Exploits ruin the game, they need to go

[XEVEN]

2 minutes ago, WanderingKid said:

CO2 vents to vacuum.  Dump heat, move on.  Chlorine geysers too perhaps, but they tend to run hot.  Hey, I finally have a good reason to starve my slicks!

Meh I'm just going to build door crushers. What is the difference? I can pipe my heat to the surface, or I can just delete it wherever i choose to build a door crusher. I mean really, it's a single player sandbox. The mechanics are intended. Who cares how people are deleting their heat?

[PhailRaptor]

2 minutes ago, XEVEN said:

Who cares how people are deleting their heat?

Klei might.  But that's for them to decide, not us.  If they don't like it, they'll change it.  If they like it, they'll embrace it as a feature.  If they have no strong opinion, then nothing will happen.

[TehPlayer14]

4 minutes ago, XEVEN said:

Meh I'm just going to build door crushers. What is the difference? I can pipe my heat to the surface, or I can just delete it wherever i choose to build a door crusher. I mean really, it's a single player sandbox. The mechanics are intended. Who cares how people are deleting their heat?

Oni should be challenging to extend play time of the game, it shouldn't be a cake walk because otherwise you will stop playing it because of low difficulty

[XEVEN]

1 minute ago, TehPlayer14 said:

Oni should be challenging to extend play time of the game, it shouldn't be a cake walk because otherwise you will stop playing it because of low difficulty

Meh, you still have to design systems to efficiently/creatively/elegantly move heat around. There lies the fun. There lies the challenge. The game isn't particularly hard to begin with, even before space and building output shenanigans. 

[JonnyMonroe]

7 minutes ago, clickrush said:

Dumping materials into space just isn't it. The solution we saw above which does that couldn't even cool enough water for a full sleet wheat farm.

If you're referring to the one I posted I'd appreciate if you tried yourself before spreading lies. The cooler I posted is actively cooling the output of a volcano (which I showed) and you think it can't keep a sealed room full of plants and no machinery cold?

45 minutes ago, PhailRaptor said:

Whether or not it is good game design, however, is still very much up for debate.  I personally don't like it, and I hope that as the game nears a release state (which it clearly does not seem to be close to at all) they will be removed.  But such a change will likely require an additional cooling method, something low tech with limited effectiveness, to form a first stepping stone from the end of early game to the middle of mid game in order to replace the fixed temp outputs.

This pretty well sums up my thoughts on the matter.

[TehPlayer14]

1 minute ago, XEVEN said:

Meh, you still have to design systems to efficiently/creatively/elegantly move heat around. There lies the fun. There lies the challenge. The game isn't particularly hard to begin with, even before space and building output shenanigans. 

Depends on the person its way harder or way easier (But for now its too easy)

[XEVEN]

12 minutes ago, TehPlayer14 said:

Depends on the person its way harder or way easier (But for now its too easy)

Last night I designed a fully automated berry farm. Berries fall off, get sucked up and conveyed to refrigerators. They are fed from geyser water cooled by PH2O. The PH20 is dumped into space. We have infinite amounts of it. It was great fun, and a good challenge.

If we do not delete heat with fixed outputs... If we do not delete heat with space vents... What do YOU suggest is a balanced alternative? Wart rooms? Nullifiers?

Fine. Let me grow warts. I'll do it that way, and it will be just as easy. Believe it.

[Coolthulhu]

Heat deletion mechanic is less of an exploit than oil cooking. Also more fun.

[clickrush]

1 hour ago, JonnyMonroe said:

If you're referring to the one I posted I'd appreciate if you tried yourself before spreading lies. The cooler I posted is actively cooling the output of a volcano (which I showed) and you think it can't keep a sealed room full of plants and no machinery cold?

I'am not 'spreading lies'. You said you are boiling 120g/s polluted water and destroy the steam via space. Let's say the polluted water comes in at 40°C on average, this would mean your cooler destroys heat at a rate of (120°C - 40°C) * 6 * 120g/s = 57.6kW, which is not even the cooling power of a AETN btw.

