Remove ads

A Different Breed (Warhammer 29K)

Reader mode
Skjadir said:
And as said i didn't even include that we can just directly reinvest the BAP into building more enhanced Industry and after like turn 5-6 completely switch over purely using BAP to build them. Forge is an excellent tool really get generation going without crippling us in other departments.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The thing is, there's a 50% chance the Forge is overkill, that it overflows and we get wasted cost reduction. Now it's true that there's a 5/6 chance that forge saves 1 AP and gives us 1 AP (by finishing a turn earlier), I'm not convinced that we can't do better with a Forge action that generates an average of 1 2/3 BAP.

Given the exchange rate for Wargear, that really doesn't seem very efficient. We could buy enough Ithilmar Warsuits to equip a lot of our troops with that.
 
LOLROFL said:
It clearly does

Note how the QM said slots, not Weapon or System slots, just slots.

Again, Mega-Lances bring something to the table that regular and heavy Starlances do not and only our Brig and Galleon sized ships can mount them.

We already have plenty of ships with Starlances (Ketches and Carracks) so increasing our Mega-Lance count would be more beneficial as those ships with Starlances can be built faster.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's not how I understood the below explanation. The first part says Heavy and Special Weapon slots can mount either their own scale of weapon or multiple weapons of the level below (Standard or Heavy respectively).

Then it goes on to say you can buy more weapon batteries with System slots, but this carries an additional cost beyond that of the weapons and slots themselves. I can't actually tell if that extra cost also applies to refunding a Weapon Battery for System slots, the wording used seems to imply it doesn't but then Mechanis' words you quoted imply it does?
Either way I'd say it'd be worth it, the Mega-lance can hurt whatever it hits but we only get 1 per purchase, meaning the rate of fire is significantly below that of normal Starlances. Plus they're fixed facing forwards so we'd only ever be able to kill 1 ship at a time with them unless we manage to catch the enemy lined up, whereas batteries can at least point in different directions.

If we could use a Galleon hull for the extra System slots I would, but IMO the second Special Weapon slot is the most disposable when it comes to refunds. If you want heavier firepower than the original we could just keep the Heavy Weapon slots as two Heavy Starlance batteries, for 4 HStarlances instead of 6 normal ones.
Mechanis said:
Standard batteries mount a pair of standard naval-grade weapons, Heavy batteries mount either a single Heavy Naval weapon or three standard naval weapons. Special Weapons Slots, similarly, may mount either a single Special Weapon—at present only the Starcaster Mega-Lance is available in this category—or a pair of Heavy Naval weapons. Note that you may, if desired, add an additional standard weapons battery at the expense of two Systems slots, an additional Heavy weapons battery at the expense of four systems slots or two standard weapons batteries, and a Special Weapon slot at the expense of two Heavy Weapons Batteries or eight system slots. This does, however, incur an additional manufacturing cost above that of the slots as designed. Additionally, you may remove entirely a Weapons Battery of either type or a Special Weapon slot in order to increase your available System slots; this, however, is less efficient that a design with fewer slots to begin with—a standard Weapon Battery returns only half as many system slots (one and two, respectively,) while a Special Weapon slot refunds only three System slots.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
thatguy99998 said:
so yes, we absoultly can switch off using forge actions to increase BAP, but each forge action gets us 2-4 BAP, meanwhile, a forge action on a multi turn project like say the grand academy (the lowest continous cost multi turn project that isnt enhance industry.) will save at least 2 BAP, more likely 4 BAP, and a possiblity of 6 BAP. so at worst, the forge on the grand academy is equal to industry, but it has a higher celling, of course, i will admit this assumes that we are building said academy already. which may not be true.
on the ships, I swear we used a forge activation to refit a bunch of nettles. The engine i was assuming would apply the same way.
My point is, BAP is best spent on BAP, while we use what is left on foward progress. wether that be 10000 EP for making Vehicles. getting more AP in other categories where we always need more (Seekers) or even trying to improve our ability to fight the curse, even if it appears our only option for seers is the scrying chamber right now
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Forge can be used for the ships or the engine.
But 1d3 roll is than how many time that project is executed with the forge:

So on retrofitting escorts its 1d3x3 Ships.

