I think this is nifty, and a really great solution to a bunch of tutorial mode problems. My main worry is that it will take away from the lonely castaway feeling of the game. And it's only a worry, a point of concern. I'm not saying that you shouldn't do it, just that you should consider this change...

While this is out of scope... When I encountered the 'thing might be destroyed in the process of handling an event it generated' issue, I decided that all destruction requests should go on a queue that was processed at a level that could handle the destruction of any of the things that could be dest...

The maximum flow problem in a graph is a fairly well studied computer science problem. I would suggest you do this: Every time someone alters a pipe network, start a thread to recalculate the network. Have the thread check for an abort signal so that it can be aborted if the network changes again be...

This is really balanced. You'll get about the same energy from a single RITEG as you would from your fuel cells in a reactor with no neighbor bonus. 40MW * 200 seconds * 5 fuel cells = 40GJ Integrating the power output curve over 32 half lives: integrate 600000*e^(x*(-ln(2)/(12*60*60))) dx from x=0 ...

One little thing that's been bugging me for a few versions: The portable fusion reactor seems out of place with no predecessors. It was fine back when we needed alien artefacts to make it, as it could be justified as alien technology. Since they were removed (and good riddance!), it doesn't really ...

DRY411S wrote:

Drury wrote:

in 0.17 if you do end up spilling your beans, they won't land on your spaghetti

you should get a promotion for this

+1 (even though I'd rather you just couldn't unequip if it meant spilling anything)

What about if it's destroyed?

What annoys me is how they're butchering upgrade planner. Now it will not automatically take from player inventory, according to this. And it looks like you have to have construction bots and personal roboport for it? BOGUS - this was the second greatest feature of UP is that you didn't need bots f...

Regarding blueprints: My opinion is that no blueprints should ever mingle with "real" items in a player's inventory. What I mean by this is that a blueprint will always live solely within the blueprints menu. Any blueprint in hand is only then an considered an instance of the real plan. P...

The solution for the 'Q' key when holding a blueprint seems like it would be very annoying. If you must do this, allow someone to select a default and never have the dialog box show up again. Edit: I missed the bit where koravex said this would only happen with brand new blueprints. Well, that's fin...

As a random thought, it might be nice to specify that an item can be moved by inserters, but not by bot. I'm thinking of Deadlock's Crating, Universal Palleting, and Shrink Wrap. I'm not sure if this would even be possible though. And the hovercraft mod would greatly benefit from the ability of a ve...

If you had bothered checking the save you'd find it running on one train doing all shipping in a single loop. This does all you wanted it to do without changing anything in LTN. I'm sorry. I missed the save. :-/ Yes, it works. I wasn't able to decipher all the circuit logic, but I've tried setups l...

It's all a matter of station design. I got LTN 1.7.13 to ship full barrels between provider and requester and the same amount of empty barrels back to provider through depot. Yes, using two trains, which seems wasteful and unnecessary in addition to having a time delay involved in which a station w...

So you think, if you explain the same stuff here the 128th time, the last should understand it finally? I have doubts. Yeah, looking at the history more, you're correct. My post is basically a repeat of mbr26's post. :-/ I've been feeling punchy and irritable lately and letting it affect how I post.

mrvn wrote:Your forgot one.

Which one? 2^31? I wasn't sure if I should include it because that's the sign bit and I thought it might confuse people enormously to have a large negative number (-2147483648) on the list.

What would be so hard with adding a chained-provider-limit. Then when a train is scheduled to arrive somewhere that provides more than chained-provider-limit items check if anyone requests those and add another stop to the schedule. Repeat till no more items are chain provided or nobody requests th...

The simple answer to this question is this: If you want separate networks, make your network id one of the numbers in this list: 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 8192 16384 32768 65536 131072 262144 524288 1048576 2097152 4194304 8388608 16777216 33554432 67108864 134217728 268435456 5368...

Well, I have the code written already. It now works and serves my purposes well. I issued a pull request, though if I were to work harder on it, I would make it a lot nicer and handle more edge cases (like fluid wagons) in a reasonable fashion. It will only really work for trains that consist entire...

I heard that request before for barrels. Chained deliveries are too much work for serving just one edge case. Well, I'm not requesting chained deliveries because that does seem like a pain, and also hard to implement in any reasonable fashion. What I am requesting is that the depot record the train...

I'm using Deadlock's Crating Machine , and with that mod (and other paletting mods) you end up with these pallet items you have to return to the provider in some way. My approach before LTN has been to always unload a train and simultaneously load the appropriate number of empty pallet items onto th...

It has low friction, so you coast a good while, but no, drifty steering is on the (extended) to do list. It would probably be performance expensive too (every tick update) So, it basically would really need engine support to do well. :-/ I'm guessing the engine has no support for the idea of going ...