A sleet wheat farm that supplies grain for 16 berry sludge eating duplicants 20kg / 600s of 5°C water for each plot times 20 (the amount of wheat you need for the recipee per cycle). You need about 2-5 times as much cooling as your water boiler provides to achieve that depending on the input temperature (40-105°C). These are rough estimates but this already shows an issue here.

Given that you have some polluted water to get rid of part of the irrigation comes from running that through a sieve and the other part comes from a cool steam vent. So lets say you have to roughly tripple the amount of polluted water you destroy which is 360g/s to cool the irrigation water. Where does all that polluted water come from? That is about 5 constantly running NGGs or from another perspective you are essentially doubling your water consumption per irrigated sleet wheat.

And that is *only* the wheat. Now add the berries and all your other cooling needs to the equation. And we're talking about only 16 dupes here which is a small colony (which I personally prefer), but anyone who wants to feed something above 20 duplicants with high quality foods quickly runs into problems using this method. Then add cooling your powerplant, your other equipment and possibly some material I/O that comes out hot.

If you aren't super lucky with geyser and vent spawns you probably cannot spend that much water just for cooling your irrigation anyways. The only way I can imagine one can achieve this w/o being lucky is to completely avoid electrolyzers and produce oxygen via morbs => deodorizer/liquid oxygen.

Again as said before maybe I'am doing some really dumb mistakes in those calculations or I'am missing something, but with the current state of the game I cannot imagine a sizeable high tech high quality food base w/o fixed heat output cooling. Also all those estimates and equations don't even cover the fact that you are 'accidentally' cooling via fixed heat outputs. It's a whole different story if they actually changed all the fixed heat buildings to dynamic heat.

[JonnyMonroe]

3 minutes ago, clickrush said:

snip

I'll get the nit-picking out of the way first. My dupes live off BBQ, which is 2 points higher than the berry sludge you're harping on about. So if you want to keep repeating that point about a 'high quality food base' then maybe actually use a high quality food as your reference point. You also keep mentioning 'High tech' What does that even mean in relation to thermodynamics? Most of the really high tech stuff doesn't generate meaningful heat unless you needlessly leave it running for hundreds of cycles, such as a polymer press or glass forge. If you mean a highly industrialised base that has large machinery arrays then sure, those can be more complex to cool. But what machinery do you even build in such arrays anymore? Massive fert/NGG setups are out of the window now and turbine/petro don't need any significant cooling, and solar needs none. Maybe explain your cooling requirements in less ambiguous terms so we at least have a reference point to go off. You're talking about cooling a sleet wheat farm as the ultimate test of an effective cooling system. This is my old bristle berry farm on my current seed:

If I can keep an uninsulated farm at 15c I'm pretty sure I can keep an insulated one at 5. The 120g/s figure was a rough estimate based on the fact that the PH2O source for the boiler is 2 NGGs and it doesn't use 100% of the output of those. It's late here and I'm not gonna spend a whole cycle counting the grams as they boil. I do supplement the cooling with some wheezes and an AETN as I would expect anyone to do when building a functional solution but at the same time this isn't the only part of the base being cooled by that aquatuner, nor is it the part that uses the most cooling. That would be this part:

That's 20kg/sec of igneous rock taken from a volcano at 400c. I can cool that but apparently sleet wheat is just beyond the capacity of mortal man.

[clickrush]

@JonnyMonroe I don't like the idea of relying on meat production via ranching atm because it requires large amounts of space and materials and/or micromanagement currently. Also duplicants don't demand >3 quality food. With the equivalent quality food 'pepper bread' (which doesn't have the soulfood debuff) the cooling needs would even get worse than with berry sludge.

The igneous rock example you gave is ironic because you are destroying *massive* amounts of heat there by feeding it to your stone hatches, who have a fixed heat output... If that is an actual 20kg/s at 400°C were talking about ~7600kW. If you would *actually* cool this with your boiler you would destroy more than 100times more water than you initially claimed.

