IUs?

Home of SOLAR STARFIRE, 6th edition, rules based on the upcoming history of the Terran Solar Union.

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Try to stick with the forum's topic. Threads that belong to another forum will be moved to that forum.

IUs?

Postby GunBunny on Sun 07 Oct 2018 19:31

I have three questions about IUs.

1st: if your not using the 10 month optional growth rule you should be able to sell IUs every month correct?

2nd: L3.03.01 is a little confusing, is it stating that IU sales can ONLY be used for construction, repairs, de-mothballing, or retrofits. OR is it stating that using the 10 month optional growth they can be sold any month as long as they are used for the above mentioned reasons? Can IUs be sold and the Mcr be used for any reason?

3rd: Since GPV is calculated by adding IU to the total of a planet value why would anyone want to spend 30 Mcr to buy them when that can be used for colonization? Unless you are planning on turtleing or there are no significant colonization target available I do not see the point. Maybe for a boost in wartime?

Forgive me if the questions have been answered somewhere else.
Last edited by GunBunny on Mon 08 Oct 2018 05:56, edited 1 time in total.
GunBunny
Lieutenant SG
Lieutenant SG
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed 01 Mar 2017 17:20

Re: IUs?

Postby Xveers on Sun 07 Oct 2018 21:46

In response to your 3rd question:
Colonization is indeed almost always the better choice since you get both a better compounding return and better per month return on most any planet (pretty much any T/ST/mT world). But the fact that they offer a better return than simply sitting in your bank account month to month is already a solid reason for getting them.

One other reason you've missed that that having more IU on a planet means that it also has more intrinsic SY capacity. While this might not be militarily valuable for actual ship construction (due to various penalties), it's VERY useful when you need extra ancillary production: You can use on-planet SY to manufacture components for refits, build more drones/AP as needed, and produce more small craft to rebuild damaged flight groups. Likewise they're also useful for building up supply depots in critical nodal systems while saving you multi-month shipping times. This is all doubly useful at low ELs when you might not have the ability to move full sized SYs on ship hulls.
User avatar
Xveers
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Wed 15 Jul 2009 02:26
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: IUs?

Postby dazrand on Mon 08 Oct 2018 05:26

1st: if your not using the 10 month optional growth rule you should be able to sell IUs every month correct?


1st : Correct in general play since growth occurs every turn, IUs can be sold on any of those turns and used without limit.

2nd: L3.03.01 is a little confusing, is it stating that IU sales can ONLY be used for construction, repairs, de-mothballing, or retrofits. OR is it stating that using the 10 month optional growth they can be sold any month as long as they are used for the above mentioned reasons? Can IUs be sold and the Mcr be used for any reason?


2nd : Yes the L3.03.01 wording is muddled. What it means to say is: Selling IU on a growth month allows you to use the funds without restriction. Selling IU on a non-growth month can occur during an Active War, but the MCr gained may only be used for construction, repairs, refits, or de-mothballing.
User avatar
dazrand
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sat 08 Aug 2009 06:06
Location: South Florida

Re: IUs?

Postby SCC on Mon 04 Feb 2019 03:47

Xveers wrote:In response to your 3rd question:
Colonization is indeed almost always the better choice since you get both a better compounding return and better per month return on most any planet (pretty much any T/ST/mT world). But the fact that they offer a better return than simply sitting in your bank account month to month is already a solid reason for getting them.

One other reason you've missed that that having more IU on a planet means that it also has more intrinsic SY capacity. While this might not be militarily valuable for actual ship construction (due to various penalties), it's VERY useful when you need extra ancillary production: You can use on-planet SY to manufacture components for refits, build more drones/AP as needed, and produce more small craft to rebuild damaged flight groups. Likewise they're also useful for building up supply depots in critical nodal systems while saving you multi-month shipping times. This is all doubly useful at low ELs when you might not have the ability to move full sized SYs on ship hulls.

Building FT often has a better ROI then colonies in the short term, but ultimately colonies are better. Do note that the worst colonization options can probably be more cheaply colonized with forced re-settlement.
SCC
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri 08 Mar 2013 15:11

Re: IUs?

Postby Cralis on Mon 04 Feb 2019 12:58

SCC wrote:Building FT often has a better ROI then colonies in the short term, but ultimately colonies are better.


Benign worlds, harsh worlds, and even most hostile worlds a few jumps or less away from the colonizing population are always better. And it should be pointed out that increasing your populations means that you are increasing your CFN size, increasing the number of FT that you can put into the pools.

There is a huge debate on the value of desolate and extreme worlds, however, and FT almost always beat those out. Pretty much if you can't colonize a desolate world inside the same star system as the population you are pulling the colonists from, FT are better (and even then they are probably still better... I should rerun the numbers one of these days and update Appendix C).

Do note that the worst colonization options can probably be more cheaply colonized with forced re-settlement.


Forced re-settlement can only be done with conquered populations. And doing so means that you now have multiple worlds that don't want to be your friend. While it looks cheaper on paper, the long terms effects are probably not worth it.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 11123
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: IUs?

Postby SCC on Mon 04 Feb 2019 23:07

Cralis wrote:
SCC wrote:Building FT often has a better ROI then colonies in the short term, but ultimately colonies are better.


Benign worlds, harsh worlds, and even most hostile worlds a few jumps or less away from the colonizing population are always better. And it should be pointed out that increasing your populations means that you are increasing your CFN size, increasing the number of FT that you can put into the pools.

Only if their withing 1 StMP, once you get that far beyond that there's ab out a 50% chance that FT are more profitable short term.

