Well, the thing about rhetoric, is that I'm supposed to come to some mutual understanding where possible.


Yes.

I suppose the point I'm making is that not having the recycler is not fun, and not good for teaching the concept. Kovarex said it himself in the quality reveal:

"it can be a HUGE ...

But that's functioning as intended.
.....
This mechanic is supposed to be hard.


In that post I was focusing on the disconnect between perception and reality, not on the difficulty itself. It's ok if something is difficult if it's introduced correctly. The problem with quality is that the ...

Panzerknacker wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2026 7:08 am Tbh I found myself mostly experimenting inside the game

On Gleba as well? That's the biggest /editor area for me. There are too many things to figure out. I would hate having to do it in game.

Greetings,

I have improved my understanding of the game over time, and now I understand why there are Factorio calculators being made.
When you learn about the ratios and start making designs with the right amount of elements, with enough throughput, then a lot of the issues of the factory that ...

From the perspective of "gambling", if my goal is to teach gambling. I want to teach the subject. I don't want to teach a particular game.


I think there's a disconnect between how simple quality seems (it's just a module you put into a machine) and how complicated it is to implement. It has ...

I couldn't build on successes or learn from failures because there is only so much I can do when the evidence disappears, regardless of success or failure.


Another related thing about Gleba is that the cost of failure is high, especially when designing. You need the seeds in order to maintain ...

iloveidea wrote: Sun Sep 20, 2026 11:15 pm Allow inserters to insert and remove modules from mining drills

I like the idea of being able to do this, but I think that a circuit condition is a better way to implement it. What do you think?

viewtopic.php?p=684150#p684150

2.1 breaks some factories.

The most likely explanation for why things are the way they are is that quality is Kovarex's baby, and he doesn't want to work on Factorio any more.

And I have to add, the problems with quality (and some other things) arise in part from the lack of iteration upon game design choices in Space Age. It's one thing to design a system that works in theory, but when it comes into contact with the broader playerbase, issues arise.

And this is one of ...

You might be surprised if you go to look at the original blog post. Kovarex explicitly laid you how he thought the strategy would play.


I am.

In practice, a small number of quality items is almost completely useless - the exception being personal equipment (and maybe space platforms). For ...

skyman wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2026 9:14 am It wouldn't have to be long jump, 2-3 tiles should suffice and even come with downside for example destroying vehicle completely if landed on the bigger entity/no space to land.

Instead of 2-3 tiles you could think bigger. How about a rocket car?

I've seen a LOT of people say, "I don't bother with quality until after Aquilo".

This is a sign of a failure of design. Quality is unlocked on Nauvis, at blue science. You'd expect people to start using it then.

A separate mod was made so that quality could be disabled entirely.

This is a sign of ...

A couple of issues I have with quality:

1. The early game.

Without recyclers you can't do much with it. You can't use it in your main production lines because it will jam your factory. And you can't do upcycling. So the only thing you can really do with it is gamble.

Now technically you CAN use ...

Cars (but not tanks) hitting walls at low angles shouldn't be slowed down and shouldn't do damage to walls and possibly to themselves.


In principle I agree with the idea that cars are not great to use. I only really use them occasionally at the beginning of the game to scout, and a major reason ...

Without going into too much detail to avoid hijacking the thread, my point still stands: the two approaches are balanced because I would chose either based on circumstances. It is unreasonable to expect for balance different approaches need to yield the exact same result. This would make a more ...

He is not suggesting to give trains proper logistic requests like tanks and spidertrons have. He is very clear about that:


Correct. He's suggesting something else.


Understanding the underlying principles must be step one before actually asking for them to be changed.


He just wants the ...

I prefer the old sound also.

worph wrote: Thu Sep 17, 2026 8:54 am Trains do not possess the ability to make proper logistic requests for their inventories.
You manually put a ghost item (correct technical term: ItemRequestProxy) into it's inventory. Nowhere else in this game do these interact with schedules.

I think that's why he's making a suggestion

If the bots can't reach it, the fuel order will never be started, so making the train wait for any current orders to finish before moving doesn't change anything in this scenario. If the train is somehow in a logistics enabled area and there's no way to service the request then it doesn't matter ...