Recommended Posts

Nebbie    299
Just now, Teunon said:

So the only method to deal with heat now seems to be a steam turbine or pray you get enough cold biomes / AETNs. Which you'll find out several hours into each map. 

The only way I don't see this being a severely misguided decision is if there are more heat management options being added soon for early game.

Has anyone done the math on the ice maker post-nerf? Previously it overall deleted quite a lot of heat, but I'm not sure now what the net effect is; I must strongly say that if overall adds heat, it's pointless to build because it's a huge waste of dupe labor relative to virtually any other possible way to move heat around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Teunon said:

So the only method to deal with heat now seems to be a steam turbine or pray you get enough cold biomes / AETNs. Which you'll find out several hours into each map. 

The only way I don't see this being a severely misguided decision is if there are more heat management options being added soon for early game.

There is a lots of ways you can use to deal with heat. Heat wasnt big problem at all, maybe now it become little bit harder but still not to hard. And if this is to hard for ya you always can use sandbox/devmode (=.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zerat    43
  • The various water types now have different densities so they will sort out when stacked

Nice!

Also, I'm a fan of the output temperature changes!

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheIceD    37

And hey, while we are here, add water dispenser already. Building pitcher pump with pressure sensor and automated valve isn't that fun (and it just looks ugly on "industrial" base).

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junksteel    804

I like the output temp changes but I don't like the options we have to deal with it.

I embraced the WW change and accepted the nerf of ice machine but now I really don't know what to do and don't feel like having to build steam turbines to deal with small portions of heat spread through the base. It's fun to build steam turbines because they are complicated for me and requires preparation. Having to build one in order to survive is a different feeling and I don't like that.I don't even do space very often because I can't figure out myself how to cool robo miners. I will have anxiety thoughts since cycle 1 wondering if I'll be able to deal with heat like 1 or 2 weeks later playing the map.

Again, I like the changes but I think we don't have enough tools to deal with heat atm or at least they are not simple enough to be as popular as what we used to have.I don't want to rely purely on the genius of others' and I'm not sure I can do it by myself even having almost a 1000 hours. I know I'm dumb but you can call me average.

Edited by Junksteel
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BaloneyOs    249

They just confirmed on stream that the new minimum temperature output is designed to be a problem so let me get this straight.

Instead of tweaking power requirement, building heat output, etc, they instead decided that difficulty should come from punishing players for using colder than minimum inputs. In the grand scheme of things the difficulty increase from this is marginal at best, but IMO it's a really lazy method of increasing difficulty.

Again, why does the difficulty increase need to come from the input material's temperature rather than aspects such as building requirements, planning, or map generation? What's actually the logic behind this decision?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gurgel    1,388
5 minutes ago, BaloneyOs said:

They just confirmed on stream that the new minimum temperature output is designed to be a problem so let me get this straight.

Instead of tweaking power requirement, building heat output, etc, they instead decided that difficulty should come from punishing players for using colder than minimum inputs. In the grand scheme of things the difficulty increase from this is marginal at best, but IMO it's a really lazy method of increasing difficulty.

Again, why does the difficulty increase need to come from the input material's temperature rather than aspects such as building requirements, planning, or map generation? What's actually the logic behind this decision?

Probably some kind of selective blindness on their side. The technical solution to this is very simple: Put a heat-exchanger between input and output. It is also utterly boring and needs a lot of space. Hence all they have achieved here is to annoy me. Same for the WWs: Do not nerv them, make them rarer. That would have made a lot more sense. Now I have to go through the entirely boring process of putting down artificial "natural" tiles and put in 4 times as many WWs. Not a challenge at all, just tedious. Basically the same as "grind" in an MMO.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Machenoid    96

No more free cooling is great, but we're still getting free heating (reee)

Sieve output should be based on filtration media used. Heat exchange between 5kg polluted water, 1kg filtration medium, add the DTU value of the machine operating to the output. Need more exchange? Increase the amount of filtration medium used. Add more wattage cost to the sieve and add a mathmatically sound amount of DTUs to the output.

Don't worry if the player put polluted water through the sieve that could freeze on the output after being turned to pure water. If the player needs to figure out an external heating solution, let them and let it be part of the game.

A player mod already on the workshop already did the full scope of dynamic temperature on the sieve and it worked fine.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RonEmpire    524

While I'm not a big fan of this nerf  (since it reduces the options for heat management) -  I think it would  only be fair if they changed it to be  NO temperature change on  input to output.   The building itself already generates heat.

