Poll: Should belts use energy (and Offshore Pumps etc...)

[ssilk]

Due to the ongoing discussion in viewtopic.php?f=6&t=21058 Conveyor belts optional using electricity
I think it would be useful to see some kind of opinion of the majority. For any result: It doesn't mean, that the game will be changed, I just want to support the discussion of that thread.

To answer #1: It is clear, that belts don't run without power.
To answer #2: You need to think more to for the covering of electricity.
To answer #3: See viewtopic.php?f=6&t=21058&start=10#p137160
To answer #4: See viewtopic.php?f=6&t=21058#p133065
To answer #6: Turned of via options or by using a mod. See also viewtopic.php?f=80&t=13022

EDIT
More frequently suggested ideas about belts:
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=21106 Smart Conveyor Belts (also Smart Splitters) / Belt Extension
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=24061 New Types of Belts (And why they are NOT a Good Idea!)
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=32665 Make Underground Belt Magic More Visible
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=22305 Walking on Belts (New Power Armor module)
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=28618 Add a transport belt ghost Arrow / Belt placement cursor clarity

[MeduSalem]

I think there should be something like an "Expert Mode"

"Regular Mode" or "Beginners Mode" would be like Factorio is currently. With all the "space magic" going on, like belts moving on their own and offshore pumps not requiring some kind of fuel, etc..

"Expert Mode" could be selected during the game start as a difficulty preset where everything has upkeep that currently doesn't have any upkeep. It basically is optionally and for people who know the game pretty well to deal with the addititional difficulty, for people who want to punish themselves even further.


Therefore I vote for "yes, if it is in an expert mode"... because I don't know if all the new players would like it if everything gets 2 times as hard. I mean, yeah I would like it that way but that's also because I already know the game. xD

[DrEthan]

I think there should be something like an "Expert Mode"

"Regular Mode" or "Beginners Mode" would be like Factorio is currently. With all the "space magic" going on, like belts moving on their own and offshore pumps not requiring some kind of fuel, etc..

"Expert Mode" could be selected during the game start as a difficulty increase where everything has upkeep that currently doesn't have any upkeep. It basically is optionally and for people who know the game pretty well to deal with the addititional difficulty, for people who want to punish themselves even further.


Therefore I vote for "yes, if it is in an expert mode"... because I don't know if all the new players would like it if everything gets 2 times as hard. I mean, yeah I would like it that way but that's also because I already know the game. xD

I agree.

[ssilk]

Sorry, whoever already voted: I've added another vote, to make this optional.

They need to vote again!

That is also my preferred way, that mod authors just add this to try it out.

[MeduSalem]

That is also my preferred way, that mod authors just add this to try it out.

Yeah basically I imagine the "Expert mode" to enable a button in the map creation settings or something like that which lets you determine with checkboxes which additional "upkeep" or "in-depth" gameplay features you want to have, maybe even "experimental ones" when the devs aren't sure yet if they want to implement it to the main game.

So it would be the hardcore "playground" for stuff that might not be fully balanced yet or that may never really become balanced enough for the masses but nonetheless creates fun for the brave and experienced players.

[MalcolmCooks]

Is hardcore/expert mode the right term? The logistical challenge of powering belts and offshore pumps would actually be minute, relative to the rest of the game, and would just need new burner entities. A better term would be simultation mode, because you are only making it more realistic, by having no magic devices, not increasing difficulty. Also such a mode should require gun turrets and splitters to be powered, for consistency. This should be no problem at all since they are unlocked through research, which needs electricity.

[Ghoulish]

Is hardcore/expert mode the right term? The logistical challenge of powering belts and offshore pumps would actually be minute, relative to the rest of the game

But you'll have a huge headache if your coal supply to the steam generators ran out for example.

Also such a mode should require gun turrets and splitters to be powered, for consistency.

Indeed.

[MalcolmCooks]

But you'll have a huge headache if your coal supply to the steam generators ran out for example.]

more of a headache than currently? I'm not sure. The coal death spiral is an easily solved problem once you are aware of it.

