Floxes are too weak

[Carib94]

I like the Floxes but I agree that they need some buffs. They should drop 600kg of wood and drop at least 10kg of dirt. I want to think that 1200g of dirt has got to be some typo XD cause that is so little.

[NewWorldDan]

21 hours ago, asurendra said:

Water - yes, water is fine. pDirt is not. Just some numbers: to support petrolium generator 100% of time you need 7,2 domesticated arbor trees. Thats means 504kg pWater and 72kg of dirt  In exchange you generate 450kg of pWater, 800kg of pDirt and some CO2 (which is not so useful). 

So you spend 576kg per cycle and get 1250kg per cycle. More than twice time mass production! And its even energy positive...

When you combine this output with 10.5 Puft and 75 molten slicksters(!), you get an output that is completely bonkers. Puft + algae distiller gives you an extra 330 pWater and 165 algae. Molten slicksters give you 750 petroleum, which yields an additional 281 pWater and even more CO2. As a full cycle, that's 504 pWater in, and 1061 out. Plus 165 algae. It's water positive, oxygen positive, power positive, and more barbecue than your dupes can possibly eat. Requires a bit of labor, but you can run a colony on this cycle without any other sources of anything. I have. Send all the excess meat to Experiment 52b.

[asurendra]

On 6/29/2024 at 2:16 AM, Primalflower said:

well, okay, I acknowledge that you get a lot of pdirt out of it. but like, why is this out of wack, though? are we talking about pufts?

This is very out of the picture. The general rule of ONI is that plants and structures produce less than they consume. With rare exceptions like drekos, but drekos are specially made as complex as possible. This encourages the player to look for new sources of resources, develop technologies, and tame geysers... Trees and pips make it possible to build a completely self-sufficient colony without going beyond the starting biome at all. It's just... wrong.

[Primalflower]

9 minutes ago, asurendra said:

This is very out of the picture. The general rule of ONI is that plants and structures produce less than they consume. With rare exceptions like drekos, but drekos are specially made as complex as possible. This encourages the player to look for new sources of resources, develop technologies, and tame geysers... Trees and pips make it possible to build a completely self-sufficient colony without going beyond the starting biome at all. It's just... wrong.

I think i just flat disagree. this design philosophy is shakey and hole-y enough to not mean anything to me, especially in situations like this where simply put, it does not break game balance, and to put it more in line would do nothing but shrink opportunities, shrink amount of things you can do. dreckos take nothing, gassy moos excrete far more mass than the gas grass is made out of or takes, morbs infinitely produce polluted oxygen, oil wells take in 1kg/s of water in order to output 3.333kg/s of petroleum and 33.33g/s of natural gas, there are a ton of examples of mass just being created or there being net gains of mass from conversions across buildings or plants, and arbor trees are no exception. they themselves don't produce infinite dirt anyway, it's a chain of things being created, and not one that's resoundingly breaking either.

[imazined]

Did someone say rocket chimney? I just heard creating mass from nothing. Funny detail the SO rocket engines are implemented in their own class. If Klei wanted to get rid of the opportunity to produce vast amounts of material with rocket starts they could have done it without breaking old designs. But that would make rocket starts way less fun.

The discussions if Oxygen Not Included should be more like - let's say - Captain of Industry are kind mood. I like ONI because it allows me to play with the systems and not to use them according to the manual.

[JDL]

I think the resource balance on the flox is very good, possibly even overpowered.

Resource input is dupe labor, power, and 6 kg/cycle of phosphorite.

Resource output is 1.2 kg of dirt, 45 kg of wood, and meat/eggs.

Assuming you send the wood to an ethanol distiller, you get a return of 22.5 kg of ethanol and 15 kg of polluted dirt per cycle per flox, plus CO2.

Either dreckos or bammoths make phosphorite renewably to supply the primary flox resource input.

Each flox requires 0.6 dreckos of phosphorite. With mealwood, 3 domestic plants support 4 drecko. Per cycle, that's 40 kg of dirt per 3 drecko, or 7.5 kg per drecko. At 0.6 dreckos, that's 4.5 kg of dirt per cycle per flox.

