I probably expressed myself poorly (english is not my language).
I didn't theorize anything, I just expressed what Jorb already said before.
Supports supporting other support's don't check for each tile (like the support itself does) only if there is or not a support on its radius. Which means that if you have a line of 10 supports and every one of them is inside the range of the next one, you can destroy one by one without causing cave-ins and leave just one last support.
That is what I wanted to say. And that would be terrible because you would be able to clear a huge room and remove all supports but one. This is non-sensical.
Here's Jorb's own quote from this thread
here although it was mentioned before somewhere else in more detail - I can't find it though, I'm sorry. Maybe it went to the archives or Hel?
jorb wrote:Because if we "fix" it that means you can remove all minesupports save the last.
Also,
Enjoyment wrote:DaniAngione wrote:I see no reason why this is such a big complaint anyway... If one wants to take advantage of some of the benefits of having a settlement in a mine, for example, they better deal with some drawbacks too
Oh, the reason is that we should build double the amount of supports we actually need... And can't remove useless ones... It's not a game-braking thing but it is annoying, when you trying to build something in mines...
Yes, I understand that
What I usually do is "play" the mine-field game to reach the most optimal spot for a support instead of building one on the safest short distance (inside the radius of the last one.) I know it can be annoying for some - but it works. I've managed to build a long road underground on W8 (like 3-4 grids long) and each pillar was distant enough from the last so the radii would touch but not intersect. It's just about patience, I guess.