Skip to content

Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) #121

Closed
#116
Closed
Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal)#121
#116
Labels
area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)

Description

@ApocDev
ApocDev
opened on Jul 5, 2026

When a recipe's building count is pinned (exact count) and that recipe produces one of the block's goals, the goal's ≥-rate floor and the pin's =-count are two independent LP constraints that fight: e.g. 2 foundries make 0.133/s steel, a 0.14/s goal needs 2.1, and neither will yield → a spurious "infeasible" over a rounding sliver.

Users pinning a building count are switching that block to supply-push ("I built N of these, size the block to them"), so the goal should yield: the pinned count drives output and the goal rate stops binding. This mirrors YAFC, where fixing a row IS the spec and output is a consequence (Yafc.Model sets the row variable's bounds to the fixed rate; there is no separate goal to conflict).

Scope:

  • Only COUNT pins (exact) relax the goal, and only on a producer OF that goal. A CAP pin ("at most N") is a ceiling the goal may legitimately exceed — its shortfall must still flag. A count pin on a mid-chain row stays a hard constraint that can honestly conflict.
  • Keep the goal untouched in the doc (naming, factory rollups); relax only the solver floor.
  • Surface the gap as a soft note on the goal so the relaxation isn't silent: "pinned N → X/s; your R/s target needs M buildings."

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions

    , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
     blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) · Issue #121 · ApocDev/pyops · GitHub
    Skip to content
    Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) #121
    Closed
    #116
    Closed
    Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal)#121
    #116
    Labels
    area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
    Description
    @ApocDev
    ApocDev
    opened on Jul 5, 2026
    When a recipe's building count is pinned (exact count) and that recipe produces one of the block's goals, the goal's ≥-rate floor and the pin's =-count are two independent LP constraints that fight: e.g. 2 foundries make 0.133/s steel, a 0.14/s goal needs 2.1, and neither will yield → a spurious "infeasible" over a rounding sliver.
    Users pinning a building count are switching that block to supply-push ("I built N of these, size the block to them"), so the goal should yield: the pinned count drives output and the goal rate stops binding. This mirrors YAFC, where fixing a row IS the spec and output is a consequence (Yafc.Model sets the row variable's bounds to the fixed rate; there is no separate goal to conflict).
    Scope:
    • Only COUNT pins (exact) relax the goal, and only on a producer OF that goal. A CAP pin ("at most N") is a ceiling the goal may legitimately exceed — its shortfall must still flag. A count pin on a mid-chain row stays a hard constraint that can honestly conflict.
    • Keep the goal untouched in the doc (naming, factory rollups); relax only the solver floor.
    • Surface the gap as a soft note on the goal so the relaxation isn't silent: "pinned N → X/s; your R/s target needs M buildings."
    Metadata
    Metadata
    Assignees
    No one assigned
      Labels
      area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
      Projects
      No projects
      Milestone
      No milestone
      Relationships
      None yet
      Development
      No branches or pull requests
      Issue actions
      
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) · Issue #121 · ApocDev/pyops · GitHub
      Skip to content
      Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) #121
      Closed
      #116
      Closed
      Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal)#121
      #116
      Labels
      area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
      Description
      @ApocDev
      ApocDev
      opened on Jul 5, 2026
      When a recipe's building count is pinned (exact count) and that recipe produces one of the block's goals, the goal's ≥-rate floor and the pin's =-count are two independent LP constraints that fight: e.g. 2 foundries make 0.133/s steel, a 0.14/s goal needs 2.1, and neither will yield → a spurious "infeasible" over a rounding sliver.
      Users pinning a building count are switching that block to supply-push ("I built N of these, size the block to them"), so the goal should yield: the pinned count drives output and the goal rate stops binding. This mirrors YAFC, where fixing a row IS the spec and output is a consequence (Yafc.Model sets the row variable's bounds to the fixed rate; there is no separate goal to conflict).
      Scope:
      • Only COUNT pins (exact) relax the goal, and only on a producer OF that goal. A CAP pin ("at most N") is a ceiling the goal may legitimately exceed — its shortfall must still flag. A count pin on a mid-chain row stays a hard constraint that can honestly conflict.
      • Keep the goal untouched in the doc (naming, factory rollups); relax only the solver floor.
      • Surface the gap as a soft note on the goal so the relaxation isn't silent: "pinned N → X/s; your R/s target needs M buildings."
      Metadata
      Metadata
      Assignees
      No one assigned
        Labels
        area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
        Projects
        No projects
        Milestone
        No milestone
        Relationships
        None yet
        Development
        No branches or pull requests
        Issue actions
        
