A loooonnng time ago, I started this thread:

https://forums.ashesofthesingularity.com/478258/page/1/#3641377

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.

NORMALLY:

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.

NEGATIVE CASE:

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)

What happens?????

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?