Resource depletion toggle for SM mode

[Gimmick Account (OP)]

Just like it says on the tin, I would love it if there were a discreet box we could tick or a dropdown menu option we could toggle to stop mineral deposits from being depleted every tick due to mining operations.  I sometimes enjoy setting up peaceful scenarios (like an ancient, isolated sublight sleeper ship arriving in a desolate system after centuries of travel, etc. ) without any enemies, where I mostly just play a relaxing game of Space SimCity against noone in particular.  Since those tend to not degenerate into quite the same extremely slow turn speeds of regular games that have exploring and fighting NPRs, the years go by much faster and resources get used up faster too.  Currently, I use SpaceMaster mode to top off deposits every now and then, but I'd like for there to be a more elegant solution.  It's just a single player game, after all, so no harm done!

[Father Tim]

If, instead of "topping off" the resources every so often, you were to add five or six digits once to the amounts present, you'd probably be set for the life of your game.

[Gimmick Account (OP)]

If, instead of "topping off" the resources every so often, you were to add five or six digits once to the amounts present, you'd probably be set for the life of your game.

I did that, but my last game of this sort went on for several hundred (in-game) years, so I'm looking for a more permanent solution.

[Jorgen_CAB]

If, instead of "topping off" the resources every so often, you were to add five or six digits once to the amounts present, you'd probably be set for the life of your game.

I did that, but my last game of this sort went on for several hundred (in-game) years, so I'm looking for a more permanent solution.

You are telling us that you straight up cheat!!!   

Jokes aside... I don't think this would be that useful... would it not be better with an option where say planetary resources (not asteroids or comets) were unlimited and only had an availability, this would then be an option in the game instead. I'm pretty sure more players would like that style of game and it would also effect the NPR positively as well.

[Gimmick Account (OP)]

You are telling us that you straight up cheat!!!   

Jokes aside. . .  I don't think this would be that useful. . .  would it not be better with an option where say planetary resources (not asteroids or comets) were unlimited and only had an availability, this would then be an option in the game instead.  I'm pretty sure more players would like that style of game and it would also effect the NPR positively as well.

Oh, I could live with the system you described as well, even in regular play, but it sounds like its implementation would be more involved, and I'm not sure whether removing specific resource amounts is something that you could just have in parallel with the current system as a toggle-able game option.  I was trying to keep my suggestion as simple as possible, programming-wise.

[Jorgen_CAB]

You are telling us that you straight up cheat!!!   

Jokes aside. . .  I don't think this would be that useful. . .  would it not be better with an option where say planetary resources (not asteroids or comets) were unlimited and only had an availability, this would then be an option in the game instead.  I'm pretty sure more players would like that style of game and it would also effect the NPR positively as well.

Oh, I could live with the system you described as well, even in regular play, but it sounds like its implementation would be more involved, and I'm not sure whether removing specific resource amounts is something that you could just have in parallel with the current system as a toggle-able game option.  I was trying to keep my suggestion as simple as possible, programming-wise.

Otherwise I agree with Father Tim..., add a few zeroes... a few billion tons of ore should be pretty much the same as unlimited resources anyway even if you play for a thousand years.

[Gimmick Account (OP)]

I'm honestly curious. . .  why? The 'tick a box'-suggestion presumably wouldn't mess with any other system already in the game, and could be switched on and off at game start like all the others.  I can't wrap my head around the idea that periodic resource 'maintenance' around several settled worlds is preferable to that.

Not trying to pick a fight here, I would just honestly like to hear your reasoning as to why.

[Steve Walmsley]

I'm honestly curious. . .  why? The 'tick a box'-suggestion presumably wouldn't mess with any other system already in the game, and could be switched on and off at game start like all the others.  I can't wrap my head around the idea that periodic resource 'maintenance' around several settled worlds is preferable to that.

Not trying to pick a fight here, I would just honestly like to hear your reasoning as to why.

There would be a few different places in the code where mining would have to be disabled for this to work, plus it affects other things such as warnings for mineral consumption, plus there is an extra db field and the required load and save. When you can create the same effect by just giving yourself billions of tons of minerals, it doesn't seem worth the extra code work for something that would be used extremely rarely. It is simply not going to get to the top of the priority list when there is other work to complete.

[Gimmick Account (OP)]

Welp, that's one suggestion dead and buried then!

Thanks for taking the time to explain.