[0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Moderator: Choumiko
-
- Fast Inserter
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 1:17 pm
- Contact:
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
if I understood you correctly
YES
train rides, flying robots that cut down trees
P.S.sorry I accidentally sent you this message in PM, messed up button
YES
train rides, flying robots that cut down trees
P.S.sorry I accidentally sent you this message in PM, messed up button
English is not my native language. Translator.
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
No, if that idea is implemented is horrible.
Making the robot do the work, while it's cool it's not usable until we research logistic robot speed 5 (and it's expensive)
Also making plenty of robot in early game is also not feasible for many player.
So it will be useless feature, because FARL turn into not friendly use.
Not to mention in future release, factorio will behave RSO like. SO the need to laying track easier is badly need.
Also, there will be vanilla feature to place track much easier than current way.
So why in the world you suggest FARL to make things harder ? Just because it's cool ? While abandoning all the benefit of current FARL feature ?
FARL is great because we can layout track much faster (and much complex) than vanilla way. If robot within FARL do the work, it's literally faster to built it with personal roboport instead using FAR, and even faster using the new method that being shown in Friday Facts.
Making the robot do the work, while it's cool it's not usable until we research logistic robot speed 5 (and it's expensive)
Also making plenty of robot in early game is also not feasible for many player.
So it will be useless feature, because FARL turn into not friendly use.
Not to mention in future release, factorio will behave RSO like. SO the need to laying track easier is badly need.
Also, there will be vanilla feature to place track much easier than current way.
So why in the world you suggest FARL to make things harder ? Just because it's cool ? While abandoning all the benefit of current FARL feature ?
FARL is great because we can layout track much faster (and much complex) than vanilla way. If robot within FARL do the work, it's literally faster to built it with personal roboport instead using FAR, and even faster using the new method that being shown in Friday Facts.
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 7:06 am
- Contact:
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Hi!
Been using your FARL mod for some time now, but im getting so fustrated with it, like yeah it work perfecly placing rails, but if i did something wrong bam, now i need to go out and start removing by hand, seen the bulldozer mode only remove from infront of the train and direkly after it place a new rail. Like what is that kind of a thing ? should it not remove from behind the train ? and not infront of it so you can acculy remove wrongly or just remove rail that you no longer want, and what the even the reasson for the -root mode when it only removes one rail and then place it in front again in a infinitive loop, yes you can go and explore but what then ? you still need to make a new rail back out there.
What im saying is that some of the modes in the train is not working as intended or atleast that is what i have noticed. Yes you have done a very good work on this mod, but really even if the bulldozer mode is WIP atleast make is usefull? Like why would i ever want to bulldoze rail infront of me and then place new one ? when i want to remove the rail.
Been using your FARL mod for some time now, but im getting so fustrated with it, like yeah it work perfecly placing rails, but if i did something wrong bam, now i need to go out and start removing by hand, seen the bulldozer mode only remove from infront of the train and direkly after it place a new rail. Like what is that kind of a thing ? should it not remove from behind the train ? and not infront of it so you can acculy remove wrongly or just remove rail that you no longer want, and what the even the reasson for the -root mode when it only removes one rail and then place it in front again in a infinitive loop, yes you can go and explore but what then ? you still need to make a new rail back out there.
What im saying is that some of the modes in the train is not working as intended or atleast that is what i have noticed. Yes you have done a very good work on this mod, but really even if the bulldozer mode is WIP atleast make is usefull? Like why would i ever want to bulldoze rail infront of me and then place new one ? when i want to remove the rail.
-
- Fast Inserter
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 1:17 pm
- Contact:
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Yes!
The robots will need to fly out of the train.
Now the train is moving and the trees just disappear. It's not real. (very quickly)
But the way offered by the game developers.
laying rails manually - very long and tedious.
Your mod is like a drop of life to the game. The game becomes playable.
The robots will need to fly out of the train.
Now the train is moving and the trees just disappear. It's not real. (very quickly)
But the way offered by the game developers.
laying rails manually - very long and tedious.
Your mod is like a drop of life to the game. The game becomes playable.
English is not my native language. Translator.
-
- Fast Inserter
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:16 pm
- Contact:
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
I agree with your conclusion, that bulldozer mode should have another option, but that you can also express in a nicer toneLaarryy1234 wrote:Hi!
Been using your FARL mod for some time now, but im getting so fustrated with it, like yeah it work perfecly placing rails, but if i did something wrong bam, now i need to go out and start removing by hand, seen the bulldozer mode only remove from infront of the train and direkly after it place a new rail. .
At the moment, as far as i could see, bulldozer mode can for example remove 1/2 tracks and place 2/4 tracks instead. You had 1 track in the direction so far but whant double tracks. Then you can use bulldoze and replace it.
Yes, would be nice if bulldoze also could remove tracks completly.
*edit* just saw the update from 3 days ago... Bulldozer actually removes tracks now completly if you have 2 Farl (one on each side).
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Would it be possible to have compatibility with Bobs trains to create faster FARLs? I'm building a long way from home and the FARL train is just sooooo slow compared to bobs Mk3 diesel locomotives.
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
monsted even if that would be possible, then your ups wont be able to handle it, so in the end it wouldn't even matter much. there is a lot of calculations happening when putting down tracks. try putting down a 4 lane diagonal through a forest, my ups drops from 40 to 15ish
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
feature request: a preview/overlay showing "if you press left/right now, this is where the track will end up after turning". I find it very hard to line up turns with FARL so they intersect existing track.
