Factorio Forums

Am I the only one who doesn't understand how relying on gaps would make any difference at all to these detectors? It will only output a solid signal when 60i/s are passing through the belt. A simple counting circuit will count up at 60/s. Idk if it's the way other people did it. But the way I've always done detectors was to have a decider with the output connected to the input so whether the belt is reading a 0 a 1 or even a 2 every item would be added until I reset it.

Also, I think that ratio breaking updates should be MORE common. Factorio is a solved game and every multiplayer map is just people plopping down the same massive blueprints they didn't even make. And everybody just waiting for it to build.

Koub wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 11:00 am

Zavian wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 10:27 am

J-H wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 12:41 am

Raiguard wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:18 pm

J-H wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 04, 2019 6:55 pm

Train signals also need fixing.

What are you talking about? Signals work perfectly fine. What needs fixing?

"No Path" does not help locate where a problem is along a thousand-unit track with fifteen signal pairs. It takes a lot of guesswork and trial-and-error to fix "No Path." Very new/moderate player unfriendly. I am on my 25th factory and still struggle with this to the point where I had to ditch a nice organized "main bus" rail system for a bunch of parallel in and out lines.
See discussion here:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=63414

I disagree with some of what you are saying. Whilst the tutorial could do with lots of improvement, the fact that you are struggling to build and properly signal what you want, does not mean that "Train signals also need fixing". I strongly suggest reading https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... ts_23_and/ . Not just part 1, but also parts 2 and 3 which are linked in the top comment. If necessary also build and play around with the examples. Youtube should also have some tutorials.
[...]

[Koub] This subdiscussion is interesting, but totally off topic. If you want to discuss it, please do it in a dedicated thread (there are existing topics about fixing the "No Path" issues)

I've read every tutorial I can find (my internet filter blocks Reddit entirely, so I can't read anything posted on there), but having to jump in a train and spend 10 minutes doing trial-and-error troubleshooting is still Not Fun, and even more so for new players who we hope will come in with a 1.0 release. A third party forum posting is not a good indicator of effective documentation/support.

My concern is that those threads have been around for a long time, and train-routing problems are much more of a core function for the average player (like me) than the exact details of how fluids flow in a scientifically correct manner, or the exact # of items that fit on a belt (I'm just happy having a bunch of full belts).
Nobody from Wube has posted in the train routing threads, and I have not seen any discussion by them of train troubleshooting improvements, or anything approaching a tutorial or explanation for how to make the circuit network do anything at all other than sit there. If I post in this thread, I know there's a chance that they might see it and realize that these areas of the game also need attention before release.

TheVeteraNoob wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:10 pm

Also, I think that ratio breaking updates should be MORE common. Factorio is a solved game and every multiplayer map is just people plopping down the same massive blueprints they didn't even make. And everybody just waiting for it to build.

I agree with this, look at nuclear power - 'perfect' ratios are almost impossible and thanks to it there are many different builds around, but then look at steam power with its perfect 1-20-40 (or whatever it was) - it looks the same every time, everywhere.

The current implementation of the script rendering boasts eight different object types. The basic geometric shapes being line, circle, rectangle, arc and polygon.

I would suggest changing the circle to an oval. And oval is to a circle what a rectangle is to a square.

V453000 wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 04, 2019 3:57 pm

As the smelting recipe change, I am proposing the following:
- Iron plate, copper plate, stone brick: 3.2
- Steel: 16

That would mean exactly 48 stone furnaces per yellow belt, which is the number that people already build, but some of the last ones flicker with inactivity in 0.16, now all of them would work nonstop.

Please also consider adjusting mining speeds. Otherwise we'll need a bunch more miners (before prod bonuses) to fill belts.

Nova wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:35 am

Factorio is still an early access game. It's in development. Things should change and many even break as often stuff can only change and improve by breaking others. In my opinion we can't rely on backwards compatibility and retention of etablished configurations as this holds back the overall development of the game. Because of this I regard "That change breaks my construction!" as a weak argument against changes.
It is still nice if we can continue to play a save game and keep our bases, but we are still only playing some kind of test version of a game. We test changes to the gameplay and report feedback to the developers. Most changes are good, some bad. This of course differs for different players.

+1

I think we are spoiled by the fact that Factorio in this early stage runs as well as it does and feels quite complete already...

Oktokolo wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 1:45 pm

Regarding belts too fast to see the items move: I would like to have a belt tier, wich is too fast to be directly inserted or picked up from by inserters. That tier would be an expressway for items to be used in buses only. You would have to merge/split from/to lower belt tiers to add/remove items to/from it.

Hmmmmm...green or white belt.

I like an “expressway” belt. I think we are unlikely to get it in vanilla though.

Nova wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:35 am

Factorio is still an early access game. It's in development. Things should change and many even break as often stuff can only change and improve by breaking others. In my opinion we can't rely on backwards compatibility and retention of etablished configurations as this holds back the overall development of the game. Because of this I regard "That change breaks my construction!" as a weak argument against changes.
It is still nice if we can continue to play a save game and keep our bases, but we are still only playing some kind of test version of a game. We test changes to the gameplay and report feedback to the developers. Most changes are good, some bad. This of course differs for different players.

