Will the asteroid always overheat?

[Jigsawn]

I'm entering my first end-game having explored much of the asteroid and dug down to magma. It got me wondering about heat in the asteroid. As far as I can see, the only eternal passive cooling in the world (before buildings come into play) are from wheezeworts and ice biomes (although I heard ice biomes eventually warm up). I wanted to run some scenarios by you to test if my theories are correct.

Let's assume for these hypothetical scenarios that dupes (and their needs) are not a factor.

Scenario 1 - If I'm right, Abysallite completely blocks heat forever. So if a world is spawned and left forever with no interference, heat should never travel between biomes because of the abysallite walls, right? However anything within a biome that produces heat (i.e. geysers/magma) will eventually cook/melt? The only things that I know of from spawn that have cooling effects are Wheezeworts and ice biomes - right?

Side note - because of Abysallite's qualities, does this mean that constructing 1-thick abysallite tiles/insulated tile enclosure will always be as effective as a 2-thick enclosure?

Scenario 2 -  Let's say you create a 1 or 2 block tunnel between biomes in an otherwise untouched world. Will heat always eventually seep through from the hotter biomes and eventually cook the whole asteroid? Do ice biomes always melt eventually if not completely sealed with abysallite, even if you just had an airlock or 1 block tunnel to enter it?

Scenario 3 -  Let's assume you have renewable resources. In theory, can you stave off heat death in your base forever using standard cooling methods like wheezeworts, steam cooling, AETN, etc? Presumably, if you sited most heat producing machinery outside of an Abysallite shell surrounding your base, then the only heat coming into your base would be via gases/pipes or airlocks. Therefore if you can cool those locations equal or less to the amount of heat leaking in, then you will never get heat death?

Scenario 4 - In Scenario 3 you manage to maintain a constant temperature in your base. Now, will your machinery outside of your base, or tunnels/airlocks between biomes in the map cause any "exposed" part of the map to eventually overheat?

Scenario 5 - Let's pretend there are no Geysers. Are there any other natural heat sources that actually create more heat than already exists in the biomes at spawn? For example, do Caustic and magma biomes actually produce heat, or in theory could you cool them over a very long period of time?

Scenario 6 - In Scenario 2 I talk about the whole asteroid slowly cooking. Has anyone tested this over a very long period of time? What would happen if there is no way for heat to be removed? Does everything eventually melt and the whole asteroid turn into a giant swimming pool of superheated liquids trapped in by neutronium?

This is more my curiosity about how the game is designed than anything else. Do you think in future that there will be permanent heat sink biomes (space outside of the asteroid, or top layer of the asteroid for example), or biomes that generate cold? They would probably need to be very end-game or heat would be too easy to deal with. Or, do you think devs will keep heat as the ultimate killer that will eventually end an asteroid even if you were able to make your actual base self-sustaining? 

 

[Hellshound38]

Weezeworts and Thermo Nullifies delete heat directly.

Overall cooling is relative so its a little bit more complicated.

For example if your base is 200 degrees, gas from a 100 degree geyser would actually cool things.

Also if you had a cool slush geyser or a liquid CO2 geyser you could use them to cool things to around like -10 and - 50.

But heat can be manipulated, and relatively deleted in other ways. element changes for example - polluted water -> water via evaporation and condensation could delete some heat because of the difference in heat capacity. The relative output of machinery can be used to change total heat, for example Gas generators or showers / bathrooms. Also heat can be deleted by certain mechanics, like polluted water in a fertilizer synth, or a water sleeve, or stuff being fed to hatches.

 

My current issue is my base is my 650+ cycle base is becoming far too cold, and I had to better insulate to prevent everything freezing and add space heaters... 

[Oozinator]

I have to install heaters for my dupes. Everything isolated.

[Cataca]

Your assumption that magma "produces" heat is wrong. Its just ingenious rock that has some thermal energy stored. From that perspective, nothing in ONI actually produces heat without player interaction. The only thing that happens naturally is cooling (wheezeworts) so technically, things are going to cool down, eventually getting to a low temp.

That said, everything is encased by abyssalite, so there are no real changes happening. The starting biome is not encased and everything around is at 20-40 degrees, so that is going to heat up at least.

