Increasing cost is equivalent to decreasing output per resource.
Sounds like, but indeed this isn't the case with the robots: You can see the costs as an investment into the future to build more bots and increase production with more robots.
Which decreases the costs of the bots.
Robots enable - unlike the belts or train - an exponential grow by producing them!
The reason for this is, that once built the logistic bot have endless usages
: A bot can be used for any transport. That makes his usage exponentially growing
: With any new chest (seen as start/end-point of a transport) you increase their capability and with any transport you have a win over the belts. While the belts have only linear usage: Once built they can be used only for this transport.
Having steadily increasing costs allows entry into the bot phase of the game, and allows slowly reduced effectiveness per cost, but doesn't decrease what a given number of bots does.
I don't see that. What you explain would mean, that the robots price increase with each bot. More or less like bitcoins.
But that does not make much sense.
Indeed I see it like so: It's like inflation of money, because the money can be used more than once after it is printed. In the real world this kind of "re-usage" (and increasing inflation) is limited by sales tax. In Factorio there is no such tax (and makes no sense) and as explained it makes no sense cause once built the robot can be used endlessly and increases the productivity to exponetial rates instead of linear rates like the belts.
Anything, that adds more costs to the bots is like adding more costs to print money. But once money is printed it has a constant "usefuleness". As bots have. And the more bots you have and the more they are used the better.
Bots ARE an upgrade to belts. To change that, we're either making bots pointless (i.e. not an upgrade from the current belts), or we need to make the late-game belt option more viable.
Well, agree. But to make it correct: They are not just an upgrade, they introduce EXPONENTIAL TRANSPORT USAGE instead of LINEAR. And that is the point, why they (also due to my year long experiences) are game-breaking in the long-term game.
So a simple solution is to reduce the exponentiality and that can be done with the already discussed suggestions (Thanks to Shados for this gread list):
- S2: Limit amount of bots that can interact with a container simultaneously / explicit bot/container congestion / limited speed of bot un/loading (e.g. by explicit queing with un/loading speeds, or by a token bucket queuing system)
- S18: Explicit per-area restriction(s) on bots (e.g. hard cap on number, decreasing speed, increasing power cost)
- S21: Nerf long-distance bot delivery times (e.g. by preventing bots from recharging before their delivery is done, by by increasing increasing charge costs for every roboport zone crossed, etc.)
- S28: Pairs of machines that effectively 'teleport' items around a base
- S33: Make bots explodey
- S34: Make bots ability to carry / effectiveness in carrying a given type of item be dependent on its production complexity, such that bots can carry more high-complexity items (e.g. rocket parts) and less (or no) low-complexity ones (e.g. ore, plates)
I add also a new idea:
S35: Limit the number of chests per logistic network.
S2: Worth testing, but I predict that this will just be overgone by the players with more chests, which is a backstep.
S18: This is one of my favourite ideas. Cause this idea makes a lot of sense, when introduced with "colored logistics".
S21: Also one of my favorites: Limit the transport-length (E.g. Bots cannot recharge while transport items and reduce speed slowly until minimum speed)
S28: That was also discussed a lot in the suggestions. It makes only sense as a replacement for the current functionality of bots (e.g. when limiting the range).
S33: This would work, when it would mean, that bots can transport a lot, but have a "half-life period", e.g. they have a limited life-time depending on distance they traveled. Cause that would make bots an ending resource and it works like with the money.
S34: Meanwhile I think it would work somehow, but it's not very logical and there are better ideas.
S35: That in combination with S2 would work. But players would cry for simpler splitting of networks (colored logistics).