Is it intended to be able to use rocketry to store tons of gas compared to normal gas tanks?

[oconzer]

I notice that you can build rocketry within your base, and it occurred to me that you could build a rocket with a carbon dioxide engine (just so the "rocket" has an engine and its the smallest height wise), then build tons of gas storage modules and a command module to store gas in that holds way more gas than the 150 kg gas tanks. Is this supposed to be intentional?

 

EDIT:

Ok I thought you had to build a engine apparently you don't.

[Sasza22]

It`s probably not intended for the rocket modules to replace gas/liquid storage structures within your base the same way it`s not intended for rocket solar panels to replace regular solars. But nerfing the stored amount will make rocket transport pretty useless. The current situation is a sideeffect of making rockets viable and giving them some QoL improvements. I think the devs might be searching for solutions to fix that without making rockets even more tedious to use.

[Orzelek]

Tbh I think that normal storages need to be expanded.
After some time playing you basically use infinite storages for both fluid and gas and storage structures only when you need automation from them.
Or maybe add some new set of compressed storages that would be pressurized (small power use for them maybe?) and hold a lot more. Alternativley thy could be just "deep" aka extend perpendiculalry to 2D plane we are seeing and hold a lot more just because.

[mfd]

Gas Reservoir is power-free buffer with automation output.
It is not a building for stockpiling large quantities.

(Large) Gas Cargo Canister needs power. Its size including Rocket Platform is larger than Gas Reservoir. Construction material is expensive. No problem.

[oconzer]

1 hour ago, Orzelek said:

Tbh I think that normal storages need to be expanded.
After some time playing you basically use infinite storages for both fluid and gas and storage structures only when you need automation from them.
Or maybe add some new set of compressed storages that would be pressurized (small power use for them maybe?) and hold a lot more.

Well I personally never have used infinite storage as it is more like an exploit rather than an intended game mechanic. I tend to build min max bases so I never really need much storage.

2 hours ago, Sasza22 said:

... nerfing the stored amount will make rocket transport pretty useless. The current situation is a sideeffect of making rockets viable and giving them some QoL improvements. I think the devs might be searching for solutions to fix that without making rockets even more tedious to use.

I personally wouldn't want them nerfed, just the liquid and the gas tanks for building normally in your base needs buffs (maybe at the cost of needing a bit more materials, like 100 more ore). The liquid tank should probably hold around 8000 Kg and the gas tank should probably hold more like 1500 kg of gas to be comparable to the rocket ones. As for the fix for making it so rockets wouldn't be able to be built inside the asteroid I'd probably say that it would require it to be in a vacuum with space exposed to it (no blocks above the "rocket" and no other "rockets" above it).

1 hour ago, mfd said:

Gas Reservoir is power-free buffer with automation output.
It is not a building for stockpiling large quantities.

(Large) Gas Cargo Canister needs power. Its size including Rocket Platform is larger than Gas Reservoir. Construction material is expensive. No problem.

It only costs 800 refined metal and 500 ore or refined metal to build a rocket platform + a rocket gas tank (for the small one). The gas tank is 3x5 and the rocket platform + small rocket gas tank module is 5x9* (forgot about having at least a single rocket port unloader.

As for power requirements to use them a gas tank takes 60 with a mini pump (though more likely 240 with a standard pump) to store and 0 power to take out gas. The rocket gas tank requires 480 to store and 240 to take out gas.

[Gurgel]

Actually, I think this is not a problem. The gas tanks in rockets have less features than the real ones. There are no automation outputs and they need power to load and unload via an additional building. The former makes them unusable for advanced scenarios, same as the rocket batteries. In a (somewhat) advanced stage of the game you will also have infinite gas-storage via door compressors, which is vastly superior to rocket storage. At the same time, you need to do a lot of research to even get the rocket storage.

Hence I doubt the devs are even attempting to do anything about it. There is no reason to.

[mackhuffer]

A few months ago, when Klei set a hard limit on the number of modules that can be on a rocket platform without an engine, I took that as an indication of intended behavior (for now). It seems like they could have simply decided to require a complete rocket for those modules to be enabled, but they didn't. I think they tradeoffs Gurgel mentions are reasonable and allow for mass storage without resorting to build that some people don't want to use.

[SharraShimada]

When such questions come up, i always ask myself, do people paint the living room pink and complain then because they could do it?

If you dont like to to something, why do you just dont do it, if possible?

This is not an attack on people whatsoever, but why do you expect hard limitations, when you just can limit yourself, if you really want to?

[Gurgel]

12 hours ago, SharraShimada said:

When such questions come up, i always ask myself, do people paint the living room pink and complain then because they could do it?

If you dont like to to something, why do you just dont do it, if possible?

