Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.

TehPlayer14

Exploits ruin the game, they need to go

Recommended Posts

JonnyMonroe    149
3 minutes ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

fixed temperature output was part of the design.

Just because it's part of the design doesn't mean it's good design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KittenIsAGeek    1685
Just now, JonnyMonroe said:

Just because it's part of the design doesn't mean it's good design.

Now THAT is an argument you can work with.  If you disagree with the design, then elaborate on why you think it needs to be changed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yoma_Nosme    498

Hahaha. I just went to toilet to "delete some of my heat" (i.k.t.m.i)and to look what's new on the forum...when this discussion exploded...

Simple solution for the purists...cool your ph2o after you used it before sending it to the sieve to 40°C. If the devs change the mechanic I don't care...that's the beauty of early access 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_Q_    644

In case of using cold polluted water its adding heat, hard to output clean water at -10 Celsius.

They could just tweak it somehow, in the long run I only need water to produce oxygen, and for some toilets, aside from that water is not required for now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KittenIsAGeek    1685
Just now, turbonl64 said:

Of course. I however can't imagine the developer thinking "hmm, let's give the player an easy way to cool the water through the water sieve and basically turning the aqua tuner obsolete." I'm sure they had an intended reason for the 40°C output, but I certainly don't believe they envisioned it being used a cooling device.

The aquatuner is not obsolete. I use it a lot in every base to move heat from one place to another.  The heat then needs to be dealt with.  In some cases, its sent to my electrolyzers for oxygen production.  In some cases its sent to a sieve.  In another case, 95c polluted water was sent to a boiler and anti-entropy device to create a pool of 5c pure water.  (BTW, boiling polluted water into pure water deletes heat!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xylophone    6

@turbonl64 You have no idea at all what the developers intention was for their game. There are many unexplainable occurrences in this game, will you lobby to have them all changed 1 by 1? Don't use the sieve if you don't like it. Better yet stop playing and make your own game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yunru    1803

Clickbait ruins forums, it needs to go.

 

Also this should really be in suggestions and feedback, nee?

Putting it here suggests you want to whine more than you want these self-proclaimed "exploits" fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_Q_    644

I'm the only one that is not using any fancy machinery.

Previous base was like 500 cycles, I even produced some plastic and made fancy rooms for people.

Now current base 200 cycles and I use coal generator, and 2 hydrogen generators, I don't have anything fancy and can leave the base running in the background without any problems.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JonnyMonroe    149
1 minute ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

Now THAT is an argument you can work with.  If you disagree with the design, then elaborate on why you think it needs to be changed. 

Ok;

I'm not the kind of person that wants ONI to strive for realistic physics simulations. Not just because most home desktops wouldn't run such a thing, but also because it's a game and if in the design process you have to choose between fun and realism of the simulation, you should choose fun. I can't speak for what others find interesting in the game but personally I like having to solve problems, preferably with some degree of creativity. These blunt direct solutions are just boring. Heat your PH2O up then seive it to DELET HEAT. Boring. I'm ok with wheezes and AETNs because they both require some thought to using them. They're limited in terms of how many are available and how much they can process. Wheezes are weak but you can put them where you need them. You have to think about where you need them Do you need to bathe them in H2 to make them effective enough for your needs? How do you incorporate the AETN into your cooling? Do you build machinery near it or build radiators or thermo regs around it?

You could have made an argument for fixed output buildings in previous versions as they were necessary to cool beyond what the random seed provided but with cosmic you can exhaust stuff into space for a much more realistic cooling solution that also requires some actual thought to make:

image.thumb.png.f0af73ce7e2a05e64e906dd299e81202.png

And that's not even that MUCH thought, but it's a damn sight more than just dumping hot materials into buildings placed as and where you need them with little to no power cost or liquid/gas routing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xylophone    6
Just now, turbonl64 said:

How about I just continue on and you being triggered by it, keeping it your own problem. It is heat deletion as unintended. In the past people argued borg cubes and fertilizer maker+gas generators were intended. People even argued abyssalite fridges were intended heat devices. Where are those arguments now?

