Add optional setting to degrade factory health with use

[WildWeazel]

Probably a global toggle plus a per-recipe health cost applied when activated. If not enough health, cancel and warn user.

[ttk2]

was this feature reqested?

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Travis Christian <notifications@github.com

wrote:

Probably a global toggle plus a per-recipe health cost applied when
activated. If not enough health, cancel and warn user.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#13.

[WildWeazel]

It tends to come up whenever factory enhancements are discussed. It would really add some depth to factory management since at present there is no reason not to allow as many people as possible to share a factory.

[ttk2]

we do want to encourage sharing factories as that encourages teamwork, not
sure if we want to balance in this direction without first having enough
forces in the other.

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Travis Christian notifications@github.com
wrote:

It tends to come up whenever factory enhancements are discussed. It would
really add some depth to factory management since at present there is no
reason not to allow as many people as possible to share a factory.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#13 (comment).

[GavJenks]

I'm not sure I see the point of this. It equates to literally the same thing as just adjusting all of the recipes to be slightly worse at the end of the day. If you want to do that, you should just do that, and it would be simpler to understand and more intuitive. (Though I'm not sure why you would want to do that, the plugin seems pretty well balanced)

[WildWeazel]

Not necessarily, because it makes factory maintenance something to be managed by the owner. Rolling it into the recipes forces whoever runs each job to pay up front, which does nothing for social interaction. Separating it from recipes allows users to take advantage of public or group owned factories at someone else's expense, providing for slightly more interesting management. It's no longer advantageous for as many people as possible to share one factory and run as many jobs as possible as quickly as possible. Owners might be more likely to restrict access or introduce membership fees, production taxes, etc.

[GavJenks]

I find it very difficult to believe that anybody owning an expensive factory would just shrug and eat that cost, versus the obvious response of "Hey guys, if you use the factory, there is a mandatory fee of ___ to cover the wear and tear. Put it in the fees chest next to the factory. Or you will lose your privileges"

Which you mentioned in your post just now, but again, all of those things (taxes, fees, etc.) simply end up being identical to an increased recipe cost, except much more tedious, annoying, and complicated. So just make the same change more elegantly and less pointlessly micromanagey by increasing the recipe cost, if that's what you want to do.

[ProgrammerDan]

Assign this to me too ... sensing a pattern. I agree with @WildWeazel that this is an interesting mechanic. I say that as a factory manager who runs a public institution full of 90% of the factories possible within the tech tree. This would be a sea change for us if all factories converted to this scheme, but it would be far more interesting in terms of the overall social mechanics. Just keeping things simple isn't a valid goal. Fostering interesting interactions and forcing innovation in design and execution is a valid goal, and this feature would allow such interactions to occur, whereas right not it's not possible.

There is no motivation whatsoever to restrict factory access beyond simply making money, and diamond mining is far more profitable. If letting people use my factories was actively costing me extra money, though, I would charge for their use and potentially hire help, based on those earnings, to keep factories healthy. The options are fascinating and complex, and in those complexities lives some real opportunities for fun new social interactions. Given that the installation of "my" factories was through 50% or more public donation, I'm still motivated to keep access relatively open, it just changes how that access is moderated.