Cargo & Industry fixes for 1.06

[Gumboots]

It may be worth carefully breaking some things if we have an idea of how many existing scenarios it's likely to affect, and how badly, and if the benefits are worth having. People would probably put up with a few broken bits if the overall game came out better, particularly if it's just something that requires enabling a new industry in the editor rather than rewriting half the scenario.

[Blackhawk]

By a rough count there appear to be ~130 scenarios that require 1.06. My knowledge of most of them is rather limited so I don't really know which ones would be effected.

[RulerofRails]

I don't know what Stoker envisioned with the Puddling Furnace. The steel mill is available in 1856. The Tool and Die and Weapons and Ammo plants accept iron until 1878, so I don't really see a gap there. Of course it would allow higher production of goods, ammo, and weapons where sufficient coal is available. Otherwise, you could always dump some of that steel at a Construction Plant and watch it disappear into thin air! Can you explain to me what his reason for it was?

As far as I can tell the problem with the current Machine Shop is that it is available from 1800, but will not produce anything until after oil becomes available in 1860 (was 1880 in 1.05). Is it possible to simply give it an introduction date of 1860 without affecting the current 1.06 scenarios? (edit: IF this is a definite decision, I am willing to scan through the current 1.06 maps to check if there are any placed (nonfunctional) Machine Shops on maps before 1860.)

I was thinking about cutting the cost of the Furnace in half if production is halved, and I can see that this would really break some scenarios. A 600k industry that could make almost 50% of its purchase price in its first year would change the game a lot. Because of this I don't consider decreasing the costs of any of the current buildings to be a good idea. In fact I would be happy with higher prices for the new industries (make the game a little less industry-reliant at Expert levels). The 1.06 industries tend to run about 10% higher return on investment than 1.05 ones, and the furnace in a good location, when supplied with only one of its inputs, is probably the best ROI industry in the game.

On the Toys to Luxuries rename: We should test this, but having more demands for ingots might make the current Furnace work much better. If we make a Mint, even with a low demand, placing one near a current Furnace might help stop it throttling back due to uneconomical ore-ingots conversions.

By a rough count there appear to be ~130 scenarios that require 1.06. My knowledge of most of them is rather limited so I don't really know which ones would be effected.

Wow! I also had a look and I realized there were more than I thought. I haven't played more than a third of them. There is a high cost of checking the effects of breaking things!

[Gumboots]

I don't know what Stoker envisioned with the Puddling Furnace. The steel mill is available in 1856. The Tool and Die and Weapons and Ammo plants accept iron until 1878, so I don't really see a gap there. Of course it would allow higher production of goods, ammo, and weapons where sufficient coal is available. Otherwise, you could always dump some of that steel at a Construction Plant and watch it disappear into thin air! Can you explain to me what his reason for it was?

I think his reasoning was that since steel was quite widely used earlier than 1856, it was a bit bonkers that steel didn't exist in RT3 before 1856. I can see the reasoning there. After all, steel has been around for thousands of years. It didn't suddenly pop out of nowhere in 1856.

OTOH I can also see what the RT3 devs were thinking, since iron was widely used for industrial purposes in the 19th century, even being used to lay rails. TBH what would be really good is to have iron mines producing their actual output, namely iron ore, and requiring that to be smelted to produce iron and (later on) steel. That may be a bit ambitious for this patch though.

As far as I can tell the problem with the current Machine Shop is that it is available from 1800, but will not produce anything until after oil becomes available in 1860 (was 1880 in 1.05). Is it possible to simply give it an introduction date of 1860 without affecting the current 1.06 scenarios? (edit: IF this is a definite decision, I am willing to scan through the current 1.06 maps to check if there are any placed (nonfunctional) Machine Shops on maps before 1860.)

Now that's a good idea. I should have thought of that one myself. I'm kinda kicking myself that I didn't. it sounds like the easiest and most elegant solution. I can't imagine any scenario author planting non-functional machine shops before 1860. I'd say this idea is a winner.

I was thinking about cutting the cost of the Furnace in half if production is halved, and I can see that this would really break some scenarios. A 600k industry that could make almost 50% of its purchase price in its first year would change the game a lot. Because of this I don't consider decreasing the costs of any of the current buildings to be a good idea. In fact I would be happy with higher prices for the new industries (make the game a little less industry-reliant at Expert levels). The 1.06 industries tend to run about 10% higher return on investment than 1.05 ones, and the furnace in a good location, when supplied with only one of its inputs, is probably the best ROI industry in the game.