I assume you don't do this intentionally in an 'exploitative' way. You just ship the minerals to your hatches and be done with it. But it just illustrates how fixed heat output is everywhere and currently almost unavoidable. This is why I initally said people should do the math before wanting it to go away and is the reason why I think @PhailRaptor made a really good point by saying that Klei first would have to add other feasable (and very powerful) cooling solutions before removing fixed heat outputs.

[KittenIsAGeek]

8 hours ago, Sevio said:

1) Intended yes, but not for the purpose that it has been turned to.

2) It is when it raises the temperature, very debatable when it opens up a heat deletion shortcut that can be used to easily cool entire bases.

3) Entirely subjective, as the walls of text you decided to skip have made clear.

So... fixed-temperature output buildings are OK when they negatively effect your colony, but they aren't OK if you figure out a way to turn that into a benefit?  Darn, I've been living my entire life the wrong way!  Guess I'll quit turning stumbling blocks into stepping stones and go back to stubbing my toes.

[Oozinator]

Just now, KittenIsAGeek said:

Darn, I've been living my entire life the wrong way! 

[JonnyMonroe]

7 hours ago, clickrush said:

you are destroying *massive* amounts of heat there by feeding it to your stone hatches, who have a fixed heat output

And plants delete the heat of the water they consume. You only deal with the heat of the water that sits in the farm tile, and I likewise deal with the heat of the rock that sits in the critter feeder. You can't get around that kind of heat deletion but you still have to deal with the ambient heat from resources before they're consumed.

But ignoring all of that, it's still demonstrably possible to get practical levels of cooling from an exhaust based system that is far less abusive of fixed outputs than a seive solution. No base is 100% free of heat deletion or fixed outputs as so many buildings and mechanics use it. The point is to reduce reliance on it and not intentionally develop around it as a mechanic and with the introduction of space that is now more possible than ever and your hang up seems to be that it uses too much ph2o to be practical. If you're farming for all of your food needs then yes it probably does use too much since you have a massively inflated water demand. I only have 2 steam and 1 ngg on this seed. No hot water and no slush. I'm cracking oil for my boiler but I only crack 180g/s for it, and not all of that is used. I didn't do the maths, I just built and adjusted my systems until they worked. If your systems are working then good for you. But coming on here and telling me something couldn't possibly work when I'm sat here watching it work? It's just not convincing me. And saying 'it couldn't possibly cool sleet wheat!' Is fairly meaningless. I think it could given what it's already cooling, but farmed sleet wheat just isn't that good anyway. The seed I'm on is better suited to Ranching thanks to the 2 volcanos, and even if it wasn't I tend to use wild sleet/pincha anyway. They're plentiful and don't suck down resources. If you want to arbitrarily increase your cooling needs to prove a point then at least go big with it and try active cooling a room full of tepidizers or something.

[Sevio]

4 hours ago, KittenIsAGeek said:

So... fixed-temperature output buildings are OK when they negatively effect your colony, but they aren't OK if you figure out a way to turn that into a benefit?  Darn, I've been living my entire life the wrong way!  Guess I'll quit turning stumbling blocks into stepping stones and go back to stubbing my toes.

Worth a chuckle to be sure when you word it like that, but it's not a stretch to say that the fixed output temperature was an easy coding solution for a building that heats its input to optimal temperature to do what it needs to do, without the expectation that one day it would be used to turn 119 C polluted water to 40 C clean water on a large scale. Heating stuff with electricity is easy, cooling it requires a heat sink. This design choice is exemplified best by the metal refinery which takes in a liquid as coolant and outputs it that much hotter depending on what refined metal it cooled.

By all means use the water sieve any way you like, I use the water sieve for heat management in my current game as well, without aquatuner so far but simply to cool down hot water coming from my metal refinery. But I would still like to see a new cooling solution to fill this gap and to spur development of more plausible ways to deal with heat and allow the game to evolve past using this quirk.

