Factorio Forums

We already had some discussion about stack sizes: https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... size#p6906

I would suggest, that stack sizes are always based on decimals, because that makes the counting much easier.

128 -> 100
64-> 50
Etc.

According to that, the number of stacks in chests, wagon etc. must be fixed, so that it is about the same size, as before.

This suggestion is, because even me, which I'm very used in binary numbers, have problems with estimation on base 2 numbers.
Edit: I was in hurry when writing that. I meant estimations on base 2 AND 10 numbers.

If they change the size of stacks shouldn't it be based on balancing and not arbitrary preferences?

I personally like ^2 stack sizes.

I dislike how some are powers of two and some are powers of ten (64 transport belts, 100 ammo clips, …). Otherwise, powers of two are very nice and easy to calculate with :-)

wrtlprnft wrote:I dislike how some are powers of two and some are powers of ten (64 transport belts, 100 ammo clips, …). Otherwise, powers of two are very nice and easy to calculate with

+1

To balancing: yes and no. I will have some effects, yes. But in my opinion only for furnaces, burners and some other devices I've forgotten yet. And when I think about it, I mean their stacks could be a little bit smaller than yet
(Off topic: think it would make sense to have also a module to improve the stack sizes, or to have more control how much the inserters fill.)

And powers of 2: I'm a programmer. I'm really familiar in calculating on base 2, 8 or 16. And I like it. And I'm doing me really hard to say that:

I think the idea with the base 2 stacks had been cool. It would be possible to calclulate with them (eg. 64 = 2^6, so can say its a "6-stack" and two 6th are one 7th, and so on).
But they didn't withstand the base 10.
And the problem is now this: there is no sense in having two bases in a game; it makes every calculation and estimation only more complex, but doesnt bring the game forward in any kind. (And I thought long, if there could be a use for two bases in this game, but there isn't just any). When I would be asked to choose I would say 10, not 2, because nobody needs to learn to handle that. That why I'm saying lets drive the base 2 stacks to hell.

But if everyone says, no, no,no! we should have base 2 stacks, then I'm the first, going with! but this means we should have only base 2 stacks, even for weapons... so to say my point again, to avoid any misunderstanding: I'm not against base 2 or 10, I'm against having two bases, because that is just useless.

This is very off topic!!
[
Just assumed, we change all to base 2. Then we could introduce a numbering of stacks based on the power.
A zero-stack is 1. It's 2^0,or for us in shorthand "^0". Simple.
^2 stack is 4.
^5 stack is 32.
^6 is 64.
Now,what is 96? 2^6+2^5. In shorthand ^6^5.

With this system the sizes of stacks can be simply expressed.
]

Surely 96 is a simply way to state it than ^6^5? Or are you trying to convey something else?

It's that:
Now every chest has its own look. Even as beginner player you see them and know how much is inside.
So with stacks.
Replace ^5 with an icon and ^6 with another. Then use it everywhere instead of numbers and you will be used to it very fast. Placing two of the icons is obviously the sum.

I'm not really sure how deep this replacement can go, but I think just replacing base 10 with base 2 but keeping everything else the same is only the begin of a good idea. And I cannot underline enough that this is very off topic and very unimportant!

id also really like this, is weird how stacksizes are

ssilk wrote:It's that:
Now every chest has its own look. Even as beginner player you see them and know how much is inside.
So with stacks.
Replace ^5 with an icon and ^6 with another. Then use it everywhere instead of numbers and you will be used to it very fast. Placing two of the icons is obviously the sum.

I'm not really sure how deep this replacement can go, but I think just replacing base 10 with base 2 but keeping everything else the same is only the begin of a good idea. And I cannot underline enough that this is very off topic and very unimportant!

I think this will kill the game in the eyes of those not mathematically inclined. Especially new players, which is what we need tons of still.

(Ok. Forget about the base-2 systems, I think the majority is for base-10.)

It's really an idea I just played around with. Not very serious!

And the idea is this:
http://turner.faculty.swau.edu/mathemat ... ary/roman/ ---> see Addition
Now replace the different digits (C, L, M...) with icons for stacks - that's all what I try to explain.

Other ideas, which are similar (based on 5 or 10, not 2):

1 = | , 2 = || , 3 = ||| , 4 = ||||, but when you come to 5 you strike the 4 through... practical to count things.

The point is: I would like to see some visibile amount, not only numbers. Numbers get soon very unimaginable.

And how could it be implemented:
This doesn't replace how full a stack is. That should indeed be shown like current as decimal number. But if a stack is full, then it gets the icon in the background of the number, telling you: This is a full stack size 50. Stack 50 is for example yellow. So if you hover over the chest, you are not interested in the exact counting, you need to know above the amount. It's then enough to show for example 14 yellow dots and 10 black. That tells you: Ok, we have 14 full stacks size 50 and 10 which are not full yet - there should be enough space left, no need to built another.

n9103 wrote:

ssilk wrote:It's that:
Now every chest has its own look. Even as beginner player you see them and know how much is inside.
So with stacks.
Replace ^5 with an icon and ^6 with another. Then use it everywhere instead of numbers and you will be used to it very fast. Placing two of the icons is obviously the sum.

I'm not really sure how deep this replacement can go, but I think just replacing base 10 with base 2 but keeping everything else the same is only the begin of a good idea. And I cannot underline enough that this is very off topic and very unimportant!

I think this will kill the game in the eyes of those not mathematically inclined. Especially new players, which is what we need tons of still.

I also think, that keeping decimal base is better, the game is complicated enough for new players already

"all your decimal base are belong to us"

Implemented in 0.10.0

Uh, I thought it was introduced with 0.9, but 0.10 is correct now: https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... ck#History
Didn't remember, that this was suggested by me. I think back to the following discussion that followed this change. I discussed this change a bit with Kovarex in Prague two weeks ago. I said, I never understand the hassle with it, perhaps because I never played Minecraft. He said, sometimes such changes are needed, against the community, because they make sense.