Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Attach:
(Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 2048KB, maximum individual size 512KB
Note that any files attached will not be displayed until approved by a moderator.
Verification:
Please type the number 5678 below. / Bitte die Zahl 5678 eingeben / Por favor, escriba el número 5678 aquí.:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: eX0du5
« on: 04 February 2011, 21:07:09 »

Should I search for (i) only instead of (i) + (I) ? Or do you really need the chance to search for both?
I mean if they are not producing and will be dead soon, you have no need to harvest them :-) - and therefore search for them.
Posted by: bontchev
« on: 16 January 2011, 07:09:28 »

Currently, in the various searches GT does not distinguish between i-inactives and I-inactives. My proposal is that you implement the capability to do so, since the i-inactives are usually still producing (unless their production is explicitly turned off, or their energy is down by too much), while the I-inactives are probably already dead (or will be dead in a week).