[Dirmagnos]

14 hours ago, WanderingKid said:

The obvious answer is the devs, which has not always been clear when asked for.  Admitted Klei is better than this.  I specifically said when things are clearly not, and then quoted two examples.  Heck you quoted me.  My point is we don't know if it is, or isn't, an exploit unless the devs say it is, or it's perfectly clear that it isn't.  How do you go from there to "Skipping Bug Reporting" for benefits?

The internal consistency would be much more clear if the devs had put a more obvious tooltip on the game for those tools that are a constant output temperature when used.  However, these components of the game have been in use for a while and ARE part of the internal consistency of the game.  They are directly changed for balance issues (such as the hot showers) when necessary.

What if devs chose to ignore obvious bugs ? Ive seen it before plenty ? First time i saw "its not a bug, its a feature" being abused by developers, was about 4 years ago(before that ive seen it mostly used in jokingly manner) and culprit was Ubisoft(no surprise there) with their game GRO(factor that contributed greatly to it demise, game had a lot of potential). They officially called obvious bugs, like wall glitching, a feature. Yes, Klei is better than that, but i find it to be futile to relax in such matters.

Anyways, my point is that devs and users are supposed to work in tandem, especially in modern gaming world, where devs save a lot of money by using players as free bug testers.

Plugging a hole in a dam with a finger is not really a solution. Tooltip wont really solve anything. If temperature outputs seem to operate under different laws of physics across various constructs, for no apparent reason, then something is seriously wrong. Where does the heat go, or where does it come from, depending on building ? This is internal consistency, not just accepting random features as facts, because reasons. Things must make sense, 2 + 2 must equal 4.

14 hours ago, WanderingKid said:

"It's just a game" is the same argument as the MST3K's mantra “It's just a show; I should really just relax”.  It admits it does its best to make fun gameplay out of real world associations without trying to become a physics simulator wholesale.  "It's a feature, not a bug" is more appropriate to associate the argument, as it dismisses the way the game is using a piece of programming that would be more intuitive and/or accurate in it's usage than what the developers can either code for or some other design flaw that the developers haven't gotten around to fixing yet.  

In this case I don't think it is either of those associations, as there are other machines in the game that do not depend on constant temperature and the design seems intentional. 

I'll admit the comment of 'hurting you at all' was ill composed.  I wasn't looking to get into a full on debate at the time, and chose my phrasing poorly.

Nobody is saying that it should be a physics simulation wholesale, its ok to have certain rules bent for the sake of gameplay. Problem is that in this particular instance, there is no good reason. It is just so. Gods made it this way. Problem is lack of connectivity to the rest of game universe in this case, as other constructs do not operate under same rules, making whole heat/cold interaction simply absurd - who needs to develop proper methods, that make sense, when you can have magical boxes that cool down or heat up various mediums for no discernible reason.

Would it make sense to have a chest that instantly cools anything put in it to -200(while itself maintaining perfect ambient temperature) ? Feature must have a purpose and a reason.

14 hours ago, WanderingKid said:

Exploits are non-intentional game design, and you obviously know that well enough.  I didn't feel the need to write a footnoted essay on the subject, but apparently that was a foolish choice. 

Let's change the context of the question: Is it an exploit when a player figures out that sniper units in Halo can't hear you when you crouch around them, so you crouch your way to behind them and unload with an autorifle?  Is it intentional game design that they can't be heard in an obvious sniper position that you can time their vision just so to avoid, or is it an exploit because the designer missed a combination of events that led to a unit having an incorrect detection value?  The exploit part is when you skip half the map entirely.  Using the tools the developer game you to play the game the best way you can is a tool, and if it is suddenly noticed, and as mentioned, properly bug reported, you can determine by the dev intereactions (or silence) if it IS an exploit and needs to be patched, or was part of the intent.

I'm glad you think that the concept of designed shortcuts for player use is utter nonsense.  Using that same context for a completely different set of mechanics, sleeping grunts are designed that they can't hear you until you, or someone else, shoots.  This is a designed shortcut to allow you to use the game mechanics to improve your position.  So, yes, there are designed shortcuts. 