This is not an attack on people whatsoever, but why do you expect hard limitations, when you just can limit yourself, if you really want to?

Yes. There is something fundamentally broken with the argument used. The only rational reason I can see is that these people actually want to limit others, because they _can_ limit themselves already in any way they want. For a single-player game this makes no sense. It seems some people habe trouble living with the idea that others will do things they do not want to do themselves. We have a lot of that in the real world.

[MrAnimaniac]

1 hour ago, Gurgel said:

Yes. There is something fundamentally broken with the argument used. The only rational reason I can see is that these people actually want to limit others, because they _can_ limit themselves already in any way they want. For a single-player game this makes no sense. It seems some people habe trouble living with the idea that others will do things they do not want to do themselves. We have a lot of that in the real world.

Perhaps I can shed some light on this for you as I am - to some extend - such kind of a person by my self. Frankly I don't care about the way other people play. My motivation is totally intrinsic: I want to build the most efficient setup. At the same time: I want to build a nice and immersive setup.

This is why I had issues using droplet or 'stacked fluid' water locks (especially towards a vacuum), with door compressors (gases not liquifying and fluids incompressible) or 'germy water cleaning dupes': those setups are much more efficient, however immersion breaking. Thus, I have a conflict of interests and this irks me.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Gurgel]

13 hours ago, MrAnimaniac said:

This is why I had issues using droplet or 'stacked fluid' water locks (especially towards a vacuum), with door compressors (gases not liquifying and fluids incompressible) or 'germy water cleaning dupes': those setups are much more efficient, however immersion breaking. Thus, I have a conflict of interests and this irks me.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I never used the 1st and 3rd of your examples. I have started using door compressors only recently, because I found they do not bother me after all. 

So why are you simply not using things that break immersion for you? It is not that any of those are needed to make the game work. The game works fine with just the obvious mechanisms. And that is the real question here. I have absolutely no problem with people not using some mechanisms and looking for alternate solutions. I have a massive problem with people requesting things being made impossible for everybody. 

[MrAnimaniac]

9 minutes ago, Gurgel said:

The game works fine with just the obvious mechanisms. And that is the real question here. I have absolutely no problem with people not using some mechanisms and looking for alternate solutions. I have a massive problem with people requesting things being made impossible for everybody. 

I understand your point. In your previous post, however, you mentioned that "It seems some people habe trouble living with the idea that others will do things they do not want to do themselves." I read this as: 'If I don't play so, you must not as well' and hence a non-intrinsic motivation as someone wants to impose their own will upon others.

I assume this misses the point and suggested a "conflict of interest" and thus a totally intrinsic motivation as reason for those requests: They're simply annoyed that they must choose between their urge towards e.g. efficiency and immersion. If both are equally important, than this can lead to quite a build up of inner tension. And no one likes inner tension.

So... What I'm suggesting is only an alternative explanation for this behaviour. It's not about putting oneself as "measure of things" but trying to escape own compulsions. But doing so with those requests ignores the "needs" of other players. And thus, it is worthy questioning and hence I get your point.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[WhiteWind36]

As mentioned above, I don't think there is a problem, because using rocket storage is very annoying, in fact I would even preferred using liquid reservoir inside of rocket instead of using liquid tank on rocket. Of course you can save up some space and store a lot more gasses or liquids in rocket storage than in regular ones, but the price for it is huge, you must have according research, and if account every resource needed to make rocket storage usable it will be few times more than what you need for a regular storage.

On the other hand if you have problems with finding enough space for building things in a small asteroid, the best exploit you can use to get more space is to build spacefarer module, it takes less space than it have inside, this way you can make isolated rooms with no need of liquid lock or airlock door, you can store lots of gasses just in the interior or you can build gas or liquid reservoirs... Or make an steam turbine + aquatuner setup, with ultimate insulation from your base, with easy access to it. When you start to think about many uses for spacefarer module it's not even worth to start using rocket gas or liquid storage not on actual rockets where you definitely need it, and have no other viable option.

[Gurgel]

8 hours ago, MrAnimaniac said:

I understand your point. In your previous post, however, you mentioned that "It seems some people habe trouble living with the idea that others will do things they do not want to do themselves." I read this as: 'If I don't play so, you must not as well' and hence a non-intrinsic motivation as someone wants to impose their own will upon others.

I assume this misses the point and suggested a "conflict of interest" and thus a totally intrinsic motivation as reason for those requests: They're simply annoyed that they must choose between their urge towards e.g. efficiency and immersion. If both are equally important, than this can lead to quite a build up of inner tension. And no one likes inner tension.

