I'm not sure whether this belongs in general or balance discussions, but I wanted to put word out since I didn't see it anywhere else... I didn't really look, but I figure it's a small detail that people overlooked. I feel like efficiency only has half the equation going. you're at 100% when you produce more than you use. What I'd like to see is an economy calculation/equation that measures your production against your consumption. If I put it like this, people should figure it out easily. If you're producing 100,000 metal and 100,000 energy. But you're only using 1,000 metal and 1,000 energy. Are you really at 100% efficiency in terms of production and consumption? So what I really want, is for my efficiency to drop again, if the difference between my cost/production is large, and for my efficiency to increase when the difference between my cost/production is small. You wouldn't stall, because you wouldn't be in negative economy. You wouldn't waste economy because you're not gaining more than you have storage for. I'd like this very much.
Do you mean your efficiency percentage displayed on the resource bar? Because that might get quite confusing.... How about a little alert saying "wasting power" or "wasting metal" shows up and flashes instead?
In short, yes that's what I mean. But I don't think it'd be confusing. And maybe that would be also good? If we had more information regarding wasting income.
While I agree that wasting economy should be more clearly indicated, I don't know about adding an extra percentage value in there, on top of fabrication efficiency, would be the most elegant way to do it, as I can see myself muddling the two up all the time. Perhaps if it was something fairly unobtrusive so if you want to check it's maybe a smaller number near each bar, but wouldn't be easily muddled with any of the other values. Maybe I'm just simple and can't do numbers well...
Don't we have that? "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." "Build more metal storage." Nag nag nag...
But it only really says it once, having a pulsating red alert beside your metal bar would be nice to have for the every once in a while that you actually look up there...
I think I phase out after I hear it once or twice, so I can't be sure of either. But to give possible solutions to my original problem.. Maybe the % efficiency should drop below 100 again after i reach max storage and my production is more than my consumption. At the same time, maybe there should be slightly highlighted, or the production/consumption should be easier to see from the start, with an emphasis on whichever one is more prominent? It 'might' also be helpful to have a nondescript alert underneath saying why it's inefficient? Anyone have better ideas on how to nonintrusively tell you whether you have too much income/too much consumption? I just definitely don't like false 100% efficiency ratings and want a solution.
Sure, but to say again (sorry to repeat myself!) - the efficiency is not your economy, it's your fabber production. If it's at 100%, your fabbers are working at 100% - if you have no energy/mass, production slows and the number reduces to reflect this. Economy efficiency would be a handy number to have, but it means just that; having an extra number in the UI. If that can be added without being cluttered or confusing, I don't see why it shouldn't be - I can imagine it being quite useful. Perhaps should find a good way of differentiating between over and under producing energy/metal. To be honest I thought the middle number was econ efficiency at first too, I don't think it's particularly clear at first.
Well the efficiency is inbetween my metal and energy income. So I never thought it would mean my fabrication efficiency. So you're right it's not clear, also when i put my mouse over "efficiency" when it's in red, it says not enough energy. Suggesting you might be wrong on that. Either way, you seem to be acknowledging and agreeing with my plea for better representation... of economic usage.