For the engine the small fault are 1EP each so 1d3 worth of project done.
While the Plasma stuff is 1d3x3EP done.

But these are all cases where you also just could dump more BAP into it, and pretty much get the same progress.

The problem with the academy is that the starting AP price is stupidly high, having to drop 6AP on a single project is pretty rough more so when it has an extra run time of 5-9 turns. Even with double forge there is a very good chance that needs multiple turns.

Alratan said:
The thing is, there's a 50% chance the Forge is overkill, that it overflows and we get wasted cost reduction. Now it's true that there's a 5/6 chance that forge saves 1 AP and gives us 1 AP (by finishing a turn earlier), I'm not convinced that we can't do better with a Forge action that generates an average of 1 2/3 BAP.

Given the exchange rate for Wargear, that really doesn't seem very efficient. We could buy enough Ithilmar Warsuits to equip a lot of our troops with that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Take a look at how things look if you keep investing into the BAP infrastructure instead of going for one-off.

The fast adding of AP means doing so is far less of a strain us, in the next turn which still being long term more AP efficient as having more AP faster is quite important for snowballing.

Pretty sure we pull this off:
Assumption Industry on average needs : (2,3,3)
Turn "1"
Enhance Industry x3
- 2 Forge action (average at 4)
Replace Primary Power Distribution Control x2

Turn "2" (Total 6)
Enhance Industry x3
-1 Forge action (boost 1)
- average case: 2 Finished, 1 building (finished next turn)
Repairing the Plasma System
-1 Forge action

+1 Free AP

Turn "3" (9 Total)
Enhance Industry x3
-1 Forge action (boost 1)
- average case: 4 Finished, 2 building (2 finished on turn 4)

1 Forge action free +4 AP

Turn "4" (12 total)
Followed by:
Enhance Industry x3
-1 Forge action (boost 1)
- ~5 finished, 4 building (2 finish this turn, 2 finish turn 5)
1 Forge action free, +5 AP


Turn "5" (15 total)
Followed by:
Enhance Industry x3
-1 Forge action (boost 1)
-8 finished, 4 building, (2 finish this turn, 2 finish turn 6)

1 Forge action free, +8AP

Turn "6" (15 total)
Followed by:
Enhance Industry x3 (15 total)
-1 Forge action (boost 1)
-11 finished, 4 building (2 finish this turn, 2 finish turn 6)

1 Forge action free, +11 AP

Start assumes average rolls on the forge, but other than that very damn close to the worst case on the forge rolls.
Overall get the Engine done turn "4", following that we start to get a lot of AP that we can invest into other things and the forge action starts to lose its effect as a turbocharger for BAP generation and just using more BAP becomes more effective.

That said the Forge actions help a lot by reducing the strain on building a lot of BAP infrastructure at the start.

Edit.
Break down that the forge is really good at helping us get our BAP generation jump started fast without going all in, and also staying flexible if we might need a lot of BAP for something else due to not having 4+ AP drained by the ongoing building.
It also builds up a lot faster than raw BAP investment if you keep investing for 3-4 turns.
 
Last edited:
IronFist said:
Does it actually compound? (Maybe I'm still misunderstanding something)

The expand action takes multiple turns (2-3 turns), so the forge would reduce it by 1D3, probably completing one expand industry action per turn per forge action. Each forge action would basically save 2-3 AP, with a chance of rolling a 1 for a 3 turn project, and not even completing the project.

Comparing that to building the Grand academy, or the Seer Circle (who have an ongoing cost of 2), each forge action would save us 2D3 BAP, while fixing the Engine's plasma system has a return of 3D3 per forge action.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

except the gains don't compound from having engine sooner. engine completing is gaining mobility, and can be put off a few turns, while enhancing industry early is more bonesinger for every turn after it completes.

while we could build a grand academy for put seeker AP, it's bonesinger which we are really experiencing a major AP crunch. it's bone singer that we'll need a bunch of to build with when the time comes to investing Bonesinger AP heavily in foundries for the sake of building a surplus of gear to create detachments and Warhosts with.
 
