Alpha test - the world is too small

[babba]

@KonfigSys Hey Konfig, thank you for your feedback...Much appreciated

The cleaning of water + tons of dirt falling down, with the 2 stacked Petroleum rockets in the base game, is a kind of side effect.

Its a build where the Regolith piles up at the top and comes down together with the waterfall, looking spectacular !

It caters for a few things I enjoyed a lot with the base game...

> Building and running the automatic launch waterfall for the show effect, Michael Bay style ( Bunker doors opening is soooo cool ! )

> Cold War feeling - If Fire/Combustion/Explosions and Hydrazine Fuel would be in the game, it would be so much fun !!!

> Fun setting up auto-fuelling and auto-loading/emptying and synchronized launching ( Factorio, NukeSiloFeeling )

> Side effect of heating up all kind of fluids with the resulting effects ( mass amounts of clean water, dirt )

> The dual stacked rocket launches powered loads of steam engines...The steam engine power was used to power lots of Aquatuners to cool the base, as Base Aircon System. The base had 20 aquatuners, the plan was to build and run 100x Tuners for max Aircon Colony ShockFreeze.

I spent something like 3500 cycles on the base in survival. I often set myself the challenge to build too much stuff at once, so that it results in a big accident. The solving and cleaning of the big accidents is the most fun for me.

If I could have safely continued with the save file 100% for sure, it would have been about the mass synchro of resource rockets between colonies. My playstyle is like "Home Improvement" >>> Rather amassing bruteforce amounts of stuff than optimizing builds in a small confined space + City Building Fun ( map wide Dupe Tube Systems, 10x 50000 watt power lines switched together as subnets etc. )..All built in survival without editor, with 50-200 dupes and lots of graves and regular funerals

In another colony I built a mushroom farm with 1000 mushrooms, 99% running automatic and covering 4 full screens.

If multiplayer is someday is in the game, I`ll invite you to my new "Michael Bay Petrol Station Asteroid". The dupes shall build one new colony just for max fuel production chemistry and Michael Bay Kaboom !!!

Would be great if we could transfer microwave power from one asteroid to another, to combine a microwave powergrid + running space shuttle fuel tankers

Still no bulldozers or mines in the game...Cant wait till the atomic reactor is in there I would so love yellow cake mining & fuel rod production + rod accidents.

[SantaJohn]

Hello everyone! If anyone is interested in my opinion, then I was expecting giant maps with new really necessary resources, new technologies and huge biomes. I wanted to build a tech metropolis. And I got a lot of small asteroids with a parallel game - it's so sad. Not interested. Not pretty. Boring. Because it is too artificial and meaningless. Even beautiful screenshots of a megacity cannot be made now. I am interested in rocketry only as an art and an incentive to create high-tech production and processing. There was no sense in it and now, with the advent of teleports, it became even less. The rocket makes sense only as the final point in the game - the evacuation. It's epic. Building rockets for rockets is stupid and boring. I beg you, make it possible to create giant maps with all possible resources and biomes. I am willing to pay for such an add-on. And small asteroids with parallel play are torment, not pleasure. Thanks for attention.

[babba]

On 12/16/2020 at 4:52 AM, SantaJohn said:

Hello everyone! If anyone is interested in my opinion, then I was expecting giant maps with new really necessary resources, new technologies and huge biomes. I wanted to build a tech metropolis. And I got a lot of small asteroids with a parallel game - it's so sad. Not interested. Not pretty. Boring. Because it is too artificial and meaningless. Even beautiful screenshots of a megacity cannot be made now. I am interested in rocketry only as an art and an incentive to create high-tech production and processing. There was no sense in it and now, with the advent of teleports, it became even less. The rocket makes sense only as the final point in the game - the evacuation. It's epic. Building rockets for rockets is stupid and boring. I beg you, make it possible to create giant maps with all possible resources and biomes. I am willing to pay for such an add-on. And small asteroids with parallel play are torment, not pleasure. Thanks for attention.

I feel with you

It was/is always possible to edit a default map size in the editor, but as long the devs toy around with the dlc in 2021...Too much will get changed in terms of content, resource spawns, dependencies and map details.

In 2022 it should more reliable be possible to modify the dlc world generator default map size(s) as more content is a bit more "Final". Whatever "Final" means for how long...

Currently IMHO it does not make much sense to modify custom map sizes, its all temporary placeholder. In the middle of 2021 it will be more clear what is to stay and how things will be.