Agree with all of that.

On the Toys to Luxuries rename: We should test this, but having more demands for ingots might make the current Furnace work much better. If we make a Mint, even with a low demand, placing one near a current Furnace might help stop it throttling back due to uneconomical ore-ingots conversions.

I still think splitting ceramics and ingots to different industries makes more sense, if we can do it without major compat problems. More realistic, and should be better for gameplay.

[nedfumpkin]

I think his reasoning was that since steel was quite widely used earlier than 1856, it was a bit bonkers that steel didn't exist in RT3 before 1856. I can see the reasoning there. After all, steel has been around for thousands of years. It didn't suddenly pop out of nowhere in 1856.

The concept of steel, meaning carbon and iron together as an alloy, does go back to the Roman times where they had a type of steel, and they still haven't figured out how to make Damascus Steel, but they did learn how Viking steel was made, the reason RT3 uses 1856 is because that is when the Bessemer Process came into use that allowed for the industrial manfucature of quality steel. Prior to that it was mostly different variations of iron produced in foundries , or crucible steel, but not on the industrial scale that became possible with what would become modern steel mills.

[Blackhawk]

-I just realized that in 1.06 the plastics factory now uses "dye + oil = 3 plastics" in one of its later recipes. I think this might be the nail in the coffin to the idea of renaming dye to hides and using a tannery instead of a dye farm. That potential change was more for looks than improving game play anyway.

-Machine Shop with a start date of 1860 is the easiest fix for that unless there was a desire for machinery as a cargo before that. If any scenario had the machine shop manually placed before 1860 it will still stay there. The only thing changing the start date will do is make it so it doesn't appear in the city/region possible spawn list until 1860. Good idea. Consider this change made, unless I hear a request for machinery before 1860.

-Puddling furnace - Useful as a way to introduce some variation of steel early. But industries also accept iron ore until steel becomes commonplace so it is not necessary but more likely just a use for another cargo early on in the game.

-Furnace - I think the best bet is separating the cargo streams. Even if a mint nearby helped stabilize the output, it would be better to not require a second industry (or potentially municipal building) to make the 1st work correctly.

Another possible industry could be a printing press (dye + paper = goods).

If a cargo were to be added, are there any suggestions? And any suggestions on Stoker's proposed industries or anything else? Consider a Glassworks and a mint of some sort included.

[Gumboots]

I think the dye "plantation" would be better as a dye factory, if anyone can be bothered. Vegetable dyes were pretty much out of date in the late 19th century. No RT3 scenario starts before 1830 anyway, and most are post 1850. This would really only be a cosmetic change though.

I can see the puddling furnace being a problem later in the game. You'd need to come up with a use for it right through the 20th century for it to be any good. Early industries wouldn't be such a problem since you could change some of them to require steel earlier, but what do you do with a puddling furnace in 1930?

"Ceramics" is a bit funny since bricks work for it, and it also has uses in electronics, but Portland cement isn't really a ceramic, so the concrete plant must be manufacturing an awful lot of coffee mugs. Anyway I assume we'd be changing the concrete plant to "cement works" or something similar, now that we're agreed it's not a good idea to ship liquid concrete via rail.

I'd also think seriously about changing the inputs for the "cement works". It definitely shouldn't take sand, since that's only used in concrete or mortar. Really it should probably take rock (limestone) rather than ceramics, but that might mess up existing scenario economies (or might add more replay value to them??). If the cement works no longer wants ceramics that will drop furnace profits, since ceramics will become a low-demand cargo AFAICT. Does anyone remember if any industry apart from the current concrete plant uses any appreciable quantity of ceramics? I can't think of one.

A cement works that took rock would also compete with the furnace for raw material. If we want to nobble furnaces a bit, that should certainly do it. OTOH, a cement works basically is a furnace (along with some grinders and such) so maybe we should rethink the whole cargo chain around rock/ceramics/cement/whatever. The old cargo chain seems to have been based on the idea that concrete could be shipped by rail, and that the concrete works would require "ceramics" which were really Portland cement that had come from the "cement works" (1.06 furnace). Presumably the "ceramics" would also have included sand for the concrete, but there's no reason that would ever go near a furnace, and even then there's no mention of aggregate. The whole 1.06 concrete plant seems borked to me.