Last edited:
Randino Treviani said:
except the gains don't compound from having engine sooner. engine completing is gaining mobility, and can be put off a few turns, while enhancing industry early is more bonesinger for every turn after it completes.

while we could build a grand academy for put seeker AP, it's bonesinger which we are really experiencing a major AP crunch. it's bone singer that we'll need to build a bunch of when the time comes to investing Bonesinger AP heavily in foundries for the sake of building a surplus of gear to create detachments and Warhosts with.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean, we left 4 Seeker AP on the table rather than delay doing the combi-grav weapons a turn, even though there's a fair chance we aren't going to make any combi-grav weapons next turn.

The big thing about the Grand Academy is that it might unlock more than just extra AP, but more and valuable options.
 
Karnax626 said:
That's not how I understood the below explanation. The first part says Heavy and Special Weapon slots can mount either their own scale of weapon or multiple weapons of the level below (Standard or Heavy respectively).

Then it goes on to say you can buy more weapon batteries with System slots, but this carries an additional cost beyond that of the weapons and slots themselves. I can't actually tell if that extra cost also applies to refunding a Weapon Battery for System slots, the wording used seems to imply it doesn't but then Mechanis' words you quoted imply it does?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'll wait for QM clarification then on the subject of slots.
Karnax626 said:
Either way I'd say it'd be worth it, the Mega-lance can hurt whatever it hits but we only get 1 per purchase, meaning the rate of fire is significantly below that of normal Starlances. Plus they're fixed facing forwards so we'd only ever be able to kill 1 ship at a time with them unless we manage to catch the enemy lined up, whereas batteries can at least point in different directions.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Generally a weapon that is an entire size class above another weapon is going to outperform that other weapon significantly as far as damage and range goes.

You are trading extra long range firepower for a possible (it's debatable if 2 Heavy Starlance batteries even beats a Mega-Lance) increase in closer range firepower.

We have 2 other ships that already have Heavy Starlance batteries so adding more of the same is a waste when you could be augmenting capabilities that those other ships cannot provide.

It's not like the two Mega-Lances need to be firelinked either, you could just have them fire sequentially so that they each nuke a different ship from outside of Heavy Starlance range.

The key thing here is that by being an entire size class higher than the Heavy Starlance the Mega-Lances will be able to shoot stuff well before the Heavy Starlances can.

If you go look at the Ork naval weapons list you can see that the Orks have both lances in the regular (Zapppaz), heavy (Big Zapppa) and special sizes (Mega-Zapppa).

Considering the fact that their Zapppa type weapons have a higher rate of fire compared to the baseline for lance weapons that would make them much more dangerous to us since the higher RoF increases the chances that one of their shots will actually hit us.

Given the fact that the Ork Special sized weapon is described as having a multi-hit effect and is very unreliable it is unlikely to be very common or able to consistently fire so if we were to fight Orks the fact that our Special scale weapon will be firing more often and more consistently back at them is going to be a much bigger advantage than just having some more weapons of the Heavy scale trading shots with their own.
 
A forge activation on a single Enhance Industry is worth 2-4 BAP, usually 2, assuming I understand how multi-turn projects work.
(Each turn saved is 2 BAP; one for not having to spend a BAP that turn to complete the project, 1 for having a BAP to play with one turn sooner. But there's a decent chance Enhance Industry offers only the one turn to save, and even if it'd cost two there's a 1/3 chance the Forge only gives the one, for an average of 2 + 2/3 AP saved. Running multiple Enhances at once shifts this up to 4 BAP, when there's always something to collect the overflow.)

This only compounds in the sense that Enhance Industry compounds, and the Forge lets us do it more often.

