Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers

[CyberCider]

The reason you use quality ammo is the same reason you use anything of quality, yes it cost more ressource, but it's better. I can't help you to find some guide on how to make quality ammo on space platform because i didn't follow a guide, i just played the game and realized that it roughly allows you ship to go faster than without quality ammo

Interesting. An observation is definitely worth something, now I’m interested. When I’m able to use my PC again, I’ll definitely calculate how much of a gain there is here.

The factorio world and the real one

You’re just not going to elaborate? Well, I suppose if you can say you’re not convinced, I can too.

[mmmPI]

Overall i'm not convinced by the proposition because it removes what i see as a rewarding puzzle that players can only access after a few hours, and even if it can be used for "almost all the materials", which is stong, it's also more complex than "more of the same" upcycling loop, which is mandadory for all the materials that can't be obtained in space platforms , like uranium , holmium or tungsten.

In what world is an asteroid rerolling cell more complex than an upcycler?

With recycling ore I can have a single loop with one "recipe." With a casino I need to balance the recipes on different crushers (remember the input isn't uniformly distributed) and have multiple loops of varying sizes.

Sounds fairly convincing to me x)

[CyberCider]

There is a difference between a design that is "simple" to make and a design more "difficult". It doesn't relate to how much you get out of them. Making a space platform asteroid shuffler is more complicated than a simple upcycler. That's comparing the thought you need to put into 1 design for it to work, the amount of understanding required.

That is very different from wether or not the design is "powerful" or "can be used for everything in the game".

I believe people argue that the design is simpler to make, which is just wrong, when in fact what they mean is that it gives outputs that exceed the reward that such amount of thought and investment put into a design should yield.

It's a problem of balance that has been mentionned, but it's incredibly poorly defended, with some bad examples, grenade upcycler ? sulfur production ? comon.

Well, I did in fact word it that way. I called it “too simple for how good it is”. There are no absolute terms here, that would lead nowhere. I’m arguing that its simplicty is too low relative to its power, and I have been saying this from the start.

And I yet again see you reply to my argument with a simple “that’s not true, you’re wrong, and it’s obvious how”. The others make an attempt at a meaningful exchange, but you have stopped doing that after I refuted you a few times. If you’ve grown tired of this topic, nobody is forcing you to keep replying.

With recycling ore I can have a single loop with one "recipe." With a casino I need to balance the recipes on different crushers (remember the input isn't uniformly distributed) and have multiple loops of varying sizes.

Hey, I said 80%, not 100%. There are some differences, of course, but the key attributes align. The same item that goes into the machine also comes out. There is no split between result and ingredient items, and there is no ingredient ratio that will randomly shift over time due to probabilities. Besides, while I’m sure there are many optimizations that can be made to a casino that add up to quite a bit of complexity, I would wager that most people don’t actually build those. A basic casino with lots of idle machines still has more than appreciable output. It’s still so strong relative to its complexity that it’s nerf worthy.

[coffee-factorio]

There is a difference between a design that is "simple" to make and a design more "difficult". It doesn't relate to how much you get out of them. Making a space platform asteroid shuffler is more complicated than a simple upcycler. That's comparing the thought you need to put into 1 design for it to work, the amount of understanding required.

That is very different from wether or not the design is "powerful" or "can be used for everything in the game".

I believe people argue that the design is simpler to make, which is just wrong, when in fact what they mean is that it gives outputs that exceed the reward that such amount of thought and investment put into a design should yield.

It's a problem of balance that has been mentionned, but it's incredibly poorly defended, with some bad examples, grenade upcycler ? sulfur production ? comon.

Well, I did in fact word it that way. I called it “too simple for how good it is”. There are no absolute terms here, that would lead nowhere. I’m arguing that its simplicty is too low relative to its power, and I have been saying this from the start.

And I yet again see you reply to my argument with a simple “that’s not true, you’re wrong, and it’s obvious how”. The others make an attempt at a meaningful exchange, but you have stopped doing that after I refuted you a few times. If you’ve grown tired of this topic, nobody is forcing you to keep replying.

Thank you, i have sent personnal attack in private as required.

Lol. Why bother? He doesn't show that courtesy. Neither does he bother keeping his criticism constructive or even rational. He's just a troll who clearly can't stand the thought of "losing" an argument. Just ignore him. It's what I do now.