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) · Issue #121 · ApocDev/pyops · GitHub
        Skip to content
        Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) #121
        Closed
        #116
        Closed
        Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal)#121
        #116
        Labels
        area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
        Description
        @ApocDev
        ApocDev
        opened on Jul 5, 2026
        When a recipe's building count is pinned (exact count) and that recipe produces one of the block's goals, the goal's ≥-rate floor and the pin's =-count are two independent LP constraints that fight: e.g. 2 foundries make 0.133/s steel, a 0.14/s goal needs 2.1, and neither will yield → a spurious "infeasible" over a rounding sliver.
        Users pinning a building count are switching that block to supply-push ("I built N of these, size the block to them"), so the goal should yield: the pinned count drives output and the goal rate stops binding. This mirrors YAFC, where fixing a row IS the spec and output is a consequence (Yafc.Model sets the row variable's bounds to the fixed rate; there is no separate goal to conflict).
        Scope:
        • Only COUNT pins (exact) relax the goal, and only on a producer OF that goal. A CAP pin ("at most N") is a ceiling the goal may legitimately exceed — its shortfall must still flag. A count pin on a mid-chain row stays a hard constraint that can honestly conflict.
        • Keep the goal untouched in the doc (naming, factory rollups); relax only the solver floor.
        • Surface the gap as a soft note on the goal so the relaxation isn't silent: "pinned N → X/s; your R/s target needs M buildings."
        Metadata
        Metadata
        Assignees
        No one assigned
          Labels
          area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
          Projects
          No projects
          Milestone
          No milestone
          Relationships
          None yet
          Development
          No branches or pull requests
          Issue actions
          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) · Issue #121 · ApocDev/pyops · GitHub
          Skip to content
          Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) #121
          Closed
          #116
          Closed
          Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal)#121
          #116
          Labels
          area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
          Description
          @ApocDev
          ApocDev
          opened on Jul 5, 2026
          When a recipe's building count is pinned (exact count) and that recipe produces one of the block's goals, the goal's ≥-rate floor and the pin's =-count are two independent LP constraints that fight: e.g. 2 foundries make 0.133/s steel, a 0.14/s goal needs 2.1, and neither will yield → a spurious "infeasible" over a rounding sliver.
          Users pinning a building count are switching that block to supply-push ("I built N of these, size the block to them"), so the goal should yield: the pinned count drives output and the goal rate stops binding. This mirrors YAFC, where fixing a row IS the spec and output is a consequence (Yafc.Model sets the row variable's bounds to the fixed rate; there is no separate goal to conflict).
          Scope:
          • Only COUNT pins (exact) relax the goal, and only on a producer OF that goal. A CAP pin ("at most N") is a ceiling the goal may legitimately exceed — its shortfall must still flag. A count pin on a mid-chain row stays a hard constraint that can honestly conflict.
          • Keep the goal untouched in the doc (naming, factory rollups); relax only the solver floor.
          • Surface the gap as a soft note on the goal so the relaxation isn't silent: "pinned N → X/s; your R/s target needs M buildings."
          Metadata
          Metadata
          Assignees
          No one assigned
            Labels
            area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
            Projects
            No projects
            Milestone
            No milestone
            Relationships
            None yet
            Development
            No branches or pull requests
            Issue actions
            
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) · Issue #121 · ApocDev/pyops · GitHub
            Skip to content
            Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) #121
            Closed
            #116
            Closed
            Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal)#121
            #116
            Labels
            area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
            Description
            @ApocDev
            ApocDev
            opened on Jul 5, 2026
            When a recipe's building count is pinned (exact count) and that recipe produces one of the block's goals, the goal's ≥-rate floor and the pin's =-count are two independent LP constraints that fight: e.g. 2 foundries make 0.133/s steel, a 0.14/s goal needs 2.1, and neither will yield → a spurious "infeasible" over a rounding sliver.
            Users pinning a building count are switching that block to supply-push ("I built N of these, size the block to them"), so the goal should yield: the pinned count drives output and the goal rate stops binding. This mirrors YAFC, where fixing a row IS the spec and output is a consequence (Yafc.Model sets the row variable's bounds to the fixed rate; there is no separate goal to conflict).
            Scope:
            • Only COUNT pins (exact) relax the goal, and only on a producer OF that goal. A CAP pin ("at most N") is a ceiling the goal may legitimately exceed — its shortfall must still flag. A count pin on a mid-chain row stays a hard constraint that can honestly conflict.
            • Keep the goal untouched in the doc (naming, factory rollups); relax only the solver floor.
            • Surface the gap as a soft note on the goal so the relaxation isn't silent: "pinned N → X/s; your R/s target needs M buildings."
            Metadata
            Metadata
            Assignees
            No one assigned
              Labels
              area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
              Projects
              No projects
              Milestone
              No milestone
              Relationships
              None yet
              Development
              No branches or pull requests
              Issue actions
              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
})();
Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) · Issue #121 · ApocDev/pyops · GitHub
              Skip to content
              Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal) #121
              Closed
              #116
              Closed
              Pinning a building count on a goal's producer should supply-push (not fight the goal)#121
              #116
              Labels
              area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
              Description
              @ApocDev
              ApocDev
              opened on Jul 5, 2026
              When a recipe's building count is pinned (exact count) and that recipe produces one of the block's goals, the goal's ≥-rate floor and the pin's =-count are two independent LP constraints that fight: e.g. 2 foundries make 0.133/s steel, a 0.14/s goal needs 2.1, and neither will yield → a spurious "infeasible" over a rounding sliver.
              Users pinning a building count are switching that block to supply-push ("I built N of these, size the block to them"), so the goal should yield: the pinned count drives output and the goal rate stops binding. This mirrors YAFC, where fixing a row IS the spec and output is a consequence (Yafc.Model sets the row variable's bounds to the fixed rate; there is no separate goal to conflict).
              Scope:
              • Only COUNT pins (exact) relax the goal, and only on a producer OF that goal. A CAP pin ("at most N") is a ceiling the goal may legitimately exceed — its shortfall must still flag. A count pin on a mid-chain row stays a hard constraint that can honestly conflict.
              • Keep the goal untouched in the doc (naming, factory rollups); relax only the solver floor.
              • Surface the gap as a soft note on the goal so the relaxation isn't silent: "pinned N → X/s; your R/s target needs M buildings."
              Metadata
              Metadata
              Assignees
              No one assigned
                Labels
                area: plannerProduction block / planning modelarea: webWeb UI (React/TanStack/vite-plus)
                Projects
                No projects
                Milestone
                No milestone
                Relationships
                None yet
                Development
                No branches or pull requests
                Issue actions