Usul wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 13, 2022 8:30 am

Hallo Tertius! Danke für die Erläuterungen! Kannst du mir bitte den gefallen tun und in Crowdin den o.g. Schreibfehler korrigieren? Ich kenne mich da nicht aus. Das wäre nett, vielen Dank!

Ich habe mir mal erlaubt die Änderung vorzuschlagen. Danke dir für den Hinweis!

in theory it could be possible to isolate separate rail networks as in most cases they are unable to interact with each other making it a candidate for a trains pathfinder You mean something like the transport lines but for rail networks? but then the update of trains themselves is also sequential ...

I'd probably make it opt-in. What? The surfaces? The statistics? That needs a bit more flesh :) I can think of two ways to approach this: 1. A parameter for surface creation so modders can tell the game whether they want a separate statistic or not. They could probably even take player input into a...

Maybe this thread helps you solve the problem: 101341

If you can reproduce it, I think it might be worth to make a bug report about it.

I don’t understand the discussion about the price. They clearly state: The general goal is to make the expansion feel like as big an addition as the whole vanilla game. This is why we plan to price it at $30.00 The vanilla game costs $30, the expansion will cost another $30. There plan is to double ...

You can do this already, this is how: Instead of filtering for steel, the first splitter should have an output priority to the right. Remove the second splitter and put the underground belt directly in front of the right side of the first splitter. Because the copper is blocked by the side of the un...

As this was brought up again here I'd like to "put my mustard to it" as we Germans say. :lol: My suggestions to at least try to mitigate this problem would be as follows: Use "Ziffernblock" instead of "Nummernblock". It's at least a bit shorter. Omit "taste" i...

It’s most likely a bug from a mod or a conflict between mods. If you provide a save file I (or someone else) can take a look at it.

Ah yes, thank you. Now it makes sense to me.

Maybe it is even worth reporting it to the devs? I mean what you are describing doesn’t appear in vanilla, but I think it would be nearly impossible for Deadlock to fix the issue if he doesn’t change which recipes can use productivity modules and which can’t.

To be honest I don’t understand your suggestion at all

For someone to be able to help you you should do the following: 1. Select the mods that led to the loop and restart the game 2. Take a screenshot of the error message you get 3. Go to C:\Users\<YOU_USERNAME>\AppData\Roaming\Factorio\mods. Make copies of the files mod-list.json and mod-settings.dat 4...

There is pretty much no reason to produce fish, let alone automatically. So I think it’s reasonable to classify it as a minor bug. (I am even surprised the devs even acknowledge it as a bug?) For now you just have to accept that producing it automatically is about 8.3 times more expensive than manua...

Koub wrote: ↑

Sun Dec 05, 2021 8:53 am

I'm sure there has been at least one thread about this somewhere, but this is one of those rare cases I can't get my hands on it XD.

It's in Balancing: 68841

I decided against moving it to implemented, because the issue that the info box might be too long to be fully visible on screen still persists (see the picture in the first post). Even though they moved the weapons slots and the GUI changed a lot.