This is nearly no different than a shortcut used to give you a way to keep your heat results at an uncomfortable but not impossible temperature when you're nearly out fresh water.  That it's also used to cool down ridiculous amounts of hot water could be considered an exploit if it was a brand new, unexpected application of existing mechanics.  That it's been here for a long time implies that it's part of the design, not an exploit working around intended design.

Non-intentional game design features do not instantly qualify as exploit, if they fall withing logical rules of the game. There is no equivalency here. In many game, many features that were not part of original design were considered part of the game without them being classifiable as exploit.

If crouching is supposed to muffle step sounds, then its a feature. But it only works under such specific conditions, so that only snipers cant hear it, then its a bug that is being exploited. Unless there is a viable reason why snipers cant hear you crawling around, have a headset with directional mic or something that would explain validity of such feature.

Skipping half the map is either cheating or bug-abuse, depending on conditions of such event.

Shortcut is to have a hotbar, instead of needing to use inventory all the time. Being able to circumvent/break rules of the system is a bug. Sleeping grunts inability of hearing player is not a shortcut, its a feature that makes sense. You do not cut any corners with it. Its generally called stealth. Otherwise youd have to call all games that employ stealth elements to be "shortcut games". Thief, the shortcut game.

And again, you try to make false equivalence between two different things. No, losing huge amount of heat into the void of the chaos gods, for not logical reason is not a shortcut, its a bug. Its the same **** as with keeping polymer presses at manageable temperatures with thin layer of water(where does all that heat go). Considering that were talking about game that put great emphasis on temp management, its a critical bug at that.

Age of the exploit, or it widespread usage, make absolutely no difference - if game would be crashing every 15 minutes and been doing that for months, then youd be ok with that ? After all, a lot of people experience that and it has been around for a long time.

14 hours ago, WanderingKid said:

As to creating the dupes with 20 value stats, there's a mod for that.  It's a single player game.  I've played many of them.  Typically if you're going to invest the time sharing with the community your games with those values you would use a tag between [Stock] and [Mod], like most people around here do.  The mod scene is only really starting up here so far, but I like what I've seen up till now.  I hope it becomes as robust as the KSP one did.

It has exactly zero influence on my enjoyment of the stock game that's been developed or the conversations I'm having with others that are doing the same.  It has some influence on what mods I may, or may not, include.  Other than that, why would I care.

The script kiddy comment is an interesting choice to grief me about.  First you say to stop calling them hackers, then grief me for using the term 'script kiddies'.  Yes, I'm aware of what the term means.  It's a reference point that easily illustrates the concept of copy/paste and slightly modify, and most people have been familiar with the term at least in passing. 

My question was not about mods or their existence. The fact that its a single player game is fairly irrelevant as well, to be entirely honest.

And if you do not care, then why do you bother to critique person opinion in regards of major cooling of water using device(for no discernible reason), that he considers to be a bug ? Could it be because you are used to this bug and incorporate it in your strategies while playing game ? Considering that you also make references to age of this feature, i presume that you simply have normalized it.

14 hours ago, WanderingKid said:

Now that's just insulting for no reason.  I never said that I found the sieve constant heat design to be difficult or skillful, I said it was easy to use and allows me to shortcut other components of the game, in particular deletion of heat.  There are plenty of other places to find heat deletion, that one just happens to be one of the handiest.  Perhaps this conclusion statement isn't directly aimed at me, but since the rest of the post was, and then you switch to a massive broad stroke statements like this, it's hard to tell. 

I'm sure you'll let me know if I was a particular target for this comment, because I'd like to see anywhere I've complained at fixes to bugs.  I will agree there are balance issues I post about that I dislike, but they're most involved in playtime for the game based on my experiences.

In other words, its ok because it convenient ? Perhaps they should have kept whole natgas circulatory system that was fixes in latest update, as it was extremely convenient for many people to completely solve any possible power issues by mid-game without much hassle, shortcutting huge sections of the game.

