Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers

[evandy]

Exponentially increasing difficulty? Wow, that's the first time I've ever heard that about vanilla factorio, but I guess it depends how you measure difficulty?

The better one I think, is science costs. Purple science is something else when you realize it's asking you for 10 rails a second for a unit, and compare that to the cost of everything else that came before it. And that's combined with the individual cost of the research. Normally though, only damage upgrades follow an exponential track. Mining productivity is linear. It is beautiful game design though, because it is a manageable task.

Yeah, depends how you are calculating difficulty. I do not equate an ever increasing volume of throughput as an increase in difficulty. It just means we need to make a bigger factory. But it's not a more complicated factory - just more copies of the same thing.

[coffee-factorio]

Yeah, depends how you are calculating difficulty. I do not equate an ever increasing volume of throughput as an increase in difficulty. It just means we need to make a bigger factory. But it's not a more complicated factory - just more copies of the same thing.

Well, the thing is, you can't really rely on copy and paste till you have a robot work force. Which you need chemical science for. So that's how this works, you have the challenge of scaling a factory, but if you put the effort in you get an increase in capability. If you do, you don't just get bots to do it, it's cliff explosives and the works.

When I see big jumps in capability like that, I feel like the 300% productivity schemes are more related to that kind of balancing. Rerolling is good for some things (it's a least a start with sulfur). But if there's something else that provides that huge lever and it's being missed, it raises some questions on if it's functioning as intended.

[Shulmeister]

5 legendary prod modules add another +125%, pushing the total over the cap of +300% / x4.

This works for all recipes where you can reach the +300% prod cap and get the ingredients back by recycling.

If you are not familiar with thing, you would do well to not rush to conclusions.

What do you mean ?

Look at biter health . That's one of the two best examples.

Biter health and robot requiring chemical science are your 2 examples of exponential difficulty ?

[Shirasik]

Well, the thing is, you can't really rely on copy and paste till you have a robot work force.

Why? Manual copypaste is effort-intensive yet some players find this a relaxing meditative practice not a burden.

Plus, how worker drone techs are related to crushers and asteroid recycling? Platforms DO build everything automatically if they have instructions and materials.

[Hurkyl]

Exponentially increasing difficulty? Wow, that's the first time I've ever heard that about vanilla factorio, but I guess it depends how you measure difficulty?

The better one I think, is science costs. Purple science is something else when you realize it's asking you for 10 rails a second for a unit, and compare that to the cost of everything else that came before it. And that's combined with the individual cost of the research. Normally though, only damage upgrades follow an exponential track. Mining productivity is linear. It is beautiful game design though, because it is a manageable task.

Yeah, depends how you are calculating difficulty. I do not equate an ever increasing volume of throughput as an increase in difficulty. It just means we need to make a bigger factory. But it's not a more complicated factory - just more copies of the same thing.

Quantity has a quality all its own, as the saying goes. I do believe that increasing throughput demands require you to qualitatively upgrade your understanding and implementation of logistics multiple times as you play through the game and a fair amount of post-game. E.g. as a post-game example, upgrading from just connecting things with a rail network to designing things in a way that one that avoids congestion as you move greater and greater quantities of goods through it.

Although I imagine by the time you've researched up to 300% productivity you're probably near the end of that.

[coffee-factorio]

Quantity has a quality all its own, as the saying goes. I do believe that increasing throughput demands require you to qualitatively upgrade your understanding and implementation of logistics multiple times as you play through the game and a fair amount of post-game. E.g. as a post-game example, upgrading from just connecting things with a rail network to designing things in a way that one that avoids congestion as you move greater and greater quantities of goods through it.

Although I imagine by the time you've researched up to 300% productivity you're probably near the end of that.

If a perceived mechanical advantage was preventing players from making qualitative changes to their builds, should the source of that mechanical advantage be removed?

That might be considered to be equivalent to removing quality modules if it appears they are causing players to pursue another large space platform for rerolling instead of one that could do deep space science research and reduce their resource needs by 10% per research. A player would have to switch out rerolling for another upcycle in that case.

The upside is if they hit on the idea that 130% research productivity +170% em plant productivity = 300%. All the platforms wouldn't be deleted, but the resources might be reallocated into a better upcycle that fits in the same footprint, even in the existing space. I don't see a quantitative advantage for it except for getting legendary sulfur.

Actually, it's a decent question for people who use rerolling.

Do you switch away from it? Because it might be that a reasonable user can figure out if this discussion is mainly be driven by hype.

[Shulmeister]

Do you switch away from it? Because it might be that a reasonable user can figure out if this discussion is mainly be driven by hype.

Yes and no you can switch in the middle to drive the discussion with more things 24 is a good value in there and you may may i believe not so

[crimsonarmy]

Do you switch away from it? Because it might be that a reasonable user can figure out if this discussion is mainly be driven by hype.

Sort of. The way I play the casino is kind of like a foundry: I use it for a bunch of things then as I delve deeper into quality use cases dwindle.

[mmmPI]

Yes and no you can switch in the middle to drive the discussion with more things 24 is a good value in there and you may may i believe not so

sounds like you are doing word shuffling, soon you'll reach coffe's quality of argumentation, i suggest you make the random bunch of words longer x)