Questiondeca wrote:My last post actually brought me to a new hidden cost, or perhaps a new hidden saving:

Upgrades, we know they can decrease costs and increase profits, but what are the costs for/against gathering them?

I did a quick test and it looks like 1 scientist takes 2 months to generate a point. at 30$/day that is

**30$X2monthsX30days= 1800$/point**.

For exploration points if we assume 2 months then it's

**50$X2monthsX30days= 3000$/point**The hiring cost of 3000$ becomes negligible over time, 10$/day as you approach the Y1Q3. However, three scientists could have been a 9000$ room running 1 to 2 lines of T1 products.The value of that point depends on the complexity of your lines and the number of machines running.

The value varies: 3$/pill = 3$/2Turns thus pill press = 1.5$/day/press for example. So here is a starting factory: 3 product lines, each having 2 disolvers and 2 pill printers. A point in disolvers = 2disolvers*3Lines*1$/day = 6$/day. A point in pill presses = 1.5*2*3 = 9$/day. So by Y1Q3 you will have spent 3000+9months*30Days*30$ = 11,100$ on a scientist, and made 2430$ for 1 point. If someone wants to do the calculus to figure out how aditional points effect that value... by this point they will have accrued a total of 4 points, each worth around 1$/day/machine. So where is the break even point?

At 1$/day/machine assuming Y1Q3 is our yardstick: pointinvested*1$*#machines/day (i.e. /dt) = 40$. So for 1 point, 40 machines must benefit to break even. points will acrue at months 2,4,6, and 8 at which point only 10 machines are needed to benefit from the 4 points. by year 2 Q3 cost/day to beat will be just above 30$ as the initital hiring cost is spread out over 600 days i.e. .5$/day

For explorers the variables are the number of ingredient lines, and the price of the ingredient. by Y1Q3 an idle explorer has cost 5000+50*9*30 = 18500$ or around 68.5$/day

for simplicity I will define 2 ingredient prices, normal defined as 30$, saturated defined as 60$, thus the value doubles when the market floods.

The calculation of earned value is 10%*Price*#productLines/day. This is very tricky because only a few lines of each ingredient can be run. Thus 1 point for three product lines of an ingredient yields either 9$/day or 18$/day. The problem is that saturation restricts the ability to expand the number of product lines, while increasing the efficacy of investing a point, but requiring 8.3 lines, or 240 ingredients/month to even break even at saturation prices.

The takeaway, I feel, is to minimize idle explorers and focus on markets in which you pull heavily. This can actually be an anticompetative strategy, by investing points in a single product and then dedicating production to differant tier drugs derived from that product, you can maximize the efficacy of explorer points while pricing out diversified competitors who spread points around. However, it might be better to avoid having idle explorers.

Should you then fire explorers? it takes 100 days for an idle explorer to cost as much as hiring a new explorer, so if he is going to be idle for more than 3.3 months, idk. This is offset by the generation of 1.5ish points worth potentialy 18$/day. at the 2 month mark 3000$ maintance will have been paid, and 2000$ remains till break even, but maintance is reduced by the benefit of the point to 50-18=32$, 2000$/32$/day => 2months till break even. However, by the 4rth point, assuming full saturation on 4 products with three lines, the explorer is now turning a profit. however, having 12 lines running requires quite a large factory.

Furthermore, during this time he has not been exploring. The value of a new drug line could be between 100 and 200$/day or greater

Well thats enough for napkin math, not really feeling a spreadsheet atm :)