@Klonan About wave defense, my idea is:

-Use a procedural generation for wave defense maps
-Each month, you take a randomly generated map, tweak the difficulty the way you want, publish it.

This way you have:
-Replayability
-Competition
-Polished difficulty
-Possibility of sharing strategies

And ...

The belt change is pure genius. Integers for speed AND spacing AND throughput. Sometimes best ideas are the most simple ones.

About the possible furnace buff, whatever you do please don't forget to test beaconed setups. But...

With the possible exception of direct insertion, exact ratios are way ...

This form of a theme is nice to have and yes it does happen in many cases which is good as it does “make sense” or invoke this kind od immersion you speak about. But by no means it is a hard rule or a design goal we have set to obey, and it does not always happen. Green science is far from just ...

Speaking of...can we get a way to prevent construction robots from deploying and chasing moving vehicles? They just get left behind and die every time the car hits a tree, the train gets a random hit from a biter, etc... wasted resources and annoying notifications.


This
I always make sure i don ...

What I like:
-Reduced cost per science pack 3
-Merging military research
-New name of science packs. Except maybe yellow, why not name it simply "Tech"? I'm fine with "Utility" anyway.
-Using solid fuel as ingredient for sp3. It's a smart move to make use of the excess oil.
-Use of prod I modules in ...

Today you can find blueprints everywhere: reddit, this forum, third party websites... According to my experience, it's hard to find what you're looking for.

For exemple in factorioprints.com there is tags. It's useful I suppose, but don't help that much.

What if there was a way to attach ...

So yes, if you put 5 fluid into 101 pipes, it should eventually disappear. But that is not a very frequent case. Most common case is the pipes are full all the time and that loss does not seem very large to me. Not great, sure, but lower limit means more time when you do want to empty it. If you ...

I don't want fluids to disappear either. [...]

Actually you made me changed my mind about the 0.05 threshold, I'm less enthusiastic.

What if pumps had an option, a "Power Purge" checkbox that would activate the 0.05 threshold in the drained pipe block?

Most common case is the pipes are full ...

I found an IRL small pump.

I'm so excited about this new fluid system. More intuitive, CPU friendly, isotrope , and above all faster fluid flow. This will allow to use medium sized oil and nuclear setups without spamming pumps as much as before!

@Dominik, With this new viscosity, can I expect crude oil to be roughtly as fast ...

Zoom out to a height where both origin and destination are visible and then zooming in again would give a sense of overview, which is great when the player wants to figure out where the camera is moved to. This can be combined with slow movements for scrolling, which will allow the scroll movement ...

The only difference is the saturation of color. I just added some sugar to the Factorio look.

This looks great, why not make a console command that could tweak the saturation?

Can't wait to see the new fluid system! I hope it's behavior will be realistic enough.

And I hope that fluids (water and steam) won't be the bottleneck of nuclear setups anymore!

My 1k spm base with screenshots, blueprints and save game

I know that chunks that are far away (and no polluted) are inactive (frozen) to save fps.

Would it be possible to delete specific chunks automatically, to save map size? Like a chunk where no nest was destroyed and no ore mined. The minimap stays updated, but the chunk is deleted as soon as the fog ...

I love all the changes, but I didn't see anyone mentioning the biggest problem I've always had with underneathies, which is that the "in" end looks too similar to tho "out" end. When zoomed out, and in a factory with a two-sided main bus, it can be hard to spot sometimes.

My suggestion would have ...

There's been few posts about underneath circular belts. This request makes sense, but I think it makes more sense to not implement it. IMHO circular belts are ok because:

In-game reason : The player has a process for building belts. He don't bother creating a new recipe that save a fraction of 1 ...

Yes. It was a glitch, but they turned it into a feature to troll everyone for eternity because it was an useful glitch.

By the way, I think they want to have the 2 different spites (one being the side openned) to preserve the glitch/hidden aspect (glitchs are fun!)

Few thoughs about the new belt height :idea:


Am I the only one who feels weird about the angle on belts? I immediately looked at them and said "I can see too much of the side". [...]



Some of my thoughts if you'll have them regarding the belts:


[*18 px] They do look to be too tall now ...

1) Happy to see your great work about belt perspective + belt endings spites + new HD res. Can't wait to see how these (massives?) new belts renders ingame, sounds promising!

2) Fluid optimisations: so you have a work in progress about this? Would be nice to get few clues about the approach you ...

An example of what I would say:
-I craft 10 assemblers
-To build an assembly line I place each assembler
-To destroy an assembly line I remove each assembler
-A player press F to pick up items