pop banking - Try proving me wrong

Size has advantages indeed. You need a relatively low unit count for defence, but in absolute terms this force is huge. But there are limits. Empire size has a very big effect. In general the additional cost of size is times NW/(1,000,000). Meaning at 7 Mill NW you get a 700% penalty on top of your already high OB%. Getting your pop banker at 200 - 250 planets and 100 - 150 Mill pop is fairly easy. But doubling his infra would cost atleast 1300 Mill GC and 150Mill iron at that time, even when you hyno him down for a jump. Even top fams will need over a week to produce this much and will only consider it when all other players are maxed maxed out i think. More beneficial to start war imho smile Above 300 planets makes it very hard to get your POP banker high on infra.

To overcome the size penalty it's best to do cf banking. Get a 2 low planet / low NW camaar players with high research and let them raid the cf banker 200 planets.  Built before NW kicks in (no size penalty, high research). When built the cf banker retakes. When doing pop the pop dies.

~Attacking is a Skill~
~Defending is an Art~