ToiDiaeRaRIsuOy

reloading solved the critter counter to the correct number. So a glitch.

The conveyer loader only picks up oxylite. There are no other critters or eggs inside the ranch. Can the critter counter in ranches bug out? I am on the pre-july 16th build

I set up a dense puft farm. I count 3 fully grown dense pufts, 1 fully grown puft prince, 1 dense pufle and finally one dense puft egg. Screenshot belows says 7 critters are present in the ranch: I seriously have no idea what I am missing here. There no pufts or eggs overlaying.

Also map dependent :D.

I usually tackle those inbetween. Early game I make sure I don't give them too many skills to keep morale requirements down, later game I make sure food quality is high enough. It is definitely a balancing act, but later game I find even highly skilled duplicants with high morale requirements getting overjoyed. There definitely challenges enough throughout the game. Even if you are goal oriented, launching a rocket to the space tear takes up a mighty amount of time, and requires a lot of steps and subgoals before you end up there.

Ah I misread. I think I roughly have that amount of hours in my current colony. But depending on circumstances, it is possible he got most out of it in his current playthrough.

It took me up to cycle 700 to launch my first steam rocket on my current colony. It will take me up to around cycle 1050 to launch my first petroleum rocket. Granted, I could have launched it probably earlier, but instead of rushing it I tackled other problems. Even if you know the solution to every problem, the game just is not finished at cycle 140. I wasn't even at the oil biome at that point. Like Sheaker says, around cycle 2200 you are probably 'done'. My goals usually are, in this order -Start: set up basic requirements like farms, water supply, oxygen supply, bathrooms, barracks -Set up ranching to get glossy drecko's and smooth hatches. -Expanding beyond first biome: locate an AETN and cool steam vent to set up advanced oxygen and cooling setup for the colony. -Expand to oil biome to get main power sorted -Locate lobby hall at the top of the map to build forward base around it -Build up to first rocket -Automate processes and put down tubular paths to decrease dupe work and travel time. Those are specific goals. Usually they do take a long while to achieve.

A colony is never finished xD. For instance, I am currently creating a cooling system for my rocket hangar. It got waaayyy too complicated, but I am absolutely loving it xD. There is always something to be done. Always the next challenge to tackle.

I concur - keep the previous branch also active. I very much like the changes made, but the new update getting sorted will take a lot of time. In the meanwhile can prepare their bases in the old branch for the changes.

But why. He had a smooth gaming experience on his old cpu yesterday before the update. Why then compromise further? I remember them scaling the maps down too - during early access when the game was still in development, not after the launch- but to me that would be not acceptable on a launched game. Of course, there are games out there that increased system requirements over the years. WoW comes to mind. However, those game with very significant updates that did justify that. Nothing on the update list justifies that performance hit. They are all point for point very good changes, but nothing in there justifies a performance hit.

I do have to wonder why there is a performance drop for older CPU's on a LAUNCHED game. Is the update to unity 2020.3 causing this? You can't just expect people accept that. I agree a roll back for those people atleast as a temporary fix should be an option. The changes in the update list are significant updates, but nowhere close to being worth a potential performance penalty.

At what temperature are foods considered to be deep frozen?

Intel: 14nm has underwent its 5th generation in 7 years AMD: 7nm underwent its 2d generation in 2 yeats. It's of course a fair comparison in the sense of it being their current line up. It's not fair in that sense to say "if they can create faster 14nm chips, imagine what they can do with 7nm". Because when they do hit 7nm, it will an archtiectural reset. It will not be as optimised as the current 14nm+++++++ chipset is. I agree their first generation 7nm will most likely be better than AMD's first gen 7nm, but I also think that difference will be dissapointing. Just for reference, the single core performance difference between the i5-6600k and i5-11600k is roughly 50%. To give an indication what they will lose in terms of that. The swtich to 7nm will of course more than make up for that, just don't expect it to immediately scale off the final 14nm product, but rather the first.

I don't mean 3nm for production, but working prototypes. I can't imagine Intel not having it atleast in R&D. The part you left out in my quote was an important nuance ;). I think for the next couple of years atleast cpu perfomance increases will stagnate. Current situation where AMD will overall be the better choice, will continue to apply.

The current 14 nm chipset from Intel is heavily developed throughout the years (it dates back from 2014...). They squeezed every last drop of performance out of that architecture. It is not exactly a fair comparison with an architecture 2 generations in. AMD probably still has headroom to improve on their 7nm line. I expect intel's 10nm not be much better than their current 14nm, simply because you are comparing a fresh new architecture with a matured architecture. Plus, we talked about this already. Intel is not faster than AMD comparing their current chipsets, at best on par with a lot more voltage..Intel squeezes more clock frequency out of their chips, AMD has a better IPC. I am pretty sure both Intel and AMD already have 3nm chipsets. Just no means to produce them on a large scale in a profitable way. The thing that always holds back is the yield rate. Now, Intel is planning on building a new production facility. That could turn the tied for them.