I think you missed my point entirely. While i agree with you, if noones using it then surely that represents an issue that needs resolving? I cant think of anyone who actually uses the stuff on a regular basis.
2 Likes
I saw the point but didn’t know that was key to the discussion we were having. If no one is using it we should probably just have the developers remove it. Less things and assets to deal with in the game.
More than likely, though, you feel that since it isn’t being used that it needs to be fixed. But I still wouldn’t understand how. I don’t see any way to make it more efficient in Oort usage because it isn’t designed that way. Plus there are many people that will push back on it. So about the only other thing to balance is the Ichor requirements. Maybe that could be made a bit less rare.
The overall issue here really is that there are a group of people that want to fuel a portal and rarely touch it in the game. There is another group that disagrees with that and expects people to manage those portals by not only getting the Oort but by also walking around and fueling them regularly. Excuses of “time” regarding fueling it are not relevant especially when people choose to use larger portals than are needed.
So the whole discussion about this will likely go around in circles because the group that wants this don’t understand or just don’t care why portals are special. They just want what they want.
1 Like
How is that hard to understand that an underused item that isnt used should be fixed so it isnt underused? Why would you possibly think deleting it is a better solution? That benefits noone.
Who? Because I don’t think there’s a single person who is in that group who can afford Oort amalgram on a regular basis, making the whole argument pointless.
The whole point of this thread is that Oort amalgram is underused because the only people who stand to benefit from it - those who don’t like to refuel portals constantly - either cant afford it or simply don’t use it because of its cost inefficiency. There is next to noone using it regularly.
All i’m suggesting is that its fixed so that it is used more often. Portals wont become anymore common or less “special” as a result, but i’m sorry if that’s so hard for you to understand.
3 Likes
It isn’t broken. People won’t use it because they don’t like the efficiency. That is their problem and not the Devs because the Devs LIKE the efficiency level. They want it more expensive because the person is getting more time in their day and can keep the portal open longer. So that is the COST – loss of Oort. People thought they could fake the Developers out and get MORE time for the same Oort cost.
I don’t understand why people cannot see this.
I said the item should go away then if people aren’t using it because I didn’t even agree with the original reason the item was created. So I don’t see any problem here at all with fueling portals. Make smaller portals so you have to fuel them not as often.
The people that asked for the Oort Amalgram are the ones that asked to not have to fuel a portal as often. They want a portal and not to touch it often in the game.
The reason I am responding is I am challenging the point that it is broken and needs any fixing. I am giving context on why it is not broken. It is working as intended but people just don’t want to pay the extra cost which is their choice.
1 Like
I’m not saying its broken, and i’m not saying we should get more oort out of it. I’m saying that if noone is using it, than it IS upto the devs to maybe take a ponder and think “ge wiz why is noone using it”.
Again, Who?
I’m not saying the concept is broken, and if it was being used i would 100% be in agreement that it doesn’t need fixing.
But surely you must understand that if something isn’t being used by anyone in any substantial quantity, maybe it DOES indeed need fixing?
I’m pretty sure its not exactly working as intended if next to noone is using it on a regular basis as I had previously established.
1 Like
I understand now that you don’t see it as broken… I think I was just generalizing comments in the thread and not intentionally trying to mean you but not taking the time to explain it better. I apologize.
I understand that thought process but don’t try to ever approach things that way. I would question why the thing is needed first and that it fulfills a need. Then I would see if there are options that exist to solve that need before I created an asset. Then if it did need to exist I and it wasn’t performing I would look at trying to make it better.
Since I didn’t see an original problem that caused this asset to be created I can’t really see a need to look at how to fix it.
The asset and how it fits into the game is exactly working as intended. The developers designed it was an inverted scale of return (maybe not the best way to say it). I know this is true because I talked with James personally about it as Ollie (if I remember right he was the Dev that helped design) worked out the system. I don’t know all the specifics but basically that was the rough explanation.
Basically that you used more Oort to get longer fuel times. They were not going to give people the ability to have to fuel portals less without them having to pay something for it – in this case more Oort. This is consistent with how they have approached portals.
Now I do understand that people not using the asset can say that it appears it is not working as intended. Personally, though, I would say it another way - the asset people wanted was not delivered in the way they wanted it - e.g. more time between fueling without more Oort costs. So that caused it not to be used and create an appearance that there is a problem here due to it not being used.
