Photosynthesis & Membrane Re-Balance

[Deus-Codes]

Brief Description of What This PR Does

Rebalancing of photosynthesis and membrane osmoregulation bonus, in accordance with Thim's idea to simultaneously overhaul the strategy behind photosynthesis behavior, make membranes actually relevant for players, and represent how the relatively low output of photosynthesis encourages sessile life. Now, if players wish to be voracious as a mixotroph, they have to make considerable behavioral or anatomical changes to support that lifestyle.

Both thylakoids and chloroplasts have been strongly nerfed, though chloroplasts remain ridiculously more efficient than a thylakoid. Membrane osmoregulation has been buffed for cellulose, silica, and calcium carbonate. Balancing numbers aren't final, and I think it would be a good idea to add other membrane changes to this patch. I more wanted to open this up to feedback and playtesting, then build from there.

Related Issues

Progress Checklist

Note: before starting this checklist the PR should be marked as non-draft.

• PR author has checked that this PR works as intended and doesn't
  break existing features:
  https://wiki.revolutionarygamesstudio.com/wiki/Testing_Checklist
  (this is important as to not waste the time of Thrive team
  members reviewing this PR)
• Initial code review passed (this and further items should not be checked by the PR author)
• Functionality is confirmed working by another person (see above checklist link)
• Final code review is passed and code conforms to the
  styleguide.

Before merging all CI jobs should finish on this PR without errors, if
there are automatically detected style issues they should be fixed by
the PR author. Merging must follow our
styleguide.

[revolutionary-bot]

The lead programmer for Thrive is currently on vacation until 2026-01-07. Until then other programmers will try to make pull request reviews, but please be patient if your PR is not getting reviewed.

PRs may be merged after multiple programmers have approved the changes (especially making sure to ensure style guide conformance and gameplay testing are good). If there are no active experienced programmers who can perform merges, PRs may need to wait until the lead programmer is back to be merged.

[Patryk26g]

Looking at adQuid's PR I would also maybe decrease the speed and osmoregulation of these membranes but not to that high degree

[Deus-Codes]

Tweaked balancing for membranes. Similarity with Thim in that cellulose, silica, and calcium carbonate had sizable reduction in movement cost.

Some differences:

1. Cellulose - Made them pretty physically resistant, but more sensitive to toxins and with same amount of health as double membranes. The "template" autotrophic-inclined membrane, less of a severe step into it than calcium carbonate or silica. Also think my movement penalty here is less severe than Thim's if I remember correctly.
2. Chitin - Chitin is more mobile than other non-engulfable membranes, with less of an osmoregulation bonus. I buffed up toxin resistance for chitin and reduce toxin resistance for the other walled membranes to make chitin the clear favorite for deterring toxins.
3. Calcium Carbonate - Made this cellulose with its pluses and minuses taken to further extremes. More health and more resistant to physical damage, but more sensitive to toxins. Slower, but with a stronger (strongest among membranes) boost to osmoregulation bonuses.
4. Silica - The "tank" option, very limited mobility but 200 health, with strong physical resistance. More sensitive to toxins. Health pool make this into an organism that you basically have to engulf in order to productively tackle.

[Patryk26g]

Its a good direction but imo the hinderence is too high, I would prefer it to be:
cellulose: 0.5 -> 0.7
carbo: 0.4 -> 0.65
silica: 0.2 -> 0.5

so that there is any point for the player to choose them. 0.5 speed in silica is small enough to not be able to move against the current

[Accidental-Explorer]

One observation here: during glaciation in a surface patch (50% lux), placing a thylakoid has a nett 0 effect on your glucose balance during the day, an therefore a nett negative effect on glucose balance throughout 24 hours, when using Calcium Carbonate (lowest osmoregulation cost). Obviously lower light and different membranes strengthen this. (Though this is also including movement cost) Is that desirable?

[Deus-Codes]

One observation here: during glaciation in a surface patch (50% lux), placing a thylakoid has a nett 0 effect on your glucose balance during the day, an therefore a nett negative effect on glucose balance throughout 24 hours, when using Calcium Carbonate (lowest osmoregulation cost). Obviously lower light and different membranes strengthen this. (Though this is also including movement cost) Is that desirable?

Good point, and buffed thylakoids slightly. Though frozen environments should be difficult for photosynthesizers as they first evolve, it really shouldn't ever be at a point where there is absolutely 0 benefit.

[Accidental-Explorer]

One observation here: during glaciation in a surface patch (50% lux), placing a thylakoid has a nett 0 effect on your glucose balance during the day, an therefore a nett negative effect on glucose balance throughout 24 hours, when using Calcium Carbonate (lowest osmoregulation cost). Obviously lower light and different membranes strengthen this. (Though this is also including movement cost) Is that desirable?

Good point, and buffed thylakoids slightly. Though frozen environments should be difficult for photosynthesizers as they first evolve, it really shouldn't ever be at a point where there is absolutely 0 benefit.

Alright, that sounds fine to me! The main reason I mentioned it is because the only feasible way you really have of fighting against "less light" is more "photosynthesis organelles", and I think that's pretty much what you see IRL.

(It's something different for for example ice sheet patches, which in a global ice age we could opt to truly make unlivable for photosynthesis-reliant species.)

But come to think of it, you probably also want to adjust the CO2 usage of the processes to match the reduced glucose output? I think that would keep the CO2 balance in the world more similar to current.

[Deus-Codes]

Just to make sure I get your meaning: you're saying this because thylakoids are likely less desirable by auto-evo, so bump up the amount of CO2 consumed to reflect this reduced presence?

If so, do you have any recommendations for a rate at which it can be bumped? Perhaps we could maybe multiply the current CO2 absorption rate by 1.5-1.75 (since thylakoids were needed by about that much)?

[Accidental-Explorer]

Just to make sure I get your meaning: you're saying this because thylakoids are likely less desirable by auto-evo, so bump up the amount of CO2 consumed to reflect this reduced presence?

Oops, sorry about that, I actually meant reduce CO2 consumption, to match the reduced glucose consumption. Just a simple 1:1 to keep the ratio the same.

But what you said is actually a good point, maybe we should first look at what the current changes do to the CO2 levels.