I have two questions before I possibly build myself a mission dyson.

1. Are rings or large moons better in the long run? And why?

2. I already own a v. massive metallic planet with rings. Artifact is sparse on it. Would you upgrade this to a dyson, or would you save it as a project planet to level up via other means? I ask because I know the mission dyson will go to a certain size and production regardless of what the initial planet was.

1. Rings is better. It gives 20% more of the good stuff and moons gives you 20% more space for artis that are not as good..

2. Id use it for the dyson.

I agree with both for the mission dyson case in specific.
For #1, rings is better for any planet that you do NOT need to protect. that means all 5 mission planets and the planet you use your 2-year chrono on. On the other hand, large moon could be better if you need to protect the planet and dedicate some space to OB and/or cloak module. Which one is better when you need to protect the planet depends on the amount of space needed for protection, total space of planet and the assortment of artifact structures on the planet.

For #2, there is no "project" for metallic outside of dyson, rift and simple uplift. While a ring is wonderful for rifting, uplifting metallic is not the best way to do rifts as there is no other transformation stage. It's not even the best for simple uplift, icy beats it in every way. Therefore, the planet is perfect for and only for dyson.

FYI: For rifting, you'd want a planet with +2 all resource transformation, such as terra, icy, toxic etc. Personally I perfer toxic as you can get it to 16/15/15 w/o any limited artifact and 16/20/15 with just crystals(which is hard to get but still unlimited) If you want to bump it up further with limited toys(resequncer, trader's boon, datacube), it's your choice and you would save one artifact use for the extra mining that was already there. After that, you can pre-transform the planet with irradiator, melter etc to make a 22x and then finally rift it.

Like the above said, make that your Dyson. Thanks to the fact that percentage bonuses is multiplicative, the additional 20% from rings (or from Ancient Civ Ruins) will make it so that when combined with artifacts such as the Trade Intelligence, Intraphasic Hoveroid, Cognizant Omniforge, Trellith ability, and other +% to production artifacts/abilities, the overall +% is greater. Also, the Orbital Stabilizer will gain doubled stats (meaning +14% mining and +2 artifact for one space), which is a bonus with rings.

The resources of the original planet are irrelevant when using the Dyson Transformer from the Colossal Project. Any planet it is used on will be made a 28x/28x/28x, so the fact that artifact is sparse means you're just getting even more out of it.

Also as said above, the Subspace Fissuron (Rift Project reward, the mission after The Colossal Project) does NOT work like above, and adds +15x to each resource abundance (which makes the prime candidates for these either 22x artifact planets or natural Dysons, with natural Dysons preferred).

Technically (and currently), this is true but only be less than 59 AP/hour; assuming my math is correct and I am including all of the items available on my list.

The issue you will run into is that as new better items come out, you will have a lot of room to upgrade your large moon planets (upgrade 1:1 producing items to 1:2). Based on the

Dyson: 28x, Colossal with rings = 75 spots
Max production = 109 points
Base Production * Ring (1.20) * Trade Intelligence (1.04) * Omniforge (1.05) * Hoveroid (1.05) * Trellith (1.30) + Litheor Transmutative (1.06)
(109 * 20.5) * 1.20 * 1.04 * 1.05 * 1.05 * 1.30 * 1.06 = 4,236.65

Dyson: 28x, Colossal with Large Moons = 95 spots
Max production = 129 points
Base Production * Trade Intelligence (1.04) * Omniforge (1.05) * Hoveroid (1.05) * Trellith (1.30) + Litheor Transmutative (1.06)
(129 * 20.5) * 1.04 * 1.05 * 1.05 * 1.30 * 1.06 = 4,178.35

Difference = 58.30

However, the large moons has 12 spaces that are 1:1. As things are moving to 1:2, so you could get your planet up to 141 points where as your Ring planet wouldn't change. This would make your large moons 330.4 per hour better.

Errr... 20 spot should at least be able to give +24 production. 200% fabricator, 18 space +24 and chances are you can come up with some +1s after
ofc, 200% fabs are limited and painful to destroy should they release more goodies to put on the planet, but at least in term of theoretical production build....
Ofc, you might be considering mining/research production as well, so used +1/+1 instead, but you are obviously omitting the other productions.

I worked under the assumption that you used 3 x +24s and no, I only cared about artifacts.