[Whitecold]

On 12/16/2020 at 4:52 AM, SantaJohn said:

Hello everyone! If anyone is interested in my opinion, then I was expecting giant maps with new really necessary resources, new technologies and huge biomes. I wanted to build a tech metropolis. And I got a lot of small asteroids with a parallel game - it's so sad. Not interested. Not pretty. Boring. Because it is too artificial and meaningless. Even beautiful screenshots of a megacity cannot be made now. I am interested in rocketry only as an art and an incentive to create high-tech production and processing. There was no sense in it and now, with the advent of teleports, it became even less. The rocket makes sense only as the final point in the game - the evacuation. It's epic. Building rockets for rockets is stupid and boring. I beg you, make it possible to create giant maps with all possible resources and biomes. I am willing to pay for such an add-on. And small asteroids with parallel play are torment, not pleasure. Thanks for attention.

I feel the DLC has fundamentally different priorities than you, and you'll be happier with the base game. Many players, myself included thought Rocketry was coming too late, a resource sink once all your problems are already solved, and the DLC clearly tries to make them an integral part of your expansion. That means making them available earlier, and also forcing the player to expand to other asteroids by restricting available resources.

That said, once the DLC is stable, map sizes should be moddable again, and maybe once the two versions are merged again the devs will also throw in some old style one-big-asteroid maps that include the new biomes.

[KonfigSys]

It sounds like you really enjoyed the vanilla game, Babba. So do I. It was so much to do and visuals were simply great.

Anyway, as we learned (from the recent update and devs plans) Klei is planning to:

1. Bring back old maps into the DLC so it will be one rather than two versions of the game. It is not clear if it is an option to have one big planetoid PLUS several small asteroids - the desirable choice or it is either one big map or space out 6 asteroid map.

2. They will bring petrol and hydrogen rockets with some small tweaks - already a good news. They will probably travel further than CO2 and you do not need to mess around to conquer 4, 5 and 6 asteroids. 

On top of that they added Sulphur volcanoes - as players asked and got it. Thank you, Klei.

All and all it sounds like Devs listen to the players base and this is a very great sign that the game will be loved by many.

[danberhe]

On 12/8/2020 at 10:18 PM, lilibat said:

This is what I was hoping for with the DLC. The base game PLUS which is what I expect from DLCs in general, not an alternate game. I do not like the DLC, and the little maps at all,  so back to the base game I go. The thought of having my lovely Rime base as home but having smaller satellite, satellites with smaller bases for certain resources sounds like my idea of a good time,  what the DLC is currently... not so much.   

it seems that your experience with dlcs tends to be on the side of shooters or adventure games.
this dlc is basically like any other rts or sim game, a new mechanic that you explore in a new game (like a new race in an rts, a new class to experience in an rpg, etc). 

when the game started and they introduced new planets (oasisse, arboria, etc) we started new colonies and experience the game on a new challenge.  this dlc is no different, new planets, new challenges, new critters, etc, if we need to go ALL THE WAY to endgame, experience something new (that at that point is pointless, just like the old rocket system) it defeats the entire purpose.

[AndreyKl]

On 12/5/2020 at 7:57 PM, KonfigSys said:

The developers came with even better idea - the real time multiple asteroids. However, there is a problem with it: the map size. It looks like (instead of one big map pre-DLC) the map was split apart into multiple but rather small maps.

Also agree that it is rather small. Managing specialized asteroids with rocket based economy has its own charms, but at the moment having to build multiple basic LS systems multiple times over on each asteroid is just not fun.

At the moment I would rather have a one or two larger main asteroids and some automated medium and tiny satellites with rudimentary LS. Having one large asteroid (not necessary the one to start at) makes the game a lot easier to manage (less tedious).

P.S. Also I hope that at least some asteroids will have dangerous and/or varied external conditions, like falling meteors, far brighter sun, longer nights e t c.

[gabberworld]

if talking about rocked cooling then i not use that at all , end result is i can turn the regolith to magma what i collect the bottom off rocked

[KonfigSys]

Spoiler

I decided to move the life support to the star base. Just land on a small asteroid and deploy the troops (using trailblazer) to develop and then destroy the small roid and take all resources. The base is sustainable for quite a long (morbs at the bottom produce p oxygen), I have a filter but when I run out of sand p oxygen is still ok to breath. Gulp fishes at the bottom right (ethanol is used to reduce temperature transfer between various morphs) clean pup water and recycle also provide some food. Excess water (and CO2) is consumed by oxyfern.

It is not my design but bits collected from various players. It took like 100+ cycles to build and make it working.

 

[KonfigSys]

  1 hour ago, gabberworld said:

assuming if you want that Swamp map is same sized like vanilla maps. then you need open the SwampMoonlet.yaml file with notepad or notepad++

after that you need change the 2 values bottom at worldsize: for the

  X: 256
  Y: 384

current Swamp map size is

worldsize:
  X: 160
  Y: 224

Here is the solution to the problems proposed by gabberworld - it was discussed in another thread but I copied it here as we discuss "the size does matter" in this thread.

 

I have to admit it is intriguing. So it is actually a very simple and relatively easy fix to all these problems with small worlds...

