• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1212 Excellent


About Rinkusan

  • Rank


Recent Profile Visitors

947 profile views
  1. You can make sustainable water using wild arbor trees -> lumber -> ethanol -> petroleum-generator polluted water -> water. Pips are OP imo. Nvm just noticed someone already mentioned the lumber pathway; ignore my comment
  2. Yep; and same with the other one except replace the trailblazer with cargo so you have enough steel to build the launch pad. To be perfectly transparent, when I tried this for the first time by visiting the swampy tundra planetoid that was 3 travel tiles away, I made the mistake of using a solo spacefarer and 2 extra cargo modules because I thought I needed 2 launch pads for some reason. It was still a success, but it resulted in spoiled food thanks to the small battery and 70% stress for one of my dupes thanks to all the sunburn, lack of atmo suit docks, etc. But my dupes made it home in one piece thanks to the sucrose in the solo spacefarer, and a proper spacefarer module would've fixed all of these issues no problem.
  3. Oh gotcha; I had no idea the sugar engine stats were that bad before.
  4. Mine's still a work in progress. I decided to make my printing pod the "cozy hub" with bedrooms, bathrooms, and nature reserves that double as free food. I obliterated my gold supply to break the decor scale and make my dupes happy. The empty space below the pod is where my recreation room(s) will be once I learn how to properly tame a gold volcano.
  5. I'd very much like world-progressing content; more specifically, unique bosses, monster waves, and environment challenges that trigger after year 1, year 2, etc.
  6. I've seen a few posts talking about the sugar engine and how nonviable it is relative to the carbon dioxide engine, and I thought I'd offer my take on this topic after playing with both in my current playthrough of the DLC. I personally think that not only does the sugar engine have its value; I've gotten way more use out of it than I have with the CO2 engine. From what I understand, the general consensus is that the sugar engine's poor speed doesn't make up for its 1 extra module, and in the context of short trips, I agree. Usually for me, that means replacing a solo spacefarer nosecone with a proper regular spacefarer module + nosecone so that my dupes can travel in luxury and sustainability, both of which don't matter all that much IF you're, say, colonizing the closest planetoid, which for me was 2 tiles away, AKA 1 tile of travel away. That's only 1.2 cycles of roundtrip travel with a CO2 engine, short enough to not need to worry about anything other than a basic amount of oxygen-diffuser oxygen and maybe an outhouse vs a whopping 4.8 cycles with a sugar engine with the added effort of beds, food, germs, sustainable oxygen, etc. On top of that, CO2 is - obviously - easily renewable all the time whereas sucrose only becomes renewable after you've conquered a sulfur vent. Where I see the sugar engine shine well beyond the CO2 engine, though, is in the far-distance trips i.e. "one-way" trips over 2 tiles of travel. Both engines have a max travel distance of 4 tiles, so normally, you'd think any travel distance over 2 tiles is basically a trip your dupes can't return from. But that's NOT the case with the sugar engine. Even though the fuel itself was a con in the previous short-distance scenario, it's a huge pro in this long-distance scenario because you can store sucrose in your spacefarer module; all you need is a simple storage bin. Send 2 sugar rockets to your planetoid 3 travel-tiles away, launch your steel cargo and trailblazer pod, build the launch pad, land your rocket, and build ladders up to your spacefarer module. Once the ladder is done, your dupes will take the sucrose from inside the spacefarer module and refuel the engine. Now you can send this rocket back home and land your 2nd rocket to complete whatever their mission was with all the time in the world thanks to the spacefarer module and, most importantly, a way back home. tl;dr I like to use the CO2 engine at the start for super-short, non-sustainable missions like visiting the 1st planetoid or early telescoping because the trip is so short. But I prefer the sugar engine for long-distance, sustainable and stress-free missions because you can use a comfy spacefarer module for sustainable everything, AND most importantly, the solid nature of sucrose allows you to store it in your spacefarer module (via storage bin) and quickly refuel your engine to return home unlike gaseous CO2.
  7. Or even better, do this but with multiple atmo suits so that - after you land, deconstruct your module, and build the landing pad for your rocket - you have plenty of time to work on a makeshift base or gather whatever resources you need from the planetoid before returning home WITHOUT having to build atmo suit docks with a gas pump, which is absolutely not an option for solo sparefarer rockets.
  8. I think these are just fun little deviations from reality for possibly artistic and gameplay reasons. For example, none of the typical real-life diatomic gases are diatomic in this game, but if they were, you wouldn't be able to make a quick and easy carbon pit to store your food. Even the carbon pit strat as portrayed in the game wouldn't work irl since, as helpful as CO2 can be for preserving food, it can't prevent anaerobic bacteria from growing on food. And if intermolecular forces were accurately portrayed in this game, you wouldn't be able to make a liquid-locked vacuum room because the liquid would just evaporate as you pump air out of the room. The game probably wouldn't be as digestable if it was true to reality rather than based on reality.
  9. From what I understand, as long as they aren't cramped or confined, pretty much any tamed critter with a lifespan of 75 cycles or lower is guaranteed to produce an egg before they starve to death. For pacus, tiles of water only affects overcrowding while the other 2 debuffs are dictated by the size of the whole room.
  10. True, but a real villain would keep their pacus overcrowded and unhappy :P
  11. @degr Couldn't you just store those 140 pacu in 1 square of water instead of that giant tank of water?
  12. I highly recommend playing on public servers; not just the official servers but the large dedicated servers. Surviving alongside 14-20 players is a unique and imo underrated experience; more people to talk to and work on a massive base, and a nice challenge of keeping more mouths fed to boot. I've been actively playing the game a little under 2 years, and only somewhat recently have I been burnt out. If you get to the point where DST has nothing else to offer you, I second @minespatch's advice on trying out another game. ONI's great if you're a nerd who's into resource management and fun semi-realistic chemistry mechanics like I am.
  13. I feel like there's not much I can add to this conversation. This is a very concerning move from Klei; while I understand the desire to keep Klei employees financially stable enough to let their creativity flourish (after all, Klei has an exceptional reputation when it comes to treating their workers right), I have the opposite level of faith for Tencent's exceptionally anti-consumer reputation much like everyone else in this thread. I was definitely not a fan of the Blitzchung incident, and I hope that asanine level of censorship doesn't bleed into our community. I really hope data security is also included in the "full autonomy of creative and operations across all aspects of the studio". It's kind of ironic that I got into Oxygen Not Included recently because I was short of breath reading this.
  14. RWYS alone is enough for me to consider this a great year for DST
  15. But you understand that you distinguished yourself in the negative direction, right? If your goal was to gain respect, you kinda did the opposite. Respect's a two-way street. Unless it's raining, berry bushes grow in 3-5 days though. Some players do struggle with hunger, and the more people on a server, the less food there is to go around. I did some math to help you see the difference between a common (not even the most efficient) crop farm and a berry bush farm down below. That said, if food isn't even an issue for you in the first place, then why do you take issue with the food nerfs? Living logs are pretty abundant endgame without wormwood. Have you tried using bearger to mow down trees?