Talk:Manufacturing Profitability

From UFOpaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Dumas, re: your point about Alien Alloys being plentiful - That section about LCs versus FBLs addresses a common early misperception. In actuality, both LCs and FBLs make the same amount of profit each ($18k), but you can make ~33% more LCs per month with a given number of engineers. In other words, LCs are 33% more profitable than FBLs, period.

Unless you want to make your FBLs one at a time, so that they don't need AAs. Then, they're just barely (2%) more profitable than LCs. (If you play with the spreadsheet, this is clear.)

So it doesn't really have anything to do with AAs. LCs are a far better deal than FBLs, unless you want to hassle with making FBLs one at a time. Either way, you never needed a single AA. (And if you've got a big surplus of AAs, then just sell'em! smile)

Let me know if I'm missing something - MikeTheRed 18:41, 9 November 2006 (PST)


I see. So that's what the AA thing means. It's not explained very clearly. I'll fix that.--Dumas 04:58, 10 November 2006 (PST)

Hmm, we go straight from Workshop to Manufacturing Profitability - there really should be a Manufacturing topic around that sits between them I think, to cover all the basics and key points. Might start it myself in next few days if no-one else does.

--Sfnhltb 18:36, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Oh and of course, another note is that the values for maintenance on Living Quarters and Workshops being fed into the equations are wrong, but you cant tell what they are going to cost unless you know what row of the base they are built on. Could make the numbers a little fuzzy (not likely to make a big difference, as the average cost is just over 17, so that would probably make these two items a little cheaper than the 22.5 currently assigned to them.

--Sfnhltb 18:40, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Huh, good point. I only just learned about that maintenance glitch today. For the time being, I'll stick in a note that those numbers are probably slightly high. For that matter, the maintenance glitch page could probably use a few notes about how much the other costs of 1) facilities in general are (e.g. for likely base configs - average cost per building as per UFOpaedia vs. actual average cost as per bug), and 2) other costs of the game in general. IOW I suspect that maintenance costs are a small part of a serious X-COM operation, relative to country funding, loot, and manufacturing profit. Which, if true, would lead to a wrap-up statement re: the maintenance bug of something like, "as can be seen, maint. costs are only a few percent of likely revenue and expenses; all in all, this base placement bug doesn't impact much, and can easily be totally ignored, if you like".

Edit: This could also go on that page dedicated to the bug. Maybe that's a better place for a longer explanation/analysis, and the Bugs page would just have that wrap-up sentence.

- MikeTheRed 19:15, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Yeah, thats along the same lines as I was thinking when I created the new page, try to avoid any bugs in that section from getting too large, if they have a lot of related detail it should be linked too, so that the bugs list is as concise as possible, most people are going to want to make sure they arent falling foul of any serious issue due to their play style and little more, if they want more information they can drill down to the dedicated topics related to it.

--Sfnhltb 21:02, 1 March 2007 (PST)

MTR - first base
MTR - 2nd & 3rd base

Works for me. It brings up an interesting question - what kinds of bases do people make? (Which would affect the average facility cost, depending on where they put facilities.) For newbies, the average cost is probably the best guess. But for vet players like us wiki folks, we probably all have our own styles. I make research at my first base in Europe, and fudge around the original Access Lift relative to base attacks. My first base has a crack squad, as do two more that look like the second inset. Then as you can see from the tiny base outlines, I have several more that are hangars up top and psi labs/LQ below, then a few more that are just LQ and hangars, for screening large recruit batches. (Good'uns are sent to the psi bases.) Manufacturing is light in 1st, heavy in 2nd, and 3rd depends how greedy I am. They all have a Stores or two, of course. And it's prior to knowing about the Maintenance Bug, naturally. (FWIW, my game date there is August 1999.)

Just some ideas about how bases might be. I'm sure the rest of you have your own styles. Heck it might be fun to make an informal area where folks show their current base layouts. - MikeTheRed 21:30, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Non integer math?

Those who know XCOM, know that it suffers from integer truncation in a number of places. This could've hurt profitability badly if it occurred there; for example, if an item needs 100 engineer hours but you only assign 99, it might've taken twice as long, and halved your production and profit potential. Fortunately, this is not the case with manufacturing; it does not truncate production time this way.

I would be surprised if it was storing progress as any sort of non integer value. What it likely does is treat the entire batch as one unit, creating at the end of the hour as it knocks them off - so it saves an integral number of hours of progress against the next item in the list.

To explain with your example, but run a batch of 10 of them:

1st hour - 99 production, not to 100, no output 2nd hour - 99 stored + 99 production = 198 done, take off 100 to make one unit to leave 98 stored for next hour 3rd hour - 98 + 99 = 197, make one store 97.

What this essentially means is that on short projects you would want to run them in batches to minimise wastage, or with a number of engineers that divides into the unit production time with no remainder if you want to build single units at a time (whyever would you want to do that? ...)

--Sfnhltb 13:33, 2 March 2007 (PST)

Obviously it could as easily store 10 x 100 = 1000 as the hours for the entire project to complete, and produce each time it drops by 100, whichever way (I think mine is more likely because then adding/removing units in the production screen doesnt require it to recalculate the hours left for the entire project each time, but BPROD.DAT or whatever could probably easily be tested to find which it is.

--Sfnhltb 13:35, 2 March 2007 (PST)