Apologies for being overly aggressive on several occasions, i tend to go off the rails sometimes.

[Dirmagnos]

13 hours ago, clickrush said:

1. Fixed heat output is intended

The game files clearly show that every of the dozen or so fixed heat output buildings are intentionally doing so. It would be a matter of seconds to change a building from fixed heat (like the electrolyzer) to a dynamic heat output (like the natural gas generator).

Even if its by design, it doesnt make it any less absurd, or poor design choice in general.

13 hours ago, clickrush said:

2. Fixed heat output is a feasable simulation tradeoff

Fixed heat output buildings simulate chemical reactions and similar. ONI doesn't have a chemistry simulation outside of buildings. It is well known that chemical reactions can either consume or release physical energy, we're talking about endothermic vs exothermic reactions here. Also some reactions need a specific temperature to work optimally. Using a fixed heat output simulates these complex things into a easily understandable game mechanic.

No, it doesnt. Heat has to go somewhere. Current implementation(in some cases) utterly ignores law of conservation of energy. Its magic, not chemistry. If sieve cools down water, then it has to output that thermal energy somewhere. Sieve itself does not heat up nearly enough, so where does it go ?

Altho best example that i can come up from the top of my head is thin layer of water to cool down stuff like polymer press. This one is pure absurdity, as there is literally no explanation for thin layer of water to have infinite energy absorption capabilities.

It is neither reasonable nor critical to gameplay.

13 hours ago, clickrush said:

2. Fixed heat output is good design

The fixed heat output mechanic is already a interesting gameplay mechanic that solves this problem in a complex way, because all the fixed heat output buildings have material I/O that first needs to be controlled and supplied in the correct way to make use of the cooling mechanic in the first place. As it stands right now dumping materials into space for cooling is not feasable nor sustainable in any way shape or form. Anyone arguing this matter can try to set up a sustainable high tech base with high quality food (berry sludge +) and long term cooling solutions for all the equipment w/o using fixed heat output cooling designs. Good luck.

No, it just ignores problem in a simple way.

Dumping materials into space shouldnt be feasible for cooling. This is not how space works. You need sufficient amount of molecules for proper heat transfer, something that space lacks. The fact that its extremely cold out there is irrelevant.

And if we were to siphon enough gas out there, then it would just create heat blanket. Heat transfer would be so slow that it would be pointless.

[JonnyMonroe]

24 minutes ago, Dirmagnos said:

Even if its by design, it doesnt make it any less absurd, or poor design choice in general.

No, it doesnt. Heat has to go somewhere. Current implementation(in some cases) utterly ignores law of conservation of energy. Its magic, not chemistry. If sieve cools down water, then it has to output that thermal energy somewhere. Sieve itself does not heat up nearly enough, so where does it go ?

Altho best example that i can come up from the top of my head is thin layer of water to cool down stuff like polymer press. This one is pure absurdity, as there is literally no explanation for thin layer of water to have infinite energy absorption capabilities.

It is neither reasonable nor critical to gameplay.

No, it just ignores problem in a simple way.

Dumping materials into space shouldnt be feasible for cooling. This is not how space works. You need sufficient amount of molecules for proper heat transfer, something that space lacks. The fact that its extremely cold out there is irrelevant.

And if we were to siphon enough gas out there, then it would just create heat blanket. Heat transfer would be so slow that it would be pointless.

Exhausting a hot material into space makes perfect sense for cooling. You think your car doesn't lose heat through it's exhaust pipe? You ever see a cooling tower on a power plant? That is dumping heat into a coolant then exhausting it. Nobody here is talking about conduction. We're talking about convection.

[Sevio]

^ +1

Dumping hot material into space is now (and should be) an effective way to get rid of heat. You need expendable mass for it and that is a good tradeoff you have to think about in the context of the game.

[watermelen671]

Why am I still here? There are so many walls of text in this thread, you could build an equivalent to the Winchester house! 

