|
Jabor posted:They could add a super-express belt without buffing inserters, just make it so inserters can never interact with the belt at all (you could even make a graphic of like, a shroud over it to make that obvious). You'd merge blue belts in order to saturate a fuchsia belt, and then you'd split them back off the main bus onto slower belts for your individual factories. I kind of like this idea. It's the same sort of lateral approach to increased throughput of having carts on tracks but it stays more in the idiom of the game. You should go post it over on the game forums. I don't think the devs read this one.
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
If you are making a high speed non interactable belt, couldn’t the whole thing be underground then? Maybe make a subsurface layer that the high speed belts travel on to get material from one side of a factory to the other without having to surface every 4 tiles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 00:14
|
|
|
Orvin posted:If you are making a high speed non interactable belt, couldn’t the whole thing be underground then? Maybe make a subsurface layer that the high speed belts travel on to get material from one side of a factory to the other without having to surface every 4 tiles. Possibly, but I think the gameplay would be less interesting. The whole point of the discussion is to reward players for engaging in the logistical challenge that belts provide, so you don't want to do that by removing too much of the challenge involved. Also, coming up with appropriate graphics for that seems difficult. In fact I'd be inclined to say that they wouldn't have underground variants at all, all your other belts would have to go underneath your super-express belts instead, and you'd have to be careful with regards to routing around train tracks and other super-express belts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 00:24
|
|
|
Solution: now that we have artillery let us be able to use them to load our machines by cannon fire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 00:27
|
|
|
sharkbomb posted:I'd probably switch back to belts if there was an easier way to load/unload trains in a balanced way with belts. Someone suggested a hopper that would basically be a combo of chests and inserters that fits perfectly to a cargo wagon. After playing this game for so long I just got really sick of trying to engineer high-throughput weird-looking splitter-inserter-chest-inserter combos that inevitably load/unload my trains unevenly. Admittedly, I haven't revisted this part of the game since I learned how to use circuit logic; I could probably build a good solution now if I had to. Yeah, circuits are how you solve this. Here's mine: For unloading:  The three inserters on each side of the splitter are wired together. They use this for their setting:  This makes them unload the chests on their side equally. With a normal belt balancer on the output, this will unload the chests fairly evenly. For loading: All the chests are wired together, and feed into the arithmetic combinator's input. The output of the combinator is wired to each of the inserters loading into the chests, and each inserter is paired separately with its chest with a different colored wire. (Press Q to make the wire stop chaining.) The combinator:  And the inserters:  The combinator takes the negative average fill level of the chests (since there are 24 chests, the divisor is -24.) Then, each inserter adds that to its chest's fill level. If the fill level of the chest is below average (below zero) then turn on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 00:29
|
|
|
Jabor posted:
No. No underground would mean building brand new waiting and offloading train stations for every good type instead of just being able to share incoming and outgoing tracks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
LLSix posted:No. No underground would mean building brand new waiting and offloading train stations for every good type instead of just being able to share incoming and outgoing tracks. Bidirectional train supremacy! (That's a good point, I guess we shouldn't go that far.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
i could do with a whole subterranean layer that could house belts, etc. it'd be cool too to see your belts going from underground to above ground and you could get all sorts of spaghetti with that poo poo in even more new and exciting ways. hell you could probably do it with a mod similar to factorissimo just map 1:1 with the game world and every time uses an underground belt make it show in the underground belt layer too. add a few things like unmovable pillars, oil deposits, etc., and you'd retain some of the challenge. make walls/mines extend to the underground layer and have tunneling biters for extra difficulty 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 01:15
|
|
|
I don't use bots much, because there's no puzzle or planning there. It's a magic solution that totally circumvents design. All you have to do is pump resources and research and power into it and throughput just goes up without needing to ever move anything. It's so easy that it feels like cheating, honestly. But on the other hand, as you scale up to late-game factories and rocket-silo building, your base's resource demands increase so much that it just becomes difficult to keep things running via belts. Your industry gets so hungry you need multiple blue belts of basic resources, pumping that many goods through train stops becomes increasingly unwieldy, and just when you've managed to engineer increasingly complex solutions to all of that, game performance starts dragging anyway. Belts could be buffed, or resource costs could be pushed down to reduce the necessary throughput for stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
Did they fix ups being better with bots? I remember seeing something on it in the optimizations a while back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
Kinetica posted:Did they fix ups being better with bots? I remember seeing something on it in the optimizations a while back. They made belt-based factories a lot more UPS friendly with all of the .16 belt updates I thought.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 04:04
|
|
|
Belts are much more optimized than in the past, but bots are still best for UPS.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Again you just get back to megabases having a far higher throughput via bots, it just requires a bigger power plant. The issue comes down to bots simply not having any collision. You need to give bots collision of some sort to fix this mess/issue. And coding something like that in just opens up a whole new can of worms. Not just power plants: you'd need more roboports to service bots that can't fly as far before going into limp mode, and coupling that with huge swarms of bots queueing up all the time really seems murderous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
It's weird to see the devs write about belts being the fun way to play the game when the tech tree is geared towards favoring bots. I think if there were more upgrades in the tree for belts and belt systems we wouldn't be having the conversation. And I don't just mean "more tiers" types of things, but some kind of improvement similar to bot improvements - improved blue belt speed, improved density, better transfers with inserters, better recipe costs, almost anything, really. ... Diagonal belts?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 07:44
