More Exciting Quality Effects (pls)

[Tinyboss]

That's the whole point, no?
Quality production machines (assemblers, plants, chambers...) and ALSO ENERGY production units like solar, ....., nuclear - just have higher SPEED, which means, it's more SPACE efficient, but it does NOT give PRODUCTIVITY bonus.
So you literally always can "build more", that's was the idea.

So, it's perfectly in line with other things, in line with the whole picture.

But it should have better productivity, otherwise quality is just a resource and ups saver. (and maybe useful when lining up ratios between different recipes)

Saving space is huge on platforms. And sometimes on Aquilo.

[Nemoricus]

Also on Fulgora.

[BraveCaperCat]

- quality boiler, nuclear reactor, and turbines are not more efficient. Just consumes more with same ratio (Always better to just build more)

That's the whole point, no?
Quality production machines (assemblers, plants, chambers...) and ALSO ENERGY production units like solar, ....., nuclear - just have higher SPEED, which means, it's more SPACE efficient, but it does NOT give PRODUCTIVITY bonus.
So you literally always can "build more", that's was the idea.

So, it's perfectly in line with other things, in line with the whole picture.

But it should have better productivity, otherwise quality is just a resource and ups saver. (and maybe useful when lining up ratios between different recipes)

yes its exactly what quality are for

No it's not, because otherwise why use quality? (except in megabases) That's the biggest issue with no additional productivity (for input->output machines like assemblers and nuclear reactors) with quality.

That's the whole point, no?
Quality production machines (assemblers, plants, chambers...) and ALSO ENERGY production units like solar, ....., nuclear - just have higher SPEED, which means, it's more SPACE efficient, but it does NOT give PRODUCTIVITY bonus.
So you literally always can "build more", that's was the idea.

So, it's perfectly in line with other things, in line with the whole picture.

But it should have better productivity, otherwise quality is just a resource and ups saver. (and maybe useful when lining up ratios between different recipes)

Saving space is huge on platforms. And sometimes on Aquilo.

On Aquilo, you can just add more parts of your iceberg or more nuclear reactors to provide heat.

Also on Fulgora.

On Fulgora, you can just use elevated rails. It's not that hard! In fact I've already made a factory which produces electromagnetic science packs on a single (large) island, so why even use elevated rails until you're making a interplanetary-megabase?

[FasterJump]

My thought on the rocket silo issue is that you could give them reduced power consumption or allow them to buffer more rockets at a time.

Quality silo and any quality crafting machine saves you power. Double the speed means it needs to be working ("ON") only 50% of the time for the same output, hence using 50% less energy per craft. Another way to see it: quality machines double your production without increasing the power cost.

There is a reason quality have no effect on some buildings: roboport layout would be messy, same for belts, pipes and underground pipes. It would be a nightmare. Cargo wagon size would change the throughput and change the designs of the stations, which is why I think that it will not be implemented. Locomotive speed is determined by fuel type/quality, but I'm not sure if tanks can also benefit from fuel quality (+exoskeleton). Maybe they could make acceleration and/or speed dependent on the vehicle quality and energy / consumption rate speed dependent on the fuel type/quality? Or just make the 2 adds up, like exoskeleton in other vehicles.

off-topic: +1 range on underground pipes (all qualities) would be helpful to align them with green underground belts.

[Theragus]

My thought on the rocket silo issue is that you could give them reduced power consumption or allow them to buffer more rockets at a time.

Quality silo and any quality crafting machine saves you power. Double the speed means it needs to be working ("ON") only 50% of the time for the same output, hence using 50% less energy per craft. Another way to see it: quality machines double your production without increasing the power cost.

There is a reason quality have no effect on some buildings: roboport layout would be messy, same for belts, pipes and underground pipes. It would be a nightmare. Cargo wagon size would change the throughput and change the designs of the stations, which is why I think that it will not be implemented. Locomotive speed is determined by fuel type/quality, but I'm not sure if tanks can also benefit from fuel quality (+exoskeleton). Maybe they could make acceleration and/or speed dependent on the vehicle quality and energy / consumption rate speed dependent on the fuel type/quality? Or just make the 2 adds up, like exoskeleton in other vehicles.

off-topic: +1 range on underground pipes (all qualities) would be helpful to align them with green underground belts.