If devs do not come with such update to have big worlds I now know what to do and it takes like 5 minutes.

I will discuss coding in the spoiler so be aware. It may ruin your game experience if you know how it works.

Spoiler

As I can see you can change the size of all asteroids in the game relatively easy (including outer ring ones). So it is very possible to make vanilla size map for the starting and actually for any other asteroids in the game. All that are changed in 

F:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\OxygenNotIncluded\OxygenNotIncluded_Data\StreamingAssets\worldgen\worlds

Clearly, it will not be F disk but C or D or whatever you use for steam games. You can change the *moonlets for asteroid generation change including size, different biomes' composition, geysers, etc. Each asteroid consists of subworlds (biomes) that are taken from subworlds folder.

 As I understood from the coding increasing X and Y not only increases the map size but also increases all included biome sizes (limited to their maximum size). You can also add some life-supporting biomes to far away asteroids such as niobium, tundra. Also I can see that niobium volcano is to be generated 100% of the time. I do not understand why some complain that it is 50% chance if the volcano is generated.

I do not know if there is any restriction mechanism to limit the total size of the world. If it is possible, for instance, to make 6 big maps-asteroids just simply by changing X and Y in the moonlets. Theoretically it seems to be possible and even simple. If one wants to check please let us know if he/she managed to make 6 big ones.

 

[yoakenashi]

I like the smaller planetoids, and prefer them to the large map of the base game. Prior to the DLC, I often separated my colony into smaller ones, but that was difficult because all of the stats (food, resources, stress, etc) were common. Now they those are unique for each planetoid, it makes gameplay so that much more easier.

[KonfigSys]

13 hours ago, yoakenashi said:

I like the smaller planetoids, and prefer them to the large map of the base game. Prior to the DLC, I often separated my colony into smaller ones, but that was difficult because all of the stats (food, resources, stress, etc) were common. Now they those are unique for each planetoid, it makes gameplay so that much more easier.

I do realize that not all players like big maps / asteroids. The proposition is simple - have both - small and large - maps to choose at the start menu.

I like the way it was in civilization game. When you create a world you can choose if it is fragmented or pandora like, it is big or small, it is diverse or same. Ideally I see it even differently, you choose only the starting location but all types of maps will become available when you explore the space.

[Wintersdark]

I'd definitely be able to choose; and separately for your starting asteroid and for others.

Personally, I'd normally prefer to play on a big asteroid as my starting one, but with little asteroids I can travel to.  I'm really not a fan of the smaller starting asteroid, and find the limitations to be really kind of annoying.  Building a big mega-colony is really my jam.

But I do enjoy the idea of making small purpose built bases on other asteroids to harvest materials and ship back to my starting asteroid. 

[babba]

On 12/24/2020 at 8:53 PM, Wintersdark said:

I'd definitely be able to choose; and separately for your starting asteroid and for others.

Personally, I'd normally prefer to play on a big asteroid as my starting one, but with little asteroids I can travel to.  I'm really not a fan of the smaller starting asteroid, and find the limitations to be really kind of annoying.  Building a big mega-colony is really my jam.

But I do enjoy the idea of making small purpose built bases on other asteroids to harvest materials and ship back to my starting asteroid. 

It would be very nice if players could choose to start on a big map as their starter world

[Tayphil]

On 12/6/2020 at 10:09 AM, Singularity42 said:

But personally I disagree. I think the smaller maps creates challenges which you have to work out how to overcome.

I think that managing a large base on a large map is actually harder. Because everything interacts and interferes with each other. I think having separate asteroids on which you can kind of neatly separate industry from living, without heat or CO2 encroaching your living areas makes things significantly easier. For me, having all these different, sometimes unforeseen interactions between my large scale systems was a significant part of the fun. I fear that this will be lacking on tiny maps.

[AndreyKl]

10 hours ago, Tayphil said:

without heat or CO2 encroaching your living areas makes things significantly easier.

That can be avoided - early on a layer of vacuum solves the issue, later on insulated tiles are good enough, two layers of insulated tiles generally are good enough for everything sans volcano. And on bigger asteroid you have more space to install such measures.

'Long commutes' are a bigger issue on bigger asteroids. And centralized power is harder on large asteroid - there are far too many things to power up with overall consumption being huge. 

I do agree that smaller asteroids provide some new challenges (ex: less space for giant water pool), but generally they just force player to repeat everything multiple times (multiple co2 fridges, multiple kitchens, multiple recreation rooms). Setting up same power system again and again plus same cooling system is just annoying.

[babba]

Requests for a big map do not have to exclude small map(s) and multiple-asteroid(s) game play - If we can have both ( and a combination of both play styles ) it will make everybody happy. Please give us the world generation options Klei 

I like both play styles...But I would like to start with a big map, without 2nd deck (Teleporter )...Where the 2nd deck resources are spawn in the big starter map with lots of geysers, volcanoes and regolith.

