Geysers, Numbers.

[chemie]

Here's hoping for that 50kg geyser so you can enjoy your 2.5 berry plants.

[trukogre]

10 hours ago, JonnyMonroe said:

This exactly. I abandoned a 200 cycle survival run once I realised I didn't have sufficient geysers on the map to build the system I wanted to build (map had only 1 metal volcano with a low output and it was gold as well - the worst type for thermal energy).

 

After that I started a few fresh maps in debug searching for a high output iron, copper or magma volcano but never found anything to my satisfaction. I've decided since to give up on Ranch until the volcanos and geysers are set at seed so I can find a map with the settings I like.

As bluelance noted, if you're using debug mode already, why not just use debug mode and simply add in such a volcano to your map? I guess the question is, if you make a POI with a volcano in it, are the numbers set by the POI parameters?  Can you simply go into the POI text file and manually dectuple the output by simply putting a zero in the right place. Or add a few zeroes, making an insane megavolcano?  I guess I'll go test that lol

 

edit: so if you create a POI with one of the new geysers, and then paste, it creates a geyser of that type with new random amounts for all variables, those amounts aren't stored in the POI file but somewhere else, perhaps someone with more coding skill than my limited amount could figure out how to edit those, still that would be the fastest way to 'save-scum' the desired geyser properties i suppose, creating and deleting repeatedly using the POI system.  Personally I'm having more fun doing this update without debug, letting the random geyser rolls dictate how the colony is shaped, but creating amusing combinations of geysers in debug is probably fun too.

[FIXBUGFIXBUGFIX]

16 minutes ago, trukogre said:

those amounts aren't stored in the POI file but somewhere else

I guess these numbers aren't stored in any place but generated randomly.

The numbers will be determined when a geyser has been created and the fog above it is removed.

[trukogre]

8 minutes ago, R9MX4 said:

I guess these numbers aren't stored in any place but generated randomly.

The numbers will be determined when a geyser has been created and the fog above it is removed.

Right, so once generated randomly they have to be stored in the savegame file itself somewhere?  I.e. relatively inaccessible.

[Kabrute]

closest I could find to relevant info

Spoiler

 

it looks like they overylay this with an actual random instance generator

 

[FIXBUGFIXBUGFIX]

19 minutes ago, Kabrute said:

**

The dices are rolled by following code.

Spoiler

	private GeyserConfigurator.GeyserInstanceConfiguration CreateRandomInstance(HashedString typeId, float min, float max)
	{
		return new GeyserConfigurator.GeyserInstanceConfiguration
		{
			typeId = typeId,
			rateRoll = UnityEngine.Random.Range(min, max),
			iterationLengthRoll = UnityEngine.Random.Range(0f, 1f),
			iterationPercentRoll = UnityEngine.Random.Range(min, max),
			yearLengthRoll = UnityEngine.Random.Range(0f, 1f),
			yearPercentRoll = UnityEngine.Random.Range(min, max)
		};
	}

 

 

[Kabrute]

i saw that but wasn't sure if it was for the old geysers, to carry them forward, and to randomize them. because the new ones have enough numbers to cover the spread as it were.

[MorsDux]

If you want less random the devs should implement more options for "custom game" - like "generate at least x of geyser type y with average output low/high"

etc..

This would solve everyones problems. Like all new players dont even check custom game they get varying experience and vastly different maps. Later on when they are experts of the game and want to specify the maps they intend to play they can set the map generation parameters as they see fit. No need to savescum etc.

 

[Asteru]

I think the geyser dormancy rate is kind of crazy. Shouldn't be dealing with large numbers for active/dormancy period. Should be something smaller like active 5 cycles dormant 2. Can keep similar ratios, but with smaller numbers. Nothing should be that significant cycle wise when most people wont even last through more than a couple of those transitions anyway. 

[SkunkMaster]

3 hours ago, Asteru said:

I think the geyser dormancy rate is kind of crazy. Shouldn't be dealing with large numbers for active/dormancy period. Should be something smaller like active 5 cycles dormant 2. Can keep similar ratios, but with smaller numbers. Nothing should be that significant cycle wise when most people wont even last through more than a couple of those transitions anyway. 

I don't think you see the big picture here.

There are colonies who are brought past the 1k cycle marker, for those a 200 cycle period is not really that impactfull.

 

My current map has 4 volcano's, 2x copper, 1x iron and 1 big volcano. No chlorine, no water, only 2x polluted, 2x steam and 2x nat-gas and 2 leaky oil geysers. - I think i'm in Lava World to be honest. - I can say that all geysers can spawn everywhere now. Even the leaky oil fissure. 1 of my oil fissures is above my base in a jungle biome.

 

Also i suspect some of these new geysers to destroy air. My room with 1 copper volcano + 1 leaky oil fissure is regularly in vacuum. 

[Asteru]

1 minute ago, SkunkMaster said:

I don't think you see the big picture here.

There are colonies who are brought past the 1k cycle marker, for those a 200 cycle period is not really that impactfull.

