I hate beacons...

[mp0011]

And I mean it. The way people use it, by spamming it wherever it fits, is just bad.

I would like to have some alternative, cleaner and easier to controll way to boost specific buildings parameters:

1) "Computation Center"
Works similar to Power Generator, but consumes green, red or/and blue electronic circuits, and electricity, produces "TeraFlops*" (or data packets, or something similar). More Computation Center You have, more "TeraFlops" your factory can use. "TeraFlops" are distributed with white fiberwires, so You need to connect Computation Centers with your machines.

2) FiberWires
Connects Computing Stations with machines, using poles.

3) Data Routers
- used to limit/redirect "Generic TeraFlops" to selected network branches;
- can be controlled by red/green signals;
- converts some or all of incoming generic "TeraFlops" to more specific signals, eg "Efficiency L1 TeraFlops" and/or "Speed L3 TeraFlops", relatively to amount of inserted modules.

4) Connected Machines
Each machine (anything that can now use beacon), connected to each data center consume equal amount of "TeraFlops", but with some upper limit. Productivity/speed/efficiency boost in any connected machine is directly related to number and level of inserted modules (in addition to regular module bust).

Specific signals incoming to machine works as additional modules.






*) I know it is misused here, cpu cycles / CPU Cores / Server Time are better...?

[tamanous]

I like the challenge to place my production lines between never ending parallel lines of beacons ...

[mp0011]

Well, you may just place new "wireless" routers, it's not forbidden Just connect it to the Computation Center.

I just think, it would by nice to be able to switch production priorities with logic circuits, so I can switch off routing in one place, and enable it in another. Or change speed to production based on the output.

[Ingolifs]

Without beacons, there would be only one solution to late-game factory building - as many as possible in a straight line. With beacons, there is a tradeoff between length, width, cost and energy usage. Unfortunately, as Tamanous pointed out above, the optimal solution seems to be to sandwich rows of production building with rows of beacons. Other, more complicated arrangements seem to be less efficient.

Therefore I'd argue that the beacon itself isn't bad, but it's implementation needs to be looked at. Even something like changing its area of effect from a square to a circle or diamond shape would increase the number of possible arrangements.

[malecord]

Without beacons, there would be only one solution to late-game factory building - as many as possible in a straight line. With beacons, there is a tradeoff between length, width, cost and energy usage. Unfortunately, as Tamanous pointed out above, the optimal solution seems to be to sandwich rows of production building with rows of beacons. Other, more complicated arrangements seem to be less efficient. <br class=""><br class="">Therefore I'd argue that the beacon itself isn't bad, but it's implementation needs to be looked at. Even something like changing its area of effect from a square to a circle or diamond shape would increase the number of possible arrangements.

I guess beacons are ok. But they should be called uglifiers because they basically uglify any layout they are put in.

That's what I hate the most about late game bases.