Merchant Ships

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
Only Gary Grigsby knows. I would 'speculate' it was done that way for simplicities sake. The game is enough of a micromanagement nightmare as it is. (sometimes called...."Quartermaster in the Pacific")

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with GG, and the Word was GG. It was in the beginning with GG. All things came into being through GG, and apart from GG nothing came into being that has come into being. In GG was life, and the life was the Light of gamers. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not comprehend it

and the darkness did not comprehend because Mr. Grigsby didn't associate with the 'small fry' that was us testers back in stock days. Closest i got to "the man" himself was him being cc'd in an ongoing email chain with another developer regarding the ground combat model tweaks i pushed for back in stock days. the changes came straight from the "man"
My 15 minutes more or less. [:D]

Not that i blame him mind you. If he had to play 20 questions with every nob tester like me he'd never get a moment's peace. [:D]

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
Only Gary Grigsby knows. I would 'speculate' it was done that way for simplicities sake. The game is enough of a micromanagement nightmare as it is. (sometimes called...."Quartermaster in the Pacific")

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with GG, and the Word was GG. It was in the beginning with GG. All things came into being through GG, and apart from GG nothing came into being that has come into being. In GG was life, and the life was the Light of gamers. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not comprehend it

and the darkness did not comprehend because Mr. Grigsby didn't associate with the 'small fry' that was us testers back in stock days. Closest i got to "the man" himself was him being cc'd in an ongoing email chain with another developer regarding the ground combat model tweaks i pushed for back in stock days. the changes came straight from the "man"
My 15 minutes more or less. [:D]

Not that i blame him mind you. If he had to play 20 questions with every nob tester like me he'd never get a moment's peace. [:D]

"nob" tester, Nik? Really?[:'(]

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
Only Gary Grigsby knows. I would 'speculate' it was done that way for simplicities sake. The game is enough of a micromanagement nightmare as it is. (sometimes called...."Quartermaster in the Pacific")

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with GG, and the Word was GG. It was in the beginning with GG. All things came into being through GG, and apart from GG nothing came into being that has come into being. In GG was life, and the life was the Light of gamers. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not comprehend it

John of the Discourses, and not John of the Signs. Is it also John of the Postings? [&o]

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: oldman45
Just wondering out loud, why didn't they seperate fuel and av gas as an end product?

Some of us wanted to do this during AE development. Priorities, priorities...

Andrew

[stuman]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
Only Gary Grigsby knows. I would 'speculate' it was done that way for simplicities sake. The game is enough of a micromanagement nightmare as it is. (sometimes called...."Quartermaster in the Pacific")

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with GG, and the Word was GG. It was in the beginning with GG. All things came into being through GG, and apart from GG nothing came into being that has come into being. In GG was life, and the life was the Light of gamers. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not comprehend it

Ok, I am going to get worried if you next ask me to drink some Koolaid [;)]

[stuman]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: JWE


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with GG, and the Word was GG. It was in the beginning with GG. All things came into being through GG, and apart from GG nothing came into being that has come into being. In GG was life, and the life was the Light of gamers. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not comprehend it

and the darkness did not comprehend because Mr. Grigsby didn't associate with the 'small fry' that was us testers back in stock days. Closest i got to "the man" himself was him being cc'd in an ongoing email chain with another developer regarding the ground combat model tweaks i pushed for back in stock days. the changes came straight from the "man"
My 15 minutes more or less. [:D]

Not that i blame him mind you. If he had to play 20 questions with every nob tester like me he'd never get a moment's peace. [:D]

"nob" tester, Nik? Really?[:'(]

We need to keep this forum relatively clean, I do NOT want to know about Nik's nob work.

[oldman45]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: oldman45
Just wondering out loud, why didn't they seperate fuel and av gas as an end product?

Some of us wanted to do this during AE development. Priorities, priorities...

Andrew

I take it this is a code item and not something that we could do in the editor. With all the talk about economics and shipping, perhaps the easiest way is to add items that have to be shipped.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: oldman45

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: oldman45
Just wondering out loud, why didn't they seperate fuel and av gas as an end product?

Some of us wanted to do this during AE development. Priorities, priorities...

Andrew

I take it this is a code item and not something that we could do in the editor. With all the talk about economics and shipping, perhaps the easiest way is to add items that have to be shipped.

Yes, that would be a code change.

Andrew

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: oldman45

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown




Some of us wanted to do this during AE development. Priorities, priorities...

Andrew

I take it this is a code item and not something that we could do in the editor. With all the talk about economics and shipping, perhaps the easiest way is to add items that have to be shipped.

Yes, that would be a code change.