Note that using the Forge repairing the plasma conduits is worth ~6 BAP, assuming we're not in a rush and can afford to gamble on whether or not the conduits complete.

Now that we've got the level 1 buildings in all categories and have some breathing space, I strongly support doing Enhance Industry and building foundries; other than that, getting the power distribution systems online as the only part of the repair that's guaranteed to take more than one turn seems advisable. Trying to crack open research is nice but not urgent, the seer circle is mostly important for our faction quest but probably also useful for scavenging, and we have a few turns so if we really need more wargear this is a time to get it by building foundries.
 
Candesce said:
Now that we've got the level 1 buildings in all categories and have some breathing space, I strongly support doing Enhance Industry and building foundries; other than that, getting the power distribution systems online as the only part of the repair that's guaranteed to take more than one turn seems advisable. Trying to crack open research is nice but not urgent, the seer circle is mostly important for our faction quest but probably also useful for scavenging, and we have a few turns so if we really need more wargear this is a time to get it by building foundries.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think it's always going to be more efficient in the medium to long run to frontload spending BAP on getting more BAP and backload building more foundries than you otherwise would using the extra BAP you have as a result.

As we would use BAP or Forge Actions to build wargear directly if we have an urgent need for it that suggests we should go for the upfront BAP building approach for now, as doing a mixture of Enhance Industry and Foundries falls between the two stools.
 
Last edited:
*shrugs*

I'm pretty sure Enhance Industry also increases the production of foundries, and that the base production of foundries is already enough to pay back our production faster than Enhance Industry does, but, like, we'll find that out as this turn completes, now won't we? No point in getting in a shouting match over it.
 
Candesce said:
Now that we've got the level 1 buildings in all categories and have some breathing space
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Seer Circle is probably a tier 1 building as the Seer building that we do have is explicitly described as an artefact we took with us in the fall.
Mechanis said:
[ ] Seerstone Tower (-1 point)
Among the artifacts borne away from disaster by your Craftworld in the chaos of the Fall is a Seerstone—a self-aware repository of warp-lore and potent scrying tool in one. Ensconced in an appropriate facility, this relic construct will provide aid in any Warpcraft research, as well as helping to train Psyker powers for use.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So we may want to grab this just like the hall and shrine.
 
F0lkL0re said:
The Seer Circle is probably a tier 1 building as the Seer building that we do have is explicitly described as an artefact we took with us in the fall.

So we may want to grab this just like the hall and shrine.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hmm, fair. I've no objection - I think we'll get immediate use out of the Seer Circle in a way we won't out of the Academy expansion.
 
Candesce said:
*shrugs*

I'm pretty sure Enhance Industry also increases the production of foundries, and that the base production of foundries is already enough to pay back our production faster than Enhance Industry does, but, like, we'll find that out as this turn completes, now won't we? No point in getting in a shouting match over it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think that whatever the level of production of the Foundries, at some timeframe it will be have been more efficient to have front loaded expanding industry and built more foundries later. The interaction between the production level of the foundries and our total BAP just changes how long it takes for the cross over point to come.

F0lkL0re said:
The Seer Circle is probably a tier 1 building as the Seer building that we do have is explicitly described as an artefact we took with us in the fall.

So we may want to grab this just like the hall and shrine.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think the 'appropriate facility' that the Seerstone Tower is ensconced in may count as the T1 building for Seers.
 
Last edited:
Alratan said:
I mean, we left 4 Seeker AP on the table rather than delay doing the combi-grav weapons a turn, even though there's a fair chance we aren't going to make any combi-grav weapons next turn.