Each flox requires 1.2 bammoths of phosphorite. With plume squash, 0.81 domestic plants support 1 bammoth. Per cycle, that's 12.15 kg of ethanol per bammoth. At 1.2 bammoths, that's 14.58 kg of ethanol per cycle per flox.

If you use dreckos, you get 3 times the amount of polluted dirt produced from an ethanol distiller than you consume as dirt to feed them mealwood per flox. If you use bammoths, you get 1.5 times the amount of ethanol produced from an ethanol distiller than you consume to feed them plume squash per bammoth.

Either method is inherently mass multiplying, with additional side resources produced depending on which loop you use (plastic/reed fibre for dreckos, clay/reed fibre for bammoths).

TL;DR: Floxes very good, make more stuff than eat stuff.

[asurendra]

11 hours ago, imazined said:

Did someone say rocket chimney? I just heard creating mass from nothing. Funny detail the SO rocket engines are implemented in their own class. If Klei wanted to get rid of the opportunity to produce vast amounts of material with rocket starts they could have done it without breaking old designs. But that would make rocket starts way less fun.

The discussions if Oxygen Not Included should be more like - let's say - Captain of Industry are kind mood. I like ONI because it allows me to play with the systems and not to use them according to the manual.

Rocket chimneys, pip planting, pacu starvation ranches etc are fine, because its player choice to use them or not. I can use rocket even if I dont want to build chimney. I can feed my dupes fish fillet with usual fed pacus. But I cant use ethanol in petroleum generator without unwanted mass duplication. Its just not possible. I cant even throw that pDirt away as solids are almost indestructible. Yes, technically I can boil it to molten glass and throw into space but it needs so many heat that it totally breaks "ethanol for energy" idea...

[imazined]

5 minutes ago, asurendra said:

I cant even throw that pDirt away as solids are almost undestructable. Yes, technically I can boil it to molten glass and throw in space but it need so many energy that it totally breaks "ethanol for energy" idea...

Polluted dirt evaporates into space ... so there is no issue. Or just leave it where the distiller drops it it's not like this is a game in which it would be an issue.

[asurendra]

Just now, imazined said:

Or just leave it where the distiller drops it it's not like this is a game in which it would be an issue.

It will be an issue as pDirt pile will become larger and larger until sim crash happen. Game engine has limits about how much mass in single debris it can handle

[Primalflower]

1 minute ago, asurendra said:

It will be an issue as pDirt pile will become larger and larger until sim crash happen. Game engine has limits about how much mass in single debris it can handle

pdirt will sublimate faster with more mass, no?

[asurendra]

1 minute ago, Primalflower said:

pdirt will sublimate faster with more mass, no?

If I isolate that pile it will stop due to pressure. If I dont isolate it I still get that unwanted mass generation as pO2

[imazined]

1 minute ago, asurendra said:

It will be an issue as pDirt pile will become larger and larger until sim crash happen. Game engine has limits about how much mass in single debris it can handle

This is utterly wrong and you would have this issue with every other type of positive production also.

Debris stack size is limited to 20 tons. Theoretically this could create a save game to large to load but that's very theoretical.

By this logic you shouldn't play this game because dupes create mass from nothing and you're forced to use them.

[asurendra]

8 minutes ago, imazined said:

This is utterly wrong and you would have this issue with every other type of positive production also.

Debris stack size is limited to 20 tons. Theoretically this could create a save game to large to load but that's very theoretical.

By this logic you shouldn't play this game because dupes create mass from nothing and you're forced to use them.

Dupes deletes mass, thats our reason to do all that base building things 

All other positive production can be easily controlled. Overpressuring geysers, stop shearing dreckos when you dont need more fiber etc. Ethanol distillers cant produce ethanol and dont produce pDirt at the same time. And its not a waste like CO2. Having wastes is fine. having live support material out of nowhere is not.  When we speak about survival game at least

[imazined]

5 minutes ago, asurendra said:

Dupes deletes mass, thats our reason to do all that survival things 

All other positive production can be easily controlled. Overpressuring geysers, stop shearing dreckos when you dont need more fiber etc. Ethanol distillers cant produce ethanol and dont produce pDirt at the same time. And its not a waste like CO2. Having wastes is fine. having live support material out of nowhere is not. 