Oh yeah, and really steel mills should be requiring rock or something for flux, if we want to go that far.

[RulerofRails]

Another possible industry could be a printing press (dye + paper = goods).

I like the idea of a printing press. Sounds more sensible than the current uses where only a small amount is required compared to the other inputs.

I think the dye "plantation" would be better as a dye factory, if anyone can be bothered. Vegetable dyes were pretty much out of date in the late 19th century. No RT3 scenario starts before 1830 anyway, and most are post 1850. This would really only be a cosmetic change though.

What are you suggesting? Make the current dye "plantation" look similar to the chemical factory? Would it be possible to turn off the fertilizer demand without wrecking things?

Does anyone remember if any industry apart from the current concrete plant uses any appreciable quantity of ceramics? I can't think of one.

No, the only other demands are the Construction Plant at 2 per year, and Distilleries and Breweries at 1 per year.

I doubt it is possible to do anything about fixing the current games with the "concrete plant" in them with a patch. Because Ceramics has other demands the whole thing gets twisted together into a mess. I can't think of a good solution.

[Blackhawk]

I suppose we'll put dyes at the bottom of the list if the effort is still there to keep going as it currently works fine but aesthetically could make more sense. The fertilizer demand should probably be able to be turned off. An extra 20% dye a year probably wouldn't be a deal breaker in most scenarios.

I was going through an old post on the forum, trying to understand more about the development of 1.06 and came across milo's post on crystals:

I'm also considering dropping Money to a Mail skin and introducing 'Crystals' as its replacement; while there's not a huge volume in them, they double as a futuristic cargo and as an input to production of Electronics and Valuables.

So in a way it seems like there was never really intended to be too much of a use for whatever crystals actually were.

I think even though the 1.06 supply chain doesn't make a whole lot of sense (ceramics rather than rock to make cement?) I don't think we can really change it too much. Ceramics over all do seem limited in use to me, other than the concrete plant. Although they are used in electronics until 1960 and in the machine shop after 1980, and demanded by distilleries/breweries but not used by them for production.

Another quote I found from the past:

Ceramics (bricks, tiles, glass, cement) {demanded by Construction Firms; required along with Steel for Concrete}

Apparently, the 1.06 guys were using the industrial chain: rocks -> ceramics --> concrete. Under the belief that ceramics could represent cement. Now this leaves us the quandary... if the ceramics are already supposed to represent cement, it doesn't make sense for it to go further go to a cement plant to again become cement.
In the spirit of maintaining backwards compatibility though, it's probably best to just rename the concrete plant a cement plant and call it a day and accept the industrial chain doesn't make the most sense.
IF the ceramics are also supposed to represent glass, that then poses the question. Should the new glassworks produce goods or ceramics?

[RulerofRails]

I was going through an old post on the forum, trying to understand more about the development of 1.06 and came across milo's post on crystals:

I'm also considering dropping Money to a Mail skin and introducing 'Crystals' as its replacement; while there's not a huge volume in them, they double as a futuristic cargo and as an input to production of Electronics and Valuables.

I like the name Valuables more than Luxuries. This could even be the extra cargo, because using Toys with the ease of production at the Toy Factory would make "Valuables" less valuable. This would be another cargo (like Medicine) that isn't used much in the game, more like a finishing touch more than a game-changer. Just an idea though Valuables seems a bit more specific than Luxur(ies)y Goods.

Another quote I found from the past:

Ceramics (bricks, tiles, glass, cement) {demanded by Construction Firms; required along with Steel for Concrete}

Apparently, the 1.06 guys were using the industrial chain: rocks -> ceramics --> concrete. Under the belief that ceramics could represent cement. Now this leaves us the quandary... if the ceramics are already supposed to represent cement, it doesn't make sense for it to go further go to a cement plant to again become cement.
In the spirit of maintaining backwards compatibility though, it's probably best to just rename the concrete plant a cement plant and call it a day and accept the industrial chain doesn't make the most sense.
IF the ceramics are also supposed to represent glass, that then poses the question. Should the new glass-works produce goods or ceramics?

I wonder why the Construction Plant demands Concrete then? Maybe there was simply no where else to use it?

I vote for goods. Making Ceramics with another industry seems like another circle. I think one is enough!

