To burn all the woods, robot brings to you...

Gergely wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 22, 2018 11:04 pm

The only problem here is that it would increase the cost of a full 90° turn from 7 to 9 items, but nothing is perfect.

It cost so for me already.
4 per curved, 9 per 90°, 36 per circle.
Why is it less for you?

I just discovered a minor flaw in my design. Updated the topic header about it. Wander, what is it? Cons: The 26,57° to 45° turn is a bit cheesy. If this really has to be backwards compatible with the current system, said turn can only cost 1 track item (because 0° to 45° costs 3 tracks). However, ...

darkfrei wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 19, 2018 6:59 pm

The best solution is free-vector bezier procedural rails, that need some amount of rails for every segment. The maximum speed will be also for every radius calculated.

You want to draw procedural sprites?

I like it, but some notes:

1.It would be nice to show current rail curves for comparison.
2.It would be nice to show possible signal positions.
3.It would be nice to explain transition between old and suggested curves.

Yes,I see how old this suggestion is.

I like the idea of being able to freely traverse the map without obstacles. However, for this, I think that a helicoper or a jetpack would be more appropriate than a Spidertron. Helicopter, Jetpack and almost anything would want fuel to hang above your factory. Especially when nowhere to land. Spid...

It is built. If you try to close red or yellow signal it ignores. If you close it green, signal visually red but no color output.

Hypothetical mentioned. By crash I mean "bump into rails end" here.
Not played with mods really.

eradicator wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:03 pm

Stuff can be on more than one network though.

What is the real purpose of that?

- Stop = Use a regular or chain signal. - Closed = Disable the rail. And yes, it *could* also be implemented as a second state for the signals, named Stop and Closed. It is still two flavors of the same thing, either will work :) There is the difference: Signal already knows what train yet to come ...

The advantage of the solution described in the first thread mentioned above is that it would also be possible to block individual trains based on a train condition (for example Train-ID or train contents). My opinion was about this suggestion, not about related one. As about related, I think it sho...

Darinth wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 30, 2018 1:29 pm

I think I'd rather just carry the train atm.

If you need the train, not the train content. Building materials for example.

Tekky wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:07 pm

destroying items this way should produce more pollution than if it were done properly in a grinder/incinerator

It can work, but when biter break your chest you would get waste explosion.

From the point of railway security this is bad suggestion. I understand the desire of it, but it is really a diversion :shock: The best way to forbid train movement is to teach the routing system to understand when specific way is closed. So option to close the signal should become two: "tempor...

For this to work, you should be forbidden to destroy items in any other way. By weapon for example. To add a bit of fairness to this, you would need each recipe to give you some waste. So you should fight with it from the start. From the other side you would need pollution poison and pollution clean...

Modular armour improve shields, roboports, speed, vision based on installed modules for current task. Modular tool can improve reach range, mining speed, craft speed, discharge damage based on installed modules for current task. Using tool with special modules developers can implement such features ...

Doesn't matter, mining tools are gone now. It would be better if it become modular instead. For improved range, speed, discharge damage etc. Think about armour: Light, Heavy, then modular. The same with tool: Iron, Steel, ... why not? I have read dev note, but things can be changed. Again, reasons:...

Why do items have to be spilled/deleted at all when taking off armor? Simply keep the stacks where they are. As long as you don't have armor you can't access them, and when you put your armor back on they're in the same spot they were before. It would also be a good idea. However, competitive playe...

It would be useful if it would not overcomplicate routing.

Isn't crafting speed 1.0 supposed to present hand-making? If so, you should not change assemblers.
Mining speed can be recalibrated as it is another possible hand process.
Furnace values are not dis-informative as is.
Other speeds should be 1.0 simply because only one machine of each type present.

I cannot understand your imaginations in details and think it is overcomplicated. You did not describe algorithm and I think it would be problematic. In your example middle part not filled with drills by pattern definitely. Imagine rectangular region, divided vertically and horizontally on three par...