Unfortunately, your statement about lower power requirements is not true for rocket silos, at least later in the game.
Even with low rocket part productivity, you can cap out a rocket silos max speed (limited by animation) with only 4 legendary beacons with speed modules and can use the rest with beacons for efficiency modules to get it to -80%, so the power draw is the same.
Again, it all boils down to the fact that the throughput of the rocket silo is limited by the animation speed and not a lot of speed is needed to get to this point when considering mid to late-game materials.

[BraveCaperCat]

My thought on the rocket silo issue is that you could give them reduced power consumption or allow them to buffer more rockets at a time.

Quality silo and any quality crafting machine saves you power. Double the speed means it needs to be working ("ON") only 50% of the time for the same output, hence using 50% less energy per craft. Another way to see it: quality machines double your production without increasing the power cost.

There is a reason quality have no effect on some buildings: roboport layout would be messy, same for belts, pipes and underground pipes. It would be a nightmare. Cargo wagon size would change the throughput and change the designs of the stations, which is why I think that it will not be implemented. Locomotive speed is determined by fuel type/quality, but I'm not sure if tanks can also benefit from fuel quality (+exoskeleton). Maybe they could make acceleration and/or speed dependent on the vehicle quality and energy / consumption rate speed dependent on the fuel type/quality? Or just make the 2 adds up, like exoskeleton in other vehicles.

off-topic: +1 range on underground pipes (all qualities) would be helpful to align them with green underground belts.

Unfortunately, your statement about lower power requirements is not true for rocket silos, at least later in the game.
Even with low rocket part productivity, you can cap out a rocket silos max speed (limited by animation) with only 4 legendary beacons with speed modules and can use the rest with beacons for efficiency modules to get it to -80%, so the power draw is the same.
Again, it all boils down to the fact that the throughput of the rocket silo is limited by the animation speed and not a lot of speed is needed to get to this point when considering mid to late-game materials.

The fix: Speed up (or make non-relevant) the Rocket Silo animation speed.

[CyberCider]

No it's not, because otherwise why use quality? (except in megabases) That's the biggest issue with no additional productivity (for input->output machines like assemblers and nuclear reactors) with quality.

It’s vertical scaling. Instead of building wide, you build tall. Instead of clearing territory and connecting logistics, you can simply apply an upgrade planner.

Also, think about this: If you want more productivity, you will use high quality productivity modules. Those have to go into every machine you build, right? And if you increase the quality of the machines themselves or their speed beacons, that will decrease the number of machines. Less machines to fill with legendary modules means less legendary modules that need to be made

[Premu]

- quality boiler, nuclear reactor, and turbines are not more efficient. Just consumes more with same ratio (Always better to just build more)

That's the whole point, no?
Quality production machines (assemblers, plants, chambers...) and ALSO ENERGY production units like solar, ....., nuclear - just have higher SPEED, which means, it's more SPACE efficient, but it does NOT give PRODUCTIVITY bonus.
So you literally always can "build more", that's was the idea.

So, it's perfectly in line with other things, in line with the whole picture.

But it should have better productivity, otherwise quality is just a resource and ups saver. (and maybe useful when lining up ratios between different recipes)

It also helps a lot if you have limited space. For example on space platforms having epic assemblers with an inherent 1.9 speed bonus makes a big difference.

[AileTheAlien]

There is a reason quality have no effect on some buildings: roboport layout would be messy, same for belts, pipes and underground pipes. It would be a nightmare. Cargo wagon size would change the throughput and change the designs of the stations, which is why I think that it will not be implemented. Locomotive speed is determined by fuel type/quality, but I'm not sure if tanks can also benefit from fuel quality (+exoskeleton). Maybe they could make acceleration and/or speed dependent on the vehicle quality and energy / consumption rate speed dependent on the fuel type/quality? Or just make the 2 adds up, like exoskeleton in other vehicles.

I fail to see how roboport layout would get messier, if the construction and logistic areas got bigger with quality. You could space them farther apart, which would give you more opportunities to work around other existing buildings, but it doesn't force you to change anything else. You still have the option of spamming them, to recharge robots faster. I also don't see how changing underground pipes' or belts' lengths would make things messier - you just get more options to use less of them, and can still make them shorter if needed. If anything, these both make your base cleaner, because you've got less things spammed all over the place.

