| 1 |
While the priorities supposedly obsolete the need for "wait" in eco management, it doesn't quite work that way. If you have a con on medium and a con on high priority, the medium one will still drain resources that the other one could've used. This means that "wait"ing cons can/will improve building speed of other projects compared to just lowering their priority.
|
1 |
While the priorities supposedly obsolete the need for "wait" in eco management, it doesn't quite work that way. If you have a con on medium and a con on high priority, the medium one will still drain resources that the other one could've used. This means that "wait"ing cons can/will improve building speed of other projects compared to just lowering their priority.
|
|
|
2 |
\n
|
|
|
3 |
Another case would be stopping unit production of a repeating fac because you just don't want those units (rather save up the resources). You could just empty the queue, but wait is faster (especially in the case of a detailed queue) and preserves it in case you want it again later.
|
|
|
4 |
\n
|
|
|
5 |
In general, you use wait when you queued up something but don't actually want the queued commands to continue until a later point in time. That can occasionally happen, but the use cases are niche.
|
|
|
6 |
I do agree that the wait functionality (and possible use cases for it) are unclear to new players, without being of any real help.
|
Use cases for "Wait", proposal to change default binding