The difference between Large moon and not large moon is only 15 spots, not 20 spots.

you wrote 75/95... i didn't really bother checking the numbers.
still would like a list thou. a 3rd +24 might or might not be better.

Wait what? How would it be better? with moons.. at the very best it can be the same as rings, never better for production. You take 20% of all of your BEST arties, that will be the same, if not better than 20% more size. Don't forget that you can also improve the planet with rings and not just the one with moons.

Find a crappy metallic. Average size.. use a item on it to get moons or rings.. Then make it your Dyson.

He already has a vm with rings, why spend GP when he can just do it for free? If he is going to spend gp for the reality transfuser then he could use it on a better project planet.

No, it can be better than rings. More slots to put things in. Re-read what I said and try the math yourself.

Look at the poor quality image below. All the things in green could be improved with greater than 1:1 item. The rings only have one item that can be upgraded, the moons have 14 spaces that can be greater than 1:1. That additional production would take it past what the 20% boost gives. I believe the numbers are even worse for rings with a Rift because you can easily fit 4 x +24 and still have room for lots of high value artifacts.



I see Gauss Chain 2 has the wrong size but either way, just swap in something else and the long term math is the same (although the current math is a little further apart as are my 128/129 typo).

Basically, I think it breaks down to production of 131 or greater on a Moons dyson will beat out a rings planet with the current available artifacts.

When you get to the point that we have that many 1:2 size:arti structures to fill in the extra 15 spaces you get with large moons, you could remove one of the +24's (18 size) on the planet and replace it with the same 1:2 structures (+36). That all ties in with getting 20% more of the better stuff. Of course you will get more out of moons if you are using more of the better stuff than you are on the planet with rings. What makes the rings better is the fact that the really good stuff is limited, and it will cost you less of the good stuff then the moons would. large moons can not be > rings if you have all the same artis available to both planets.

Also, instead of Silthion T-Plasma Vesicle, put in Uldri Spacial Marker V3 in rings planet.
so we are looking at 110 vs 127, which translates to 132 vs 127.
With a multiplier of 20*1.04*1.05*1.05*1.3*1.06, this means a difference of 5*20*1.04*1.05*1.05*1.3*1.06=158 APH
btw, it's 20 and not 20.5, it's (1+900%)*2.
Ring is always better because we will always be adding 15 spaces of production that is worse than the average producton of the existing 75 space. Otherwise, the planet is built wrong.
Large Moon is only better if the production-space ratio is larger than 20% increase. For example, if 10 space is dedicated to defense purposes, then it's 65 vs 80 and it's possible for 15 spaces of stuff to produce more than 80% of the average production of the other 60 space, it'd be better. Hence large moon is only useful in planets that's not purely production.

Any chance you can run the numbers on a planet with "worthless" small moons?

I will concede this. I ran the numbers. A ringed planet with current 2:1 modules and better plus all 2:1 gives you 50 ap/hour better however, that would require the average player to destroy 3 +24 hyperforges which I would be surprised to see anyone do. With the rarity of them, I don't like factoring that in and I guess that is why I think I am right.

Here you go, I also fixed earlier errors to make things more accurate.

So you want him to waste 64 GP for 110 production, and hopefully not get another ring/large moon?

Don't ever use a RT on a bad, smaller planet. If you get a bad RT draw, you can upgrade the larger planet, but you'd have to burn 50xsizes GP to make the smaller planet you used the RT on bigger.

what you talking about? he already have a ringed planet, so he doesn't need to do anything
and why'd you hope not to get ring/LM? they are the best there is(with ring being better in this case)
and size doesn't matter for rifting or dyson transformation.
Now, for epic MC oceanic, you'd have to start with VL icy. But that's a different story.
Thou I won't RT a small planet anyway, cause even if it turns out to be not perfect and unsuitable for dyson/rift, a larger planet can still become an awesome "standard" planet with whatever effect
And reroll might be worth it because it's more than 110.
For starters, difference of LM and ring is 158. The calculations are repeatedly off....
Secondly, as I've mentioned above, even if you abort uber transformation, you'd still end up with a better-than-standard planet for regular uplift. That'd give another 50 or something easy. So overall, you'd be gaining around 200 extra APH for 64 GP. I'd say that's a reasonable deal. So if I were to remake-dyson(made it before effects came out, so it's just LM), I'd certainly roll a couple times on VM metallics to try and get rings.