|
|
|
I'd like to see Bob's Inserters made vanilla, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 07:50
|
|
|
I'd like to see loaders added properly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 09:16
|
|
|
Why can't I charge my batteries from electric poles? It's so painful to use any power armor stuff without portable fusion reactor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 09:57
|
|
|
There's A Mod For That™
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 10:09
|
|
|
Alternatively, a burner generator module so you can carry around your own personal smog cloud.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
Yeah Loaders might be all the belt buff they need
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:Yeah Loaders might be all the belt buff they need how though? loaders will fully saturate a belt quickly, but it still boils down to a fully saturated blue belt being nowhere near as efficient as a tonne of bots. it'll be a little buff, but it's definitely not the only buff they need.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
Well, Loaders and Warehousing in stock. Makes for much better flow control of raw materials. I don't really agree that bots need a real debuff but I'd be ok with getting rid of the carrying capacity bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
Finally unlocked the tank yesterday, drat that thing makes taking care of hives so much easier 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
explosivo posted:Finally unlocked the tank yesterday, drat that thing makes taking care of hives so much easier  tanks own
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
I don't even have the cannon shells made yet, was just rocking the AP ammo and flamethrower. So good. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:35
|
|
|
I want a customizable tank where you can replace the cannon with a rocket launcher or souped up flamethrower. Also cannon turrets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
explosivo posted:I don't even have the cannon shells made yet, was just rocking the AP ammo and flamethrower. So good. The shells are pretty good, as long as you realize that they're basically only for worms, and only because they have superior range. They are pretty bad at cutting down biters by themselves (but if you get a green biter, kiting it while pounding it with shells works fine for killing it.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Gwyneth Palpate posted:The shells are pretty good, as long as you realize that they're basically only for worms, and only because they have superior range. They are pretty bad at cutting down biters by themselves (but if you get a green biter, kiting it while pounding it with shells works fine for killing it.) Yeah, Shells are mainly for pounding a base with heavy artillery (before you get REAL artillery at yellow science), even the explosive shells with their AOE aren't good against biter/spitter hordes (that's what the MG/flamethrower/cowcatcher on the front are for)
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
Good to know, thanks for the Tank tips, all!
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
Another tank tip: If you have personal laser defense, it will fire at biters from inside the tank while you focus on hitting nests with cannon shells. Bonus tank tip: If you have a personal roboport, move your construction bots to the tank's inventory before engaging, then back to your inventory after it's clear and they will repair your tank. If you keep them on you during combat, prepare to lose a lot of bots to worm-spit. I finally got my Hans Blix NOTHING TO SEE HERE center up and running, 20 centrifuges kitted with speed module 3s running Kovarex enrichment 24/7  
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
I don't know if the numbers changed at some point but I recall back when nuclear power was added to the game someone worked out that two well-supplied centrifuges running enrichment produced enough to keep even the most extravagant megabase nuclear plant fueled forever. If you go too overboard on Kovarex you will eventually run out of material for the top tier of ammunition and cannon shells.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
Jamsque posted:I don't know if the numbers changed at some point but I recall back when nuclear power was added to the game someone worked out that two well-supplied centrifuges running enrichment produced enough to keep even the most extravagant megabase nuclear plant fueled forever. If you go too overboard on Kovarex you will eventually run out of material for the top tier of ammunition and cannon shells. I'm making nukes, get that depleted poo poo outta here Edit: Note that 20 centrifuges kitted with speed module 3's can make enough U-235 for just over 1 nuke per minute Foehammer fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Jan 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Foehammer posted:I'm making nukes, get that depleted poo poo outta here Ah, I forgot about nukes. They are on the list of 'things I have never intentionally built in 250 hours of Factorio' along with lamps and anything to do with the circuit network.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
Foehammer posted:I'm making nukes, get that depleted poo poo outta here We need nuclear artillery shells.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
uPen posted:We need nuclear artillery shells. i'm guessing you mean tank-mounted atomic bombs, because there are definitely DU shells
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Jamsque posted:Ah, I forgot about nukes. They are on the list of 'things I have never intentionally built in 250 hours of Factorio' along with lamps and anything to do with the circuit network. I'm worried. Do we need to stage a thread intervention? No lamps? What madness is this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
Gwyneth Palpate posted:i'm guessing you mean tank-mounted atomic bombs, because there are definitely DU shells I think he's talking about the artillery platforms they added in 0.16.x Which is mostly stable now if you haven't updated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:I'm worried. Do we need to stage a thread intervention? No lamps? What madness is this? Who needs lamps? They don't aid production at all. I just lean waaaay close to my screen during in-game night until I get night vision goggles. If you want to get really mad at me, I didn't start using trains until like a month ago Jamsque fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Jan 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Gwyneth Palpate posted:i'm guessing you mean tank-mounted atomic bombs, because there are definitely DU shells I want to shoot atomic bombs out of the artillery cannon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Has anyone else seen huge lag spikes when using atomic bombs in multiplayer? Every time someone uses a nuke in my server they get a lot of stuttering and sometimes they're unable to move for a little bit, and everyone else who can see the nuke is also affected. It's really dangerous, it makes it difficult to avoid the blast radius when doing hit and run nuke attacks, and if you get stuck in place the biters can kill you. We only play with 2-4 people and I should have plenty of network bandwidth for that (I'm hosting the server process) so I don't know what's going on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 22:09
|
|