Input water at 10degrees needs to output at 10degrees. 
10 to 40 Is just extreme.


10 to 10 makes sense.   (heat still is being created by the building).

Maybe as an alternative solution is    add 10 heat to anything under 40degrees?.   

Edited by RonEmpire
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QuantumPion    62

I wish Klei started off by obeying the laws of thermodynamics to begin with (conservation of mass & energy), then creating buildings and gameplay based on that. Instead the game is balanced on a mishmash of non-physical shortcuts and hand-waving, and changing anything has big unintended repercussions down the line.

Edited by QuantumPion
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yunru    1,140
1 minute ago, QuantumPion said:

I wish Klei started off by obeying the laws of thermodynamics to begin with (conservation of mass & energy), then creating buildings and gameplay based on that. Instead the game is balanced on a mishmash of non-physical shortcuts and hand-waving, and changing anything has big unintended repercussions down the line.

I don't, that's frankly a terrible concept. A closed system would mean once you've used everything then it's gone, an open system would mean you would eventually be flooded with either resources or heat. Neither of those are fun. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nebbie    299
35 minutes ago, Gurgel said:

I don't get that obsession. If you want a physics simulator, there are already plenty of those out there. This is a game. It is about entertainment. It takes creative freedoms. It is simplified to be able to run in real-time. It has dupes, which are artificial life and as such extremely unrealistic. It has an all-seeing guiding god-like external presence (us).

Conservation of mass and energy as a base just means having the same numbers on each side of a process, not making those processes more complicated; it has nothing to do with processing power, creative freedom, or entertainment value. Additionally, the game could be based on most things following that, and then some added things that violate it; the fundamental problem is that different processes in the game obey such bizarelly-different rules that we end up with huge imbalances like ways to easily delete heat in something you'd be doing already (negating the point of things specifically made to deal with heat), and many basic loops you need to run a base involve huge changes in resource masses that add frustration and can even slow the game to a crawl with too many resources.

By not having any sort of base in equal numbers on each side of a process, it becomes very easy for runaway issues to develop, like Waterweed that kills all your bleach stone, Mealwood that kills all your dirt, or water sieves cooking your base. We don't need every process to conserve mass and energy, but it would be nice if the things that cooked bases were petroleum generators instead, and farms didn't have such a huge disparity between wild (1/4 resources from nothing) and domestic (haha RIP that resource unless you spend a ton of time doing annoying ranching and/or get a geyser).

Conservation of mass means you can set up self-sustaining cycles. Conservation of energy means a slow but inevitable heat death instead of WOW YOU FED ICE BIOME WATER INTO THE SIEVE? RIP. And of course, really, it should be noted that fully applying conservation of energy would lead to a heat death just from always losing energy via dupes instead of them being free power from wild plants, but nobody is arguing to go that far, to completely apply it, we just want water sieves that don't cook our chilled water, and maybe some reasonable ways to get back or at least make our chlorine and saltwater and not need to do cheaty wildplanting.

Edited by Nebbie
Summary paragraph
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gurgel    1,388
3 minutes ago, Nebbie said:

Conservation of mass and energy as a base just means having the same numbers on each side of a process, not making those processes more complicated; it has nothing to do with processing power, creative freedom, or entertainment value.

You can focus on accuracy or you can focus on other things. You claim that accuracy is free. That is very much false. This is software. You cannot simply have the "same numbers" on both sides. It takes extra effort and it comes with its own sets of problems. And it comes with an invitation to all nit-pickers when the tiniest detail is wrong. Much simpler to explicitly be non-realistic in parts and just ignore these people. 

Please stop claiming untrue things just because they are convenient. You can say that you want physical accuracy, but the "justifications" you use are just thing you are making up on the go.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nebbie    299
Just now, Gurgel said:

You can focus on accuracy or you can focus on other things. You claim that accuracy is free. That is very much false. This is software. You cannot simply have the "same numbers" on both sides. It takes extra effort and it comes with its own sets of problems. And it comes with an invitation to all nit-pickers when the tiniest detail is wrong. Much simpler to explicitly be non-realistic in parts and just ignore these people. 

Please stop claiming untrue things just because they are convenient. You can say that you want physical accuracy, but the "justifications" you use are just thing you are making up on the go.