Andrew

It also leads to madness as avgas and ammo have toluene in common. So toluene production from coal and oil is a constraint on production of both.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: herwin
It also leads to madness as avgas and ammo have toluene in common. So toluene production from coal and oil is a constraint on production of both.

Yes I think that way does lead to madness [:)]

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: herwin
It also leads to madness as avgas and ammo have toluene in common. So toluene production from coal and oil is a constraint on production of both.

Yes I think that way does lead to madness [:)]

+1

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: herwin
It also leads to madness as avgas and ammo have toluene in common. So toluene production from coal and oil is a constraint on production of both.

Yes I think that way does lead to madness [:)]

Indeed, indeed. If we was to take a step back and look at things as a gestalt (oy gevult!), it's not so much the constituent parts of the "stuff", but rather how much "stuff" is required and how much transport tonnage is needed to move the "stuff".

I truly think it's all in the "Stuff Required" part of the algorithm. Supply, no matter what it constitutes, or who uses it, is a fixed Input quantity.

Supply used for any purpose is used in accord with a hard-coded consumption algorithm. Making different "things" use different amounts of "stuff" for performing different "tasks", would have gone a long way towards addressing many of these issues; especially if the requirements were largely increased. It would require a lot more transport tonnage to move a lot more "stuff" (regardless of its composition) in order that "tasks" be performed by "things".

But then, messing with the algorithm is right out. Can't do it (much as I would like to), and it ain't gonna happen in any case, so ....

There is nothing in the "data" elements that allow for dinking with the supply input requirement (not without totally screwing up about 10 other things) and since code changes are right out the window, it does not seem feasible to do a great deal of analysis on supply as a means to increase transport tonnage requirements.

However, the production system consumption algorithm is 'soft', in that the input requirements are adjustable in "data". So if a means can be found to require more "inputs" to the algorithm, without disturbing the relative proportionality of its output, that would have the desired effect of requiring more merchant tonnage to move the "stuff", thereby reducing the tonnage available to do wierd things. Yeah???

Ciao. John

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: herwin
It also leads to madness as avgas and ammo have toluene in common. So toluene production from coal and oil is a constraint on production of both.

Yes I think that way does lead to madness [:)]

+1

The inmates sitting around the asylum all agree "Yes, that would drive us mad!" [:'(]

[Nikademus]

production of SPAM should be tracked seperately. A vital element of the war effort. [:)]

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
production of SPAM should be tracked seperately. A vital element of the war effort. [:)]

You have ruined me. And probably lost the war in the pacific, and certainly impacted Gunnars decision to invade Britain to acquire its stock of spam to feed his hungry Vikings, and Alfred probably wouldn't have been such a pissy wannabe if there weren't so much spam to go be King of; woof!! dude!! Get a frikkin grip!! It's what made the world go round and it sure tastes better than that putrid stuff they stick into McDonald's sausage McPukemuffins.

The entire course of history has been changed by your insensitive comments on a food source rich in trans-fats and fairly bursting with cardiac arrest potential. How dare you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE

[Nikademus]

I dare....because i am a Triglyceride LOTTO winner!

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: herwin
It also leads to madness as avgas and ammo have toluene in common. So toluene production from coal and oil is a constraint on production of both.

Yes I think that way does lead to madness [:)]

Indeed, indeed. If we was to take a step back and look at things as a gestalt (oy gevult!), it's not so much the constituent parts of the "stuff", but rather how much "stuff" is required and how much transport tonnage is needed to move the "stuff".

I truly think it's all in the "Stuff Required" part of the algorithm. Supply, no matter what it constitutes, or who uses it, is a fixed Input quantity.

Supply used for any purpose is used in accord with a hard-coded consumption algorithm. Making different "things" use different amounts of "stuff" for performing different "tasks", would have gone a long way towards addressing many of these issues; especially if the requirements were largely increased. It would require a lot more transport tonnage to move a lot more "stuff" (regardless of its composition) in order that "tasks" be performed by "things".

But then, messing with the algorithm is right out. Can't do it (much as I would like to), and it ain't gonna happen in any case, so ....

There is nothing in the "data" elements that allow for dinking with the supply input requirement (not without totally screwing up about 10 other things) and since code changes are right out the window, it does not seem feasible to do a great deal of analysis on supply as a means to increase transport tonnage requirements.

However, the production system consumption algorithm is 'soft', in that the input requirements are adjustable in "data". So if a means can be found to require more "inputs" to the algorithm, without disturbing the relative proportionality of its output, that would have the desired effect of requiring more merchant tonnage to move the "stuff", thereby reducing the tonnage available to do wierd things. Yeah???

Ciao. John

Amen, bro!