Foundation for buildings / pavement / concrete slabs / base

[ataaron]

So, I have been thinking about something that is missing in every factory: Foundations.
The only game i can remember that has done something like that is Dune which I played a lot in my childhood so i am a bit nostalic about this .

Currently everything is just placed on grass,sand,mud... which looks pretty cheap to me.
Another possible benefit would be that quick offensive building would take longer when a foundation is required to place buildings so it becomes less practical.
Exceptions of course would need to be:Mining buildings,rails,pumps,pipes,item belts and power poles. (possibly more)
Also running on concrete is faster than running on sand,grass or mud. So getting around in your base is faster while running outside of the base remains the same.
Future Multiplayer application:
When placing foundations on the ground, the game could remember which player placed the foundation so by placing foundations you could claim land which prevents other players from stealing or blocking your base (if there will be public servers this will need to be considered).
This also limits the speed to expand claims because foundations require some resources.

So mostly i think it is a style feature with a possible bit of balance but what do you think?

[SilverWarior]

The original idea of foundation would not fit into Factorio quite well. Imagine you have to place hundreds of foundation tiles just to be able to place long belt to bring your resources to your furnaces. This would become realy tedios.
The main reason why foundations were implemented in Dune is to prevent player from building their buildings anywhere (needed connection to command centre). Also if I remember corectly it was posible to build building directly on the ground provided they were still conecting to any foundation or command centre (I belive it was introduced in Dune 2000) but those buildings were getting damaged over time so you need to keep reparing them.

If Factorio would be changed in such way that you can't build larger structures on unstable terrains (mud) without foundations they might become usefull.
Another use for them would be like building platforms over water to be able to build and traverse water.

But I would love the ability to pave my factory if that would provide me with higher movment speed. But currently the game doesn't take a ground type into players speed (only exception is when running on conveyor belts).

[ataaron]

The original idea of foundation would not fit into Factorio quite well. Imagine you have to place hundreds of foundation tiles just to be able to place long belt to bring your resources to your furnaces. This would become realy tedios.

I did put belts in the exception list already because i saw this concern coming so yeah i agree, at least the basic belts should be independent from a foundation and if you need very long/fast belts then trains should be used for that anyways.
I meant foundations to be used to cover your entire base(maybe roads between bases as well) and in dune you also did not place foundations in 1x1 size.
So if foundation plates were 3x3 then covering large areas for a big base would be pretty quick.
Foundations should also be cheap (something like basic stone and maybe bricks for advanced foundations but nothing more)

[Coolthulhu]

Sounds like needless complexity.
If all buildings were to require foundations, why not include their cost in the building cost? If costs are included, why not make placing and removing foundations a part of placing/removing the building? If foundations are placed/removed with the building, why are they there at all?

The only reason I see for having them would be different terrains having different costs. Say, you really need to place that big electric pole on this swampwater tile. The deeper you go in the bad terrain, the higher the cost - 1 per tile for those few tiles on the edge, but if your entire building is on the mud, the cost would be increased proportionally to size (big, heavy stuff needs better foundations). Preferably not just linearly - if inserter needs 1 foundation, then roboport should need 500.
Though I'd still prefer to have them automatized: if you have foundations in your inventory, you can place stuff on mud. When removing stuff from mud, you get foundations back. Manually placed concrete should be named "roads" and not be involved in the building process itself.

On a side note: I'd love to see furnaces producing slag that you either need to dispose of or put to good use.

[ataaron]

Sounds like needless complexity.
If all buildings were to require foundations, why not include their cost in the building cost? If costs are included, why not make placing and removing foundations a part of placing/removing the building? If foundations are placed/removed with the building, why are they there at all?

The only reason I see for having them would be different terrains having different costs. Say, you really need to place that big electric pole on this swampwater tile. The deeper you go in the bad terrain, the higher the cost - 1 per tile for those few tiles on the edge, but if your entire building is on the mud, the cost would be increased proportionally to size (big, heavy stuff needs better foundations). Preferably not just linearly - if inserter needs 1 foundation, then roboport should need 500.
Though I'd still prefer to have them automatized: if you have foundations in your inventory, you can place stuff on mud. When removing stuff from mud, you get foundations back. Manually placed concrete should be named "roads" and not be involved in the building process itself.

On a side note: I'd love to see furnaces producing slag that you either need to dispose of or put to good use.

