Build time 0.5s for Logistics/Construction Robots

[Peter34]

0.5s appears to be the default build time of anything in Factorio.

We see this, for instance, in the Landfill mod where 20 Stone is used in 0.5s to build 1 unit of Landfull to turn a 1x1 tile from Water into Land.

Sometimes 0.5s is perfectly fine, but in a few cases, it looks as if the devs neglected to actually think about what a good build time would be, and so they left it at the default. That is, ill-considered game design.

I don't think it should take ages and ages to make Logistics Robots and Construction Robots, it's just that the 0.5s build time feels super short. Even keeping in mind that it takes 20s, an eternity in Factorio, to make the required Robot Frame, I do think a build time of each Logistics Robot or Construction Robot should be 3s instead, that is increased by a factor of 6.

Because 0.5s just doesn't feel realistic at all. We're dealing with a complex end-of-chain product, after all.

[Krayt]

This is also the case for vehicles like the tank i think. Once you have all required materials it only has a final crafting duration of 0.5 .
This seems a bit odd although you certainly have a longer over all time needed because of the engines.

[SirRichie]

I actually like how things are at the moment. Yes, this may not be realistic, but you cannot use realism as a reason for almost everything. Many things in Factorio sacrifice realism for a smoother gameplay experience (belts do not need power, hitting a rock does not destroy your car, reclaiming placed items without damage, etc. etc. etc.).

I also think 0.5 seconds is not ill game design, because the end products usually require to either craft some items which need a long time to craft or the creation of many dozen small items, which also adds up in time.
Thus, instead of having to automate another step, you can pick up the (rather advanced) raw materials and turn them into a full product yourself.

You simply do not need thousands of robots (unless you're going really crazy-big). But you may want to automate the frame.

[GopherAtl]

As a rule .5s seems to be the crafting time for "things most players will never mass-produce, only hand-craft." Bots are a bit of an exception, but ultimately your production is limited by the 20s for a bot frame, and it seems reasonable in my head at least that the difference between a logistics robot and a construction robot, and a blank bot frame, is just a bit of programming. You have to build up production of electric engines and drone frames, and then the final specialization to useful bots is just a quick and easy step.

[lancar]

In addition to remedying the short construction time, I'd like some sort of in-game explanation of how we can carry so much in our pockets and chests.
I mean, we can plop down entire trains that we make in record time from stuff in our pockets, and while I see the benefits from a gameplay perspective I'd really like SOME sort of explanation for it.

That way it wouldn't feel as off when I pick up (mine with a pickaxe!) my own car because I don't have anywhere to park it.

[SirRichie]

In addition to remedying the short construction time, I'd like some sort of in-game explanation of how we can carry so much in our pockets and chests.
I mean, we can plop down entire trains that we make in record time from stuff in our pockets, and while I see the benefits from a gameplay perspective I'd really like SOME sort of explanation for it.

That way it wouldn't feel as off when I pick up (mine with a pickaxe!) my own car because I don't have anywhere to park it.

Gameplay abstraction.

Seriously, what else should we find an explanation for? Why the water does not deplete? Why oil wells do not deplete? Why buildings do not need maintenance?

[TuckJohn]

the time to create end-chain products needs to be increased. Things such as robots should take 3-5 seconds. 0.5 s is just not enough.

[lancar]

In addition to remedying the short construction time, I'd like some sort of in-game explanation of how we can carry so much in our pockets and chests.
I mean, we can plop down entire trains that we make in record time from stuff in our pockets, and while I see the benefits from a gameplay perspective I'd really like SOME sort of explanation for it.

That way it wouldn't feel as off when I pick up (mine with a pickaxe!) my own car because I don't have anywhere to park it.

Gameplay abstraction.

Seriously, what else should we find an explanation for? Why the water does not deplete? Why oil wells do not deplete? Why buildings do not need maintenance?

Underground water channels. Deep oil reserves. Efficient construction vs timeframe of game length.

Really, if you want to throw better examples at me you should pick something like the instant build (placement) times, Diesel Locomotives that run on coal, or Conveyors powered by pure magic.
Gameplay abstraction in all its glory, but explaining some of the more jarring offenders eases immersion.

At least, I like to think so.
</off-topic>

[orzelek]

the time to create end-chain products needs to be increased. Things such as robots should take 3-5 seconds. 0.5 s is just not enough.

And I'm keeping opinion that you are trying to remove a useful feature. You build time consuming components and then assemble them quickly into a robot.
It's a compromise that means we don't need to actually automate two separate lines to make different kind of bots - we just automate till frames and then easily make final bots in composition we need at given moment.

Reality argument won't work really - a lot of things are far from reality and adding few seconds here will not help. And I'm not convinced it would add to realism - you have a frame and just need to attach some tools and put in program forgiven type of robot.

[SirRichie]

the time to create end-chain products needs to be increased. Things such as robots should take 3-5 seconds. 0.5 s is just not enough.

Is there a reasoning or argument to that?

I agree with orzelek. Especially in the case of bots, it is complex enough to build the frames. Adding another step of automation does not increase gameplay depth.

Underground water channels. Deep oil reserves. Efficient construction vs timeframe of game length.

Really, if you want to throw better examples at me you should pick something like the instant build (placement) times, Diesel Locomotives that run on coal, or Conveyors powered by pure magic.
Gameplay abstraction in all its glory, but explaining some of the more jarring offenders eases immersion.

At least, I like to think so.
</off-topic>

Just my point. There are so many things that you'd have to "find" an explanation for, that short construction times do not add much to the list.

And at least to me, Factorio never appeared to be a game in which you get get immersed in the atmosphere of the game world. Yes it is there and yes it's a fresh idea. But immersion to me happens on the abstract level, on the optimizing, on problem finding.
I would hate to see fluent gameplay being broken in the attempt for a higher degree of atmospheric immersion.

[bobingabout]

it does seem a little odd that it takes 20 seconds to put a circuit in a robot frame.

[SHiRKiT]

Totally ranting and off-topic: while I completely hate anything being built in 20s, I think it's totally fine. After all, engines takes a long time to be built, and then to mount in a very advanced frame it's no easy thing. Now, I love that the robots themselves takes 0.5s to be built, because I then stack tons and tons of robot frames, and whenever I need to built more robots, I built them on demand

[TuckJohn]

it does seem a little odd that it takes 20 seconds to put a circuit in a robot frame.

How about this- robot frames take ~8 seconds and it is the robots themselves that take the 20 seconds.

[bobingabout]

oh, I thought you were complaining that robots SHOULD take 0.5s.

I just looked it up, the frame takes 20 seconds, the robot takes 0.5s

Consider that you have to construct the frame from raw materials, and all you have to do to turn the frame into a robot is add a circuit... 0.5s per robot is good. 20s for a frame might be a bit long, but it's not too bad.

My opinion is keep it as it is.