You're being a brat, and don't know what you are talking about. Get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KittenIsAGeek    1685
Just now, turbonl64 said:

Cool, but isn't that the exact same issue we are discussing, you heating up water and conveniently sending it to, for instance, the water sieve to have it cooled down without inconvience?

The heat has to be dealt with somewhere, somehow.  In the ONI game there are several ways to deal with heat:

  1. Use wheezeworts or an anti-entropy device to directly destroy heat.  These aren't that strong, but can be powerful if used correctly.
  2. Change the phase of the substance -- water -> Steam removes heat.  There's a post on this forum showing the math and mechanics on how to do it, but I'm not going to search for it right now. 
  3. Send the hot substance into space.  Works, but you want to make sure you're not venting a precious resource you'll need later.
  4. Send the hot substance into a fixed output device.  There are many to pick from.  Trolls tend to pick on the sieve for some particular reason. 
  5. Move it to a part of the asteroid you're not active in.  

You have many options.  If you think that option #4 is an exploit and ruins the fun of the game, then don't do it. Use a different method.  However, please stop calling an intended part of the design an exploit.  Options #1 through #4 ALL delete heat.  The mechanics are different for each option, but they all accomplish the same thing: A direct removal of heat from your closed asteroid system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JonnyMonroe    149
6 minutes ago, turbonl64 said:

In the past people argued borg cubes and fertilizer maker+gas generators were intended. 

Nobody ever made a half good argument for borg cubes being intended and fertilizer generators clearly were intended. The devs didn't accidentally type the numbers in. They may not have considered the full implications and it was clearly bad design that they have since changed but the old NGG/fert synths setups ran 100% off numbers that were intentionally set as they were and were working exactly as they were designed to work.

 

I'm happy with the NGG change but it's a design change that reflects a change of intention. It in no way signifies that the old design was unintentional, just that intentions changed and design improved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
watermelen671    19562
4 minutes ago, turbonl64 said:

How about I just continue on and you being triggered by it, keeping it your own problem. It is heat deletion as unintended. In the past people argued borg cubes and fertilizer maker+gas generators were intended. People even argued abyssalite fridges were intended heat devices. Where are those arguments now?

2 minutes ago, xylophone said:

You're being a brat, and don't know what you are talking about. Get over it.

Uh...guys? Please keep it civil, we don't want to get a mod involved and have this thread shut down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TehPlayer14    121
16 minutes ago, Yunru said:

Clickbait ruins forums, it needs to go.

 

Also this should really be in suggestions and feedback, nee?

Putting it here suggests you want to whine more than you want these self-proclaimed "exploits" fixed.

It wasn't intended clickbait (I wanted an accurate title)

Also this should be in general why because (it's not a suggestion duh)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JonnyMonroe    149
Just now, turbonl64 said:

I personally think they haven't considered the full implications for the water sieve either. It's a water filtration device, it's silly that it removes heat. If the designers would want to give us heat deletion through devices, then why not through other means like the ore refinery or the petroleum generator? That would make sense.

You actually can delete tremendous amounts of heat through a petrol generator. FAR more than you can with a water sieve. I used to cool volcanos and heavy machinery with just one and was easily keeping large portions of the map at -180c

I'm not endorsing it, just pointing out that it's there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trukogre    235
6 minutes ago, JonnyMonroe said:

You actually can delete tremendous amounts of heat through a petrol generator. FAR more than you can with a water sieve. I used to cool volcanos and heavy machinery with just one and was easily keeping large portions of the map at -180c

I'm not endorsing it, just pointing out that it's there.

Details?  What was your input temperature of the petroleum, what temperature were you keeping the petrol generator at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KittenIsAGeek    1685
Just now, JonnyMonroe said:

You actually can delete tremendous amounts of heat through a petrol generator. FAR more than you can with a water sieve. I used to cool volcanos and heavy machinery with just one and was easily keeping large portions of the map at -180c

I'm not endorsing it, just pointing out that it's there.

I've done similar things.  750g/s of polluted water can absorb a LOT of heat energy from a volcano, especially because the phase change into steam removes even MORE heat from the system.  I've been thinking about a steam generator/petrol generator combo down near the lava fields to produce nat. gas and water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JonnyMonroe    149
Just now, trukogre said:

Details?  What was your input temperature of the petroleum, what temperature were you keeping the petrol generator at?

