[POLL] Should all solid's mass be cut in half, and make digging give 100% of the resources back?

[Yoma_Nosme]

I'm late to the party but nevertheless I want to state my opinion.

My vote was no because I don't see any advantage in it. What I would like would be ''better gear'' for dupes allowing a higher percentage of dug material to drop. But decreasing mass by 50% and make 100% drop is a missed cause. 

Cheers

Ps. I don't like the 50% drop either. But there's no gain in halving the mass...it all comes down to the same in the end

[pacovf]

I find it annoying when I dig up a metal ore vein, and end up with half the ore I expected because I forgot about this rule. It’s an inconsistency whose point in balancing the game is unclear to me. I would prefer if we did without it. It’s far from the top of my list of things I want changed, though.

[Soulwind]

A variable rate based on equipment and/or mining skill would be the best alternative, imo.

[CannedSmeef]

Just give us all the resources on digging.  It's really frustrating knowing you're only getting half the stuff anyway.

[KittenIsAGeek]

On 7/7/2019 at 8:06 PM, Nebbie said:

Honestly, I think heat moves a little too slowly right now, although part of that is this "abyssalite" nonsense deliberately put there so cold biomes and caustic biomes can be next to each other without immediate issues.

First, I don't think that heat moves too slowly.  There was a time early in the thermal expansion where heat moved more quickly and everyone was cooking their bases.  There was also a point where it was moving too slowly -- a coal generator would melt itself because the heat generated each tick wasn't transferring away from the machine.  Right now, I think we have a good balance.

Second.. I do not agree that abyssalite is nonsense. It serves a purpose, and I have yet to see a good alternate proposal.

 

Now, back to the main topic: Should solid mass be cut in half when digging out a tile?

From a real-world physics standpoint: No.  That violates the law of conservation.  From an ONI standpoint?  Yes.  Here's why:

I think the system as it stands works just fine.  If the mass remains the same and we get 100% back, then we'll have far too much material.  If the mass is cut in half to mirror what we get from digging, then we lose the thermal inertia of the natural tiles.  If the mass of natural tiles mirrors what we get from it, then there's no reason to simply leave the tile natural.  Frequently I use natural tiles as a thermal buffer in my base designs.

That said, I think there should be some sort of information stating that material is lost in the process of mining, since it isn't intuitive and most won't notice until they start wondering why their pile of ice melted into a pool half the size of the one they mined.  Or perhaps give a technology upgrade to highly skilled miners that allows more of the material to be recovered while mining.   I don't know what a good solution might be, especially since I don't know what intent the developers had in mind when they made their design decisions.

I would also like to point out that losing half the mass kinda makes sense in an ONI type of world.  Think about it.  If you're inside a cave and you mine out a 6 foot area of rock... where do you put that rock?  Because of the jagged edges, your volume of material is now greater than it was before you started.  Eventually you'd get to the point where you couldn't move, because you've filled all the available space with broken rocks that don't fit as closely together as the original solid rock.  Your mass of rock is certainly the same as before you started digging, but the volume that mass occupies will increase dramatically.  

It kinda makes you wonder what would happen in ONI if gravity were modeled.  Some of you have made dump stations where all your excess material rests in one tiny location... "Hey, Burt!" "Yeah, Mi-ma?" "Why are you floating?" "Oh.. that's because I'm at the Lagrange point between the asteroid's center of mass and our new material storage dump." "... I have no idea what you said, but.. cool!"

[xantar2482]

Why not make the yield based on the skill level of the digger?

Rates are just an example:

    -  Level 0 Digger - 50% material yield

     - Level 1 Digger - 60% material yield

     - Level 2 Digger - 75% material yield

     - Level 3 Digger - 100% material yield

I think this is a nice alternate solution that drives you to gain skills and prevent you from using non-digging dupes as diggers. 

You could also look at making yield based on a new trait or a science.

[chemie]

They could always cut the mass in half at spawn and then give you back 100% on dig...would that work for you?

[pacovf]

Completely off-topic, but this is not the first time I hear the argument, so I will bite: I don’t know how much stuff you would need to dump in some spot for its gravity to have any noticeable (theoretical, since it’s not implement) effect in the game, but it’s not something that you can achieve without debug tools. The asteroid has no noticeable curvature whatsoever in the range of the game map. Even the core has no noticeable curvature. For that to be true, the asteroid has to be *massive*. Some quick napkin calculations suggest that the asteroid is at least hundreds of times deeper than the width of the game map. Add to it that neutronium is suggested to have an effectively infinite density... yeah, you are not affecting the local gravity of the asteroid, no matter what you do.

[Oozinator]

For me it's ok, like it is.
It's no "bug" feeling.
I think at it that way, that dupes are silly biatches and can not handle tools well and destroy mass in the digging process.
There is enough stuff on a map, to get a base started.
Portal spawns and space missions for the rest.

[Asteru]

I think of the mass being cut in half along the lines of half of it becoming dust that isn’t usable from the digging process. In that, I like the idea of the higher the skill in digging, the higher % in mass that is returned. 

[Risu]

1 hour ago, pacovf said:

Completely off-topic, but this is not the first time I hear the argument, so I will bite: I don’t know how much stuff you would need to dump in some spot for its gravity to have any noticeable (theoretical, since it’s not implement) effect in the game, but it’s not something that you can achieve without debug tools. The asteroid has no noticeable curvature whatsoever in the range of the game map. Even the core has no noticeable curvature. For that to be true, the asteroid has to be *massive*. Some quick napkin calculations suggest that the asteroid is at least hundreds of times deeper than the width of the game map. Add to it that neutronium is suggested to have an effectively infinite density... yeah, you are not affecting the local gravity of the asteroid, no matter what you do.