[chemie]

7 minutes ago, Cataca said:

Your assumption that magma "produces" heat is wrong. Its just ingenious rock that has some thermal energy stored. From that perspective, nothing in ONI actually produces heat without player interaction. The only thing that happens naturally is cooling (wheezeworts) so technically, things are going to cool down, eventually getting to a low temp.

That said, everything is encased by abyssalite, so there are no real changes happening. The starting biome is not encased and everything around is at 20-40 degrees, so that is going to heat up at least.

Geysers produce lots of new heat.  Metal volcanoes, steam geysers etc

[Cataca]

3 minutes ago, chemie said:

Geysers produce lots of new heat.  Metal volcanoes, steam geysers etc

Only the 4 that are dug out naturally. And once they are overpressurized, they stop producing heat, while wheezeworts will not.

 

edit: it is a moot point anyhow. With the abyssalite walls it would take millions of turns for temps to equalize.

[DyingCrow]

Heat death is something to be prevented, not solved. How to, comes through experience. My current colony, temps range from 45-50ish outside the airlocks to 90ish down by the oil pools, where i set up the initial petroleum/plastic production, which is actually still running. Inside the living area, however, i keep it at a comfortable 20-25ish with no issues. While this may become an issue in another some hundred cycles, not too worried about it. 

So yeah, there is definitely a possibility for mass heating in the very, very long run.

[PhailRaptor]

4 hours ago, Jigsawn said:

As far as I can see, the only eternal passive cooling in the world (before buildings come into play) are from wheezeworts and ice biomes (although I heard ice biomes eventually warm up).

It has been conclusively determined that Biomes do not affect ongoing temperature equilibrium.  When the world is generated, a they are given designated quantities of thermal energy, but beyond that they are merely artistic overlays and nothing more.  An Ice Biome does not produce "coldness" (or rather, consume heat).  Neither does the Caustic Biome produce heat.

4 hours ago, Jigsawn said:

Scenario 1 - If I'm right, Abysallite completely blocks heat forever. So if a world is spawned and left forever with no interference, heat should never travel between biomes because of the abysallite walls, right? However anything within a biome that produces heat (i.e. geysers/magma) will eventually cook/melt? The only things that I know of from spawn that have cooling effects are Wheezeworts and ice biomes - right?

Side note - because of Abysallite's qualities, does this mean that constructing 1-thick abysallite tiles/insulated tile enclosure will always be as effective as a 2-thick enclosure?

Natural Abyssallite tiles work just like regular tiles constructed from Abyssallite.  So they are effectively impervious to heat up until about 500 C of difference between the Abyssallite in question and it's surroundings.  So wherever the Abyssallite Veins are intact, this is correct, the biomes will be preserved.  But as discussed above, Biomes do not have any heat generation or consumption inherently in them.  So objects within them will not be destroyed over time.  Unless....

There are 3 situations where this is not true.  The first (and hopefully most obvious) is the Starter Biome.  There is no Abyssallite surrounding it, so heat can freely move into it from the Caustic and Swamp Biomes.  The second is where the Ruins have breached the Abyssallite Veins between the Biomes.  Placing them is done after the Abyssallite Veins, so it overrides them.  There are curtain Ruins that are basically always across the Veins, allowing heat to flow through from one side to the other.  The final situation is new, the presence of a Geyser, Fumarole, or Volcano.  With the exception of the Slush and I believe CO2, these all generate substantial amounts of heat (especially the Volcanoes).  The effect is not that noticeable in the Caustic Biome, but it will somewhat quickly begin baking the Swamp Biome, and with every eruption will thaw out significant chunks of the surrounding Ice Biome.

Actually, now that I think about it...  it should be possible to create a perfect thermal barrier using alternating single tile Vacuum.  Construct a lattice of Tiles diagonally with Vacuum spaces between them.  Vacuum is unable to transfer heat, so there'd be no way for it to get through.

4 hours ago, Jigsawn said:

Scenario 2 -  Let's say you create a 1 or 2 block tunnel between biomes in an otherwise untouched world. Will heat always eventually seep through from the hotter biomes and eventually cook the whole asteroid? Do ice biomes always melt eventually if not completely sealed with abysallite, even if you just had an airlock or 1 block tunnel to enter it?

