A nice trick Meh. Hacky. And I’d probably rather have the soft locks that add that junk into the train schedule. I realize most people probably don’t care. But I would *technically* consider the fact that the waiting list isn’t consistent on what it considers a slot in the waitlist for the station ...

4) The train will only release its reservation if it would otherwise be allowed to continue to its next stop (the next stop isn’t stuck at max limit—has an active train that has not completed its wait condition—T <> 0). (This prevents a premature pathing if the destination is blocked by a train sti...

When B fills, it completed its wait condition, and is now T = 0 && C > 0. It unregisters. B is now 0/1 and A can path to it. So A unregisters and becomes 0/1. Now C can path to it and becomes 0/1. For a tick or so. Then since they all now have trains pathing they are 1/1 again and with stay...

If have 1 train at A pending for B, 1 train at B pending for C and 1 train at C pending for A, then you have a deadlock. If the train at B is not pending for C but instead receiveing material. then the train waiting in A is logically stopped preventing the train waiting at C to come in A. Because t...

To clarify the "bug": 1. train wants to leave 2. there is no free station available. All destinations report x/x as trainlimit/train reservation. 3.The train has left the station (no "T" signal) yet the station counts the departed train toward the reserved trains in x/x I'd like...

Removing “pending” trains, or whatever the condition is called, would set both limits to 0/1 and allow both trains to proceed to their next station, freeing the deadlock. Yes it would allow both train to move in the example. But it is not something you can generalize (imo). All the trains with &quo...

To clarify the "bug": 1. train wants to leave 2. there is no free station available. All destinations report x/x as trainlimit/train reservation. 3.The train has left the station (no "T" signal) yet the station counts the departed train toward the reserved trains in x/x Exactly....

If you only have two stations (in this schedule) and two trains, why are you using train limits in the first place? I don’t. This is a simplified example. I have blocks of sets of stations. But the math is the same for 2 or 2000. If you have the same number of trains as you have stations with train...

TL;DR Trains (particularly with dynamic train limits) can soft-deadlock when both “ends” of a loop are “full” (in regard to Train Limit). What ? It’s not my solution, so I’ll point to Nilaus’ recent video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2DyxgQxxmA&t=245s. Scenario: fairly standard logistics t...

Awesome work! This is superior in every way to everything else ever created.

Yasssss!

Congrats on the milestone. I’m being serious when I say this: I have rarely experienced such an amazing, caring group of people working on a project. And I believe that helps lead to the awesome community surrounding this game way of life.

So, my opinion hasn’t changed much after a post .60 run each of default Rail World and Death World Marathon games. Generated, didn’t preview, went in blind for a “core” experience. The *actual* oil changes don’t really bother me. The only difference is that instead of building a multi-stage refinery...

I have also uninstalled the game after more than 2500 hours and playing almost every day. The shot has been that my 11-year-old daughter has literally told me: "Now that is super easy," and now prefers to play the "Oxygen not included." A pity that has stopped listening to the p...

Moolicious wrote: ↑

Sat Aug 10, 2019 3:40 am

How can this be considered a stable release candidate when oil is still an abomination? I’m still sticking with .59 until this is fixed

I expect you’ll be waiting a while.

Adapt and overcome.

(Seriously, I doubt the oil changes will be reverted. Refined a bit, but not reverted.)

To me, I feel like this isn't 'kicking the can down the road', its breaking up a concept from a large and more complex item into smaller and more manageable pieces. I pretty clearly had my refinery process broken up into discrete blocks. It seems that a perhaps better choice might have been to guid...

I would still switch from coal to solid fuel early on to keep the boilers and furnaces well fed. [...] I've seen at least 1 anecdotal report that using solid fuel like this in the 0.17.60 series is considerably worse, and it's not hard to see why; solid fuel now directly competes with plastic and s...

meganothing wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 01, 2019 4:20 am

If you want a stone golem, don't buy a mud golem

Well, sure. But you can always toss him in the furnace with some coal to fire him to stone.

"most" my bad. I do find the suggestion of some additional science pack, maybe needed for some more product rich variant of BOP and/or some highly speculatic early construction drones quite intriguing. Actually it's hard to argue against this last half belt :D No worries, I wasn’t trying ...

Presuming not all of them are "unfit" to play factorio, what is the best solution to smooth the spike. As you and most users agreed before, not by simplifying blue science. So oil is the best next candidate to go. It is doubtful a more complex solution (early cracking) or just a UI change...

I may not agree 100% with all the changes, but, looking at it from vanilla perspective only, it makes about 95% on my sense meter. most of me disagreeing with the changes stem from "I'm used to the old version" and "I'll have to make changes to my mods." Heh. Yes. We developers ...