Zack Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Should i stop assign more scientists to a project if the progress is shown as excellent ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Caine Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 You can assign as many as you like. Each scientist you add to a project does less work than the last one, so there is a point where adding more scientists isn't worth it. However, the exact formula is secret. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinHann Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 I think there is a limit, I once hit it during 21 Stable, maybe around 100 scientists. Haven't ever built that many labs since though and it's a bit hazy now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean-Luc Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 I always put only as many are needed for excellent progress and then spread them out, you get the most value out of your scientists that way I feel. You can actually micro manage your research. As time goes on less and less guys are needed for excellent progress so you can gradually move scientists from one project to another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandyxx Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 i'm think, that shown status (good-average-excellent, etc.) corresponds to how much time is needed to finish the research and not to it's status. each research has human-day value. so in the end if we add scientists to the excellent research will be completed in, lets say 2 days. but if we hack the game and assign 99 scientists to research it will be completed much faster, maybe in matter of hours. so imo best way to research something valuable is to assign maximum scientists to that research, instead of spreading research potential. because if we will spread researches (e.g. armor and laser weapons) lets say, armor needs 120 human-days and lasers need 60: we got 30 scientists to assign. if we assign them 20 to 10, then we will get both researches done in six days. if we assign them 0 to armor and 30 to weapons, then weapons will be finished on second day. and after that we will research armour in 4 days. so in the end, we will obtain both researches on sixth day, but in second case, we will already get laser weapons and we can produce them. so we minimize state when we doesn't have anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills6693 Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 You can assign as many as you like. Each scientist you add to a project does less work than the last one, so there is a point where adding more scientists isn't worth it. However, the exact formula is secret. Scientists have diminishing returns? Did not know that, thats awesome to know. Now I actually have a reason to spread them out, before this I thought it was just pointless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slandebande Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 i'm think, that shown status (good-average-excellent, etc.) corresponds to how much time is needed to finish the research and not to it's status.each research has human-day value. so in the end if we add scientists to the excellent research will be completed in, lets say 2 days. but if we hack the game and assign 99 scientists to research it will be completed much faster, maybe in matter of hours. so imo best way to research something valuable is to assign maximum scientists to that research, instead of spreading research potential. because if we will spread researches (e.g. armor and laser weapons) lets say, armor needs 120 human-days and lasers need 60: we got 30 scientists to assign. if we assign them 20 to 10, then we will get both researches done in six days. if we assign them 0 to armor and 30 to weapons, then weapons will be finished on second day. and after that we will research armour in 4 days. so in the end, we will obtain both researches on sixth day, but in second case, we will already get laser weapons and we can produce them. so we minimize state when we doesn't have anything. I agree, I have used the "progress" tab for estimating the time needed for the project to complete. I also agree with your second point, that if the two things being researched (and you aren't manufacturing anything super important) it would be optimal to have the two researches completed with at least some time to start manufacturing the first item. One thing though, to the more knowledeable people around here: Does the diminishing returns of scientists apply on a per project basis? I had always thought it was applied on a per base basis. Or maybe it is a combination? That would at least make the most sense to me, as they would all be sharing the same lab whether they are working on different projects or not, but the "too many cooks spoil the broth" saying would also be applicable in most cases, as there is a point where throwing additional hands at a problem is not the solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandyxx Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) ok here is info from test: Researches.HunterTank 80 Researches.MIGInterceptor 80 started at sep 01 4:58 ~ 5:00 1) both only excellent (21 scientist each) : both researches are finished at sep 05 10:35 4 days and 5,5 hours = 101,5 hours *21 = 2131.5 human-hours for each. total 4263 2) 40 scientists set to each research: both finished at sep 03 16:40 2 days and 11,6 hours (11 hours 40 minutes)= 59.6 hours *40 = 2384 human-hours for each. total 4768 3) 80 scientists to mig and after that 80 to hunter mig is finished at sep 02 20:40 39.6 *80 = 3168 human-hour hunter is finished at sep 04 12:21 79,3 *80 = 6344 human-hour total so in the end, i was wrong, and with excessive amount of scientists some work is wasted Edited June 19, 2014 by Sandyxx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zack Posted June 19, 2014 Author Share Posted June 19, 2014 Nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Caine Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 It might be worthwhile working out what the exact level of diminishment is, because then you can work out the most efficent spread of scientists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dranak Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 I think I remember it being 1% per scientist, but I'm too lazy to math. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yianyan Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 The number is a secret? From the manual: Scientists assigned to a project suffer from diminishing returns – the first scientist works at 100% efficiency, the second at 99% efficiency, the third at 98% and so on. Is this a lie or did everyone just miss it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Caine Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Shows you how often I read the manual. If that's what the manual says it is, then that's what it is! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills6693 Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Yes, and therefore the 'ideal' spread of scientists, to get the most work done, is to be equal between all possible projects. However then you'll get nothing fast. Thus I'd recommend, personally, a balance (and that is what is intended, I imagine). I would say don't assign more than about half of your scientists to one project, and assign your other ones split between other projects. That way you can get things done that you need, quickly - but you are not wasting too many man-hours rushing that tech, and are getting better progress on other techs instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.