Depends on what you build the tunnels out of.  If you use Abyssallite, then they will be preserved up to a 500 C temperature difference.  But you can't build an airlock out of Abyssallite.  You'd have to use a 3 door mechanism, using Automation to momentarily lock then open the middle door after a Dupe has passed through it.  Opening the middle door with both side doors closed creates a Vacuum, which as discussed above, does not transfer heat.

4 hours ago, Jigsawn said:

Scenario 3 -  Let's assume you have renewable resources. In theory, can you stave off heat death in your base forever using standard cooling methods like wheezeworts, steam cooling, AETN, etc? Presumably, if you sited most heat producing machinery outside of an Abysallite shell surrounding your base, then the only heat coming into your base would be via gases/pipes or airlocks. Therefore if you can cool those locations equal or less to the amount of heat leaking in, then you will never get heat death?

Scenario 4 - In Scenario 3 you manage to maintain a constant temperature in your base. Now, will your machinery outside of your base, or tunnels/airlocks between biomes in the map cause any "exposed" part of the map to eventually overheat?

The limiter here would be whether or not you can sustain yourself 100% from what is inside your shell.  Eventually, the machinery outside would succumb to the heat and first break, then melt (but to cover the entire map, it would take a very, very, very long time).  There are plenty of ways to create thermally neutral bases, though.  Most of them require taking the maximum advantage possible out of fixed temperature outputs on machinery, like the Water Sieve always producing 40 C clean water regardless of the input (so, say...  99 C water, deleting more than 49 C of heat, because P-H2O holds more heat than clean H2O).

4 hours ago, Jigsawn said:

Scenario 5 - Let's pretend there are no Geysers. Are there any other natural heat sources that actually create more heat than already exists in the biomes at spawn? For example, do Caustic and magma biomes actually produce heat, or in theory could you cool them over a very long period of time?

With Geysers removed, the only source of additional heat is your activities.  Assuming there was no Abyssallite to block the spread, the map would eventually even out it's temperature.  Think of it like a topographical map, where the Ice Biomes are the valleys and the Magma Core is a mountain range.  Caustic Biomes would be smaller ridges, and Swamp Biomes would be in between.  As the heat spreads, the topography of the map would change and level off if left along for a long enough period of time.

5 hours ago, Jigsawn said:

Scenario 6 - In Scenario 2 I talk about the whole asteroid slowly cooking. Has anyone tested this over a very long period of time? What would happen if there is no way for heat to be removed? Does everything eventually melt and the whole asteroid turn into a giant swimming pool of superheated liquids trapped in by neutronium?

I think the game engine would grind to a halt from what people are calling the Time Dilation "bug" long before that happens.  Basically, there comes a point, relative to your system specs, where there are simply too many calculations being performed per tick.  First, the game will start slowing down.  Then, it will begin noticeably lagging on triple speed.  Then it will start "dropping" ticks per second.  It reaches a point where the game basically freezes on normal speed because all the ticks per second are getting dropped and the save file becomes unplayable.

[Jigsawn]

All very interesting, thanks folks.

I find it quite amusing that people are actually struggling with freezing in long games when I assumed all the dupes would be in some hellfire inferno

But now the new geysers are in the game, as soon as you unleash a volcano or two surely they will eventually cook any unsealed part of the map? Or do you reckon the combined cooling of wheezeworts would still counteract that over time?

But then again, as someone pointed out above, geysers/volcanos etc will naturally reach max pressure/flood themselves, whereas wheezeworts can carry on cooling forever.

I'm curious for those whose bases are freezing, how did you end up in that state? Wheezeworts around your base slowly leeching the heat away? Cold oxygen coming in from a cooling system with no heat to offset it?

 

 

 

[badimo]

1 hour ago, Jigsawn said:

I'm curious for those whose bases are freezing, how did you end up in that state?

I typically wind up with a cold base/map by pumping cold oxygen everywhere.  Eventually, I heat up the oxygen once things have gotten too cold for basic living.  I’m also careful to minimize heat and power production overall through ongoing power auditing and automation.

[JonnyMonroe]

3 hours ago, Jigsawn said:

I'm curious for those whose bases are freezing, how did you end up in that state?

