I just tried it myself and it worked for me, the vote got updated. I will have to do more tests!
Another possible bug–with resource gathering:
I have a new base on FO-705D planet, which has ARgon and Nitrogen (and nothing else).
I have several COLectors, and expected the rate of gatehring AR and N to be exactly proportional to their concentrations, and independent of cycle-rhythm I chose. But it is NOT the case.
When I use maximum 20-cycle production order, I will get 29 AR and 6 N, which correcponds to 5.8 AR and 1.2 N a day. From concentrations I was expecting 5.98 AR and 1.38 N, but that is small deviation which I can attribute to rounding.
However when I choose just 2-cycle order, I get 2 AR and 1 N every 12 hours (with 100% efficiency), which means 4 AR and 2 N a day–too few AR and too many N.
The situation is even worse (better for me) with 1-cycle order, when I get 1 AR and 1 N every 6 hrs!
It means I can get 4N a day from a planet with 0.0229822 concentration !
I am not complaining, but I doubt it is on purpose…
Thanks, I will look into this!
- I had 2 DW in my inventory…
- Satisfaction regarding DW was 100%
- bought 40 DW on the CX
- just 29 DW in my inventory?
(no, no open trade left… all bought…)
(no message regarding unsatisfied workers though! and would be a huge coincidence that this happens within exactly these 30 secs…?)
Did you mix up the amount and limit fields by any chance?
Edit: asking because I’ve done this
@Prdgi: checked it again: no…
I think the consumables need some more information. Like a timer, when the next batch is required?
Or maybe it would be even better when not all for one day is consumed within one timestep, but you have a “demand for 1 DW each x hours, y minutes” (with smaller timesteps the more people you have to support)?
We are currently discussing how to get the whole consumables system more transparent, both the efficiency gain caused by the different types of consumables and the different edge cases (e.g. what happens when a new Hab module is built etc.)
@Sonicus83 That being said, could it be that the discrepancy was caused by the construction of a new building?
I found a bug with Zirconium:
I extract ZIR, and 1 m3 of it weights 4.84 t
It can be processed only in AML to ZR and SI, at a rate 1 ZIR = 1 ZR + 1 SI
but 1 ZR weights 6.53 t, so we have a hudge mass creation here! not to mention SI mass…
How come the process at AML almost doubles the mass of outputs relative to inputs?
BTW currently there is no use for ZR (and this makes ZIR useless as well), and without any way of getting rid of it, it would quickly block storage space… so please make a quck fix to its weight and provide us with ability to “jettison” stuff ASAP
I would suggest for the mass of ZR to be below 2 t.
And the easiest method to quickly introduce the possibility to “jettison” stuff is to enable MM buying it with a very low bid price (like 1 CIS/NCC/ICA, or even 0.01…)
Hi - thinks you have a issue with the ratio - AUO --> AU
AUO is 3,86 t - and you use 3 x to make 2xAU —> 11,58 t
With Carbon - 2,25t - 3 AUO and 1 C (total of 13,83t) makes 2 x AU (total of 38,64t).
So around 25t added from nothing.
Normally 1 ton of Gold ore will give 3-10 grams of AU and you use mercury in the production not carbon. So all in all 3 x AUO should give around 115,8 g or 0,0001158t
Best regards - (super game btw.)!
Regarding efficiency for production:
If you have no consumables left (or almost none), the productivity goes down… so far so good.
I have a second colony which ran (almost completely) out of supplies (7 %) but i have + 25 % from the CoGC-program and +12 % from two experts. In total i have now 44 %… with more experts i could raise it to about 50 % without the need for consumables!
I think the bonus-program and the experts should be multiplicative than additive (maybe change the numbers then!)
Efficiency of pioneers + CoGC + Experts
100 % + 25 % + 12 % = 137 %
50 % + 25 % + 12 % = 77 %
7 % + 25 % + 12 % = 44%
Better (from my view):
Efficiency of pioneers * CoGC * Experts
100 % * 125 % * 112 % = 140 %
50 % * 125 % * 112 % = 70 %
7 % * 125 % * 112 % = 10 %
Is it cheating to accept “no supplies” and let them run at 50% later? Can i be forced to supply them?
An idea for Improvement–BIG improvement:
- introduce new Echange category: “Ship Auction” (with one position: “Standard ships”);
- annouce that once a week (or once a day, or every 2 hours) there will be 1 (or more) standard ship sold to the highest bidder;
- proceed as promissed–with a limit, below which you do not sell ships, of course–until demand for sips is saturated, or ship construction is introduced;
- consider introducing some other designs of ships (like a “Barge” with 4 times the cargo space, but half the speed) to be sold through the Ship Auction–as additional position in this category.
This can function untill actual ship construction is introduced, at which point the exchenge category should be renamed to just 'Ships" and should allow for trade in standard ships.
The custom-made ships shall only be traded through Local Markets.
I hope you will like it
Some new features using existing mechanics (with minimal UI design) could be made, specifically, more planetary projects.
Similar to the COGC, but without voting. Players contribute materials in order to gain a 10-25% boost to planetary fertility for a week.
Orbital Transfer Array
Quite Expensive. Allows ships transfer materials to bases and market from orbit (no need to land). High upkeep.
Decreases fuel costs for landing and takeoff by 50%.
Why not extend the concept to “System Projects”?
Must be paired with a gate in another system. Multiple gates may be built in system. Upkeep is based on distance. Allows ships to transit between systems without using FTL fuel.
The FTL Gate would be most useful for a “Barge” type ship which would not have an FTL drive installed.
When making a LD - Local Database there is no input to the Software development factory - so “no input” gives 1 piece of LD.
Yep, that is correct, the input for the software development is just the workforce’s time.
I have an idea for improvement / modification. Fuel consumption by ships should be fixed value (changed by ship mass, cargo, destination etc.), with a little flight modification like <economical, optimal, fast as possible>. One slider, second (FTL) is usless. When ship jump just uses FTL. Graph to visualize calculation should looks like tan(x) where y axis tells us about change fuel usage, x axis - how many time we save. This solution would be simpler than the current.
p.s. sorry for my english
When I develop software I need Coffee, Tea, and Snacks xD
and on some projects a replacement keyboard after the last one went flying out the window (metaphorically) — or is it
and that being said, this game needs TEA to offset the COF usage
When posting on the local market, if I type “DW” into the Commodity field instead of “Drinking Water”, clicking the “Post” command will do nothing and provide no error message. Some sort of indication that I need to correct the commodity name would be helpful.
Also, when I type in the “OVE” commodity, I get the dropdown suggesting “Basic Overalls” - but when I press Enter, intending to accept the suggestion, it posts the ad!
You are right, those are same usability issues we should fix sooner than later!
I have a bug on the FX. When I try to settle an order (for buying ICA with NCC) I get the message: “You have reached the maximum amount of unfilled order for this broker”. Anyhow I have no unfilled order placed (actually I have deleted one or two some days ago, maybe they are still counted). A work-around is possible by selling NCC for ICA but still I miss offers on the other broker.
Edit: Work-around is not possible anymore…
That bug is fixed, but not released yet. We will release it with the next maintenance patch.