The big thing about the Grand Academy is that it might unlock more than just extra AP, but more and valuable options.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
sure, but their options that can frankly wait. perfect is the enemy of good enough, and the far more advanced than our enemies now that we are safe from Biel Tan is precisely that. the techs we have available too us without it are good enough for building a navy and army which will keep us and our allies safe for the next few hundred years, so the academy can wait until turn 7 or 8 while we increase bone singer AP so when the time comes to build the few dozen foundries we need built to stock up on war gear in prep for building a proper grand army of Vau-Vulkesh, it's done sooner.

eventually we'll need to start the lengthy process of expanding our navy to extremis system clearing numbers and properly refurbishing the crone class. bone singer AP will come in handy their too.
Candesce said:
Now that we've got the level 1 buildings in all categories and have some breathing space, I strongly support doing Enhance Industry and building foundries; other than that, getting the power distribution systems online as the only part of the repair that's guaranteed to take more than one turn seems advisable. Trying to crack open research is nice but not urgent, the seer circle is mostly important for our faction quest but probably also useful for scavenging, and we have a few turns so if we really need more wargear this is a time to get it by building foundries.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Seer tower is more for general scrying than our curse research. we'll likely being going all in on eye of Tzeench for turns 5 and 6 in the hopes we get lucky and just break the entire thing as the action text hints at, so a seer tower isn't especially critical.

we don't really need war gear for half a dozen turns. we are still in the process of reverse engineering techs and designing various key elements of a proper Vau-Vulkesh Warhost, and we have basic development actions and the relic vaults to hit as well. we are far enough away that the Orks won't be showing up for a while, and have 60 Zahr-Tann warhosts for more negligible threats.

currently we are probably going to redesign the Ithilmar to add conversion shields, and likely designing either a sloop or a fighter alongside max relic vaults in hopes of finding sometjing worthwhile this time.

we have 15 AP, minus 2 for continued repairs and refits for Arach-qin and Quilan.

- Replacing Primary Power Distribution (4 AP)
- Enhancing Industry (3 AP) + Forge
- Enhancing Industry (3 AP) + Forge
- Build Foundry (VGW) (2 AP)
- Develop Grenades (1 AP)

here. solid plan that increase BAP, Finishes RPPD, Builds a foundry for VGW, and develops grenades.
 
Last edited:
One thing we should *probably* do with BAP next turn is really invest into our engine repairs, not just a few points around the edges. We need 22 BAP to get moving, and the Orks have only one valid target now.
 
F0lkL0re said:
The Seer Circle is probably a tier 1 building as the Seer building that we do have is explicitly described as an artefact we took with us in the fall.

So we may want to grab this just like the hall and shrine.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think so. it's more of a subplimentary tool for scrying. we have the tier 1 building for Seer AP, as evidenced by options to construct a war circle, train a blade dancer troupe, and construct a seeing circle in the Seer AP tab.
Candesce said:
Almost certainly a light cruiser, but maybe other stuff too.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think light cruiser should wait. there is probably at least one thing in stewardship unlocked by finishing Hall we'll want to start immediately, and our fighters are a lot more vulnerable to destruction than our Caravels right now, in addition to having all the tech we want to arm them with. we can design a interceptor class vehicle, do the suspected stewardship thing, and try for 4 or 5 points in Relic Vaults, maybe add conversion fields and possibly something else to the Ithilmar if we have a point of AP spare.

Candesce said:
Maybe with a different development pick, depending on what we're rationalizing or designing that turn.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
melta weapons maybe? we'll see what we are redesigning, but if it's a fighter type vessel like I've suggested, than grenades is probably best.
Vehrec said:
One thing we should *probably* do with BAP next turn is really invest into our engine repairs, not just a few points around the edges. We need 22 BAP to get moving, and the Orks have only one valid target now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
the Orks have no idea where our craft world is, and if you check the maps in info, there is a fair amount of space between us and the edges of grimtusks empire. we are safe for a few to a handful of decades. it's far more likely he starts working towards a rematch with Arach-qin over the 3 worlds in his empire they burned than come searching for us beyond it's limits. we are perfectly safe where we are for probably half a dozen turns. I'd worry more about Fea-Eresh.
 
Last edited:
Over the long run, it's always going to be more efficient to spend AP on Enhancing industry and then using the resulting BAP to build foundries than to spend the same amount of BP building foundries.

