XansHuzzah

Dunno then. By all means though, if you find a bug, go a head and let me know here and I’ll fix it. Between the way the solar panels are calculated, the diminishing return math, and the differential equation, its very possible I’ve got a typo or a number wrong somewhere since spreadsheets are not the greatest way to handle that type of computation.

​

Oh! Check the changelog. Since you have to make your own copy of the sheet, I found a miscalculation in how I was computing solar cells in version 1.1 of the sheet. Version 1.2 corrects this (as well as the Winter Is Coming award). That might be enough to throw off the numbers “just slightly.”

Xystem4

yeah, I’ve got that set correctly (it’s at 0 now, so nice and easy) but the numbers are still a bit off. Nothing that matters significantly whatsoever, just got me curious about the math. It’s also totally possible I’m just stupid or illiterate and put in the wrong numbers somewhere

XansHuzzah

I’ve found when the numbers differ slightly, its because the current pollution level isn’t updated. Since the current level impacts the pollution rate, it can give slightly different numbers. I do say the current level is “optional” since its not technically needed the choices you the player have made for singular generation or consumption calculations, nor is it needed for the “equilibrium.” But if you want an accurate snapshot of where you’re at and how long until you reach a specific point, you do need to set it.

Xystem4

I’ll do some more digging and will let you know! The thought came to mind because I’m getting some slightly different numbers on my game than what the sheet would indicate, and I’m trying to track down what the discrepancy could be.

I do have the challenge completed (3 times), but looking again I’m actually producing slightly more pollution than the sheet predicts, not less (which is what I’d have expected to happen if it was caused by the Energy challenge). Still, I’ll look through the code a bit just to satisfy my own curiosity

XansHuzzah

I don’t think so. The factor controlling energy consumption from that challenge is computed in This block of code in the `resources` where energy consumption is computed after everything else. Thats the only place I can see in the code from a quick glance where the challenge itself applies its effect. The pollution calculation block and all of the building variables the pollution calculation block reference don’t use that global modifier.

So in short, I dont think the Energy Challenge impacts pollution generation, just net energy +/- for the boons or banes that comes with it. If anyone has actually completed the challenge and wants to check it against my sheet, I’m more than happy to update it if theres a problem.

Xystem4

Should completions of the Energy challenge be affecting the pollution levels? Since the reward for runs after the first decreases energy consumption

XansHuzzah

Further Updates:

• Correctly calculating Solar Farm energy (was a bit mangled and confusing)
• New: Accounting for “Winter Has Come.” Both if the challenge is active, and how many completions you have done of it.

XansHuzzah

I’ve updated the sheet to include:

• “Time Until Stage X” with the actual time at current pollution generation levels
• “Equilibrium Pollution Levels” to see where you will level off at (i.e. where passive dissipation equals active generation/consumption)

I’ve also edited the main post to reflect this

XansHuzzah

The PDF is more of a mechanical breakdown but alludes to costs. But yes dirty power generates pollution equal to how much power they create (i.e Magneto = 5 pollution/tick, Steamworks = 1) . Most building which consume power generate pollution equal to consumption (Pumpjack Oil wells = 1 for example, Oil wells on their own don’t make pollution). Then Quarry, smelter, mine generate fixed fractional pollution per tick.

reallyzen

Thanks. What I’m missing in your pdf is a list of Worst Offenders. My gut tells me Magneto > Calciners > Steamworks > Oil Wells > Quarry > Smelters > Mines but I’m probably wrong here or there. I’m on my phone, I couldn’t check the spreadsheet in details.

XansHuzzah

This is a much better start to a guide on how to manage pollution than my post provides. I’ve got the mechanical parts written up, but nothing really on practical application.

reallyzen

Excellent.

Quick facts for the lazy:

• Your goal is <50ppm, where you suffer no ill effects.

• You reach stability by having summer as Healing, spring and autumn as Equilibrium, and winter as Worse. Easiest then is to find balance during spring or autumn as Equilibrium. There’s atm no extra modification induced by cold / normal or warm type of season.

• By piling up tons of cats digging for coal, you can manage your polluting means of production to favour iron at the expense of coal production. More Iron through calciners, more coal through less mines etc. but tons of geologists.

• Research Carbon Sequestration and max out Factories. Add Solar and Hydro to further mitigate PPM creation from polluting structures.

• Read OP’s guide, there’s tons more to it. Lazy cats? ATHEIST CATS???

Radhil

Thank you

LadWhoLikesBirds

Based