Factorio Forums

cost of maintaining? just give us two fluid wagons. one with a single giant tank, and one with 3 individual tanks.
drop the GUI.

Looking more closely at the overlapped text I'd like to propose an alternative solution - get rid of the text in that dialog altogether. It adds very little anyways as the dialog is really for configuring the tank and not managing fluid levels.

JihadJ0e wrote:Looking more closely at the overlapped text I'd like to propose an alternative solution - get rid of the text in that dialog altogether. It adds very little anyways as the dialog is really for configuring the tank and not managing fluid levels.

The feature was not removed because of the broken text position, the GUI must have had other, more serious problems.

kovarex wrote:Thanks for the report, I solved this bug for the next version by removing the feature of disconnecting wagon parts and so this gui won't exist anymore.

Whyyy???

Normally you encourage having options and fun ways to do stuff. Why would you remove this? I hope you're going to add it back again...

TK_Neg wrote: But do consider this: would you be ok with the decision to make the standard cargo wagons one inventory type only, just because the numbers in the inventory grid were overlapping(based on what information we've been given on the subject)? I wouldn't. I wouldn't want have a supply train of 15 wagons when I'm trying to expand a base, nor would I want a supply train of six different wagons when trying to transfer six different fluids to the same place compactly.

It just seems like a massive overreaction to me is all.

Mh. Needing 15 wagons would be excessive; such trains are really hard to handle. But needing six different fluids is already a rather extreme case, and still works with two platforms and trains with three wagons each. Considering that fluid transport has been rather easy so far, it doesn't seem as much of a problem as other cargo trains, which are large and often at throughput limits.

Imagine in turn you could have, say, a train tunnel or bridge as a building, and in turn get a number of these smaller cuts. Heck, personally, I'd probably trade even the ability to load different items into cargo wagons for a non-blocking train crossing!

impetus maximus wrote:cost of maintaining? just give us two fluid wagons. one with a single giant tank, and one with 3 individual tanks.
drop the GUI.

I'm not a Factorio dev, but I'd guess that this leaves less maintenance work, but still some, and then adds some graphical work to distinguish the wagons in an intuitive fashion. Maybe it's a good idea, maybe it isn't... but again, I don't understand why I should feel strongly about it, while there are so many possibilities for changes that could make a much bigger difference. Look at the changelogs, the game is already producing and removing bugs faster than people can keep track. And the current belt mechanics war really affects things all around; again a sign that the devs are at complexity limits. Even just analyzing the fluid wagon situation might be a poor investment. There are so many interesting ways to go and hot topics to work on, while this thing at best does what it did in 0.15 -- which isn't much for most people and cases.

It was really a favorite phrase of Friedman, and for good reason: you gotta have a sense of proportion!

Not liking this change at all. The trains are already too long, and this forces to use more wagons. If you do that, you could just as well remove fluid wagons altogether and tell people to use barrels.

So if we're losing this as an entire feature, can we have 2 fluid wagons instead?One being separated and another being all connected as they are normally now?Or maybe a single fluid tank wagon?Rather than the 3 streamline?(A smaller wagon that stores 25k?)

Loewchen wrote:

JihadJ0e wrote:Looking more closely at the overlapped text I'd like to propose an alternative solution - get rid of the text in that dialog altogether. It adds very little anyways as the dialog is really for configuring the tank and not managing fluid levels.

The feature was not removed because of the broken text position, the GUI must have had other, more serious problems.

No. That's the only issue pressent in the report, and one of the devs said it would be simple to fix. The only reason they gfave for this removal was to make it simpler and more intuitive, which imo it was before.