"Needless complexity"
Well what can i say to something like that... but tbh i mostly think this is a good idea because of the looks/immersion.
when you build an industrial base it should look like a different biome and concrete foundations were my best guess.
Also stone currently does not have many uses so it would become more important when it is the main resource for claiming more land.. and actually this just gave me an idea! (will edit main post)

[ssilk]

I think the look is a good argument. But for gameplay?

In dune this was used to avoid upcoming sand-worms... We could have worms, too. Could be nice.

[Coolthulhu]

I mean, it's totally fine to have nice looking base, but if it is supposed to be something more than a decoration, it should have good reasons to exist.
While stone having more uses would be good thing, those uses should be... useful. Also, factorio is already relatively tedious (comparable to minecraft, but below dwarf fortress), so all additions to the game should be as free from tedium as possible.

I'm not saying that this idea is bad, just that it needs to be expanded/changed before it's good. Or maybe reduced to just decorations, because while gameplay role of foundations isn't clear, aesthetic gain from having buildings look like they're built and not "placed" is obvious.

[Garm]

Possible uses:

- Spawner spawn prevention within the large bases.

- Passive alignment for car - forces cars to align itself with the road for easier driving through the wall openings (not the walls themselves)

- Requirement for some advanced machinery/buildings

- Landing pads for rocket assisted delivery

- Car speed boost

[ssilk]

I mean one big point is, that I don't want to set all the foundations myself. I want something, which works more ore less automatic.

A good point is also this road-idea. I had it some month ago. But in conclusion this means, that we end to have different foundations: one for buildings/not road and one for road. And how to place diagonal roads with 3x3 foundations? Hm.

I really don't have good answers for that.

[TGS]

This isn't a bad idea. Just that without some serious tweaking it really wouldn't be anything more than an unnecessary annoyance. Best case I could see would be to have a separate 'pavement' item that could be laid, and any building save for drills, belts and poles would have to be placed on this pavement. But aside from looking nice as has been brought up. What's the point? I mean what really is the gameplay advantage to this? I wouldn't find it more immersive, I would find it tedious. Remember we are not building cities, we are building factories. On an alien planet no less. I just can't see a way of it being implemented that would advance gameplay. I imagine most would find it annoying.

Now if the worms in the game were mobile and it protected you from those worms that would be neat, but again you don't need building foundations for that. Simply have the pavement as I suggested. But then you're really adding a completely unnecessary 'element' to the game. Placing what are essentially ground shields to stop worms from popping up in your base. You're creating a condition to meet the feature. You're supposed to do it the other way around. Create features that meet conditions.

This is really a case of "It works for one game, but not another" imo.

[ssilk]

Yes. I think, when built into the game, then it is no game element. Just nicer graphics.

Siedler 3 has this nice paths: if a Siedler walked many times over a piece of land, then it changes first to a path and then a way.

Same could be done here: if the character walks some times over a place he removes the grass, the sand get darker from the dust etc. also only graphical things, except this influences the walking speed...

The same idea I had for the car. The first time you need to be carefully and after some drive we have a street and the car follows it like a train.

[torham]

Joined into this, cause identical. ssilk

------------


The base of any building or factory are good foundations

- would help with navigation, if we could pave roads; walkways, and differentiate sections of the factory with different paving slabs.
- Could give minor bonuses like +10% HP for structures, or 5% movement speed buff
- would look good. We are here to turn this planet into a industrial heaven, we need to start with concrete jungle

Here is a mock up pic. There would be no need to redo all of the ground tiles, since the paving would be just a layer on top of it, maybe a building without a collision box or something like the rail tiles are.

[Koub]

That reminds me so much of Dune 2

[ssilk]

You should look also into this topic: https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... ilit=Roads

[torham]

Damn, I suspected that this has already been brought up. I did search for "Pavement", but didn't turn up any good results. Sorry for the double post Ssilk.

[ssilk]

No prob. It's for me often the same, that I don't find the right search-word.

I have a secret: In most cases I've two ways to find the right topic. So also in this case:
a) I remembered, that they already have spoken about Dune in that case. So I just searched "dune". https://forums.factorio.com/forum/sea ... words=dune
b) I remember very well, what I've written at any time here, so in this case I search also for my postings and "road", cause I remember, that I wrote something about using that as a road. https://forums.factorio.com/forum/sea ... mit=Search

So in most cases I have two ways to find the right topic.

[Tyrithe]

While we're here, I want spice, harvesters, and giant worms that burst through my base because they're angry.

I'll settle for a Gypsum harvester and a paving layer that are all automated and just do it outwards from the building. Kinda still want the giant worms though but I guess we have those!