Goeff's response there was that
I don't personally see the need to require that example case to take an additional 4 turns to complete instead of 3 turns more, but even if you accept the premise that any increase to the blocksize should require the full base number of turns to complete, then losing all past progress is still an excessive penalty. Reducing the % completion from the adjusted 25% down to 24.9%, so that it would still take an additional 4 turns to complete, meets that goal while only wasting a very tiny amount of the previously spent PP instead of all of it. And then there are a myriad of cases, like changing from one 4-turn ship to four or more of the ships, in which case they would necessarily still take an additional 4 turns to complete without throwing away any of the previous progress.Working as intended I think... If you want to produce 2 ships, and it takes minimum 4 turns to produce any given ship, you can't take a half-produced ship and turn it instantly into two quarter-produced ships. Regardless, it's probably a forum discussion, not a bug.
So, if you have a ship that takes a minimum of k turns to complete, with X% currently finished, and you increase the blocksize from M to N, then the adjusted % completion Y could be calculated as
Code: Select all
Y = min( X*M/N, 1.0/(k-1) - 0.001)
But I'll also circle back to the base question -- perhaps this had already been discussed and agreed upon, but if not, what are people's current thoughts on, that an increase to blocksize requires that there be a penalty so that the base min number of turns is needeed after the adjustment before completion?
**edit the above calculation is assuming that as part of switching over to % completion you also did away with the pre-loading and topping-up provisions we previously had put into place to account for changing costs; if those still exist in some form then some further adjustment could be needed.