|
So in the last update, some little details were added to the barracks, though most of them are too small to read. Anyone know how to rip the texture files?
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:50 |
|
|
Why can't I get this to work?   The lifter lifts the tracks and the pusher pushes the conveyor belt into place underneath it, but it just sits there. I've tried all sorts of stuff but I can't get stuff moving on a belt after lifting it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Lima posted:Why can't I get this to work? The lifter is still lifting the tracks. It is a bit annoying, yes, things need gravity to push them down onto a conveyor belt for them to work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Lima posted:Why can't I get this to work? Try pushing the item onto the conveyor instead, you have to get the object off the lifter beam before it can do anything. This makes it rather annoying for larger items.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Orthogonalus posted:The lifter is still lifting the tracks. It is a bit annoying, yes, things need gravity to push them down onto a conveyor belt for them to work. Uncomfortable Gaze posted:Try pushing the item onto the conveyor instead, you have to get the object off the lifter beam before it can do anything. This makes it rather annoying for larger items. Ooh I didn't think that the lifter would continue to generate lift. This simple setup works:  Thanks 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Lima posted:Why can't I get this to work? I assume someone will figure out why it's not working eve- ah gently caress it.   Uncomfortable Gaze posted:Try pushing the item onto the conveyor instead, you have to get the object off the lifter beam before it can do anything. This makes it rather annoying for larger items. I think you're pretty much spot on there as to why it doesn't work.  (Designs not rated for efficiency) Kaislioc fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Feb 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Lima posted:Ooh I didn't think that the lifter would continue to generate lift. This simple setup works: That's pretty much exactly how my lifter setups work. I also realized that lifters configured like this make excellent rate-limiters, no worries about objects pushing their way through your blocker setup.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
I give up, I can't make Meat Product Type 101 run any faster than 68 cycles. edit: I apparently lied, I only had to completely rebuild the entire machine differently. TacMan fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Feb 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
Uncomfortable Gaze posted:That's pretty much exactly how my lifter setups work. I also realized that lifters configured like this make excellent rate-limiters, no worries about objects pushing their way through your blocker setup. It seems to be: -As soon as any part of anything is in a lifter's beam, it stops and can't be conveyored off -It can be pushed off by a pusher (and possibly other incoming blocks? Haven't tried) -lifter beams aren't shielded by any intervening blocks
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
TacMan posted:I give up, I can't make Meat Product Type 101 run any faster than 68 cycles. If (when) Guavamoment or WildM does an infinifactory tourney y'all are going to make my brain melt. I'm pretty much at the "can solve damned near any puzzle" stage, which I never got close to in Spacechem. The fact that you can not only beat my time of 80 on Meat 101 but bring it down to sub-70 is terrifying. Uncomfortable Gaze posted:That's pretty much exactly how my lifter setups work. I also realized that lifters configured like this make excellent rate-limiters, no worries about objects pushing their way through your blocker setup. They're also wonderful overflow storage. As long as the space above the lifter is open you can keep storing spare parts and chunks above it forever without worrying about earlier parts of the assembly backing up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:If (when) Guavamoment or WildM does an infinifactory tourney y'all are going to make my brain melt. if you use lifters this way, you can use grinders to destroy anything that goes too far up in case you need that vertical space.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 01:10
|
|
|
Elswyyr posted:Could anyone give me a hint on Optical Sensor Array Type 4? I can't figure out how to make the X shape. I've managed to weld 4 things together in the correct shape, but then my machine jams.     This is how I did it, YMMV Bonus content since everyone was comparing their Guided Javlin Type 1 setups a few pages back. 
ModeSix fucked around with this message at 02:53 on Feb 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
This is a tweaked version of my original solution for the Javelin. Its not my best on cycles but it is my best on footprint (46).
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 10:08
|
|
|
Elswyyr posted:Could anyone give me a hint on Optical Sensor Array Type 4? I can't figure out how to make the X shape. I've managed to weld 4 things together in the correct shape, but then my machine jams. Here's how I did it.    