Spoiler

I suppose to keep this relevant I'll just throw in my two cents on this issue with something I like to say when these sorts of things come up:

I'm here to have fun time, not have a hard time. If I wanted a hard time, I'd go wrestle a bear with a boulder trapping my arm.

 

[lurkinglurker]

15 hours ago, TehPlayer14 said:

But being an exploit is not automatically good or bad. 

15 hours ago, TehPlayer14 said:

No

For the people who keep harping on "ONI's so and so <insert something here> is an exploit", I would like to point out a fact:

Rocket/Grenade jumping, Bunny hopping/Wall sliding and the Spy in FPS, move/stop staggered shooting and supply cancelling in RTS, third person peekaboo around cover in third person shooters, last-hitting/last-killing in both MMORPGs and Dota/Moba-like games (and Warcraft 3) and the entire concept of Combos in Fighting games are core mechanics of all of their genres...

... and they are ALSO ALL, TO THE VERY LAST OF ALL OF THEM, EXPLOITS. Yes, really. All of them started their lives as unintended effects in a game.

And these utterly totally foundation-level quirky "I can't think of those games without this stuff" mechanics of entire genres can be exploits and also better their source genres. Think about it. (said improvement can reach somewhat ridiculous degrees: note that you can't really get any more "core" than interrupting a move with another move in fighting games).

We even can hold one of the very foundations of all of gaming itself, the fact a game gets harder and harder as it progresses, ON AN EXPLOIT. (The game is called Space Invaders... and back when the arcade machine came out, the processor cannot handle all the invaders on screen... thus resulting in the lucky accident of said game moving faster aka becoming more difficult as more invaders get shot up towards the end)

So let's stop harping on the fact that ONI's fixed temperature and other quirks are or are not exploits (most if not all totally are) and rather focus on whether said exploity quirks betters the game (IMO, almost all of them does. The Devs agree too, apparently).

 

[avc15]

23 hours ago, turbonl64 said:

It's not an intended design, it's an exploit. If you like it, better use it now before developers remove it from the game 

(and if you wish not to drag the discussion down to this, then by all means elaborate on your standpoint instead of trying to shut me up)

Unfortunately you're wrong about this. Klei doesn't speak much on this topic but someone can link you back to squiggle discussing this very thing: buildings and fixed output temps. Klei made them that way on purpose, having understood what that means.

Nobody's ridiculing you. Klei is on record.

You should probably change your argument to something more defensible, like, "buildings should conserve energy". I wouldn't mind if they did, personally, either.

 

edit: wow, 7 pages in 24 hours.. that's what happens to such an inflammatory topic, I guess.

[avc15]

I only saw one person get hot headed, I think. IE: why this went 7 pages

Also didn't see anyone really set the record straight on this point just a bunch of "yes, it is" "no, it isn't".

 

[chemie]

15 hours ago, XEVEN said:

The PH20 is dumped into space. We have infinite amounts of it. It was great fun, and a good challenge.

If we do not delete heat with fixed outputs... If we do not delete heat with space vents... What do YOU suggest is a balanced alternative? Wart rooms? Nullifiers?

Exactly.  If you want to delete heat, there are a bunch of options, and heat and mass deletion to space void is the biggest.  In fact, it can be done with less power vs sieve.

( and is more like an exploit since it is taking advantage of game mechanic vs a building operating as developers programmed to)

[clickrush]

5 hours ago, JonnyMonroe said:

I didn't do the maths, I just built and adjusted my systems until they worked

Exactly. And you are accidentally using a fixed heat output system (your hatches) to destroy almost 8MW of heat continuosly. It 'works' because it is a fixed heat output system. And by the way, a way more powerful one than your average sieve/aquatuner system.

I'am done with this discussion. Everyone just throws around all kinds of anectodes and nobody actually tries to understand why fixed heat is in the game in the first place. If Klei doesn't give us other (more interesting and powerful) cooling solutions and/or increase the geyser/vent outputs drastically, fixed heat needs to stay.