Friday Facts #359 - Crash site: The beginning

[brunzenstein]

The drill looks better... But compared to the previous version, it is worse to see whether it works or not.

+1

[NotRexButCaesar]

The drill looks better... But compared to the previous version, it is worse to see whether it works or not.

+1

-1

[Filter62]

The drill looks better... But compared to the previous version, it is worse to see whether it works or not.

Don't know why you thinks so, but it's practically the same, colored indicator is still there.

[sadkov]

The logistics flow chart on the logistics tech icon was always looking quite obscure. One quick (but relatively weak) fix would be to swap red and green chests on the diagram so less arrows intersect with each other and it at least doesn't feel like a mess anymore. Another way to improve the look would be to make the arrows slightly thinner so the don't load the icon so much.

Also a way to make the chart even more comprehendable is to arrange the chests "logically" in the flow order. It seems that top to bottom is the best way to convey the idea of the structure. To fit everything in a square I put both providers on the same level as well as the storage and the buffer chests - that seems fitting the idea of their usage. Here is my madskillz sketch of the second icon:

Screen Shot 2020-08-12 at 2.33.01 PM.png (83.97 KiB) Viewed 7187 times

[NotRexButCaesar]

The logistics flow chart on the logistics tech icon was always looking quite obscure. One quick (but relatively weak) fix would be to swap red and green chests on the diagram so less arrows intersect with each other and it at least doesn't feel like a mess anymore. Another way to improve the look would be to make the arrows slightly thinner so the don't load the icon so much.

Also a way to make the chart even more comprehendable is to arrange the chests "logically" in the flow order. It seems that top to bottom is the best way to convey the idea of the structure. To fit everything in a square I put both providers on the same level as well as the storage and the buffer chests - that seems fitting the idea of their usage. Here is my madskillz sketch of the second icon: Screen Shot 2020-08-12 at 2.33.01 PM.png

I was under the impression that the icon was intentionally complicated to make the research feel advanced.

[valneq]

Only recently did I realize that the arrows actually mean the possible flow of items. I don't think it is crucial that new players learn from the graphics how the flow is possible. It is more important to understand the descriptions of the logistic chests. So I would say it is perfectly fine as is. It is supposed to be an icon representing the idea, not explaining how it works.

[Basterbane]

Crash site start reminds me of the idea I had some 3 years ago posted on this forum. Was my first ever post here too so I didn't know the drill on not posting all the ideas in one thread.

Long story short: I had the idea of having a crashed shuttle or escape capsule provide player with initial low efficiency lab, small source of electricity and an assembler removing some if not most of handcrafting early game.
Science was also more of restoring damaged data from the craft hard drive than reinventing the wheel from scratch. Space science came from connecting to the global space internet network.

[mudcrabempire]

Oh man, you guys. That crashed ship looks so good! But one tiny nitpick I have is the dirt underneath it.

The state of the ground tells us the story about how the ship crashed. Like, not just "a ship crashed here" but how the crash played out.

etc. +painting.

As someone with a hopefully decent grasp on physics I think I can say this: Find yourself a theoretician, a computer and several cups of coffee and you will get an explanation (plus simulation) for how the ship had to crash in order to end up as on [whatever sprite you provide].
Angle at which ship crashed, velocity, momentum, angular momentum, stuff falling apart, stuff tumbling and bouncing around, construction of the ship, composition of the ground, what exactly can the engineer survive, ... there are plenty of free variables to play around with.

It's less of a question of realisticity and more of a missed? opportunity for nice little graphical details.

[someone1337]

@mods: is there still a reason for game version field in the info.json?
Cant it all be solved by a "base>=..."-dependency?

As in: why not remove that field and allow for smooth transitions going forward?
There were enought mod breaking changes that required the use of the base-style-dependency anyway and on the other hand: most mods dont break (except for the fix to the game veraion string) just because the game gets a new "major" release.

So if you made the it mandatory to use the versioned base dependency and made the game + mod portal read + use that info instead of the game version field, i think it would be overall better. (More like real software engineering where you only live by versioned dependencies)

The factorio_version is for Factorio version. Dependency on base if for dependency on base mod. Different things. Factorio can be played without base mod, provided you install some other mod.

Have you actually tried disabling basemod in any reasonable up to date version (0.18, 1.0)?
Even if you manage to do it, you wont end up with anything even remotely useful ... In that regard you can consider the base "mod" as "the game"... there is no reason to do any distinction at a level that deep.

In another news: Have you heared of the gnu-hurd kernel? They by now support usb2.0 and ext2 - but hey, they have an awesome microkernel structure where you can replace even core kernel components without recompiling...

[Bilka]

Have you actually tried disabling basemod in any reasonable up to date version (0.18, 1.0)?
Even if you manage to do it, you wont end up with anything even remotely useful ... In that regard you can consider the base "mod" as "the game"... there is no reason to do any distinction at a level that deep.

In 0.18 that's pretty easy to do, you just need to enable/use parts of https://mods.factorio.com/mod/minimal-no-base-mod to provide the minimal prototypes that the game needs to load. The mod is most likely broken with 1.0 (I haven't checked yet, but it should be broken), but I'll fix that within a few weeks. After that disabling the base mod is not just reasonable, it is easy.

[someone1337]

yeah, ok, then just add a core(shim) for those that need to go without "base" and let base depend on core ...
So those that really want to can depend on core only and others can depend on base...

This would still solve the problem in a nicer way that the current dual-field solution.

[Jan11]

I like the older version of the new mining drills much more.

[kirazy]

I like the older version of the new mining drills much more.

There's an app for that:
https://mods.factorio.com/mod/classic-mining-drill
https://mods.factorio.com/mod/semi-classic-mining-drill

[rengels]

I really would like to have the crash site in my pre-1.0.0 game.
Can somebody post a script to generate it please.

[Jan11]

I like the older version of the new mining drills much more.

There's an app for that:
https://mods.factorio.com/mod/classic-mining-drill
https://mods.factorio.com/mod/semi-classic-mining-drill

Thanks

[NotRexButCaesar]

I like the older version of the new mining drills much more.

There's an app for that:
https://mods.factorio.com/mod/classic-mining-drill
https://mods.factorio.com/mod/semi-classic-mining-drill

Can we get the super old fan looking one?