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
Here's my low-cycle Javelin:
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
None of my designs are as neat or intuitive as most of what people are posting but drat I do love making these insane contraptions. One of my big issues seems to be not realizing the puzzle's inherent setup, for example I had no idea that the javelin puzzle essentially just spills out the pieces in order for you, and I waste a lot of space and cycles building everything piece-by-piece before putting it all together in the end. I had designed some solutions for when I need to split up a supply into various ratios, involving series of pushers and sensors and loop-backs but there appear to be much more simple solutions after watching a lot of these gifs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
DONT CARE BUTTON posted:None of my designs are as neat or intuitive as most of what people are posting but drat I do love making these insane contraptions. One of my big issues seems to be not realizing the puzzle's inherent setup, for example I had no idea that the javelin puzzle essentially just spills out the pieces in order for you, and I waste a lot of space and cycles building everything piece-by-piece before putting it all together in the end. I had designed some solutions for when I need to split up a supply into various ratios, involving series of pushers and sensors and loop-backs but there appear to be much more simple solutions after watching a lot of these gifs. Don't worry about it, people build things different ways (personally I have a bad habit of building logic gates everywhere, even if not needed). Also puzzles stop giving you good ratios the moment you set them to maximum. The Javelin puzzles for example example set everything to 1:1:1, so you're going to need some sort of trick to sort things out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
Yea, I love how flexible the solutions can be. I finished the game without ever building a logic gate, and I can build my low-cycle solutions without them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Don't worry about it, people build things different ways (personally I have a bad habit of building logic gates everywhere, even if not needed). Also puzzles stop giving you good ratios the moment you set them to maximum. The Javelin puzzles for example example set everything to 1:1:1, so you're going to need some sort of trick to sort things out. That's not exactly how it works:  The ratios stay the same. You're probably just blocking inputs by having the blocks change direction. In fact, one neat trick to prevent jacking up your ratios is to have all inputs controlled by pushers that trigger on the same switch, and then placing that switch over the fastest input. Also, Chunjee posted:Overlords keeping an eye on progress?  It's not just me. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Uncomfortable Gaze posted:Yea, I love how flexible the solutions can be. I finished the game without ever building a logic gate, and I can build my low-cycle solutions without them. As I get/got better at building stuff I used them less and less. The only time I generally use one now is whenever I build stuff on a lifter. I imagine they'll become more important later on when people start making challenges with intentionally skewed inputs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Don't worry about it, people build things different ways (personally I have a bad habit of building logic gates everywhere, even if not needed). Also puzzles stop giving you good ratios the moment you set them to maximum. The Javelin puzzles for example example set everything to 1:1:1, so you're going to need some sort of trick to sort things out. I'm pretty sure that even on maximum, things come out in appropriate proportions. The problem is that whichever part is most frequent will be trying to come out every single cycle, so it's impossible* to avoid stalling it when you try and actually do something with that input. It's the stall that actually throws off the proportions. With the Javelin, for example, if you just drag conveyors straight out from each input you'll find that the body pieces come out every cycle, while the engine and nose appear every third cycle. * don't ask Jabor fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Feb 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
What's the best Wave Detection Array? I got mine to 96 cycles, which is part of the 'lowest bar' of the chart. Anyone have better?  Also this gif tool rules out loud Edit: Minor refinement got me to 91 Evilreaver fucked around with this message at 02:50 on Feb 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
Evilreaver posted:What's the best Wave Detection Array? Gif tool has some issues. Mainly I think the time is based off of outputs. Which means if you have a faster output it's going to give a lot shorter of a gif. Still an amazing tool though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
Evilreaver posted:What's the best Wave Detection Array? The only optimization I could think of was the pusher delay, so parallelism got me to 88:   It's making two sets per side in a single cycle, so the gif recorder messes up. e: There's some cleanup that can be made to shave a cycle or two. e2: Yep, 86 by compacting the left side over a little and cleaning up the small jam on the right. zeekner fucked around with this message at 03:36 on Feb 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Wild M posted:
I got a red flashing overlay of that camerabot but I didn't see it around me 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
Yeah, I bump into that guy from time to time. I think it's pretty cute.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
Evilreaver posted:What's the best Wave Detection Array? I've got 79, nobody on my list has lower than that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 09:31
|
|
|
Managed to get my footprint on Gneiss Chair down to 89 by moving the timing loop on top of the main belts: Still a way off the best footprint score I've seen (Strong Mouse's 80), but I'm fairly proud of it. I guess moving the whole thing a bit away from the input might help lower it further?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 10:31
|
|
|
Paul.Power posted:Managed to get my footprint on Gneiss Chair down to 89 by moving the timing loop on top of the main belts:  67 by carving instead of assembling. As you said about yours, this one could also be improved by finishing closer to the output.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 13:35
|
|
|
Got this footprint down to 29, but the lowest someone in my friendslist has is 27. This is not pretty.  I've totally given up on getting rid of those last two footprint 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Buffis posted:Got this footprint down to 29, but the lowest someone in my friendslist has is 27. I think you can cut the top welder in the welderblock above the lifter. Also welding together 9 blocks and only using 2 of them is awesome
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Buffis posted:Got this footprint down to 29, but the lowest someone in my friendslist has is 27. The trick is to not rotate the welded assembly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
Lima posted:Also welding together 9 blocks and only using 2 of them is awesome It's actually just 6 blocks. I don't want to be wasteful! Control Volume posted:The trick is to not rotate the welded assembly. Yeah, I actually figured that out, but I still need one block to keep the center area thing in place, so that it does not fall down on the bottom track. Here's what I came up with for 28. Some unneeded stuff towards the end but nothing that adds footprint. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
Haha the support block, the trick to that is ultimately finding out a way to have it attach to the output structure. I solved that problem by having my top block go sideways at the end (the entire line was shifted over by one after the stamper). Then once you do that all you have to do is figure out how to weld them together. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Orthogonalus posted:
Yeah, I've got mine down to 58 by doing that.  I might be able to shave off another 1 or 2 by having the block assembly drop instead of lift. Fake edit: Dropping it brought me down to 52, a lot better than I thought!  My cycles are just garbage, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Looking at other people's solutions makes me feel real stupid. My solutions are mostly rate-independent, though. I also feel the campaign was cut short. Especially since arriving at the barracks felt like a "Here is where act 2 starts" point, but there's nothing more. At least not yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
ymgve posted:Looking at other people's solutions makes me feel real stupid. My solutions are mostly rate-independent, though. More is coming! http://www.reddit.com/r/infinifactory_roadmap/comments/2uxf5d/we_just_pushed_a_new_update_what_should_we_add/ quote:we're currently working on our first mini-campaign for Infinifactory, which takes place at the end of the main campaign and adds new mechanics, puzzles, and story in a neat little bundle. The plan, at least as it stands now, is to make a few of these over the next few months, with each one exploring a new area of gameplay, and have them all tie together into a post-game story that compliments the main campaign.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
ymgve posted:Looking at other people's solutions makes me feel real stupid. My solutions are mostly rate-independent, though. Agreed. I'm really hoping it's the start of bigger plotline in a future update or even DLC. NickPancakes fucked around with this message at 01:51 on Feb 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
Orthogonalus posted:More is coming! http://www.reddit.com/r/infinifactory_roadmap/comments/2uxf5d/we_just_pushed_a_new_update_what_should_we_add/ Awesome! I also fired up the game for the first time in a few weeks, and am sad to see that two of my solutions don't work anymore. I think some levels got their layout changed?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:50 |
|
|
Since I don't feel like banging my head against the existing levels that I've all solved to get super ideal machines, I thought I'd try my hand at the level editor to see what all I could make. So for anyone else who beat every level and want more, have a goon-made challenge: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=387664559 And yes, it is solvable, you can't publish before you solve your own puzzle. If anything, this puzzle ended up deceptively easy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 06:38
|
|