Version 0.15.7

Information about releases and roadmap.

Re: Version 0.15.7

Postby Mr. Tact » Sun May 07, 2017 4:24 pm

One more vote for 5, 8, 11 on the undergrounds...
Mr. Tact
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:37 pm
Location: Urbana, IL USA

Re: Version 0.15.7

Postby credomane » Sun May 07, 2017 6:55 pm

Put my vote in too for 5,8,11! Did the math for the new recipe cost.

Red UG would need increased, again, to 50 gears.
Blue UG can be left at 80 gears. That is 23.1 iron per tile while blue belt is 21.5. The 0.15.8 cost per tile was a little high (25.8 iron per tile) but with the new length it evens out more to the original pre-0.15.7 value of 22.9 iron per tile.
credomane
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2016 6:21 pm

Re: Version 0.15.7

Postby Ober3550 » Mon May 08, 2017 2:19 am

credomane wrote:Put my vote in too for 5,8,11! Did the math for the new recipe cost.

Red UG would need increased, again, to 50 gears.
Blue UG can be left at 80 gears. That is 23.1 iron per tile while blue belt is 21.5. The 0.15.8 cost per tile was a little high (25.8 iron per tile) but with the new length it evens out more to the original pre-0.15.7 value of 22.9 iron per tile.


I don't want the lengths to change. All current designs use the 4 wide bus belts but undergrounds on the bus aren't the only reason to use them. Yes you get full cost effectiveness if you have the belts at full length however using the underground trick on production outputs isn't viable if you need faster belts. Half of the time you don't need the full length of a normal underground let alone the super expensive ones. I dislike it purely because it increases the cost proportionally to theoretical usage not practical.
Ober3550
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 9:01 am

Re: Version 0.15.7

Postby Tym » Mon May 08, 2017 11:19 pm

unless the upgrade works dramatically differently than other upgrades, an increase in the possible length of an underground shouldn't affect the actual length of an already placed underground.
Tym
Inserter
Inserter
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 4:55 pm
Location: Bolton, MA, USA

Re: Version 0.15.7

Postby 5thHorseman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:24 am

Tym wrote:unless the upgrade works dramatically differently than other upgrades, an increase in the possible length of an underground shouldn't affect the actual length of an already placed underground.


People are concerned that they're devoting extra resources to creating faster underground belts when they're not actually going to utilize the added length.

I guess I understand it, but I don't personally pay attention to that sort of thing.
Image Laziest Bastard Mod or Let's Play Image
"So you launched a rocket in a spaghetti factory? Well I hand crafted a rocket and threw it into space with my bare hands!"
User avatar
5thHorseman
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
 
Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:21 pm

Re: Version 0.15.7

Postby theRustyKnife » Tue May 09, 2017 5:30 am

5thHorseman wrote:
Tym wrote:unless the upgrade works dramatically differently than other upgrades, an increase in the possible length of an underground shouldn't affect the actual length of an already placed underground.


People are concerned that they're devoting extra resources to creating faster underground belts when they're not actually going to utilize the added length.

I guess I understand it, but I don't personally pay attention to that sort of thing.

Same here. To me it's nice to have the possibilities for when I need them and I already use so many resources for infrastructure that this won't make much difference.
Check out my mods!
User avatar
theRustyKnife
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2015 9:26 pm
Location: Prague, Czech Republic

Re: Version 0.15.7

Postby Zaka » Tue May 09, 2017 12:20 pm

An interesting approach to the problem might be to create underground belts the same as surface belts, 1 piece at a time.

This way your would "pay by the square" for the length that you use and items would be removed from inventory based on the total belt length.

Ascii art:

>> = 2 belt lengths
>=> = 3 belt lengths
>====> = 6 belt lengths (standard yellow)

Cost for construction can be based on belt type and max length can be based on belt color. If it were handled this way you would only pay for what you use.
Zaka
Inserter
Inserter
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 5:23 pm

Re: Version 0.15.7

Postby Steelsky » Tue May 09, 2017 12:28 pm

Zaka wrote:An interesting approach to the problem might be to create underground belts the same as surface belts, 1 piece at a time.

This way your would "pay by the square" for the length that you use and items would be removed from inventory based on the total belt length.

Ascii art:

>> = 2 belt lengths
>=> = 3 belt lengths
>====> = 6 belt lengths (standard yellow)

Cost for construction can be based on belt type and max length can be based on belt color. If it were handled this way you would only pay for what you use.


Thinking further in this the underground belts could be made with the 3 tiers of stone/brick/concrete we already have to explain why it's able to reach further underground.

/S
Steelsky
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2017 9:37 am

Previous

Return to Releases

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AntiElite, Choumiko, Hallas, mexmer, Pandemoneus and 27 guests