<various futile attempts to reason with mmmPI, which only received personal attacks in response>

Same to you, @coffee-factorio. You should probably stop trying to argue or reason with him, and just ignore. At least until he starts actually trying to contribute to the discussion (don't hold your breath for that though). I've even considered contacting a moderator to request that he be banned from the thread so we don't have to deal with his shit anymore, but getting mods involved is usually a bad idea in general when on internet forums. So... whatever.

It's kind of his thing.

You know, one could even make an argument that asteroid rerolling reduces the diversity of builds if it replaces all of these upcyclers with only one build.

I agree. I think this should be discussed. I think crimsonarmy has good intentions in at least saying that the idea can be abandoned when given evidence that other builds produce better results on a case by basis.

[mmmPI]

You are trying to sound more uninformed that you are it seem. Ypu propose removing asteroid shuffler, to instead use grenade upcycler, which makes no sense, and really this means upcycling coal at the ore patch. When comparing the 2, yeah the solution of upcycling coal at the ore patch is easier and less complex than making an asteroid platform. Duuhh

[Shulmeister]

I believe people argue that the design is simpler to make, which is just wrong, when in fact what they mean is that it gives outputs that exceed the reward that such amount of thought and investment put into a design should yield.

Yes

You know, one could even make an argument that asteroid rerolling reduces the diversity of builds if it replaces all of these upcyclers with only one build.

I agree. I think this should be discussed. I think crimsonarmy has good intentions in at least saying that the idea can be abandoned when given evidence that other builds produce better results on a case by basis.

No can't do for uranium, holmium, tungsten.

You are trying to sound more uninformed that you are it seem. Ypu propose removing asteroid shuffler, to instead use grenade upcycler, which makes no sense, and really this means upcycling coal at the ore patch. When comparing the 2, yeah the solution of upcycling coal at the ore patch is easier and less complex than making an asteroid platform. Duuhh

But upcycling coal at ore patch is already possible, it should be removed too, because it's too simple , the proper way should be to upcycle grenade !

[crimsonarmy]

With recycling ore I can have a single loop with one "recipe." With a casino I need to balance the recipes on different crushers (remember the input isn't uniformly distributed) and have multiple loops of varying sizes.

Hey, I said 80%, not 100%. There are some differences, of course, but the key attributes align. The same item that goes into the machine also comes out. There is no split between result and ingredient items, and there is no ingredient ratio that will randomly shift over time due to probabilities. Besides, while I’m sure there are many optimizations that can be made to a casino that add up to quite a bit of complexity, I would wager that most people don’t actually build those. A basic casino with lots of idle machines still has more than appreciable output. It’s still so strong relative to its complexity that it’s nerf worthy.

You have two options with a casino:
1. Make a huge platform so lots idle machines is okay. This has a giant up front cost.
2. Make a smaller platform (but still very big) that is far more efficient in machine use.
In both cases you need protections to prevent asteroids locking the thing up, a new design for a ship, and a large planet-side manufacturing hub to build the thing (especially if you choose option 1).

You also need to remember that crushers have only two module slots so you need twice as many machines and the upcycle rate is a lot lower than 80% return would lead you to think. Asteroid reprocessing is also slow taking two seconds which means you need a huge amount of crushers and quality modules.

[mmmPI]

But upcycling coal at ore patch is already possible, it should be removed too, because it's too simple , the proper way should be to upcycle grenade !

Have you seen that on a guide somewhere ?

[crimsonarmy]

You know, one could even make an argument that asteroid rerolling reduces the diversity of builds if it replaces all of these upcyclers with only one build.

I agree. I think this should be discussed. I think crimsonarmy has good intentions in at least saying that the idea can be abandoned when given evidence that other builds produce better results on a case by basis.

Asteroid reprocessing is the the best way to get quality sulfur and I think that is it (If I am wrong here feel free to correct me; I didn't check too hard)(biosulfur is an alternative but getting legendary bioflux sucks).

My general quality progression is:
1. individual upcycling setups for everything I want quality versions of
2. make a casino and get a few other quality resources
3. slowly replace the things the casino gives with better alternatives

[Shulmeister]

But upcycling coal at ore patch is already possible, it should be removed too, because it's too simple , the proper way should be to upcycle grenade !