BTW, well done on finding that stuff.

[Gumboots]

I was going through an old post on the forum, trying to understand more about the development of 1.06 and came across milo's post on crystals:

I'm also considering dropping Money to a Mail skin and introducing 'Crystals' as its replacement; while there's not a huge volume in them, they double as a futuristic cargo and as an input to production of Electronics and Valuables.

So in a way it seems like there was never really intended to be too much of a use for whatever crystals actually were.

I think even though the 1.06 supply chain doesn't make a whole lot of sense (ceramics rather than rock to make cement?) I don't think we can really change it too much. Ceramics over all do seem limited in use to me, other than the concrete plant. Although they are used in electronics until 1960 and in the machine shop after 1980, and demanded by distilleries/breweries but not used by them for production.

Another quote I found from the past:

Ceramics (bricks, tiles, glass, cement) {demanded by Construction Firms; required along with Steel for Concrete}

Apparently, the 1.06 guys were using the industrial chain: rocks -> ceramics --> concrete. Under the belief that ceramics could represent cement. Now this leaves us the quandary... if the ceramics are already supposed to represent cement, it doesn't make sense for it to go further go to a cement plant to again become cement.

Beats me what they were thinking. A "futuristic cargo" that is almost useless? Why would you want that, compared to all the other alternatives that make more sense? And why would you need "crystals" in a machine shop? And "ceramics" are Portland cement? The whole thing seems bizarre.

Anyway, did I ever mention that backwards compat is a PITA? It always ends up meaning you have to keep doing dumb stuff because somebody in the past decided to do dumb stuff.

Ok, provisional thinking out loud. We could....

1/ Turn the existing rock > furnace > ceramics biz into rock > cement works > hey actual cement!
2/ Split ore > ingots out to a second industry (foundry or whatever).
3/ Make a glassworks that chews up the sand (renamed crystals) and produces, you guessed it, glass.
4/ Change breweries and whatever else to demand glass instead of ceramics.
5/ To maintain the existing electronics recipe pre-1960, I think it would be acceptable to have electronics chew up some glass (used to be used for valves, etc).
6/ Electronics post-1960 could also use glass, or sand, to represent silicon, or could use ingots, to represent actual high grade silicon, or something else.
7/ Construction firm can demand all sorts of stuff if we want it to (sand, rock, steel, cement, timber, glass are all realistic).
8/ As a possibility, other municipal buildings and/or warehouses could be set to demand glass too (represent glaziers/broken windows/ whatever).

Out of those I think 1 and 2 are close to certain. 3 and 4 make sense to me. I can't really see them causing any problems. The rest sort of follow naturally.

Oh and if we need to keep a thing that produces concrete as such, I'd have it as a municipal building that demands concrete precursors but does not produce concrete as a shippable cargo. If necessary it could produce something else (small amounts of passengers or waste maybe?). That would be realistic as a separate entity to the construction firm, since construction firms often get their concrete in from a supplier.

[nedfumpkin]

One of my peeves with 1.06 was that it didn't really make a lot of sense in the supply chain that they introduced.

Cement is quarried and made right there. Limestone doesn't get shipped to a factory to produce cement since it doesn't make economic sense at all. Nor would there be a concrete plant per se. Most concrete is mixed in the trucks, and usually at the cement quarry.

Vegetable dyes continue to be used today, however, I wouldn't consider dye to be a separate cargo category, it should fall under chemicals. In fact dyes are just pigments in a different form than paints or inks.

Ceramics and glass should be considered the same thing, because essentially they are..

JMO

[Gumboots]

Depends on the local geology and local economics. I can assure you that I've seen many concrete plants in Australia, and have a couple in the local area. The geology around here is primarily volcanic (long extinct) and there is simply no local limestone to quarrry. That means cement has to be shipped in and concrete mixed at a local plant. The area around Sydney is different in that it is primarily sedimentary with only small and scattered volcanic intrusions, but most of it is sandstone. There are only seven significant cement manufacturing plants in the whole country. Any cement produced in these plants has to be shipped to all other destinations, which in practice requires that most of it gets shipped.



Note that any construction along the south coast from Perth over to Adelaide requires shipping in cement, even though the coast of the Great Australian Bight has massive limestone deposits. There may be limestone there, but there aint no cement plant. OTOH there aren't many people there and it's a rotten place to try and build a port.

