Talk:Colony

I had sent a Colony Ship to a slot position 5. The resulting planet is about 6500KM in diameter and the field size is 40. How come? How do we interpret the table in the description? What does 60% Average mean? I supposed that the minimum was size 108 whereas I had 40. Is the table wrong?
 * There's a 60% chance that the table applies and a 40% chance that it's totally random (planet slot doesn't matter). You got the 40% chance and didn't get lucky. You can get lucky with it as well though, I've had a 230 fielder as slot 3 raiding colony before. -- Jeffoh (talk) 12:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I was just wondering - the fields on a planet change if it is colonised more than once but does the picture?
 * ~I'm pretty sure the picture is random. --Master Bob 03:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Could we please get some kind of useful information in the 'graph' image? Without any kind of numeric scale ANYWHERE on it, it doesn't actually show anything useful beyond "yeah it's kind of like over there, and about yea big". I think it should be removed until an image that gives some useful information can be supplied. --Jebus


 * The values from the table were used to make the graph. I added scale information to the picture description for clarification -- Spacemanspif 23:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The purpose of a graph is to present a graphical depiction of data---a general depiction of how the data vary. If you're looking for accuracy and numbers, a graph is not what you want.--Verdant 23:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleting and recolonizing
Greetings. I deleted and recolonized 3 or 4 times the SAME slot 4, and I got the same size every single time. I think it may be based on if a DIFFERENT user colonizes the same slot it will be different. Just my feelings on the matter. GPML...


 * I disagree, colonized the same slot 6 and got a 56 then 50 then 243, I stopped at that point. --Br4indead 15:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you lose points when you abandon a colony ?
 * Yes you will lose the value of all structures and defense on the planet Br4indead 17:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I must have gotten lucky too
I have a slot 15 colony, sized 12.672 km with 160 fields. --Amaroq 17:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Lucky random as well
I have a slot 15 with 199 fields. I was wondering though how is the random generated? Is every 1000 attempts a 300 size or what?


 * I got a 15 with 204 fields. O_O Something's definitely wonky with this chart. --206.212.232.235 00:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Picture and table?
Is the table and the picture saying the same thing? According to the pictur the 6th slot planet has 60% chance to be the biggest planet but according to the table it's the 4th planet? Have I missed something?
 * The 4th slot max_size was wrong, according to the official forum's Formula thread.


 * The table and picture, assuming they say anything at all, are saying different things. Maybe labeling the graphs with units, would make it more obvious. 67.171.140.29 01:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * So which one is right? --84.80.29.30 20:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Inconsistent figures
Why are the figures in the table different from the figures in the Formula thread and Formula Thread Updated posts on the Ogame forums?

http://board.ogame.org/thread.php?threadid=1285 http://board.ogame.org/thread.php?threadid=195153

122.104.250.223 01:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, predominantly by monitoring figures, it would seem slot 5 is the best at producing planets with the most fields. This information displayed seems very inaccurate.

It seems that the figures in either one or the other are updated more frequently. The figures in the above table and graph are accurate. Every colony that I have fell within the 60% range.--RCTking 20:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I got a fairly large colony in position 8
I happened to obtain a colony with 203 fields in position 8, which seems to be much larger than the values given in the table. Even better than that, I got a planet in position 6 that has 324 fields! I guess I got pretty lucky!--Skrewer68.155.175.83 04:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You must have done. And there's me getting 45 is slot 5! 82.19.167.91 08:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

155
"Colonies with fewer than 155 fields are generally not suitable if you have long term expansion plans"

how is this number calculated? should I keep a colony with 155 fields?
 * I'm not sure how the number is calculated. If you have a colony with 155 fields, I wouldn't plan on keeping it for long and would try to get rid of it as soon as possible. --Master Bob 19:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Restore 60% Colony sizes
I would like to restore the table to the published values from the ogame formula thread, it seems every time some one gets a planet outside the 60% range they feel the need to adjust the table. Thoughts? Br4indead 12:08, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Go ahead. I didn't even realize that people had been changing the values, much. If you are up to it add a more in depth explanation on the 60% range. --Master Bob 22:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Colony sizes 60% values
Please don't change the colony 60% values just because you got a planet outside the range. There is a 40% chance to get a plane outside the table range. The only justifications for changes to the table are a citation on the talk page to a Ogame forum post with the new values, or you have created thousands of planets using statistical rigger and can document a change to the 60% values. All changes without justification will be reverted. Br4indead 15:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Ogame formula thread with planet sizes Br4indead 22:10, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

How was this data gathered?
How certain are we that this really IS the algorithm used? I am trying to get a big planet in slot 1 for grav, but after 10+ attempts I consistently get planets between 30 and 50 fields (34 and 48 seem to occur most frequently). Of course I may just be a victim of randomness, as I have a slot 15 180-fielder, but I'm wondering if the game doesn't use a slightly different algorithm... Was this all determined empirically or has a GF employee actually given some info?

Thanks in advance for any info -- 188.60.87.52 18:27, February 21, 2010 (UTC) Fubar