[MeduSalem]

But you'll have a huge headache if your coal supply to the steam generators ran out for example.]

more of a headache than currently? I'm not sure. The coal death spiral is an easily solved problem once you are aware of it.

Exactly. It is a one-time beginners trap after which you learn how NOT to do certain things.



But that said ske and I had an idea that could actually help dealing with exactly that kind of problem over in the other "belts should require energy" thread: viewtopic.php?p=138278#p138278

In the post I basically wrote that if sterling/diesel/electric motors were modules that have to be put inside a machine first one could actually build an entire factory running solely on coal power without ever touching any Steam/Solar Power Plants ever... and only upgrade to Electric Power if you are sure you can tackle the challenge.

[DrEthan]

woops i voted for the wrong one on accident.

[ssilk]

woops i voted for the wrong one on accident.

Allow re-voting: Please re-vote.

[The Phoenixian]

My opinion is "Can you make it interesteing."

MeduSalem brought up, with the idea of "expert mode": In a game like Factorio I'd quite like to see difficulty modes affecting not just health and damage but also things like recipes. Imagine if, at higher difficulty levels, steel was needed for assembling machine 2s and science pack threes required light alloy structure (which would probably have it's costs re-balanced and instead be unlocked by the "flight" technology) on instead of steel. Or if Purple science required, oh, let's say, Mk 1 energy shields.

But I digress: That's a discussion that really merits its own thread.

Back on topic, even with that, I'd still want to see an interesting way to make belts work in order to agree with making them powered.

[Koub]

I voted No, cause game-play is more important than immersion. I know there is absolutely no way I can convince anybody, but I think Factorio should not get too elitist. I'd prefer it remain accessible to most.
Moreover, rethink almost all the game to modularize every single item seems to me a major overhaul, requiring a lot of work from the devs. Work I'd prefer invested into other things than making the game absurdly complex for the fun of the 10% most hadcore engineers of its audience (no offense, I really think this desire of complexity is really not common amongst the hundred of thousands Factorio players).

[MeduSalem]

I voted No, cause game-play is more important than immersion. I know there is absolutely no way I can convince anybody, but I think Factorio should not get too elitist. I'd prefer it remain accessible to most.
Moreover, rethink almost all the game to modularize every single item seems to me a major overhaul, requiring a lot of work from the devs. Work I'd prefer invested into other things than making the game absurdly complex for the fun of the 10% most hadcore engineers of its audience (no offense, I really think this desire of complexity is really not common amongst the hundred of thousands Factorio players).

I respect your opinion Koub, but somehow you got me to ask myself where the limit of "complexity in gameplay" is in a game where the gameplay actually is about automatation of complex processes. Sounds much like a vicious cycle to me.

Where do we draw the line and say "complexity to a certain degree is fun and beyond that is not fun because it is too complex"? Where is it? Do developers or we as the community have a rulebook for that?

Because if we think about that reasonably then stuff like Circuit Networks should never have been added to the game because they provide only fun to... 10% of the playerbase, as you would say Koub. The rest will never quite touch that stuff because basically everything can be automated and run just fine without it. I mean I don't want them to be removed, because I surely belong to the 10% even I have not found many practical uses yet, which hopefully will change with 0.13.


But really... It's actually quite a philosophical problem.

The masses roll in the money, but the most of them will be gone after a few months of play anyways because that's what casual players are like. The only ones to stay even after a game has long been abandoned by the developers themselves are the hardcore players and most of them are the ones who would be willing to pay even more to keep development going.


I ask myself if we would have similar threads if upkeep costs for Belts/Offshore Pumps/etc would have been a thing right from the beginning of the game. I ask myself if people would then argue "remove the upkeep from Belts" instead. But probably not because then people would be like "It's a feature, deal with it."

[Yinan]

Because if we think about that reasonably then stuff like Circuit Networks should never have been added to the game because they provide only fun to... 10% of the playerbase, as you would say Koub.