The largest plant is at Fisherman's Landing, near Gladstone (handy PDF map here). The nearest limestone quarry is about 50 kilometres away. There are others at up to twice that distance, presumably because making cement requires considering other factors apart from just limestone, one of which would be how to get the stuff to the markets. They have a nice port at Gladstone, and the coastal terrain is flat.

Vegetable dyes are still used, but my guess is that the vast majority would be synthetic. Classifying them under "chemicals" does make a fair bit of sense, but we're sort of stuck with a "dye plantation" that has to do something useful somehow. My 2c would be that re-skinning it and renaming it as a factory is the best option, if the cosmetic change is deemed important enough to bother with. Perhaps we could make it do something else too. If a printing works is being contemplated, shipping some sort of pigments to that makes sense. Ditto for a mint, if we're having that, since both paper money and plastic money require pigments.

Sort of agree about ceramics and glass, in a certain sense. Main difference is the the former is mostly clay-based while the latter is mostly sand, so they tend to be produced in different factories.

[nedfumpkin]

I admit that you are right that cement gets shipped...I was indeed thinking locally.

Vegetable dyes versus chemical dyes really is about composition, since there is a chemical process involved in both, hence my grouping them as chemicals. In TM there is a publishing house, same as a printing plant, but it also makes books so the result is goods. Recipe calls for paper and either textiles, hides or chemicals.

A mint will produce coins, generally they don't print paper money. The reason being that mints actually create money (or they used to) whereas paper money isn't real, it's just a promisary note. And don't get me going on the polymer money...not sure if you know this, but Canada actually produces some, or all of the money used in Aus and NZ. I cannot stand that new plastic crap...don't even like to touch it.

I see what they were getting at with ceramics versus glass, but really, they are essentially the same thing, and a lot of ceramics and glass are comingled now.

[Gumboots]

That printing works output and recipe makes sense, although it looks like we wont be having hides so there would be a slight change there.

Agree about mints generally being limited to producing coinage, but if its game purpose is "thing that makes money" then we could have it make all sorts.

Paper money is as real as metal coinage. Both are really a form of "promissory note" since their intrinsic material value without goverment backing, or without societal confidence, is close to nothing. Plastic money doesn't bother me. It's just as functional as the paper money that preceded it. Also, it doesn't get soggy when you leave it in your jeans by mistake and it ends up in the washing machine. Anyway, it's a reality now so putting in some production chain for it might make sense, depending on game balance.

Australian plastic notes are produced in Melbourne by NPA. Apparently the Reserve Bank is not aware that their notes actually come from Canada.

PS: Come to think of it, if we do have a mint it should not be a buyable industry, since mints are government controlled and not available for purchase by private companies. It should be coded as a "municipal building", with inputs and outputs but no purchase option.

Oh yeah, also it probably should not be spawned since in practice you wouldn't have mints popping up in every one horse town. It'd be better for scenario authors to place it in one or two major cities.

On a whim I just checked the Reserve Bank of New Zealand website. Apparently they are also not aware that their notes come from Canada. They seem to be under the misapprehension that said notes are printed in Melbourne by NPA.

[Gumboots]

Something occurred to me about a concrete plant, although concrete as such is generally not shipped (with the exception of bagged drymix, which is a fairly recent commodity) there is quite a market over here for various products made from concrete or from other cement products. Examples of widespread concrete products are roof tiles and pavers (can also be ceramic of course). Then there's cement sheeting in various forms for construction use. Not sure if any of these would be useful in terms of gameplay, but they do open up options for balancing out industry if we need them.

[Blackhawk]

Ok so in an effort to fix 1.06's supply chain while trying not to break anything.
1. The furnace stays as its broken self to maintain the existing scenarios. And any wise scenario maker would disable it for future scenarios. (Creating unfortunately a "dud industry" but a possibly acceptable outcome to ensure backwards compatibility)
For future scenarios:
2. Rock > Cement at a Cement plant (formerly concrete plant). However, the old recipe of ceramics > concrete/cement might also have to be kept to maintain backwards compatibility. (or the alternative is the concrete plant remains, and a new cement plant is created. Again creating a "dud industry" though but at this point it does not seem as if we will be using up all ~16 potential industry slots)
3. Ore > Ingots at a Smelter/foundry
4. Sand > Ceramics (possibly renamed glass) at a glassworks/glass factory. Recipe could vary. Only sand or possibly sand + a fuel (coal/diesel). Might be an issue of profitability as to what works best.