Have you seen that on a guide somewhere ?

No, only on this thread, i'm curious

[mmmPI]

But upcycling coal at ore patch is already possible, it should be removed too, because it's too simple , the proper way should be to upcycle grenade !

Have you seen that on a guide somewhere ?

No, only on this thread, i'm curious

Well here is one, i heard those bad boyz are "relatively" more complex than asteroid shuffler. The way it works is that the mining drill puts ore in the wagon, and when it's not legendary the coal goes into a recycler. When it is legendary, it is put on a belt, from the wagon or the inserter, and it is collected in the infinity chest used for demonstration purposes.

It works unless the wagon clogs, which doesn't happen before mining productivity 200 + !! Then it's time to change the module in the beacon for a slower one.

up to mning prod 250.png (674.58 KiB) Viewed 225 times

I wouldn't say it's more complex than asteroid rerolling but hey who knows ...

[CyberCider]

… to instead use grenade upcycler, … and really this means upcycling coal at the ore patch.

“You said one thing, but really you meant another thing”

Yeah, sorry, this is just not how human conversation works.

i heard those bad boyz are "relatively" more complex than asteroid shuffler.

No, you didn’t hear that, because I didn’t say it. In fact, if you had been reading my posts (which I’m starting to doubt), you would have seen me use ore recycling as an example of what quality shouldn’t be. I call space casino too simple by calling it nearly as simple as ore recycling. I’m really sorry, but your posts are starting to sound suspiciously like bait. You are not putting in even the bare minimum of effort to contribute to this discussion. Seeing as not only your messages lack any substance, but you’re also refusing to correctly interpret my messages. Honestly I think I’ll just stop interacting with you, and I advise anyone else in this thread to do the same.

[Shulmeister]

But upcycling coal at ore patch is already possible, it should be removed too, because it's too simple , the proper way should be to upcycle grenade !

Have you seen that on a guide somewhere ?

No, only on this thread, i'm curious

Well here is one

I meant upcycling grenades

Seeing as not only your messages lack any substance, but you’re also refusing to correctly interpret my messages. Honestly I think I’ll just stop interacting with you, and I advise anyone else in this thread to do the same.

can we still have the math for the grenade upcycler ?

[CyberCider]

But upcycling coal at ore patch is already possible, it should be removed too, because it's too simple , the proper way should be to upcycle grenade !

To be honest with you, since I originally started this thread, I have learned a lot about quality. And I have learned, much to my surprise and disappointment, that coal recycling is actually viable. It has inferior resource efficiency to grenade upcycling, but higher throughput. And depending on individual tastes and the power possessed at the current point of the playthrough, this can place coal recycling as the “best” method for obtaining quality coal/plastic. I think this sucks, but it’s not the result of a singular exploit, and rather just unfortunate circumstances. So it would be much harder to address, as it’s not a matter of an exploit patch, but rather an actual rebalance.

So, honestly, this is one case where I genuinely believe space casino brings something good to the game by ensuring coal recycling isn’t a competitive option. If you ask me, I would be totally willing to accept a compromise of this nature:

LDS casting, lava metal recipes, and both kinds of metallic asteroid crushing are given a property that makes them wipe the quality of their ingredients, always starting from common no matter what quality the ingredients were. This way, every harmful aspect of space casino is neutralized (iron, copper, stone), but players are also never encouraged to build coal recycling, because space coal is better. And again, I absolutely find asteroid rerolling to be preferable to ore/plate recycling, sometimes referred to as “washing” in the community.

I don’t think this would be the ideal outcome. That would be a world where the foundry is able to craft solid LDS, placing LDS upcycling as undisputably the best source of quality plastic. This way quality modules could be cut from asteroid recipes cleanly and simply, without arbitrary differences between individual recipes, and coal recycling would still be overshadowed by a more complex alternative. But I don’t think either of these can be expected to be implemented by the devs, and we are most likely to end up in a world where coal recycling is unfortunately widely used. But, I don’t know, maybe it’s nice to see that we don’t totally disagree.

Edit:

can we still have the math for the grenade upcycler ?

Sure, as soon as I’m able to.

[Shulmeister]

But upcycling coal at ore patch is already possible, it should be removed too, because it's too simple , the proper way should be to upcycle grenade !

