I’ve been considering two alternatives, one of which I have even implemented, but it does not work. It was based off last week’s changes but adding a heavy+light only recipe unlockable in logistic science. This process had petroleum gas as an input which would make sure the most basic one has to be ...

I’m sorry if my reply seems delayed, I’ve been reading the comments from multiple sources and I just didn’t have time left to reply properly to them. I have been taking notes and I will try to reply to most of the things that I have noted down. I won’t be using quotes as a lot of them are paraphrase...

meganothing wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:26 pm

I'm ok with the oil changes now. "Roadblocks" have been addressed and there is even more reason for needing AOP now.

The FFF didn't address any of the GUI suggestions, so Wube seems to think the GUI is not part of the problem.
...

Please do note the GUI update is not yet finished.

I think that inherently by having a puzzle after knowing the basic mechanics of the process, it already does distribute the challenge better. Indeed the multiple output process is the new problematic part. Ah, herein lies the rub then. When I think oil, I think first and foremost of the multiple ou...

First off, thank you for this post, it's great and to the point. The issue I see here is that the introduction of pumpjacks/refineries/chemplants doesn't actually present a conceptual puzzle, because it only uses concepts that are already familiar to the player; they just use different buildings wit...

17 pages of valid arguments pinpointing the real issues, and giving a ton of solutions how to deal with them. It just looks like you never read them or just did not want to consider and weight them being blinded by your own solution. The overwhelming majority of forum users is against your solution...

The biggest concern I could think of, is that with the new BOP, new players will skip AOP, as for reasons stated quite good in the last 16 pages (e.g. reserving not enough spacing). Sometimes they will need lube, so minimal AOP has to been set up. Probably cracking all LO to PG , as stated new play...

{...} One idea that has some merit to me is that rather than delaying learning the multiple output, try making it so players have to handle it sooner. IE, make a regular assembler recipe, prior to oil, give two outputs. This has the benefit of moving one of these 4 concepts to a stage of the game t...

The biggest concern I could think of, is that with the new BOP, new players will skip AOP, as for reasons stated quite good in the last 16 pages (e.g. reserving not enough spacing). Sometimes they will need lube, so minimal AOP has to been set up. Probably cracking all LO to PG , as stated new play...

Well, it appears that all these pages of opinions were pointless and any more will be too. The decision seems to have been made and that will be that. I'm sorry that I dare to post counter arguments or my general impressions, but please convince me otherwise about those points if you believe I miss...

I am quite surprised how many times I have read "the problem of multiple output refining is just delayed" in a bad meaning. The fact that it's split (delayed) is a huge benefit - first time around you learn how basic pumpjack/fluid transport/refinery/chemplant works, and second time around...

Of course that's a bug! It does make the Space science pack technology tree a bit uglier to draw, but indeed technology pre-requisities should always be there to be able to craft the things a technology unlocks. I was just made aware of it, sorry for the long delay. Fixed in next release.

I fully support removing loaders from the introduction campaign, but a nice loader structure graphics would look sweet for the console-given loaders, like most likely every now and then in following FFFs. You do have a graphic for the infinity chest, which is not used in regular gameplay either, af...

New ores look great, can't wait to use them. I'm using the "better ore icons" mod (which looks quite similar to the new icons?) at the moment but will switch to the new vanilla ones when they are implemented. Yeah there's a little story I omitted for the FFF, basically when we tried to ma...

Artman40 wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 01, 2019 3:11 am

I really like the random resource icons. I think an option to disable the random look could also be a good idea.

I think it should be easy to remove by a mod.

Not supported yet. Currently it's defined this way in our branch: icon = "__base__/graphics/icons/mip/iron-ore.png", icon_variations = { { icon_size = 64, icon = "__base__/graphics/icons/mip/iron-ore-1.png" }, { icon_size = 64, icon = "__base__/graphics/icons/mip/iron-ore-2...

assuming the random icon generation could be used by modders? would love to see random icons like that for all of bob's and angels' ores I'd do it. I'd do it now, but the question is, does the game engine support this yet? if so, how do I use it? Not supported yet. Currently it's defined this way i...

blizgerg wrote: ↑

Fri May 31, 2019 12:47 pm

I see one artifact in that image that would want to be fixed, on the curve from going up to going left it looks like it chooses new random icons.

Otherwise, I think that looks beautiful. Love it.

That's because they switch layering in the corner.

I understand defenders are later now because they actually need the flying robot frames, but in 0.16 they required flight technology, which is really weird. The design idea behind them was that you can secure oil patches with them which obviously doesn't work anymore, but I don't think it worked sig...

I've done a significant amount of testing and tweaking when making the new worms, and in general I can say at least this: - Early gun turret creeping does work decently until some point. Once there is a bit too many small or medium worms, it falls apart quite quickly, and you tend to lose a lot of a...