I can think of scenarios where you would want to leave the orphaned requests in place, so I think you have to provide that flexibility

The suggestions given absolutely should not be implemented. If an epic silo surrounded by a full ring of epic speed 3 beacons still doesn't have maxed throughput, the base speed of the silo would be so slow it would be practically unusable at the point it's actually unlocked.

Just have higher ...

I don't think I agree with this. Currently you can accomplish what you're describing by manually deleting all the requests in the group before deleting the group itself, whereas with your suggestion there would be no way to delete the group but leave the requests in place on things that were using it.

How about having trains become only available way after Aquilo just the same? Yes, you could beat the game without bots and trains. One can war glass shards instead of diamonds. One can live with Q4 all the way.


Why not unlock elevated rails right when trains are unlocked? Why not have all the ...

My "Thought problem" is: As a software engineer i encourage data encapsulation. When i adopt my old pattern, i would produce the old 6 sciences on nauvis. white i need to import. I can only have one import point on any planet. The other 4/5 also needs to be imported. This feels like breaking my ...

As I said in my initial post, I didn't need to scale AT ALL in space age. I upgraded my steel furnaces to uncommon and my inserters to stack and that covered me for the whole game. In 1.0 I needed to "add additional furnace stacks", which was a logistics problem - more stuff to move around. In ...

I think you misunderstand, I mean alongside the ability to place elevated rails on the Fulgora oceans, allow power poles to do the same thing as part of the same research. Makes sense with the nature of what is already unlocked.


It doesn't though. Currently, placing power poles on Fulgora's ...

The post victory screen in 1.0 was fun, but in space age it's pure vanity.


There's literally no difference. The post-game in 1.0 was all about making the big number go up. The post-game in SA is also about making the big number go up. SA actually does this way better than the base game ...

The only answer we got from the devs was that they did not want to change the behavior. I guess they are talking about how demolishers destroy rocks and cliffs when they pass by, but devs could at least disable particles without affecting that.

If there isn't radar coverage and there aren't any ...

On a related note, this bug fix destroyed the throughput for switching recipes with fluid outputs. You can't quickly pump out the output fluids anymore because of this, and instead have to wait for them to slowly drain on their own.


Maybe I'm misunderstanding what's happening, but I'm 99% sure ...

I feel like a relatively simple solve for this is that demolishers are only updated if there's a player-built structure in their territory or part of their territory has active radar coverage.

Lets say you need 1000 foundations, some solar panels and some laser turrets. If you launch 100 foundations, 50 panels+laser turrets, your defenses are probably up. If you strictly prio foundations, it takes 20 launches of foundations before any panels or lasers are up. That is a significant delay ...

Bots in personal roboports are currently extremely inefficient due to the pseudorandom way jobs are assigned. It doesn't matter for a static roboport, but with a personal roboport the player could move themself throughout the build to optimize bot travel time if jobs were assigned by proximity ...

I would love some kind of in-game editor now that remote view is a thing. I've always found Factorio to have a big problem with incentivizing the player to close their game and open a sandbox save any time they want to design something new, which doesn't work in multiplayer and is a poor play ...

Sorry, I meant people will fet confused between "none" and 0.

Also is there a use case where you would want "none" instead of setting the maximum to equal the minimum?


I mean, it's for the maximum. I don't think people will get confused between "maximum of 0" and "no maximum."

And from reading ...

He is not wrong tho, except he's wrong about when it is unlocked. Don't need the legendary quality and quite frankly, you need so many uncommon, rare and epic to upcycle that by the time you DO have legendary you should have a decent stockpile of epics to upcycle "easily".

The thing here is that ...

"None" would work exactly the way "inf" currently works, which is that if Trash Unrequested is disabled the item is never trashed, and if it's enabled anything above the minimum is trashed.

"Inf" being the same as 2^32 - 1 is how it should work, but it currently doesn't work that way if Trash ...

Currently, setting the maximum on a logistic request to "inf" does not actually behave as if the request has a maximum of infinity. Rather, it behaves as if there is no maximum set. The difference is relevant when Trash Unrequested is enabled, as a request from N to inf will auto trash anything over ...

computeraddict wrote: Tue Nov 19, 2024 9:40 pmYou can set a maximum of 2^32-1 and get an effective infinity, or just mash 9 5-6 times /shrug

Okay, and? Being able to work around them with an ugly kludge doesn't mean obviously wrong things shouldn't be fixed.