So... What I'm suggesting is only an alternative explanation for this behaviour. It's not about putting oneself as "measure of things" but trying to escape own compulsions. But doing so with those requests ignores the "needs" of other players. And thus, it is worthy questioning and hence I get your point.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Well. I am willing to believe there are actually some people that are subject to your alternate explanation. Observable human behavior however does imply that they are a minority and that the majority of people requesting possibilities to be removed are motivated by an urge to force others to behave "virtuously". One poster in the past even used the phrase "seduced by the exploits" as if using non-obvious Oni mechanisms was the same as going over to the dark side and would ensure you only get bad options for your next reincarnation. 

There are countless historic and current examples for this type of behavior. The current pandemic also nicely provides examples, for example people trying to "save" others from vaccination. Of course, these people are anti-science and extremist, but it shows the mind-set. And then look at ways to "view the world". I am not even going to open that can of worms, but what people have done and are still doing to "save" others by forcing their view of how the world works on others is beyond savage. This forum is not the right place for such a discussion anyways.

39 minutes ago, WhiteWind36 said:

On the other hand if you have problems with finding enough space for building things in a small asteroid, the best exploit you can use to get more space is to build spacefarer module, it takes less space than it have inside, this way you can make isolated rooms with no need of liquid lock or airlock door, you can store lots of gasses just in the interior or you can build gas or liquid reservoirs... Or make an steam turbine + aquatuner setup, with ultimate insulation from your base, with easy access to it. When you start to think about many uses for spacefarer module it's not even worth to start using rocket gas or liquid storage not on actual rockets where you definitely need it, and have no other viable option.

Hahaha, nice! I like the idea.

[WhiteWind36]

1 hour ago, Gurgel said:

Hahaha, nice! I like the idea

And how do like the idea of rocket providing oxygen, great hall and washroom for your colony? And even stress relieving massage. Let's count morale you have +6 from great hall +2 washroom, +3 shower, at leat +1 with party phone (could be +4 if there is another duplicant using phone same time on other asteroid/rocket. It's from 12 to 15 morale without account for food morale bonus also salted food. And shower removes soggy feet, sopping wet, eye and skin irritation debuffs and massage table removes sore back debuff.

P.s. forgot to put vent in this build. But there is enough place to put it in.

[oconzer]

15 hours ago, Gurgel said:

Well. I am willing to believe there are actually some people that are subject to your alternate explanation. Observable human behavior however does imply that they are a minority and that the majority of people requesting possibilities to be removed are motivated by an urge to force others to behave "virtuously". One poster in the past even used the phrase "seduced by the exploits" as if using non-obvious Oni mechanisms was the same as going over to the dark side and would ensure you only get bad options for your next reincarnation. 

There are countless historic and current examples for this type of behavior. The current pandemic also nicely provides examples, for example people trying to "save" others from vaccination. Of course, these people are anti-science and extremist, but it shows the mind-set. And then look at ways to "view the world". I am not even going to open that can of worms, but what people have done and are still doing to "save" others by forcing their view of how the world works on others is beyond savage. This forum is not the right place for such a discussion anyways.

 

On 11/22/2021 at 11:13 AM, SharraShimada said:

When such questions come up, i always ask myself, do people paint the living room pink and complain then because they could do it?

If you dont like to to something, why do you just dont do it, if possible?

This is not an attack on people whatsoever, but why do you expect hard limitations, when you just can limit yourself, if you really want to?

 

On 11/22/2021 at 11:52 PM, Gurgel said:

Yes. There is something fundamentally broken with the argument used. The only rational reason I can see is that these people actually want to limit others, because they _can_ limit themselves already in any way they want. For a single-player game this makes no sense. It seems some people habe trouble living with the idea that others will do things they do not want to do themselves. We have a lot of that in the real world.

Not sure why people are thinking I said anything in my OP about limiting anything. All I had asked is if the being able to build rocketry inside your base as incomplete rockets was intended behavior for the game. Personally I've not used any of it inside my base, but honestly I've thought about how many broken things you can do because you can, as you can basically expand your bases by building tons of command modules inside your base giving up 6x7 spaces to make 8x10 spaces, and if the behavior isn't intended then it should be fixed eventually so players don't use it and then end up with borked builds due to changes happening later.

[Gurgel]

The thing Is Oni is a simulation. If you approach a simulation with limits of what people can do with the elements given, you run into a problem with implementation complexity. For example, if you limit rocket tank use to complete rockets that have a free launch path, then that can still be used for purposes other than shipping things. If you make the working of that tank contingent on the launch-path being free at the time it is being used, you add a ton of complexity. In the end, this complexity kills you.

Hence simulations must be approached with a mind-set of "what can that element do". Because that keeps complexity down and interactions localized. It is quite normal for simulations to allow things that were not envisioned by the designers.