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 7:19 pm
- Contact:
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Slight bug placing Hazard Concrete, had to add a "-- it's a title?!" for it as detailed below. It threw an error "Couldn't find item for: hazard-concrete-left".
Great mod!!!!
Modified code from FARL.lua starting at line 265 (in Notepad++)
Great mod!!!!
Modified code from FARL.lua starting at line 265 (in Notepad++)
Code: Select all
function get_item_name(some_name)
if not global.item_names[some_name] then
local name = false
if game.item_prototypes[some_name] then
name = game.item_prototypes[some_name].name
elseif game.entity_prototypes[some_name] then
local items = game.entity_prototypes[some_name].items_to_place_this
local _, item = next(items)
name = item.name
else
--it's a tile?!
if some_name == "stone-path" then
name = "stone-brick"
end
if some_name == "hazard-concrete-left" then
name = "hazard-concrete"
end
end
if name then
global.item_names[some_name] = name
else
error("Couldn't find item for:" .. some_name, 2)
return nil
end
end
return global.item_names[some_name]
end
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Thanks for the report. Fixed in a way that should work with tiles added by mods too.
I also made the vanilla hazard tiles mirror correctly if mirroring is enabled in the settings
I also made the vanilla hazard tiles mirror correctly if mirroring is enabled in the settings
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 7:19 pm
- Contact:
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Sweet, I'll have to dig through and see what you did! I haven't tried it yet, I'm playing with and fixing some abandoned mods on RimWorld right now, but I have two pregnant alpaca's which is nice.Choumiko wrote:Thanks for the report. Fixed in a way that should work with tiles added by mods too.
I also made the vanilla hazard tiles mirror correctly if mirroring is enabled in the settings
Thanks for all the hard work on this mod, its a thing of beauty.
-Dead
-
- Fast Inserter
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 10:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Suggestion: FARL follows ghost rails when it encounters them.
Why? I find it much easier to manually lay curves and twists-and-turns than try to guess when to start turning with FARL. Or, sometimes I will design track layout over a large area for aesthetics or follow the natural flow of the land. It would be nice if I could turn FARL loose on the ghost rails to finish the job of laying the rails, signals, etc.
Why? I find it much easier to manually lay curves and twists-and-turns than try to guess when to start turning with FARL. Or, sometimes I will design track layout over a large area for aesthetics or follow the natural flow of the land. It would be nice if I could turn FARL loose on the ghost rails to finish the job of laying the rails, signals, etc.
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Suggestion
Farl gets equipment grid, moves slower, requires roboport and robots to lay rails. (early game farl lays JUST track until roboport/bots are added)
Farl gets equipment grid, moves slower, requires roboport and robots to lay rails. (early game farl lays JUST track until roboport/bots are added)
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Had that idea a while ago already, see here: https://github.com/Choumiko/FARL/issues/34Nexela wrote:Suggestion
Farl gets equipment grid, moves slower, requires roboport and robots to lay rails. (early game farl lays JUST track until roboport/bots are added)
Some of the issues probably apply even with grids for trains/wagons but at least i wouldn't need a scripted player anymore Will be definetly thinking about how to best do it (soon)
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
An idea that came up when trying to make Electric Vehicles compatible with FARL:
Instead of (or in addition to) a fixed FARL locomotive have a "FARL equipment" item that can be placed in any locomotive with an equipment grid and turns it into a FARL. That allows for easier integration with other types of train/track types without you having to worry about any kind of compatibility nonsense (because we all know if someone adds a new kind of non-standard rail/train people will ask for FARL integration).
Instead of (or in addition to) a fixed FARL locomotive have a "FARL equipment" item that can be placed in any locomotive with an equipment grid and turns it into a FARL. That allows for easier integration with other types of train/track types without you having to worry about any kind of compatibility nonsense (because we all know if someone adds a new kind of non-standard rail/train people will ask for FARL integration).
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
mknejp wrote:An idea that came up when trying to make Electric Vehicles compatible with FARL:
Instead of (or in addition to) a fixed FARL locomotive have a "FARL equipment" item that can be placed in any locomotive with an equipment grid and turns it into a FARL. That allows for easier integration with other types of train/track types without you having to worry about any kind of compatibility nonsense (because we all know if someone adds a new kind of non-standard rail/train people will ask for FARL integration).
I like this idea! A FARL brain that you put into your locomotive.
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
That's an interesting idea yeah.
Since i got a request to make FARL compatible with another mod yesterday i think i'm gonna try it.
As for FARL + construction bots: It's probably gonna need at least 1 cargo wagon with an equipment grid, modded bots/roboport and won't happen before mid october
Since i got a request to make FARL compatible with another mod yesterday i think i'm gonna try it.
As for FARL + construction bots: It's probably gonna need at least 1 cargo wagon with an equipment grid, modded bots/roboport and won't happen before mid october
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Construction bots in trains would make a lot more sense if one roboport could access the whole train. Currently personal roboports only allow access to the wagon they are installed in.
My Mods: mods.factorio.com
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Are there any plans to add landfill capability to FARL? Or is that what is meant by water bridging?
I just finished laying out this by hand then drove the FARL over it but it struck me that if I have landfill in the wagon, why doesn't FARL just fill in any water squares it wants to build on?
I just finished laying out this by hand then drove the FARL over it but it struck me that if I have landfill in the wagon, why doesn't FARL just fill in any water squares it wants to build on?
Re: [0.12]Ideas, suggestions & discussion
Put landfill in the wagon and turn on bridge water