The difference here is that the Circuit Networks are not needed for the game, that's why there existance is not a problem.
You can play the game without ever touching the Curcuit Networks and you won't have much problems.

But when you complicate necessary elements, like belts to suddenly use energy, then things are different. In the beginning everyone has to use belts. There is practically no way around it (other than doing everything manually, which is a pain in the ass).

[MeduSalem]

The difference here is that the Circuit Networks are not needed for the game, that's why there existance is not a problem.
You can play the game without ever touching the Curcuit Networks and you won't have much problems.

But when you complicate necessary elements, like belts to suddenly use energy, then things are different. In the beginning everyone has to use belts. There is practically no way around it (other than doing everything manually, which is a pain in the ass).

I seriously don't think that filling a belt motor with some coal would kill anybody and later upgrade to an electric motor or whatever.

But exactly because a good deal of the playerbase prefers their "space magic convenience" is why I am for difficulty settings where the beginner difficulty spoon-feeds the player and the expert mode does not. If some players prefer to stay on the beginner mode it is their business, but I wouldn't outright forbid experienced players from having some more fun.

And also I'll quote myself...

I ask myself if we would have similar threads if upkeep costs for Belts/Offshore Pumps/etc would have been a thing right from the beginning of the game. I ask myself if people would then argue "remove the upkeep from Belts" instead. But probably not because then people would be like "It's a feature, deal with it."

[MalcolmCooks]

And also I'll quote myself...

I ask myself if we would have similar threads if upkeep costs for Belts/Offshore Pumps/etc would have been a thing right from the beginning of the game. I ask myself if people would then argue "remove the upkeep from Belts" instead. But probably not because then people would be like "It's a feature, deal with it."

To answer this in a roundabout sort of way,
One of the recent changes that was made was to give burner inserters a full bar of fuel when placed. This means that if you relegate burner inserter use to belts which carry coal, then you never have to manually put coal in them to start them off, unless they run out of fuel completely. I don't know if this was something suggested on the forums or if the devs made the decision themselves, but when I saw the change I was pretty pleased. I'd never thought it much of a problem that you had to manually put coal into burner inserters, but still it was a hassle that I was glad was removed, even if it invoked magic handwaving. As far as I have seen, nobody had much of a negative response to this either. So yes, I absolutely do think that in your hypothetical scenario, people would suggest that belts and pumps would have no energy cost because it's pointless and just creates a minor hassle, and I think that there would be a positive response if that was implemented.

[Hexicube]

Where do we draw the line and say "complexity to a certain degree is fun and beyond that is not fun because it is too complex"? Where is it? Do developers or we as the community have a rulebook for that?

If an item's function can be described in 10 words or less, it's in a good state. For instance:

Assembly Machine - Turns items into other items
Furnace - They smelt items
Belts - They move items in a set direction
Inserter - Moves items from one location or container to another

Granted this won't change the explanation with belts, but that's a good rule of thumb for that specific line. If it takes more than 10 words, it might be a little too specialized.

And also I'll quote myself...

I ask myself if we would have similar threads if upkeep costs for Belts/Offshore Pumps/etc would have been a thing right from the beginning of the game. I ask myself if people would then argue "remove the upkeep from Belts" instead. But probably not because then people would be like "It's a feature, deal with it."

That's besides the point, belts do not have an upkeep currently so it's not worth asking if the opposite scenario would occur. It's on you to argue that belts should be changed, not on us to argue that we would have asked for belts to be changed if they were in the state you wanted, and so far I'm not convinced that the change would be at all beneficial.

Since you're into quotes, how about "If it isn't broke, don't fix it."? The belt functionality is a core mechanic of the game, if them not using power was actually badly immersion breaking I would expect a lot more people to be complaining about it, therefore it isn't nearly as bad as you're making it sound.

