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?