A loooonnng time ago, I started this thread:
And at some point it all made sense to me.
But a friend just asked me to clarify something on this topic, and I went back to remind myself.
And suddenly... I realized I still have a fuzzy spot in my understanding of going negative.
The question, fundamentally, is whether going negative can result in sub-optimal production time.
Below are two scenarios to express what I mean.
Unit that costs 60 metal and 60 rad, takes 1 minute to produce... (1 metal and 1 rad per second)
And my production capacity is 1 metal and 1 rad per second...
Then if I produce 1 unit, it is done in 1 minute as planned.
And if I produce 2 units simultaneously, I end up with 2 units in two minutes.
In a certain sense, this means that my production is still occurring at the optimal speed.
I get the same resulting number of units within the same time period, based on my current production capacity.
I have to wait longer to see anything happen, but my resources are still being generated and consumed at the same optimal speed.
So.. now lets look at the negative resource situation.
This time, lets consider a unit that would consume 5 metal + 10 rad per second; and it would normally take 1 minute to produce the unit.
Let's say that I only have capacity for 4 metal + 10 rad production per second. (shortage of 1 metal per second)
I presume production speed of resources remains unchanged.
But what about consumption?
Does resource consumption become sub optimal?
How does this scenario actually work?
- Would metal be provisioned fractionally, such that each tick rad is being fractionally consumed in proportion to the provisioned metal?
- Does metal not get provisioned each click, so that a single "tick" of production might actually take longer to occur?
- Is provisioned metal sent to storage until a full tick is possible?
Chasing my tail a bit here. Could someone please clarify?