Can assume the gravity exists for story related reasons. This isn't an untouched asteroid after all.
 

[Nickerooni]

2 hours ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

First, I don't think that heat moves too slowly.  There was a time early in the thermal expansion where heat moved more quickly and everyone was cooking their bases.  There was also a point where it was moving too slowly -- a coal generator would melt itself because the heat generated each tick wasn't transferring away from the machine.  Right now, I think we have a good balance.

Second.. I do not agree that abyssalite is nonsense. It serves a purpose, and I have yet to see a good alternate proposal.

 

Now, back to the main topic: Should solid mass be cut in half when digging out a tile?

From a real-world physics standpoint: No.  That violates the law of conservation.  From an ONI standpoint?  Yes.  Here's why:

I think the system as it stands works just fine.  If the mass remains the same and we get 100% back, then we'll have far too much material.  If the mass is cut in half to mirror what we get from digging, then we lose the thermal inertia of the natural tiles.  If the mass of natural tiles mirrors what we get from it, then there's no reason to simply leave the tile natural.  Frequently I use natural tiles as a thermal buffer in my base designs.

 

When I voted “yes”, I assumed they’d halve the thermal conductivity through one of the hidden variables - which would be close enough (or double the specific heat capacity - which is mathematically equivalent). That way it doesn’t muck up balance.

[KittenIsAGeek]

37 minutes ago, Nickerooni said:

When I voted “yes”, I assumed they’d halve the thermal conductivity through one of the hidden variables - which would be close enough (or double the specific heat capacity - which is mathematically equivalent). That way it doesn’t muck up balance.

Help me understand here because I'm a little confused.  You're saying that they should complicate the code by making un-mined 'natural' elements have different thermal properties than their equivalent mined version?  Wouldn't that simply be shifting the problem?  A player would see thermal activity through 'natural' areas as they develop their base, then suddenly wonder why the math doesn't add up.  "Hey, how come sandstone's conductivity doubles after I've mined it?"  All so that when we mine 800kg from a natural tile we get 800kg of debris ready to be used?

"Hey, Mi-ma?" "Yeah Mae?" "How come my laser mining gun made this copper more conductive?"  "... because magic, Mae.  Just get it over to the hatch farm."

[Maxposting]

I would be all 4 thumb-up for letting 100% skilled miners dig 90-100% of the block

[stretch611]

4 hours ago, xantar2482 said:

Why not make the yield based on the skill level of the digger?

Rates are just an example:

    -  Level 0 Digger - 50% material yield

     - Level 1 Digger - 60% material yield

     - Level 2 Digger - 75% material yield

     - Level 3 Digger - 100% material yield

I think this is a nice alternate solution that drives you to gain skills and prevent you from using non-digging dupes as diggers. 

You could also look at making yield based on a new trait or a science.

I realized the 50% mining yields some time ago. At the time, I just figured that in a future build that late game research would eventually be released that would improve the yield. However, now this idea of digger skill seems like a better prospect... or a combination of both.

On 7/7/2019 at 9:49 PM, bobucles said:

...if a big body of water freezes, attempting to dig it out will cost you half the water.

Now, not only is the loss of water a problem, so is the loss of the potential cooling power of the ice mass.

[Nickerooni]

2 hours ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

Help me understand here because I'm a little confused.  You're saying that they should complicate the code by making un-mined 'natural' elements have different thermal properties than their equivalent mined version?  Wouldn't that simply be shifting the problem?  A player would see thermal activity through 'natural' areas as they develop their base, then suddenly wonder why the math doesn't add up.  "Hey, how come sandstone's conductivity doubles after I've mined it?"  All so that when we mine 800kg from a natural tile we get 800kg of debris ready to be used?

"Hey, Mi-ma?" "Yeah Mae?" "How come my laser mining gun made this copper more conductive?"  "... because magic, Mae.  Just get it over to the hatch farm."

Gas and liquids have a hidden 25 multiplier on thermal conductivity. Insulated pipes have a 0.01 multiplier (don’t quote me on that number). Just make natural tiles have a hidden 0.5 multiplier, “the material isn’t packet tightly - internal vacuum gaps”. Even dupes have this multiplier adjusted based on their clothing. It’s totally suitable for natural tiles.

[Nitroturtle]

These convoluted solution suggestions are hilarious.  The simpliest fix, and I believe this has been mentioned, is to just make un-dug tiles display half their mass in the tooltip.  There ya go, done.

[Lutzkhie]

The amount mined should be based on the Miner's skill level to make miner skill more efficient and interesting 

[Ambaire]

There's no reason to overcomplicate it with the twofold approach. Just make digging give 100% of the mass and that's it.

[nakomaru]

9 hours ago, Nitroturtle said:

These convoluted solution suggestions are hilarious.  The simpliest fix, and I believe this has been mentioned, is to just make un-dug tiles display half their mass in the tooltip.  There ya go, done.

You would still lose half mass when converting algae, fertilizer and coal to dirt/refined carbon (once matter duplication is fixed). There's no good reason why we shouldn't be able to use those material paths. There's no good reason why half of your viscogel or magma should annihilate because you dug it out when it froze.

Or if you keep matter duplication and just change the tooltip, that's fine - if you're fine with buggy and unpredictable matter duplication.

Just like the fixed temperature sieve output, there is one correct solution and it is obvious to everyone.