For me, the change to the number of items on a belt is in the same category as the speed change to inner and outer lane of belt corners, for example. That was some interesting mechanic, but did look more like a bug and was pretty annoying. The current behaviour feels much nicer, at least for me.

Amen. Since all science stuff is changing and I will probably have to rebuild from scratch, why would it be so hard to make/think of a few new blueprints along the way. Especially for peaople who know every timing of every inserter etc.

I like the changes and am each week getting more eager to get my hands on 0.17 and lose my time.

Matthias_Wlkp wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 5:02 pm

I think we are spoiled by the fact that Factorio in this early stage runs as well as it does and feels quite complete already...

^this
For the rest: i like the direction this is going. belts FTW!

How will this affect corners? At the moment I’m getting

Inside, the lights flicker between 1 and 2.
Outside they flicker between 4 and 5.

I may have made a mistake when setting the logic up.

gotyoke wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:48 pm

Please also consider adjusting mining speeds. Otherwise we'll need a bunch more miners (before prod bonuses) to fill belts.

as V453000 said in this post 30 miners to fill yellow belt is quite nice.

Avezo wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:42 pm

TheVeteraNoob wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:10 pm

Also, I think that ratio breaking updates should be MORE common. Factorio is a solved game and every multiplayer map is just people plopping down the same massive blueprints they didn't even make. And everybody just waiting for it to build.

I agree with this, look at nuclear power - 'perfect' ratios are almost impossible and thanks to it there are many different builds around, but then look at steam power with its perfect 1-20-40 (or whatever it was) - it looks the same every time, everywhere.

There was talk about randomized recipes and different recipes for different difficulties. I don't remember if there's currently a working mod for randomizing recipes but it's definitely a way to counter the blueprint problem.

The "automate everything" paradigma of factorio reflects a very real problem whereas you can replace most functions of real-world workers with machines and we are increasingly doing that. The effect is that the need for humans is decreasing and we have to invent pointless tasks to keep people employed in pointless jobs. Maybe that IS the point of the game

Great changes can't wait to play "new" factorio. Any hint on release date? Its already January

VuiMuich wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 06, 2019 9:34 am

gotyoke wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:48 pm

Please also consider adjusting mining speeds. Otherwise we'll need a bunch more miners (before prod bonuses) to fill belts.

as V453000 said in this post 30 miners to fill yellow belt is quite nice.

Eh I'm cool with it. It means new belt speeds will improve consumption, not production, which would keep the game pacing about as it is now, which is fine.

When is the release date announcement for version 0.17?
I want to watch for new graphics and for all changes in action

ske wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 06, 2019 12:47 pm

Avezo wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:42 pm

TheVeteraNoob wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:10 pm

Also, I think that ratio breaking updates should be MORE common. Factorio is a solved game and every multiplayer map is just people plopping down the same massive blueprints they didn't even make. And everybody just waiting for it to build.

I agree with this, look at nuclear power - 'perfect' ratios are almost impossible and thanks to it there are many different builds around, but then look at steam power with its perfect 1-20-40 (or whatever it was) - it looks the same every time, everywhere.

There was talk about randomized recipes and different recipes for different difficulties. I don't remember if there's currently a working mod for randomizing recipes but it's definitely a way to counter the blueprint problem...

Randomizing recipes is awkward because it must be done at game startup, so you can't get a decent user experience akin to map generation. I don't think anybody really did a substantial job of it for that reason (I abandoned the idea myself). 0.17 allows startup settings to be synced to saves, so it might become more viable.

On topic of breaking changes, I'm fairly philosophical about it. Might cause problems for my mods and saves, but I'm more interested in factorio being polished. I especially don't mind mining/smelting changes, as I find that the least exciting part of the game right now, so pretty much anything to change it up is welcome. What devs are proposing in this FFF for furnaces etc. seems quite conservative anyway.

That last animation...

I wonder if there's an multiplayer RTS mod out there...
Gotta breed your biters to take out the enemy factions whilst building your factory so that you can launch the rocket first.

Bigbigcheese wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:38 pm

That last animation...

I wonder if there's an multiplayer RTS mod out there...
Gotta breed your biters to take out the enemy factions whilst building your factory so that you can launch the rocket first.

I have an RTS mod that will be ready for 0.17, which is what I used to test and demonstrate the new features shown in the GIF

On the down side... this is just more for me to change in my mod (The rebalance that changed all the belt speeds to round numbers, which will NOW result in unround numbers)
On the up side... belt speed maths should now be easy.

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 07, 2019 9:27 am

On the down side... this is just more for me to change in my mod (The rebalance that changed all the belt speeds to round numbers, which will NOW result in unround numbers)

Look on the bright side. If you must rip out the speed overhaul that's less code and options you have to maintain