To be honest with you, since I originally started this thread, I have learned a lot about quality. And I have learned, much to my surprise and disappointment, that coal recycling is actually viable. It has inferior resource efficiency to grenade upcycling, but higher throughput. And depending on individual tastes and the power possessed at the current point of the playthrough, this can place coal recycling as the “best” method for obtaining quality coal/plastic. I think this sucks, but it’s not the result of a singular exploit, and rather just unfortunate circumstances. So it would be much harder to address, as it’s not a matter of an exploit patch, but rather an actual rebalance.

You do realize that it's just what mmmPI was saying but i tried saying differently ?

Do you have any math to show for the grenade recycler to compare ? because for now apart from you changing stance there's not much that feels conclusive.

[CyberCider]

You do realize that it's just what mmmPI was saying but i tried saying differently ?

Not really? mmmPi accused me of calling coal recycling more complex than asteroid rerolling, which I never did. I called grenade upcycling more complex than asteroid rerolling, because it definitely is, but that’s a different statement. You said that there’s a hole in my argument because the removal of asteroid rerolling would shift one part of the meta towards ore recycling, which is even worse. And this I agree with, although I wasn’t aware of it until relatively recently, which is why it never came up earlier in this thread.

Do you have any math to show for the grenade recycler to compare ? because for now apart from you changing stance there's not much that feels conclusive.

Again, as soon as I’m able to. I’m returning home in 3-4 days now, I’ll post it then.

[Shulmeister]

You said that there’s a hole in my argument because the removal of asteroid rerolling would shift one part of the meta towards ore recycling, which is even worse. And this I agree with, although I wasn’t aware of it until relatively recently, which is why it never came up earlier in this thread.

That's what mmmPI said I'm sure he'll appreciate you don't have to tell him.

Here is a video that may help , to learn some of the things mentionned that seemed unfamiliar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umetTHC9pTA

Again, as soon as I’m able to. I’m returning home in 3-4 days now, I’ll post it then.

Ah thanks ! maybe the beginning of a new guide !

[crimsonarmy]

But upcycling coal at ore patch is already possible, it should be removed too, because it's too simple , the proper way should be to upcycle grenade !

To be honest with you, since I originally started this thread, I have learned a lot about quality. And I have learned, much to my surprise and disappointment, that coal recycling is actually viable. It has inferior resource efficiency to grenade upcycling, but higher throughput. And depending on individual tastes and the power possessed at the current point of the playthrough, this can place coal recycling as the “best” method for obtaining quality coal/plastic. I think this sucks, but it’s not the result of a singular exploit, and rather just unfortunate circumstances. So it would be much harder to address, as it’s not a matter of an exploit patch, but rather an actual rebalance.

So, honestly, this is one case where I genuinely believe space casino brings something good to the game by ensuring coal recycling isn’t a competitive option. If you ask me, I would be totally willing to accept a compromise of this nature:

LDS casting, lava metal recipes, and both kinds of metallic asteroid crushing are given a property that makes them wipe the quality of their ingredients, always starting from common no matter what quality the ingredients were. This way, every harmful aspect of space casino is neutralized (iron, copper, stone), but players are also never encouraged to build coal recycling, because space coal is better. And again, I absolutely find asteroid rerolling to be preferable to ore/plate recycling, sometimes referred to as “washing” in the community.

I don’t think this would be the ideal outcome. That would be a world where the foundry is able to craft solid LDS, placing LDS upcycling as undisputably the best source of quality plastic. This way quality modules could be cut from asteroid recipes cleanly and simply, without arbitrary differences between individual recipes, and coal recycling would still be overshadowed by a more complex alternative. But I don’t think either of these can be expected to be implemented by the devs, and we are most likely to end up in a world where coal recycling is unfortunately widely used. But, I don’t know, maybe it’s nice to see that we don’t totally disagree.

As I see it there are five ways upcyling works:
1. Low efficiency high throughput low to mid complexity: dumb ore upcyling, iron chest upcycling, etc.
2. High efficiency low throughput mid complexity: casino, blue circuit upcycling, etc.
3. mid efficiency mid throughput mid complexity: most upcyclers
4. high efficiency high throughput high complexity: entire production chain quality, optimized postgame casino, etc.
5. ultrahigh efficiency ultrahigh throughput low complexity: LDS shuffle (I wonder why people think this is overpowered )