[noaIV]

would love large maps since ya they can't shrink the maps much more as is

[babba]

19 minutes ago, noaIV said:

would love large maps since ya they can't shrink the maps much more as is

Have you built a colony in a rocket 

[noaIV]

didn't own the dlc when that bug still existed

 

[Tayphil]

On 2/23/2021 at 12:13 AM, AndreyKl said:

'Long commutes' are a bigger issue on bigger asteroids. And centralized power is harder on large asteroid - there are far too many things to power up with overall consumption being huge. 

Yes, I had to spend a *lot* of time planning my base layout with respect to the power system and grid, and even though in the end it worked as intended, my grid was enourmous with 8 low power lines running in parallel between 21x21 blocks of infrastructure.

On 2/23/2021 at 12:13 AM, AndreyKl said:

That can be avoided - early on a layer of vacuum solves the issue, later on insulated tiles are good enough, two layers of insulated tiles generally are good enough for everything sans volcano.

Of course, everything can be avoided and insulated *somehow*. But heat builds up and escapes into living or farming areas when you are not doing any cooling measures. That tends to ba harder if you have everything on a single large asteroid, Imo.

[KonfigSys]

I am glad that Klei finally did the large asteroid start option. I saw a lot of people like it (including myself).

There are still some problems to be fixed - pips, arbor tree, Al. But I have no doubts they will be done at some point.

Yes, the large map (large base) needs better planning - many buildings, many opportunities. Hyper tubes are needed again.

It is very good that we have two options to choose from.

 

[kezat]

4 hours ago, KonfigSys said:

There are still some problems to be fixed - pips, arbor tree, Al. But I have no doubts they will be done at some point.

I'm curious what do you feel is the issue with pips and trees? Are you thinking of the lumber and ethanol cycle or only just pips and trees?

For me i enjoy working with ethanol as it has some interesting challenges with it but some useful side benefits namely all the co2 you could ever need and Pdirt. Also love that it is sustainable.

[AndreyKl]

20 hours ago, Tayphil said:

Of course, everything can be avoided and insulated *somehow*. But heat builds up and escapes into living or farming areas when you are not doing any cooling measures. That tends to ba harder if you have everything on a single large asteroid, Imo.

That was far more of an issue on smaller asteroid for me.

On large one, you have more 'cool places' to start your farm at and can provide far more of a 'buffer' between hot and cold places. Active cooling is needed eventually, but vanilla large asteroid has a lot more capacity for handling heat (for hundreds of cycles) until you research said cooling. Correctly done water->oxygen production setup can easily Push heat out of a living area on large asteroid without need to cool said areas, and large asteroids make it far easier to setup.

CO2 is also much easier to deal with on larger asteroids due to sheer size of a potential 'CO2 pit'. Needs to be dealt with eventually, but is far less urgent.

One interesting complexity on larger asteroids: oxygen distribution, on small asteroid single half-hearted place to generate, cool and distribute oxygen is enough, with minimum of a pipe network (oxygen will reach most important places on its own), on large ones oxygen takes too much time to distribute itself, thus pipe network and individual generators are needed. On the other hand, when I'm pumping large amounts of oxygen, said oxygen is my coolant system, but on smaller asteroid there is a lot less need for oxygen due to having less of a population thus actual cooling can be needed.

[KonfigSys]

15 hours ago, kezat said:

I'm curious what do you feel is the issue with pips and trees? Are you thinking of the lumber and ethanol cycle or only just pips and trees?

For me i enjoy working with ethanol as it has some interesting challenges with it but some useful side benefits namely all the co2 you could ever need and Pdirt. Also love that it is sustainable.

Out of these three I missed Al, as I could not substitute it with anything to make super coolant. 

First, I hoped to get pips and arbor trees on one of the asteroids, then in a remote place of the large classic starting map. When I realized they are not there I was surprised but not really upset. I heavily rely on pips in my standard game for pip planted farms. 

I do not use ethanol much; I prefer to use oil and automatic oil boilers. Recently I started using arbor trees and ethanol - less heat generation than with oil; lumber can be transported in the habitat module and ethanol can be made on any asteroid with a simple set up. Extra p dirt and CO2 are all nice to have. I am heavy on slicksters (for dup free oil production) so I always like extra CO2 generation. I did not like to use ethanol as arbor trees require a lot of labor to cut the branches (yeah, I know about the bug to cut branches with two liquids but my personal preferences are not to use this bug; I have nothing against people using various bugs and I use other bugs and mods though). If we can get juicy fruit mutation for arbor tree it will be revolutionary but it may never happen (no mutation for arbor tree currently).