An AEVA for Infrastructure might be more appropriate considering the resent loss.
It's not a bad idea losses aside, cause of Karachi and the future planned cities. However, I would prefer to get the HI AEVA first given how much Free dice we are currently and will continue to poor into it. As that will give the greatest return on investment. The more dice we anticipate rolling in a category the quicker we will effectively pay off the one department die we use to get it. Over the past year we have put 7 Free Dice in Tiberium in Q1, 3 in Heavy Industry 1 in Tiberium and 3 in Orbital in Q2, 3 in Heavy Industry 3 in Orbital and 1 in Services in Q3, and 7 Free Dice in Orbital in Q4. That is an average of 1.5 Free dice in HI and 2 Free Dice in Tiberium.
Category | Die Bonus | Average Roll | Dice to Pay Off AVEA | Turns Without Free Dice | Turns with Average Free DIce |
Infrastructure | 27 | 77.5 | 25.83 | 5.17 | 5.17 |
Heavy Industry | 34 | 84.5 | 28.17 | 5.63 | 4.33 |
Light and Chemical Industry | 24 | 74.5 | 25.17 | 5.03 | 5.03 |
Agriculture | 29 | 79.5 | 26.5 | 4.41 | 4.41 |
Tiberium | 39 | 89.5 | 29.83 | 4.26 | 3.31 |
Military | 31 | 81.5 | 27.17 | 3.88 | 3.88 |
Bureaucracy | 29 | 79.5 | 26.5 | 6.63 | 6.63 |
This does only calculate how quickly we would expect the AEVA to pay itself off. But it seems to imply that Tiberium is the best one to put an AEVA in as it will pay itself off quickest. To be fair we do expect to resume aggressive Tiberium investment in Q2. Though we also have to weigh exactly how much we really want the things in Heavy Industry vs the Income and Abatement in Tiberium.
Thing about the U-series is because you need super heavy elements to make a things out of super heavy elements consistently for both wear and tear and minimum effectiveness reasons. They simply aren't resource cost effective at 280 resources for the first one. You can't make your resource investment back anytime soon. You only save a single dice(meaning recoup your resource investment) on plants 2/4/5 on average rolls.
[Average rolls with bonuses on dice are at about 80 so threshold is (80/160/240/320) for any savings per thousand points of project. discount levels are at (50/100/150/200/250/300) for the 6 plants.]
This is why U-series plant number 6 is not a 5% discount and instead a Tib mining bonus. Making things out of super heavy materials saves costs, maintenance, and size in some places and increases costs and usability in other cases. They are only really useful for some things. Making household goods out of things that start off with the density and mass of depleted uranium is... ill advised. No one sane wants toilet seats heavy enough to shatter the bowl during normal use.
So in terms of resource investments they are a black hole. The upfront costs are kind of brutal. So its not a matter of if you 'can' invest in them as much of if you 'should'. This is why I suggested one a year once you get the first bonus tier. You also don't know that all the bonuses hit all the effected projects all the time. At some point it may effect different projects instead.
So when making a plan the question really is 'should' you do it. Not if you can. This is the question as there are other things you can spend those resources on and ramp up faster. The answer in terms of resource efficiency is yes.
You are also probably better off building up your Tib harvesting levels up first so you don't feed all your STUs to those things and prevent access to other projects later. You are spending those STUs on the gravitic shipyard already. Plant 3 is effectively useless but necessary in terms of investment.
So even if you can afford the next U-series plant you have to build two for it to really matter. That is where the budget busting comes in. Those things are resource hungry and investing in them means other project suffer. The opportunity costs are harsh for doing the third and fourth plants, things move faster overall if you don't do them and instead upgrade Tib mining and processing capacities you actually get more extra resources faster.
I think there is a misunderstanding here, the point of the U-Series Alloys isn't to make household appliances out of them, maybe on a key component like how there is americanium in smoke detectors, but I don't think the idea is ever to make a toilet bowl out of U-Series Alloys. Where the Alloys come in is the machines that make the toilet bowl, or the machines that make the machines that make the toilet bowl. And in the structural components of the house or factory itself. Having a house, more accurately an apartment complex or arcology, or factory that can suffer a missile hit and still be standing is important to the GDI given NOD's terrorist methodology.
Each Alloy Phase thus far has knocked off ~5% progress cost for most projects. Not all of them true, like how the reduction is lessened in Orbital and Agriculture, but elsewhere it has dramatically improved the amount of stuff we can get done. Phase 3 is far from useless as the shear economic benefits the Alloy Foundries provide across the board.
Take the megaprojects. Their 5th Phase's in particular. The original Phase 5 costs were on the order of 1000-2000 progress for each megaproject. This means that a 5% reduction reduces the cost by 50-100 on average ~75, or a little bit under a die. We currently have 6 such mega projects on the books (Chicago, Karachi, Nuuk, North Boston, Bergen, and Reykjavik). Now not all the megaprojects are at Phase 5, one hasn't even been started, but we can average them out to say each needs ~1500 Progress to complete. That means each Phase of Alloys saves us 5-6 dice on those megaprojects alone. That is not counting the reduction in cost in Orbtial for the Stations. Nor is it counting how even if it won't explicitly save a die on the smaller projects where the progress cost saved is 5-20 per Phase of Alloys, that cost saving adds up because there is die roll variance. That roll variance means that without a Phase of Alloys we might need another die to finish off a project, with that phase we wouldn't. The Medium Housing Bay, for instance, where we were just 10 Progress short of Omake completing it last turn.
I don't think there has been any evidence of the Alloy Foundries varying their effectiveness on individual projects. There has been variance between projects like how Orbital and Agriculture don't receive a full discount as the alloys correspond less to the Progress cost of those projects. But a specific project such as Nuuk, or Rail construction, has received the same Progress cost reduction, modified for how much progress has already been completed. The project description for the effects of Alloys does not change except for Phase 6, for Phase 3-5 it is the same '5% discount on many projects'.
For Phase 6, I'm not sure if the benefit is worth it. It would be if the income increase was more then 180 RpT (with IHG Processing, 200 RpT without) as that would mean the 2 STUs needed were recouped. But for Phase 1-5, while it is certainly an immense investment of STUs, the economic benefits are far larger.
For the STU economy, I have done an analysis
here on what our minimum STU budget currently is. Bottom Line Up Front: We have an effective minimum budget of 17 STUs for the rest of this Plan. Currently available projects that need STUs cost a total of 13 STUs. This does not count the Gravitic Bay whose cost was included in the effective minimum STU budget. Meaning we will still have a surplus of +4 STUs.
This does not count future projects that may cost STUs, nor does it count Tiberium investment beyond the minimum for Plan Goals. I suppose we will find out soon how many STUs the Microfusion Cells and Conestoga will cost, which will change that math. I will note that space exploitation is going to be a big part of our economy going forward. And with how Microfusion is needed for infantry scale Energy weapons and its benefits for Power Armor. Both of those are going to need STUs by the truckload. However, Given the opportunity to get 33% more stuff done with Alloys vs having the latest and greatest shiny toy, I'm going to pick the former as that alloys us to scale our economy quicker to get the latter.
To quote the project description, I guess I say all of this to mean I very firmly come down on the side of one 'who consider(s) the limitation a small price to pay for the economic benefits.'