Changing cargo wagon size would change throughput, but not in a bad way. In sparse locations like ore mines, you've got plenty of room to load from both sides of the wagon. (And if you're already loading from both sides, then the result is the same as unloading, or loading in confined spaces.) Unloading materials would be slower, but you're still providing useful materials - the train's not being wasted. If anything, it could let you have fewer buffer chests, or possibly none at high tiers, which would let you reclaim some space and inserters. The trains are sitting unloading for longer, but with train groups it's trivial to add more trains to your network. If you already have a lot of trains, to fully saturate mines unloading stations, with extras sitting at the depot, then you shouldn't really affected. I think you'd just have slightly too many trains sitting at the depot with ore from mines (or far-away loading stations), since you don't need to compensate as much for the gaps between trains. (As the unloading times increase, the gaps between a train unloading and another train pulling into the station become a smaller fraction of the total time.)

[Tinyboss]

Changing cargo wagon size would change throughput, but not in a bad way.

It would ruin any setup that has inventory filters set on every slot, counting on that to prevent any other item type from being loaded. They could make it so that when a world is first loaded in the new version, all the higher quality trains start with their extra slots disabled. It would be a PITA to go unblock the slots in every cargo wagon in the world, but I can't think of any better way to handle it.

[AileTheAlien]

Changing cargo wagon size would change throughput, but not in a bad way.

It would ruin any setup that has inventory filters set on every slot, counting on that to prevent any other item type from being loaded. They could make it so that when a world is first loaded in the new version, all the higher quality trains start with their extra slots disabled. It would be a PITA to go unblock the slots in every cargo wagon in the world, but I can't think of any better way to handle it.

If a wagon has all slots filtered, filter the new ones to nothing. Otherwise, don't filter them.

[Tinyboss]

If a wagon has all slots filtered, filter the new ones to nothing. Otherwise, don't filter them.

How do you know the player wasn't counting on just one or a few slots being unfiltered?

Look, I'm not saying it's some kind of unsolvable problem. Just that I understand why it wasn't a no-brainer to do it at the same time as chests.

[mcmase]

Agree/disagree with some, not too concerned overall though.

But DANG I was also sad when quality nuclear bomb only did more damage. It already kills most everything with common quality. I want a legendary bomb that's 10x the size!!!

[AileTheAlien]

How do you know the player wasn't counting on just one or a few slots being unfiltered?

Can you put filters onto a cargo wagon and screenshot it, to show what you're talking about? There's only three states I can imagine here, that should cover all players without any problems:

1. The cargo wagon is completely unfiltered. The player needs to set up their train schedules carefully, to avoid (un)loading the wrong material at the wrong place.
2. The cargo wagon is completely filtered. For example, I do this in my science wagon so that I'm always guaranteed some space for all sciences, and avoid having one science clogging the wagon.
   all

   

   1-all-filtered.png (34.51 KiB) Viewed 445 times

3. The wagon is partially filtered. I can only imagine that this is used when the unfiltered slots are expected to be filtered with exactly one bulk good, because otherwise you'd have to use circuits to stop loading based on item counts. And if you're doing that, you don't need to use the filters anyways, because item-slots multiplied by stack size is just a different number item-limit. So for example, this train could be used to load bullets for turrets, then load missiles for missile turrets, but it has to wait until fully unloaded or risk not having enough of either of those. It's always got some materials to repair the walls and turrets, and replace destroyed ones. (Note that I don't have missile turrets researched yet here; Imagine the laser turrets are missile turrets.)
   some

   

   2-some-filtered.png (35.93 KiB) Viewed 445 times

The completely filtered wagon is the only one where I'd care about extra slots being added, because it'd mess up my item-counts. (But like, I personally wouldn't care very much, because I just need some of all sciences, and having one science get a bit extra is just asymmetric and not actually damaging to my specific use-case.) The completely unfiltered wagon is the same with 40 slots or 400 - it's cargo is controlled by its schedule and the stations' circuit and inserter logic. The partially-filled wagon is like the completely unfiltered one, but with a few slots reserved for special needs - the rest is controlled by its schedule and the stations' circuit and inserter logic.

[Arcus]

Hmm, would it be possible for higher quality rocket silos to have increased lift capacity per rocket? Just spitballing.

[BraveCaperCat]

Hmm, would it be possible for higher quality rocket silos to have increased lift capacity per rocket? Just spitballing.

It's currently not possible to have different lift capacities for different rocket silos, let alone the same rocket silo.