Other notes;
- I think keeping the glass (or ceramics) in the pre 1960 electronics recipe is fine, and using sand in the 1960 recipe seems acceptable.
- Construction firm indeed can demand anything we'd want it to
- Muni buildings. Retail, hospital, school etc could all potentially have more demands added (like glass). However, houses have their demands full, if any more demands were added it wouldn't fit in the display window.

- I envisioned the Mint as muni building with only demands. (I think stoker viewed it as a possible industry). While ideally we wouldn't want mints popping up in every city, I think a couple of Mints would be acceptable. Maybe not the most realistic, but acceptable. The US has 3 mints, and several printing press locations for paper money. However, if using a smaller country then I could see where having multiple mints pop up would be unrealistic.

- I suppose a concrete plant could be considered a place were things are made out of cement, rather than a place where concrete is made and shipped from. After all not only are roofing tiles, pavers, potentially made at there, but also larger things like the concrete support beams used to support highways/bridges and concrete pipes.

[Gumboots]

Ok so in an effort to fix 1.06's supply chain while trying not to break anything.
1. The furnace stays as its broken self to maintain the existing scenarios. And any wise scenario maker would disable it for future scenarios. (Creating unfortunately a "dud industry" but a possibly acceptable outcome to ensure backwards compatibility)
For future scenarios:
2. Rock > Cement at a Cement plant (formerly concrete plant). However, the old recipe of ceramics > concrete/cement might also have to be kept to maintain backwards compatibility. (or the alternative is the concrete plant remains, and a new cement plant is created. Again creating a "dud industry" though but at this point it does not seem as if we will be using up all ~16 potential industry slots).

The furnace is not actually "broken" as such, IMO, since quite often it does work very well. I've used it a lot in the 1.06 scenarios I've played (which admittedly isn't many). It just falls down under some circumstances and could be improved.

I'd strongly prefer to not create dud industries. It's just more clutter on an already cluttered interface, both in the game (particularly) and in the editor. If it's a choice between creating dud industries and leaving 1.06 industries alone, I'm not sure there's any advantage in changing things. My opinion is that we should be trying to improve 1.06, not to introduce more dumb stuff that doesn't work properly. That seems like a backward step.

If the overriding concern is going to be not breaking anything at all, even things which are easy to fix, in any 1.06 scenario, ever, then I think we should forget about calling this 1.06.01. Just calling it 1.07 and doing the job properly would be better for everyone. 1.06 scenarios should still play ok, although possibly needing minor industry tweaks in the editor.

[Blackhawk]

Attached is a rough look at what some buildings could look like as replacements for the 1.06 warehouse industries.

1.06 Buildings.rar

(2.45 MiB) Downloaded 135 times

The hospital, electronics factory, construction firm, and pharm plant are using TM skinned buildings.

The cement/concrete plant is a fertilizer factory with a brighter, whiter look and the color smokes are switched. While a re-skinned iron mine or something might look more like a concrete plant, a mine isn't upgradeable so I went with the fertilizer factory. There is a little bit of glow on the railings for now.

The machine shop is still a warehouse but with some new colors.

* I didn't include a readme, but as with all the other custom things, put the pk4 in the /Data/UserExtraContent folder, and the bty's in the Data/BuildingTypes folder. It wouldn't be a bad idea to back up your existing bty files before copying over them.

-----
While I would like to be able to break the supply chain and make this a new and improved 1.07, however, with the limited number of map makers around lately it's probably best to stick to something backwards compatible. (Oilcan and Arop both haven't been on in awhile and lately they were producing the most maps)

[Gumboots]

While I would like to be able to break the supply chain and make this a new and improved 1.07, however, with the limited number of map makers around lately it's probably best to stick to something backwards compatible. (Oilcan and Arop both haven't been on in awhile and lately they were producing the most maps)

In that case I'd still be in favour of doing it without creating any duds. "Fixing" 1.06 by creating more broken stuff in 1.06 just doesn't seem to have any point to it, IMO. TBH if this patch is going to add more broken stuff, I'm not sure I'd bother with it.

So how can 1.06 be improved without creating any duds? Is that possible? (should be)