The petrol went in at about 90c or so? I wasn't heating it, just pumping directly from slicksters/cooker. The petro (and NG) gens output their waste products at whatever temperature the building itself is so I sealed it in hydrogen and cooled it down to -200 then used sweeper arms to extract the -200c ice it was producing. The ice was then put on a rail loop to exchange heat with plastic on a rail which cooled the base. it all got very, very cold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trukogre    235
Just now, JonnyMonroe said:

The petrol went in at about 90c or so? I wasn't heating it, just pumping directly from slicksters/cooker. The petro (and NG) gens output their waste products at whatever temperature the building itself is so I sealed it in hydrogen and cooled it down to -200 then used sweeper arms to extract the -200c ice it was producing. The ice was then put on a rail loop to exchange heat with plastic on a rail which cooled the base. it all got very, very cold.

Yea, I"ve used the petrol generator as a cooler holding it at -20 C, I've never gone full polluted ice cooler with it yet though.  So, let's do the math:

750 g/s of pwater, at -200 C.  If we say your base was at a temp of 20 C, and we exchange heat with plastic until the ice has melted and the pwater has stabilized at 20 C as well, then we're accomplishing 750 * 220 * 6 = 990 kWatts of cooling to the outside environment

water sieve:  I'll stick with the 'cooling to the outside environment' measurement for this, and pretend the sieve outputs the full 5 kg, although it seems to me it often averages 10% under that for whatever reason.    So, let's say we heat up the pwater to 110 C, sieve cools it down to 40 C, that's 5000 * 70 * 6=  2100 kW. 

So, no, in a certain sense the sieve is actually twice as powerful as the petrol generator, in the pure 'heat deletion' sense.  The petrol generator is better in a few ways, A. can cool things to -200 C with no additional setup  B cooling via plastic is quite easy, whereas the sieve requires additional machinery to move heat from the environment into the pwater, possibly many aquatuners so quite power expensive.  However, the petrol generator setup you have is a bit complicated.  Still, it's a great cooler, but the exact statement you made was that it deletes far more heat, and this appears to be untrue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JonnyMonroe    149
1 minute ago, trukogre said:

750 g/s of pwater, at -200 C.  If we say your base was at a temp of 20 C, and we exchange heat with plastic until the ice has melted and the pwater has stabilized at 20 C as well, then we're accomplishing 750 * 220 * 6 = 990 kWatts of cooling to the outside environment

This was done a few patches back when petro gen outputted 1250g/sec

 

For bonus points I later did a similar thing with NGGs at -200, that used 9 NGGs. I decommissioned it because it was a pain getting the CO2 out (sweepers can't pick up frozen CO2), and I needed CO2 at the time for my slicksters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trukogre    235
Just now, JonnyMonroe said:

This was done a few patches back when petro gen outputted 1250g/sec

Your statement was "You actually can delete tremendous amounts of heat through a petrol generator. FAR more than you can with a water sieve.", which is in the present tense, and so I evaluated your statement using today's machinery.  I am unsurprised to hear that this was done several patches ago, but I believe I chose correctly for doing the math with today's numbers.  Even with the old numbers, your statement above, put into the past tense , would still be untrue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JonnyMonroe    149
Just now, trukogre said:

which is in the present tense, and so I evaluated your statement using today's machinery.

That's fair. I presumed the discussion was specifically the build as I had made and used it but doing the math for current numbers makes more sense in the wider discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmf35    38
9 minutes ago, JonnyMonroe said:

The petrol went in at about 90c or so? I wasn't heating it, just pumping directly from slicksters/cooker. The petro (and NG) gens output their waste products at whatever temperature the building itself is so I sealed it in hydrogen and cooled it down to -200 then used sweeper arms to extract the -200c ice it was producing. The ice was then put on a rail loop to exchange heat with plastic on a rail which cooled the base. it all got very, very cold.

See this is the type of "exploit" I can get behind. It requires ingenuity and effort to manipulate the gameplay mechanics. Buildings that "magic away the heat" when it's not their primary purpose (like wheeze & atn), don't make the player work or think creatively. They need to be fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites