Friday Facts #383 - Super force building

[Cerberus]

Half of the replies seem to be about what people want or want not to happen in one of the 3 modes. So my suggestion:

Add a new tool to the quick action bar that brings up a mini-config menu.

Code: Select all

                  | Normal | Shift | Shift+Ctrl |
------------------+--------+-------+------------+
Add Landfill      |  [ ]   |  [ ]  |     [X]    |
Remove Landfill   |  [ ]   |  [ ]  |     [X]    |
Remove Cliffs     |  [ ]   |  [X]  |     [X]    |
Replace Buildings |  [ ]   |  [X]  |     [X]    |
Upgrade Buildings |  [ ]   |  [X]  |     [X]    |
Tunnel Belts      |  [ ]   |  [ ]  |     [X]    |
Tunnel Pipes      |  [X]   |  [ ]  |     [ ]    |
Remove Trees      |  [ ]   |  [X]  |     [X]    |
...

Fantastic idea!

[computeraddict]

But how would you add it to a blueprint if whenever you place it it is already gone?

If it only deconstructs itself after being placed, just blueprint the ghost?

[Impatient]

So in the end, wooden boxes in empty spots of a super force built blueprint that are then removed with a filter planner seems like it does the job even better, just requires an extra step simple step.

I thought of wooden boxes too.

But it kind of did not satisfy me. Wooden boxes, if built, do block player movement. And they can interact with other entities. Like in the edge case where you forget to remove an inserter and it then puts stuff in the box. Maybe expensive stuff.
Walls dont interact with anything but block. So I went with power poles. They are only "dangerous" if one has separate power networks.

Maybe there will be even more sophisticated workarounds. But being able to super force build and blue print NOTHING would solve it all.

[Qon]

But how would you add it to a blueprint if whenever you place it it is already gone?

If it only deconstructs itself after being placed, just blueprint the ghost?

That has issues as well. You want your self-deleting item to be required to be placed then, by a bot. Which then has to remove the entity as well? How do you make sure the logistics network has the item? How do you get enough quantity? That's kind of weird. And how do you then place ghosts and prevent bots from placing them and then deconstruct them again?

With manual deconstruction of wooden chests you can just not have any wooden chests. And you can remove them while they are ghosts. And there's no burden on the construction bots carrying entities back and forth you don't actually want. That's otherwise potentially an enormous load that cripples your construction of actual entities and might also send your power into a death spiral.

So in the end, wooden boxes in empty spots of a super force built blueprint that are then removed with a filter planner seems like it does the job even better, just requires an extra step simple step.

I thought of wooden boxes too.

But it kind of did not satisfy me. Wooden boxes, if built, do block player movement. And they can interact with other entities.

Ghosts don't block player movement. Ghosts don't interact with other entities. Wooden boxes are an example of a 1 tile item that is never crafted.

[Illiander42]

I have one request though: now that you have super force building. Maybe it is a good idea to move cliff deconstruction to super force building instead of regular force building?

That would be nice. I too have had situations where I destroy cliffs when I didn't mean to and it can be frustrating.

Yes Please!

[wild_dog]

THANK YOU!

I've been playing with the "ghosts on water" mod, which would convert a blueprint to an alternate with alt ghosts, that would place the landfill first and then convert to regular ghosts when done.

Not only was this mod essesntial in Space Exploration, but it had a few little quirks and edge cases, and mandated i had 2 coppies of my BP books: 1 normal one, 1 converted to GoW.

This will be SO MUCH EASIER!

It also helps in situations where you want to upgrade an existing placed BP, which is awsome.

Like, you have built a train station BP, discover and fix some bugs, and then want to upgrade the existing stations.
Or when you have an alternate BP where for example the chests switsh kinds (passive to active provider).

The only thing that would be added on my wishlist for thiss is a propper implementation of what the Don't rebuild this stuff mod tries to do: in stead of requiring a deconstruction and rebuild, get newly placed BPs to use and 'update' or cancel out existing deconstructions ghosts when a new ghost is placed over it that would replace the same building/belt.

In the GIFs, you still can see that when a new belt is placed over an existing belt, the existing belt needs te be deconstructed and a new one placed in its place in stead of giving an 'upgrade' placement. That could save a bit of efficiency where the new placement drone arrives before a deconstruction drone, halving the number of drones required and preventing drones from getting stuck waiting on the deconstruction drone.

[SnowZyDe]

I want to suggest you an improvement



During the game, we usually fill it with water and lay concrete on top. the problem is that it is then difficult to find the right water to connect the pumps. please change the color of concrete over water

[Rubeus]

2 Questions:

1) Is it really worthwhile to have 2 different ways to "Force Build"? I always thought it was a bit strange in the first place that you had to press an extra button to tell the robots to clear the trees/rocks under the blueprint. From a usability standpoint, it seems that "garbage" objects (Trees, rocks, items on the ground) should be automatically dealt with. Only when there are potentially important entities (cliffs, any player construction, vehicles) being destroyed should there be a secondary action required to confirm.
(Not really a big deal either way, however. Just seems like "pointless complexity".)

2) Mining landfill using roboport bots can potentially lead to a "Player Stuck" scenario in fringe cases (e.g. a biter attack destroys the box of newly mined landfill, and there's not automated landfill production). Given remote view and all that, it shouldn't be an issue in normal circumstances. Not sure if this is something that should be dealt with or not, but this does seem like it could cause angst in some situations.

[Koub]

From a usability standpoint, it seems that "garbage" objects (Trees, rocks, items on the ground) should be automatically dealt with. Only when there are potentially important entities (cliffs, any player construction, vehicles) being destroyed should there be a secondary action required to confirm.

What is "garbage" and what is "potentially important" is subjective and varies from player to player. For some people, trees are considered important, and their destruction is avoided as much as possible for example.

[Warmed]

Awesome as usual !
You sure are finally adding what we all hoped for in the past.

Will this extra modifier be hardcoded, or could we be able to rebind the key(s) ?
As suggested here for the current standard "Ghost mode" and "Shift" key :
Toggle ghost mode explicitly

It's not about muscle memory, it's about pinky finger's muscles that's all !

[Unknow0059]

I don't need to "super force" the ground into water so that I can place pipes anywhere I want.
Having to place pumps in lakes I don't control is one of the few believable things about Factorio's world.

(two different people corrected me, thankfully this is not the case!!)

[ekisacik]

Better to be vague about the details than try to describe it with a name that doesn't really match all the things that it does.

Until this post, I hadn't realized that placing buildings with Shift was "force mode", been referring to it as "ghost placement" this whole time... so it could be "Ghost place" and "Force ghost place", where the latter is an extension of the former. It doesn't sound as cool, though.

[computeraddict]

2) Mining landfill using roboport bots can potentially lead to a "Player Stuck" scenario in fringe cases (e.g. a biter attack destroys the box of newly mined landfill, and there's not automated landfill production). Given remote view and all that, it shouldn't be an issue in normal circumstances. Not sure if this is something that should be dealt with or not, but this does seem like it could cause angst in some situations.

The way SE dealt with this is to add a respawn button. I'm expecting something similar might show up in Space Age, especially considering the far greater chance of soft locking yourself in space or another world.

[computeraddict]

I don't need to "super force" the ground into water so that I can place pipes anywhere I want.
Having to place pumps in lakes I don't control is one of the few believable things about Factorio's world.

The FFF is showing the removal of landfill from water, not the creation of water.

[FuryoftheStars]

This seems great to me!

As a side note about the platform building animation, as some people see the scaffolding and rails moving the prebuilt platform pieces into place as apparently being grey goo tech, it might be better to add inserter like arm animations that protrude and swing the various pieces in place to get the point across.

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

I have one request though: now that you have super force building. Maybe it is a good idea to move cliff deconstruction to super force building instead of regular force building?

I'd like this, too.

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

I wonder how such a modification would work with railroad bridges? Will the water be covered with earth and ordinary rails will be laid on it or will bridges be placed on the water?

I imagine it works by whatever conflicts, thus a railbridge that does not conflict with water would likely not get landfilled.

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

While you are working in this anyways, what do you think about moving the automatic deconstruction if trees and rock to normal placement?

Is it really worthwhile to have 2 different ways to "Force Build"? I always thought it was a bit strange in the first place that you had to press an extra button to tell the robots to clear the trees/rocks under the blueprint.

There are many people that like to build preserving nature as best as they can. I personally would not want what you suggest. I even fought against the removal of the obstacle avoidance feature with the ghost rail planner.

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

Mining landfill using roboport bots can potentially lead to a "Player Stuck" scenario in fringe cases (e.g. a biter attack destroys the box of newly mined landfill, and there's not automated landfill production). Given remote view and all that, it shouldn't be an issue in normal circumstances. Not sure if this is something that should be dealt with or not, but this does seem like it could cause angst in some situations.

I'd imagine you'd have some landfill manufacturing going on somewhere, but even still, with the remote building changes, this should actually give you the ability to reconfigure/build a part of your base into landfill production while trapped on the remote island, safe from biters.... wait a sec, that sounds like a good idea. Couple of palm trees, beach chairs, drinks....

You could also potentially, depending on the size of the island, build the new railbridge out to you for a loco to come retrieve you.

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

I wonder if you can soft-lock yourself by

1. not having bots,
2. picking up landfill behind you,
3. and placing all of it ahead of you

Since IIRC you need for example real concrete "in-hand" to hand-mine it the placed tiles...

You can add landfill to your toolbar and then select it from there to be given the ghost tool, which can then be used to remove the landfill so you can replace it.

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

Instead of Super Force building, couldn't it just be force building, with a toggle for removing what's already there?

What is the difference? Sounds like you described super force with your "suggestion". It's "toggled" on when ctrl is pressed down, toggled off when ctrl is released.

I'm not too excited about Ctrl+Shift keybind for the super-forced blueprint placing. Why would i still need the regular forced mode over it? I will just change Shift modifier to super forced and unbind the forced one? Even if it potentially removes things out of the way that still sounds much more preferrable to me.

That is the purpose of keybinds, yes. You do that.

I like the suggested default keybinds for this, makes sense to me.

+1 to everything Qon said here.

Aside from the fact that you can rebind, I seriously am curious where the dislike for the extra modifier key is coming from? We already have ctrl+shift for some things in game, but also ctrl and shift are right next to each other. You don't even need to spread your fingers to press them, let alone the fact you could just do it with one finger!

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

Given water pumps can be landfilled over after placement, can I make a small request that they be placeable on landfill directly without removing the landfill first?

Heh, I'd actually like to request the opposite... disallow landfilling over pumps.

[Toastinator]

While I'm super happy with most of these updates (Especially the QoL updates). I'm concerned about the Final Product. Without seeing it, Its hard to say. Here's my Criticism so far:

1-Super Forced Building Should 100% Fill in the Land Fill. Its Less annoying to remove unwanted then Fill in Tiny Holes everywhere.
2-Space Age should be an Expansion and add on from the end of original Factorio.
3-Ill be really disappointed if you cannot turn the Space Platform into a Space Ship.
4-I really hope Space Suits are coming in a future FFF. Space Travel without being able to Explore kind of ruins the point.
5-Limiting Space Platforms to belt only Seams like a bad move. I would rather be heavily incentivized to use belts then prohibited. (Robot Attrition?)
6-Weight? Factorio has never been that realistic... You can literally carry a Stack of Nuclear Reactors and 500 other things and Rockets are going to be weight limited? Sounds Ridiculous. We all love to Mega Base and I don't get Space Mega Base Vibes from that.
7-Limiting Space Platform Hubs and Landing Pads also doesn't sound like a good idea. Let the Player Decide and Find out through game design, its a bad idea later.
8-I like the concept of Quality, I Just Dislike the Naming.

Side note: Why do you need a Mod (Clean Floor) to Remove the Weeds and tree stumps on Freshly Laid Concrete/Brick floors? Would Love to see that in 2.0

Game Design is hard plus Space Exploration adds a lot of Unfair assumptions and Expectations about Space Age. These are just my opinions on these FFF Updates. Overall, I'm Very happy with everything presented so far. Especially for all the Train Updates.

[Khagan]

1-Super Forced Building Should 100% Fill in the Land Fill. Its Less annoying to remove unwanted then Fill in Tiny Holes everywhere.

This is sufficiently absurd that it made me suspect sarcasm, but your other points seem genuine, so I suppose you are serious. Consider:

1. Landfill costs resources.
2. Placing landfill requires conbots who have other jobs to do.
3. If you really want to fill in the holes, it's just a couple of swipes with a big brush, while removing unwanted tiles would be extremely fiddly.

The forced build should place the absolute minimum of landfill (and I have no doubt that is exactly what it will do).

[Rubeus]

From a usability standpoint, it seems that "garbage" objects (Trees, rocks, items on the ground) should be automatically dealt with. Only when there are potentially important entities (cliffs, any player construction, vehicles) being destroyed should there be a secondary action required to confirm.

What is "garbage" and what is "potentially important" is subjective and varies from player to player. For some people, trees are considered important, and their destruction is avoided as much as possible for example.

My point is that having 2 levels of "Forcing the build", unless there's a specific reason for it, seems like unnecessary complexity. What is the use case for separating a "force" and a "super force"? It seems these should be the same functionality. It makes sense to have a mode that forces the removal of objects in the way; this is fine. However, I question what use case there is for specifically allowing the truncating of blueprints where the land is unsuitable (water tiles). The other features - while useful - would likewise make sense to put into "Force build".

If "Force Build" removes trees/rocks/cliffs, why would it be a separate function to remove buildings, as well?

I don't really have a problem with this... again, it just seems like added complexity (complexity creep) for something that would be right at home in the normal "Force build".

Now, if one was "Opportunistic Build" where it just omits the blueprint items that encounter obstructions while the other was an actual "Force build", this would make sense with your example above. Want to keep the trees? "Opportunistic build" on the openings between trees. Screw the forest and the rivers? "Force build" to automate paving the world.

[iestynne]

When placing new belts it would be useful to use the super force build modifier to specify that the new belts are 'dominant' (pre-existing belts should duck under the new belts) as opposed to the default 'submissive' behavior (new belts duck under pre-existing belts). For main bus editing, that would be a godsend.

[FuryoftheStars]

If "Force Build" removes trees/rocks/cliffs, why would it be a separate function to remove buildings, as well?

Because you may not always want to actually remove/upgrade some of the buildings you're pasting over.