I don’t have an exact list of who was for it and who was against it. Here are a variety of threads related to the discussions:
2 Likes
I can see how we have different ways of looking at it. I suppose now it’s up to the devs to decide if there still happy with it (assuming they even look through this thread).
For me personally, I don’t plan to use it unless it becomes atleast as efficient to do so. Given how unlikely this is, i’l leave it as is.
1 Like
Wow, I didn’t expect this thread to go into a debate. It was just a question on the usefulness of the almagrams. Thank all of you for answering! But I do want to say one thing:
Thank you guys for keeping your debate open minded and calm! Seriously! @Xaldafax & @Vansten
1 Like
I’d use them in all my portals if I could and I use all my portals weekly if not daily. I still don’t want to be bothered with having to carry Oort on me while I’m trying to go do something. And I don’t use the new fuel in my portals because it’s close to impossible to get enough Ichor to use in one portal let alone all of my portals
1 Like
Yep, I only have two small portals and one 1x3 portal. I’ve been saving up the ichor so I can stock them full for awhile!
Once you do that, could you please let me know how it turns out in the end? As far as longevity goes. I’m curious,but cautious to spend the supplies needed. Thank you so much!
Absolutely will! Might take some time though, I don’t know how much meteorite ichor that I need but it’s a slow process!
1 Like
I would never use a fuel source (Oort Shards) to fuel something when the next processing step above that actually rewards less time. I am wasting Oort Shards and another resource, along with spark and the crafting time the machine uses (which could have been used to make something far more useful) to get a worse result.
That’s the reason nobody uses Oort Amal. It isn’t a cost effective fuel source. It doesn’t follow the same design concept of compacting coal. We’re also getting that next step up past regular compact coal (unless I am mistaken) and honestly it probably will be better than regular compact coal. Portal fuel should be absolutely no different. Even if it’s just merely twice as good, it won’t really be that big of a difference.
If developers didn’t want the hundreds upon hundreds of portals in the game like we have currently, they would have made meteors only spawn twice a day at best but that would have a trickling effect throughout the game as it would make Rough Oort way more rare and traveling would be way more expensive and that cripples the economy.
So pretty much Oort Amalgram is a huge waste of resources and time to craft. The math behind what you get doesn’t lie.
2 Likes
Not sure if this was stated, but…
Seems the amalgams are a “cost for convenience” sort of thing. Using the maths, It looks like 1 amalgam = 3 oort shards? Basically, an amalgam-filled portal should last 3x longer than an oort-filled one of equal size.
You loose the effectiveness of the raw oort shards in exchange for not needing to babysit a portal. I don’t think the amalgam was meant for stead use, but maybe for when you plan on a break and want to keep portals open while you’re away.
I think the cost/power loss of an amalgam is appropriate, but is much better for powering larger portal long term as they can eat through a stack of oort in just a few hours. Not everything in the world becomes more efficient when processed further- it can often just serve a different purpose.
The issue from the math someone did was that the larger the portals were, the less and less effective the amalgam became. The change was negligible for small 1x2 portals, and small but noticeable for 1x3s but was completely a waste for the largest of portals.
Why should portal fuel be exactly the same as fuel to heat up or cook a resource? They are different things an use cases. If we used coal to fuel portals like for electricity or something then maybe… but we do not. We use a special resource - Oort. So is completely acceptable that the compact system could be different.
The meteors do spawn in a specific case… people have found a way to take advantage and leverage the system to get more Oort than you would if you played it via the normal method. Players then took that extra Oort and used it for more portals…
The Devs don’t care about the amount of portals basically. It is different than that. They see it as a server port cost and rare items that is special. So they put a system around that.
They aren’t at fault if people are trying to fuel their portal drug obsession but aren’t happy about the returns.
I think it’s more work to get the ichor than to refuel the portal more often.
10 Likes
It is. More time too which is a net loss when looking at how to use your limited resources as effectively as possible.
I see. Thank you for the clarification!
How about the Devs allow us to compact the amalgams. Compact/Refined/Decorative Amalgam Oort Blocks. Suddenly, it’s worth it, and that color looks pretty awesome.
I could be totally wrong, but I thought James or a dev said that they prefer larger portals to numerous smaller ones for some reason. (Even though it seems that players prefer the smaller, cheaper, longer-lasting portals)
Maybe it has to do with accessing the world data each time you “look” at a portal or something? I dunno.
4 Likes