[MeduSalem]

To answer this in a roundabout sort of way,
One of the recent changes that was made was to give burner inserters a full bar of fuel when placed. This means that if you relegate burner inserter use to belts which carry coal, then you never have to manually put coal in them to start them off, unless they run out of fuel completely. I don't know if this was something suggested on the forums or if the devs made the decision themselves, but when I saw the change I was pretty pleased. I'd never thought it much of a problem that you had to manually put coal into burner inserters, but still it was a hassle that I was glad was removed, even if it invoked magic handwaving. As far as I have seen, nobody had much of a negative response to this either. So yes, I absolutely do think that in your hypothetical scenario, people would suggest that belts and pumps would have no energy cost because it's pointless and just creates a minor hassle, and I think that there would be a positive response if that was implemented.

I don't see how the change of Burner Inserters starting off with a bit of energy is comparable. The game helps the player when first plopping down the Burner Inserter, which is good and has my support, but then the player basically has to ensure that the Burner Inserter keeps on running by ensuring it gets supplied with more fuel or otherwise it will just sit there waiting. So there is a difference in first-setup-convenience and not having to put a second thought into something.

With Burner Inserters you get help once, rest is up to you (they may still run out of fuel if they miss on trying to pick from the belt so you are punished for bad designs)
With Offshore Pumps the game helps you forever. No Upkeep, not even the lakes are running dry (which is not even something I am asking for altough that has been suggested as well several times already)

I still think that if you place down an Offshore Pump for the first time it could also start off with a little bit of energy (like your character giving it a little kick off to start the process), but then requiring more energy to keep on running. Same with Belts... little kick off from your character, but to keep on running it has to be powered by something.

If an item's function can be described in 10 words or less, it's in a good state. For instance:

Assembly Machine - Turns items into other items
Furnace - They smelt items
Belts - They move items in a set direction
Inserter - Moves items from one location or container to another

Granted this won't change the explanation with belts, but that's a good rule of thumb for that specific line. If it takes more than 10 words, it might be a little too specialized.

Good point. I might want to remember that for future suggestions because I like that philosophy.

On the other hand probably most concepts can be turned into a summary of 10 words if choosing the right words, but when looking closer into it there is so much more to it. Like in the above description there is no mention of Assemblers requiring energy to continue working. That there are Module Slots, that there are various tiers that allow more ingredients, etc.

That's besides the point, belts do not have an upkeep currently so it's not worth asking if the opposite scenario would occur. It's on you to argue that belts should be changed, not on us to argue that we would have asked for belts to be changed if they were in the state you wanted, and so far I'm not convinced that the change would be at all beneficial.

Since you're into quotes, how about "If it isn't broke, don't fix it."? The belt functionality is a core mechanic of the game, if them not using power was actually badly immersion breaking I would expect a lot more people to be complaining about it, therefore it isn't nearly as bad as you're making it sound.

Well it has been suggested several times by several people. I am not the first one and most definitely I won't be the last one. I didn't start the trend, I just give my opinion on the topic started by others.

And my opinion is that for some people it makes sense to have the upkeep and what I am arguing for is that they should be given the opportunity to play this way without forcing it on the people who don't want to play this way, which is why I am for an expert difficulty setting that increases immersion/complexity for the ones who like that kind of thing, and I think there may be enough people who would like to give it at least a try before condemning it as "no it breaks gameplay, so nobody should have the fun".

The recent disaster with the Loader proposal from the Devs changed my opinion on new/improved features radically. Only after realizing how stubborn I have been myself when arguing against them I realized that many people nowadays condemn every addition/change to the game because they want the game to stay exactly as it is because they have become used to how things are. Any deviation from that and anarchy rules the developer forum. Ever since I am like "yeah why not, give it a try" and if it doesn't work out too well it can either be removed again (which would be a waste) or made an optional feature (which is a good alternative).

[Ghoulish]

But you'll have a huge headache if your coal supply to the steam generators ran out for example.]

more of a headache than currently? I'm not sure. The coal death spiral is an easily solved problem once you are aware of it.

For new players, yes, a considerable headache imho.