fishforfuture wrote: Fri Sep 29, 2023 8:01 pm Yeah, and not having wood as an ingredient for the rail recipe?!?

I thought these are golden ones. Expected for gold ore

Kinda little bit sad for me personally. I see intersection intricacies as part of fun. Making it easier takes some part of game from me. Graphics is awesome nevertheless

I guess, there will be various "schools" among the players, like "no delivery bots", "no beacons", "no quality" etc. So we'll ...

Can't wait to start making railway pr0n

Svip wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2023 6:09 am Removing the ballast because there is concrete underneath would hardly be realistic.

The concrete is absolutely realistic.
Of course, this is expensive and this is used only where needed, or if... railway owner is too rich

The angles from the circular track are very close to 22.5° which is good for making circles look round and even given that 5²+12²=13².

Actually, 1:2 slope ratio is the only clever solution in the game because it matches how we build sloped walls and other buildings.
I just wanted players to not ...

pointa2b wrote: Mon Sep 18, 2023 12:30 amQ1-Q5

+1

TheRaph wrote: Sun Sep 24, 2023 11:17 am yellow = 22.5°-angel (wider than high)

BTW arctan(0.5) = 26.6°, not 22.5°

May I ask for very large radius rail curves, for aesthetic purposes? They look more natural.

Also, current curves might require significant train slowdown, so large radii would be useful.

And I'd like to have very small radius curves (excl. half diagonals for simplicity), and trains would pass ...

May I ask for very large radius rail curves, for aesthetic purposes? They look more natural.

Also, current curves might require significant train slowdown, so large radii would be useful.

And I'd like to have very small radius curves (excl. half diagonals for simplicity), and trains would pass ...

I definitely will try 2.0. Will I play it? You mean, will I abandon my unfinished megabase? I think no, unless some killer features will be introduced. Advanced rails will not kill my base.
Anyway, I think I will not start large megabase in 2.0 at once, I will wait for most serious bugfixes and ...

Which others did you find?

I think there are several important points. I should refresh my memory, but unfortunately, I lost motivation of spending time on re-reading entire discussion again. After the last FFF, I have feeling that kovarex is not going to change something, there's not a single ...

The 35-page discussion was very low quality, mostly talking about unimportant things like the name and useless critique based on misunderstanding of the quality system. And it was mostly redundant. It wasn't really 35 pages of discussion, it was 35 pages of the same post redundantly posted in ...

I read "Quality clarifications". It seems 35-page discussion was just wasting of time and NOTHING will change (except the naming which is not a "strategic" issue). Kovarex just repeated his beliefs we did not agree. I feel disappointed.

An use-case is important because there also are input-balanced and output-balanced concepts.

I'm a big fan of fewer, but more distinct tiers, like has been suggested previously. There's no additional challenge between automating Q2 -> Q3 and Q3 -> Q4, as the same design can be repeated.
I think this is very valuable observation. I like Kovarex process, but Kovarex x 5 doesn't give x5 ...

I'm not a fan of quality tiers, but I think I could live with them. I'm fine with random products, though I think 5 tiers are too much. For me, 3 tiers would be ok, because I won't use intermediates anyway. When I build my next 10^n SPM megabase, I use only highest tiers of everything because they ...

Earendel wrote: Mon Aug 28, 2023 12:47 am http://shorturl.at/jFIKT

I calculated 27 science packs. This is very bad number for a nice-looking megabase . 28 types would be better. 32 would be perfect.

AFAIK timings are not linear, they also depends on hardware: CPU speed, RAM throughput, CPU cache size etc.

do you rather to rebuild your factory upon discovering a flaw?

Depending on how bad is a flaw. Or maybe, this is not a flaw, just "you can do it better"? The last statement will be valid for every single base you build :D. No base will be perfect.
I suggest you to finish the game (whatever it ...

I agree with @datarza on this one. I can't imagine the coding on this to be that difficult.


You are not familiar enough with Unicode. Some players are so incompetent, so they don't even know what to google for.

On the other hand, maybe devs could implement lowercase for some of most common and ...