You mean floating point errors? Those could be largely ignored (nobody's gonna miss .00001 kg of something per cycle), and in fact the whole issue can be sidestepped with integer approaches (to my knowledge, ONI has no crazy huge or crazy small numbers to really strain a 32 bit integer, let alone 64-bit like the game is) with a little offset so you can get to the hundredths place or such. I'm not sure which approach ONI is actually using (I'd personally go with offset integers, like Java's BigDecimal, to prevent really annoying things like finding 0.999995kg of a seed in a storage container), but which one doesn't matter, as all that's being called for here is to try to start with a balanced scale, not to demand with supreme strictness that not a single piece of anything is lost anywhere in any way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yunru    1,140
3 minutes ago, Nebbie said:

You mean floating point errors? Those could be largely ignored (nobody's gonna miss .00001 kg of something per cycle), and in fact the whole issue can be sidestepped with integer approaches (to my knowledge, ONI has no crazy huge or crazy small numbers to really strain a 32 bit integer, let alone 64-bit like the game is) with a little offset so you can get to the hundredths place or such. I'm not sure which approach ONI is actually using (I'd personally go with offset integers, like Java's BigDecimal, to prevent really annoying things like finding 0.999995kg of a seed in a storage container), but which one doesn't matter, as all that's being called for here is to try to start with a balanced scale, not to demand with supreme strictness that not a single piece of anything is lost anywhere in any way.

There is no "sliding scale of conservation of mass and energy", it's all or nothing. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ambaire    347
7 hours ago, Ipsquiggle said:

Buildings which were previously outputting at a fixed temperature (i.e. the Water Sieve at 40°C) now treat that configuration as a minimum output temperature.

Why? Just make (temp out) = (temp in), perhaps raised by 2-3 degrees, and that's it. There's no reason for this artificial minimum temperature. It's outrageous illogical heat addition.

Edited by Ambaire
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nebbie    299
33 minutes ago, Ambaire said:

Why? Just make (temp out) = (temp in), perhaps raised by 2-3 degrees, and that's it. There's no reason for this artificial minimum temperature. It's outrageous illogical heat addition.

I must note, logical or not, the big problem is a player would expect taking polluted water from a cold area to help cool down the sieve's output, and this punishes that for no reason, while making optimal play being a setup that moves heat from outputs to inputs to get them at the output temperature to prevent heat addition.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RonEmpire    524
1 minute ago, Nebbie said:

I must note, logical or not, the big problem is a player would expect taking polluted water from a cold area to help cool down the sieve's output, and this punishes that for no reason, while making optimal play being a setup that moves heat from outputs to inputs to get them at the output temperature to prevent heat addition.

Agreed.    It's just annoying having to  use a "cooling/normalizing" loop of pipes    to 'reuse' the input temp   to cool/normalize the output temp down   and then  finally send the heat  to the sieve.      This creates an unnecessary loop and piping for no reason when the input temp can be sent as output temp.  
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
avc15    416

I like these changes but I don't think people will like it in old bases - there will be no longer any easy ways to delete heat, so, we'll have to look for ways to concentrate heat and vent it out to space instead, or, make considerable use of steam turbines.

While that checks my boxes for realism and coolness, I think the playerbase will reject it.

 

Edit: though it appears certain individuals have done some testing and there is still heat deletion.

Edited by avc15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BaloneyOs    249

If we nerf cooling all around but keep the heating part progression will be slower.

If progression is slower then fewer people will reach late game.

Which means fewer bad reviews due to late game lag.

Ok guys we officially solved late game lag! *laughs in jet suits*

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove anti entropy stuff and ice biomes, make this game not that casual, force us to explore asteroid faster!

One move in wrong direction and you already DEAD, that will be awsm.

6 minutes ago, BaloneyOs said:

If we nerf cooling all around but keep the heating part progression will be slower.

Thats not how it work.
If you need solve overheat trouble you not gonna wait until it become to late. This force you explore asteroid faster, you cant just wait until 48 cycle and get ww by abuse saves, coz this is just doesnt solve your problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
natanstarke    190
59 minutes ago, BaloneyOs said:

If we nerf cooling all around but keep the heating part progression will be slower.

If progression is slower then fewer people will reach late game.

Which means fewer bad reviews due to late game lag.

Ok guys we officially solved late game lag! *laughs in jet suits*

Thats pretty accurate oo i forgot to take that into account but that kinda dies off because they're trying to change the pipes and more of the core of the game " thats because were having tons of crashes" so at least they are trying to solve the late game lag thanks again klei for that :) hope the crashes end up soon and the water sieve becomes output = input or back to what it was " just a hope but i respect the final decision anyways".

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now