Assuming no interaction between total BAP and foundry production, which would bring the time scale in, the expected cross over point is currently at 15 turns from the start of construction.

If you spend BAP on Enhance Industry it's on average 4.5 BAP over three turns, which would produce 2.25 Foundries.

In Scenario one where you build Enhance Industry then Foundries with the extra BAP, on turn 15 you'll on average have 5.5 Foundries and have accumulated 33 Foundry-Turns worth of production.

In Scenario two, in turn 15 you're have 2.25 foundries and 30.5 Foundry-Turns of Production.

Subsequently, the advantage of the Enhance industry first approach just compounds. By turn 20 after the start it would have produced an average of 68 compared to 41.75 units of production. By turn 25 it's 115.5 compared to 53.

And the Enhance Industry first approach has the big advantage that it also has option value. We could choose to do something else with those BAP not stop building foundries.

This is irrespective of how much each foundry produces. I've measured in units of how much a Foundry produces a turn. This is simply down to the relative BAP costs and construction time of each of them.
 
Last edited:
We do not have data on what foundries produce.

WE DO NOT

Alratan said:
This is irrespective of how much each foundry produces. I've measured in units of how much a Foundry produces a turn. This is simply down to the relative BAP costs and construction time of each of them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You. Are. Lying.

You are straight up, bald facedly lying, and presenting your imagination as fact.
 
Last edited:
Alectai said:
We do not have data on what foundries produce.

WE DO NOT



You. Are. Lying.

You are straight up, bald facedly lying, and presenting your imagination as fact.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No. Alectai. You're flat wrong. I've just done a spreadsheet on it. If you disregard the potential increase of foundry production with AP (which is also probably independent of foundry production rate, and can only move things in favour of the Enhance Industry first scenario), the comparison between the scenario where you do Enhance Industries and then invest the resulting BP in more foundries compared to just spending the initial BAP on Foundries up front does not depend om how much foundries produce.

That's because on both sides you're measuring the output in foundry-turns of production, so the actual amount produced cancels out of the ratio.

Retract your accusation please.
 
Last edited:
Alectai said:
We do not have data on what foundries produce.

WE DO NOT



You. Are. Lying.

You are straight up, bald facedly lying, and presenting your imagination as fact.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm pretty sure he's just using algebra and leaving foundry production as a variable...? You don't need to have solid data on what foundries produce for his numbers, since foundries are created by BAP and all other figures are known, their actual output can be entirely black-boxed. The math doesn't require any knowledge of foundry output at all.
 
Alectai said:
We do not have data on what foundries produce.

WE DO NOT



You. Are. Lying.

You are straight up, bald facedly lying, and presenting your imagination as fact.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No, they fucking arent, When they fucking say that, they mean that in the same way you use X in math. it doesnt matter what X equals, you still have X*turn amount. notice how in the part you quoted, they clarify UNITS they arent measuring the factory output in EP or gear. THEY ARE MEASURING IN TERMS OF AMMOUNT FACTORY PRODUCES PER TURN, a Variable.

you yourself are lying, though wether from ignorance or maliciousness. i have no clue.
 
Alratan said:
No. Alectai. You're flat wrong. I've just done a spreadsheet on it. If you disregard the potential increase of foundry production with AP (which is also probably independent of foundry production rate), the comparison between the scenario where you do Enhance Industries and then invest the resulting BP in more foundries compared to just spending the initial BAP on Foundries up front does not depend om how much foundries produce.

That's because on both sides you're measuring the output in foundry-turns of production, so the actual amount produced cancels out of the ratio.

Retract your accusation now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We have.

No data.

On what a foundry produces.

Period.

Any amount of math cannot materialize data from a vacuum

I will not, and if this game is going to be about needing advanced algebra to do prophecy, I don't want any part of it.

Combined with the QM saying "You are not going to get the data needed to make perfect decisions", I am willing to trust the one writing the quest over a known bullshitter who's been called out for this several times before.

Projection requires perfect awareness of every variable to be remotely accurate, we don't even know what we don't know yet.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top