Friday Facts #159 - Research revolution

[Afforess]

Another thought on this, as I'm sure not everyone agrees with me (though they are WRONG ) is to have the science factor be governed by a game setting. Allowing masochist to make the game take more science if they desire it.

Marathon mod.

I don't like the marathon mod. I don't want everything in the game changed, just the science. I know it's easy enough to have in a mod, but I'm one of those weird people that play with few to no mods and those few that I do/have used in the past don't change gameplay, colored trains mod for example.

Then there is this mod ScienceCostTweaker Mod https://mods.factorio.com/mods/UberWaff ... ostTweaker
You can tweak it however you like in the configs.

Nowhere near as nice as an in-game slider would be. I last tried that mod in 0.12 and it didn't work then, so I've never gone back and checked if issues were fixed.

[Mooncat]

Dat liquid wagon!
So we can insert at most 3 different fluids to it?



By the way, any plan to implement Klonan's Laser beam turrets to the game?

[Rseding91]

Dat liquid wagon!
So we can insert at most 3 different fluids to it?


By the way, any plan to implement Klonan's Laser beam turrets to the game?

No, 1 fluid. It's just visually 3 tanks.

[Slayn25]

ooooo I like this FF. Good ideas.

[aubergine18]

Love the sound of all these changes!

Research: Can we get ability to have an "OR" mode on tech prerequisites? For example:

Code: Select all

prerequisites = {
  { 'tech_a', 'tech_b" } ,
  -- or --
  { 'tech_c', 'tech_d' }
}

That change to the research system will allow mods to much more easily implement branching and converging tech paths through the tech tree, so that players can sprint down one path and still unlock a few techs associated with a different path. While we can do this via scripting already (clunky but it works) the main issue is that the tech tree UI doesn't show the alternate routes to a given tech (it can only show the main prereqs, not the 'Invisible' scripted alternatives).

Oil tanker: Love it! But hoping that emptying it is done from underneath rather than top.

[Mooncat]

Dat liquid wagon!
So we can insert at most 3 different fluids to it?


By the way, any plan to implement Klonan's Laser beam turrets to the game?

No, 1 fluid. It's just visually 3 tanks.

ok....
Thanks for the quick response.

[Ghoulish]

Question: Will there be a bottom drain for the fluid tank cars? Or will the liquid be pumped out of the top?

Was not expecting the research changes, but it's most welcome! (edit, oh you said drain..)

[aubergine18]

Also hoping the sprites for tech packs are easily tintable via prototypes so mods can add new packs without needing extra graphics.

[Mooncat]

Question: Will there be a bottom drain for the fluid tank cars? Or will the liquid be pumped out of the top?

I asked the same thing too in #157.
I think the picture cannot answer the question. We know pumps are directional, and it only shows a pump that is either pumping in or out. It can't tell whether we will have another set of animation for the other direction.
IMO, pumping out liquid from the top is not efficient, so I guess there is another animation set. But based on the liquid wagon image, it is really hard to tell now.

Edit: hmm, based on #155

It seems the pump is pumping out fluid from the wagon.

[RobEVO]

It seems like in that kind of PVP mode the rocket won't really be useful. Researching all the military and then going to murder the other teams seems MUCH faster. Maybe tweak the resource requirements for a rocket for PVP?

[Braxus]

Good idea to improve science pack.

Now, you can work on the Alien artifacts.
Maybe make 2-3 kinds of artifacts wich depents on Aliens evolution ?

[Ruin]

I really like the items (e.g. assembly machines, pump jacks, furnaces) being added into the research packs. It will make for a much more interesting science production chain.

[Kayanor]

I see how Factorio is related to Minecraft:

[Smarty]

I see how Factorio is related to Minecraft:

[MeduSalem]

Actually I think that a PvP mode only works out if the map is truly symmetrical on all axes.

Making them asymmetrical is just the foundation for heated flamewars with "we just had the bad starting position - no you just suck"-stuff, like is the case in most other games that have asymmetrical maps.



Also I'm for the research changes... though the final ingredients for all the tiers are obviously up for debate. I'd actually be in favor if the ingredients would only be intermediate products instead of also final products... because the intermediate products somehow follow an increasing complexity curve more naturally by default already.

[Andrzejef]

I think I start going in the direction not really along the factorio-way. You know, I stopped upgrading my factory at one point, just to expand the railways First rail signal network that works with logic modules, then roboport in trains announenent, now this fluid wagon... Two words for ya: choo-choo!

I'll get back to one of previous FFF, where the embedded code debug window was showcased. I'd like something such in game, you know, scripting the behavior of certain entities like drones from roboport, so my roboport trains would drive themselves on vital quest to find and exploit a proper digsite Over and over and over again, mwahahahahahahaha!

[3trip]

Stupid hurricane Matthew, now I'm stuck posting this from my mobile until The power comes back.

Devs, have you thought about letting players choose their team's spawn point at the beginning? Just cordon off an area and let the first member of a given team choose a spawn point.

It may or may not be balanced, but it will stop players from blaming the developers for placing their spawn.

[Splitframe]

When I think of PVP in Factorio something like Tech-Wars from Warcraft 3 always comes to mind.

In short: The structures you build spawn creatures in set intervals and they run to the enemy on their own.

It would fit the slow pace of Factorio as it takes some time to "overpower" the enemy with a steady creature flow.
Personally I'd also prefer if the creatures you spawn are ignored by the enemies creatures and vice versa.
That would lead to people having to think about base design and creature flow.
So that your creatures still can leave and and the other run against a wall with towers.

Just a little proposition, maybe you think about it.

[Klonan]

Actually I think that a PvP mode only works out if the map is truly symmetrical on all axes.

Making them asymmetrical is just the foundation for heated flamewars with "we just had the bad starting position - no you just suck"-stuff, like is the case in most other games that have asymmetrical maps.



Also I'm for the research changes... though the final ingredients for all the tiers are obviously up for debate. I'd actually be in favor if the ingredients would only be intermediate products instead of also final products... because the intermediate products somehow follow an increasing complexity curve more naturally by default already.

The rocket launch is only there as a stalemate win condition, i expect most matches to be won through destruction of all other teams silos, but in that case of two impenetrable fortresses, a resource intensive win condition could work well to promote expansion for resources and to motivate players to disallow enemy expansion

[MeduSalem]

Actually I think that a PvP mode only works out if the map is truly symmetrical on all axes.

Making them asymmetrical is just the foundation for heated flamewars with "we just had the bad starting position - no you just suck"-stuff, like is the case in most other games that have asymmetrical maps.

The rocket launch is only there as a stalemate win condition, i expect most matches to be won through destruction of all other teams silos, but in that case of two impenetrable fortresses, a resource intensive win condition could work well to promote expansion for resources and to motivate players to disallow enemy expansion

Yeah, I agree with that. I think that the most maps would probably end with some teams being erradicated prematurely with rush-methods and only the ones surviving with a solid strategy... and if they only make one mistake they are gone too. That said I'd still suggest making the maps symmetrical so that they at least have the glimmer of hope that the map is balanced and everyone having equal chances.

I have seen and played so many battles in the old ESL days that I know that only 2-3 tiles difference in the map might actually turn out as a disadvantage and have longterm effects on the game session felt until the bitter end. And we are not even talking about those pro-gamers who ragequit and give up after making only one mistake.