First I'm getting real tired of this discussion. Obviously you're grasping to defend a position that is disliked in this thread and generally difficult to defend.

Second why do you even think ethanol distillers creating polluted dirt from nothing?.

1kg/s in --> 1kg/s out



> Having wastes is fine. having live support material out of nowhere is not.

Third this here is the reason why I still engage with your weird position. In a discussion about potential changes to the game we all like you're trying to sell a judgement as a fact. If this purely for the argument sake I would sit laughing at the sidelines and eat popcorn.

And fourth don't call CO2 a waste I have a full concept of feeding a colony of a single CO2 engine (the glued together soda cans one)

 

[asurendra]

1 minute ago, imazined said:

First I'm getting real tired of this discussion. Obviously you're grasping to defend a position that is disliked in this thread and generally difficult to defend.
 

Some people dislike it, some people agreed. That's what discussions are for, so that both sides can make their arguments

Quote

Second why do you even think ethanol distillers creating polluted dirt from nothing?.
 

Its arbor trees that create mass from nothing. 70kg in, 333kg out. Thats why I think that trees need rework

Quote

Third this here is the reason why I still engage with your weird position. In a discussion about potential changes to the game we all like you're trying to sell a judgement as a fact. If this purely for the argument sake I would sit laughing at the sidelines and eat popcorn.
 

Its not a fact, its my opinion which I can defend with facts and math. Math is  objective, your popcorn is not

Quote

And fourth don't call CO2 a waste I have a full concept of feeding a colony of a single CO2 engine (the glued together soda cans one)
 

Feel free to do whatever you want, thats a singleplayer game. I just want to see more possibilities with which everybody can play. The desire to simplify and make things easier has already killed a lot of games.The more complex and deeper the game mechanics, the more diverse and crazy structures can be created. And making floxes another "do-to-win" is not cool. We already has arbor trees for that...

[GluttonyMain]

27 minutes ago, asurendra said:

Its arbor trees that create mass from nothing. 70kg in, 333kg out. Thats why I think that trees need rework

In real life trees gain mass from carbon from air. Im not sure arbor trees need a change, but if they were to get one perhaps they could consume carbon dioxide.

30 minutes ago, asurendra said:

Feel free to do whatever you want, thats a singleplayer game. I just want to see more possibilities with which everybody can play. The desire to simplify and make things easier has already killed a lot of games.The more complex and deeper the game mechanics, the more diverse and crazy structures can be created. And making floxes another "do-to-win" is not cool. We already has arbor trees for that...

See I dont think floxes are even in the top 5 most OP things. You mentioned arbor trees, but I think Dreckos are the true OP critter, and hatches are very close behind. Sure hatches might not be mass multiplying, but they eat something with so little value and so abundant they might as well produce free coal. Than theres pips which can give you free almost anything in exchange for space via wild planting. Than theres morb, which is literally free pOxygen.

[Sinistrem]

 

Flox stats after the latest update.

[Mariolo]

11 hours ago, Sinistrem said:

 

Flox stats after the latest update.

Well this is a good change but I still wouldn't use them over arbor trees. I guess they are intended to be early game critters

[NNOUS]

For what it worth tho, it give wood and also meat. Arbor tree can't stop the colony hunger but they can

10 hours ago, Mariolo said:

Well this is a good change but I still wouldn't use them over arbor trees. I guess they are intended to be early game critters

 

[Mariolo]

10 hours ago, NNOUS said:

For what it worth tho, it give wood and also meat. Arbor tree can't stop the colony hunger but they can

 

Arbor trees CAN feed your colony. The arbor tree loop creates ethanol for free, which gives you polluted dirt to feed any pokeshell morph, so you can get seafood; and if you burn the ethanol on petroleum generators you can make CO2 for slicksters which give you meat. Floxes produce as much meat as pips so a full ranch can barely sustain 2 dupes.

Wild arbor trees are even water positive so you can make oxygen from them. It truly doesn't compare