 

My current map has 4 volcano's, 2x copper, 1x iron and 1 big volcano. No chlorine, no water, only 2x polluted, 2x steam and 2x nat-gas and 2 leaky oil geysers. - I think i'm in Lava World to be honest. - I can say that all geysers can spawn everywhere now. Even the leaky oil fissure. 1 of mine is above my base in a jungle biome.

 

Also i suspect some of these new geysers to destroy air. My room with 1 copper volcano + 1 leaky oil fissure is regularly in vacuum. 

I humbly disagree. I think shortening the durations while still maintaining a good ratio can still be challenging while pushing the player to having to deal with it more often. Not suggesting shortening just the dormancy cycle, but also the active cycle, so its the same % of time being dormant as they seem to be now, but to simply occur more often. Instead of long infrequent periods, have shorter frequent occurrences of it. 

[SkunkMaster]

54 minutes ago, Asteru said:

I humbly disagree. I think shortening the durations while still maintaining a good ratio can still be challenging while pushing the player to having to deal with it more often. Not suggesting shortening just the dormancy cycle, but also the active cycle, so its the same % of time being dormant as they seem to be now, but to simply occur more often. Instead of long infrequent periods, have shorter frequent occurrences of it. 

if it would run in shorter bursts the challenge would also be lowered. That's a fact. 

There will be limited need for pressure rooms and planning if it's on 1 cycle and then off 2.. same if it's on 10 and off 20.

The real challenge comes when it's on for 40 and off for 120... when it puts out such vast amounts in those 40 cycles, but has to cover a total of 160 cycles, that's where it gets hard.

Either you have several power options, so you have other power income in those 120 cycles, or you have a room big enough to store all that gas. 

Either way, if it would just be on for 1 and off for 2 then they would be as similar to regular geysers that they can come.

[Soulwind]

48 minutes ago, SkunkMaster said:

if it would run in shorter bursts the challenge would also be lowered. That's a fact. 

There will be limited need for pressure rooms and planning if it's on 1 cycle and then off 2.. same if it's on 10 and off 20.

The real challenge comes when it's on for 40 and off for 120... when it puts out such vast amounts in those 40 cycles, but has to cover a total of 160 cycles, that's where it gets hard.

Either you have several power options, so you have other power income in those 120 cycles, or you have a room big enough to store all that gas. 

Either way, if it would just be on for 1 and off for 2 then they would be as similar to regular geysers that they can come.

Maybe at the top end of the rng there are super geysers where storing massive quantity of output for 20 cycles to cover the 140 cycle dormant period could be accomplished...  

From what I've seen so far, it's more of getting a fraction of the resource for a fraction of time.  I've seen several geysers so far where I would rather just cap them off and pretend they don't exist than build the infrastructure needed to try and gather the resource.   It is so low as to make no difference to my colony.  

And the low end of things definitely seems more weighted than the high end.

Add the loss of "living factories" (ie critter based resources) with the massive resource reduction that critters got and the creative paths available from this update feel a lot less available. 

[chemie]

If gysers suck, it just forces you to hatch coal and coal gens.  Hardly game changing.

[SkunkMaster]

2 minutes ago, Soulwind said:

Maybe at the top end of the rng there are super geysers where storing massive quantity of output for 20 cycles to cover the 140 cycle dormant period could be accomplished...  

From what I've seen so far, it's more of getting a fraction of the resource for a fraction of time.  I've seen several geysers so far where I would rather just cap them off and pretend they don't exist than build the infrastructure needed to try and gather the resource.   It is so low as to make no difference to my colony.  

And the low end of things definitely seems more weighted than the high end.

Add the loss of "living factories" (ie critter based resources) with the massive resource reduction that critters got and the creative paths available from this update feel a lot less available. 

I think you will see more critter farms now then ever. But you can't rely on them as much as you used to. Both good things in my book.

 

Also the fact that there are so many different geysers plays a role. you might have really ****ty water geysers, but if you just have 1 good oil geyser, or polluted water geyser, or.... you really just need 1 or 2 good geysers, and then you need to figure out how to convert their output to that of what you need. <--- this is also good in my book. No more standardized builds, except basic stuff. No more "just need to find my gas geyser, then all my energy needs are met". 

 

The randomness also plays well in here i think. you might have a real good polluted water geyser one game, but another you will have a Magma volcano who spews non-stop.. Both would lead to different energy setups, don't you think? 

 

So many are focused on what you lose in this patch, only few seem to focus on what you actually get. So far, what i can see, you get WAY more, then you lose. WAY WAY more.. renewable metal ? renewable magma ? so much heat now that a borg cube seems more of a necessity then just an exploit.  For real, what is not to like in this patch ?

That it's random what you get for geysers, so not 1 colony will be close to the same? right... in my book that just adds replayability to the game. 

 

 

[Soulwind]

And I agree with you. 

I just think that the balance levels are set too low (or maybe just too wide) and that critters were reduced too much.  Needing 100 in the farm to get the same performance as 1 pre - ranch critter just doesn't feel balances to me.