I decided to cool my base by having cold plastic on a conveyor running around it. I didn't really bother to do the maths on how much cooling I would actually need and only realised the issue when my dupes all started getting hypothermia. I solved it routing the plastic differently such that it dumped some of it's heat into machinery first (machinery that I wouldn't ordinarily bother cooling).

[cpy]

17 hours ago, PhailRaptor said:

I Then it will start "dropping" ticks per second.  It reaches a point where the game basically freezes on normal speed because all the ticks per second are getting dropped and the save file becomes unplayable.

So what is maximum cycle we can get to?

[BT_20]

3 hours ago, cpy said:

So what is maximum cycle we can get to?

5000-7000 ish cycles it will get to the point that dupes starve during the night because it literally last the equivalent of multiple regular cycles.

[Cypher-7]

26 minutes ago, BT_20 said:

5000-7000 ish cycles it will get to the point that dupes starve during the night because it literally last the equivalent of multiple regular cycles.

How does that happen? Do nights get longer as the game goes on?

[Kabrute]

the game does "5 ticks per second" to start with, and each cycle you need more calculations per tick, so eventually the game starts dropping ticks to make up the difference.  Basically, "It can process 1 gig per second so It process 5 200 meg packets per second, eventually your packets are to big to process 5 per second, so now you get 4, then 3, then 2. "  The numbers are made up but thats the effect.  We say that a cycle is 600 seconds but its really 30,000 ticks, however long it takes to run through them, from what I have observed.

[onlineous]

9 hours ago, JonnyMonroe said:

I decided to cool my base by having cold plastic on a conveyor running around it. I didn't really bother to do the maths on how much cooling I would actually need and only realised the issue when my dupes all started getting hypothermia. I solved it routing the plastic differently such that it dumped some of it's heat into machinery first (machinery that I wouldn't ordinarily bother cooling).

As of late I see a lot of people cooling / heating with conveyors. I actually always used petroleum pipes. It might help you as well, because it's easier to automate. Abbysalite pipes don't transfer heat (or really small amounts). With some liquid shutoffs and some branches made of other materials (I use granite, because I don't want too much heat transfer) you can automatically cool down your base temperature to your desired temperature.

[JonnyMonroe]

8 hours ago, onlineous said:

As of late I see a lot of people cooling / heating with conveyors. I actually always used petroleum pipes. It might help you as well, because it's easier to automate. Abbysalite pipes don't transfer heat (or really small amounts). With some liquid shutoffs and some branches made of other materials (I use granite, because I don't want too much heat transfer) you can automatically cool down your base temperature to your desired temperature.

Any automation that can be done with pipes can be done with conveyors, it's just a bit more complex. The main reason for using them though is the faster heat transfer, higher overall thermal capacity and wider temperature range solids can occupy without phase change.

I still use pipes for certain specific situations but generally I find solids a better solution for industrial scale cases.

[onlineous]

34 minutes ago, JonnyMonroe said:

Any automation that can be done with pipes can be done with conveyors, it's just a bit more complex. The main reason for using them though is the faster heat transfer, higher overall thermal capacity and wider temperature range solids can occupy without phase change.

I still use pipes for certain specific situations but generally I find solids a better solution for industrial scale cases.

It could be me, but can you control if conveyors transfer heat or not? With a conveyor system the system is either on or off (I assume?) whereas with piping you can turn certain sections on and off, based on temperature.

I can understand using conveyers in high heat / high cold environments, but in a living environment the highest heat producers are usually the electrolyzers and they can be quite easily cooled with -55 degrees petroleum.

[JonnyMonroe]

2 minutes ago, onlineous said:

It could be me, but can you control if conveyors transfer heat or not? With a conveyor system the system is either on or off (I assume?) whereas with piping you can turn certain sections on and off, based on temperature.

I can understand using conveyers in high heat / high cold environments, but in a living environment the highest heat producers are usually the electrolyzers and they can be quite easily cooled with -55 degrees petroleum.

Using conveyors and automation you can emulate the functionality of filters, shutoffs and valves. You can also make compression rooms just as you can with fluids that are able to infinitely stack solids to buffer outputs and inputs. Insulating a conveyor is harder but not impossible.

I normally just pop a few wheezes around living environments. No decor hit and they're more than adequate for the small amount of cooling it needs.