Cralis wrote:There is a huge debate on the value of desolate and extreme worlds, however, and FT almost always beat those out. Pretty much if you can't colonize a desolate world inside the same star system as the population you are pulling the colonists from, FT are better (and even then they are probably still better... I should rerun the numbers one of these days and update Appendix C).

Their worth it .

Cralis wrote:
Do note that the worst colonization options can probably be more cheaply colonized with forced re-settlement.


Forced re-settlement can only be done with conquered populations. And doing so means that you now have multiple worlds that don't want to be your friend. While it looks cheaper on paper, the long terms effects are probably not worth it.

Tese rules can also be used to move your own populations around though the value of this is highly questionable even though no RC penalties apply
It's a strategy worth using, at least in a system where you already have a colony, particularly it that colony is at or near it's population cap given how much it reduces the cost to colonize the plant (potentially to zero in some cases)
SCC
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri 08 Mar 2013 15:11

Re: IUs?

Postby Cralis on Tue 05 Feb 2019 16:50

Ahh forgot about that sentence. Now that you've brought it back to my attention, I will correct it.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 11123
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: IUs?

Postby szurkey on Tue 12 Feb 2019 04:02

GunBunny wrote:I have three questions about IUs.

I am probably not the best person to answer, because I have house rules that are different...
GunBunny wrote:1st: if your not using the 10 month optional growth rule you should be able to sell IUs every month correct?

Correct, but my house rules discourages this. You buy IUs for 30, but sell IUs for 27. This keeps IUs from being treated like CDs (Certificate of Deposit). They're not CDs; they're large physical infrastructure.

GunBunny wrote:2nd: L3.03.01 is a little confusing, is it stating that IU sales can ONLY be used for construction, repairs, de-mothballing, or retrofits. OR is it stating that using the 10 month optional growth they can be sold any month as long as they are used for the above mentioned reasons? Can IUs be sold and the Mcr be used for any reason?

This has already been answered and my house rules do not modify it.

GunBunny wrote:3rd: Since GPV is calculated by adding IU to the total of a planet value why would anyone want to spend 30 Mcr to buy them when that can be used for colonization? Unless you are planning on turtleing or there are no significant colonization target available I do not see the point. Maybe for a boost in wartime?

My house rules double colonization costs, redo habitability so T species colonize ST planets as an O2, and vice-a-versa, Benign is Hab +/- 1, Harsh is Hab +/- 3, Hostile is Hab +/- 5, and eliminate the construction complexes of PU. If you want a population of a habitable planet to have a construction complexes, you have to build 50 IU to get each one.
User avatar
szurkey
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat 05 Sep 2009 09:19
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: IUs?

Postby Starfire on Sun 17 Mar 2019 16:22

GunBunny wrote:
1st: if your not using the 10 month optional growth rule you should be able to sell IUs every month correct?


Correct, but my house rules discourages this. You buy IUs for 30, but sell IUs for 27. This keeps IUs from being treated like CDs (Certificate of Deposit). They're not CDs; they're large physical infrastructure.


While you are welcome to do this, you are perhaps misunderstanding the concept of IUs in the game.
Yes, they are large infrastructure.
But, when you sell them, they are NOT dismantled to get the money back. Rather they are sold to PRIVATE interests. When you (the government) BUY IU, you (the government) are not building them, but rather you are buying them from PRIVATE interests. So, yes, they are very much like CDs. You will also note that IUs have a lower long term rate of return than almost any other investment. So, spending on PTU placement is better in the long run due to the growth component that IUs do not get. But, if you need to save for a large project (IUs are there for you).
Nerf Rock, Paper is fine. Signed: Scissors.
Nerf Scissors, Rock is fine. Signed: Paper.
Nerf Paper, Scissors are fine. Signed: Rock.
User avatar
Starfire
Marvin Lamb
Marvin Lamb
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:59
Location: The Villages, FL

Re: IUs?

Postby Whitecold on Mon 18 Mar 2019 00:40

Starfire wrote:
GunBunny wrote:
1st: if your not using the 10 month optional growth rule you should be able to sell IUs every month correct?


Correct, but my house rules discourages this. You buy IUs for 30, but sell IUs for 27. This keeps IUs from being treated like CDs (Certificate of Deposit). They're not CDs; they're large physical infrastructure.


While you are welcome to do this, you are perhaps misunderstanding the concept of IUs in the game.
Yes, they are large infrastructure.
But, when you sell them, they are NOT dismantled to get the money back. Rather they are sold to PRIVATE interests. When you (the government) BUY IU, you (the government) are not building them, but rather you are buying them from PRIVATE interests. So, yes, they are very much like CDs. You will also note that IUs have a lower long term rate of return than almost any other investment. So, spending on PTU placement is better in the long run due to the growth component that IUs do not get. But, if you need to save for a large project (IUs are there for you).


I don't like the private sector idea. Some empire types may not have a private sector to sell to, and even sold infrastructure should generate tax income. Similarly, in war (or for whatever else reason occurs) an empire might decide to nationalize all IU in existence then as consequence.
Also, sold IU should still contribute to ground based construction facilities if they are still there.
Infrastructure also often shows its benefits indirectly by benefiting the entire economy, not making any money themselves, so it doesn't matter who owns the infrastructure to get its benefits.
You already get interest on your treasury, so IU are not really needed for saving up to things, where your first cruisers and trade treaties are the only things that really seem to need saving for.

Lastly is of course the appeal of the idea, running an interstellar empire I want to develop the worlds I just colonized with massive infrastructure projects. Buying up existing infrastructure has absolutely none of that appeal.
Whitecold
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Fri 19 Sep 2014 15:03

Next

Return to Solar Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests