Factorio Forums

Bauer wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:59 am What we need is a sexy idea how to introduce a new concept that is adequate for late game. I'm sure that a 20x20 miner is not the answer.

This is a very good point! I'll think about it.
And I just came up with something. Railway mobile miner. It's a special wagon that mines ore in width range while on station (or special kind of station).
Player needs to pave the railway and electric line through multiple ore patches, and train with multiple miners will drain them sequentially.
I didn't figure out how to deliver ore from miner to production (miner itself shouldn't do that), and what additional infrastructure such miner might require. It's just a concept yet.

To make my point even clearer.

Let's have a look at logistics:
If you want to transport 13 iron ore from A to B, you put it in your inventory and walk. This is the quickest, easiest, and most economical solution.
If you need to transport 13 iron ore from A to B per second, walking is still possible, but obviously not ideal. A transport belt is the obvious answer.
What is not obvious is how to make good belt designs. After a few '000 hrs of game play and after seeing other people's solutions, a player learns how to use belts, but the amount of posts about belts in this forum and on reddit prove that it's not trivial. That's good, because it's the fun part of the game.
If you need to transport much more iron ore, belt's are no longer the answer. The game provides a completely different concept, aka trains, making us learn again how to use the mechanics. Again, not a trivial but rewarding job.
[For some logistics jobs, obviously bots is the best solution, and also this concept has a devil in the details when scaling up. However.]
My point is: If a job becomes tedious when growing big, a new concept is introduced to the player, allowing him to scale up. This is repeated again and again unit we hit he ceiling, aka UPS limit.

If you think about it, this is true for many concepts:
- hand crafting --> assembly machines --> modules/blue prints (think about how much this changes the factory design!)
- gun -> ... -> tank -> ... -> capsules -> ... -> artillery (not sure about the exact order, depends on playstyle)
- PLC: manual insertion -> backpressure -> intelligent splitters -> ... -> combinator logic

If I ignore that a player might mine a few iron ore or coal in the first few minutes of the game, there is no such progression in mining.
You find yourself an ore patch, slam down a few miners and setup means of ore transportation. This is exactly the same for the early game when you use the burner miner and for the late game when you blue print rows of miners with modules and logistics chests or blue belts:

1. Manually (i.e. non-automated) search of an ore patch
2. Place miners -- the layout of miners is almost the same throughout the game (and only changes due to logistic choices)
3. When the patch is outmined: Manual interaction required (tearing down of old setup and GOTO 1)

In the late game your bots will help with 2, but no significantly other design is inspired by an improved mining mechanism.
There is no game mechanism to support upscaling. To develop 10 ore patches is exactly 10 times the job of the development of 1 ore patch.
The game actually makes the player ignore this fact by (completely unrealistically and artifically) providing bigger ore patches with increasing distance from the starting area. Thus, the search-develop-abandon cycle more-or-less keeps up to the increasing pace of you exponentially growing factory. But it doesn't make it less tedious.

The introduction of a completely new game concept is unlikely to happen before v1.0.

However, as mentioned before, having programable vehicules would be such a concept.
Radars could scan the map for ore patches and the existing combinator logic could be used similar to the AAI mod.

The beauty of it is: It could also be used to take the automation of base-defense to the next level. Pushing the wall further out becomes really tedious after a while. I'd see some beauty in having an automated, vehicule based defended perimeter that can be expanded by setting parameters in a constant combinator.

The problem is:
The typical non-engineer player would be completely overwhelmed/overburdened by having to design a complex program with combinators. High level programing languages have been invented for a reason! Not everyone of us is a DaveMcW, at al.

I'm highly qualified programmer, but I barely use circuit network, maximum systems of 2-3 combinators for simple logic. Do not misunderstand me, I very like circuit engine, but it is a game within a game, and I don't want to play it. It's funny to play with in sandbox, but not to build entire factory around it. For me the beauty of Factorio is in analog gameplay.
And for most players circuit network is way to difficult.
Neither circuit network or any programmable entities should be strictly required for comfortable end-game.
I don't think expansion will ever be automated through common tools. I'm not sure it is even possible.

Insert random
"its ok that the vanilla game is underdeveloped in its content because there are mods out there. muh" - BS-Argument.

Hannu wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:35 am

Bauer wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:59 amWhat we need is a sexy idea how to introduce a new concept that is adequate for late game. I'm sure that a 20x20 miner is not the answer.

I agree. Increasing size and speed of the miners would give a bigger factories, but it is difficult to see any real and interesting change. Megabase builders would just build more assemblers and continue whining about UPS but there would not be any new and interesting planning challenges.

I understand where you come from. However you should know that, adding just 1 bigger mining drill wasn't the intention, adding multiple levels of excavators Going from basic electric miners to massive machines( I say massive in a 100x100 mine-able area bucket wheel that moves along a set path) that have crazy recipes all needing a quantity of the previous tier miner to be built. These miners would move late game mining from simply placing the same deposit blueprint over and over to placing 1 massive object that generates tons of pollution(being something you have to defend because its a large investment). But also outputs ore at a scale that the logistics of moving it would become an even bigger challenge(maybe it outputs more then a blue belt and you would need to feed tape train cars for it). this would help the ups issue, and yes i know that feeds right into your " they will only build it bigger" point However that is Factorio in a nutshell, the ability to build your factory and always expand with an ever increasing arsenal of tools, machines, and weapons.

Rjskeet wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 4:56 pm

Bauer wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:59 amWhat we need is a sexy idea how to introduce a new concept that is adequate for late game. I'm sure that a 20x20 miner is not the answer.

I understand where you come from. However you should know that, adding just 1 bigger mining drill wasn't the intention, adding multiple levels of excavators Going from basic electric miners to massive machines( I say massive in a 100x100 mine-able area bucket wheel that moves along a set path) that have crazy recipes all needing a quantity of the previous tier miner to be built. These miners would move late game mining from simply placing the same deposit blueprint over and over to placing 1 massive object that generates tons of pollution(being something you have to defend because its a large investment). But also outputs ore at a scale that the logistics of moving it would become an even bigger challenge(maybe it outputs more then a blue belt and you would need to feed tape train cars for it). this would help the ups issue, and yes i know that feeds right into your " they will only build it bigger" point However that is Factorio in a nutshell, the ability to build your factory and always expand with an ever increasing arsenal of tools, machines, and weapons.

I think even a 100x100 miner, built from 1500 steel(+stuff) that needs a nuclear plant to run isnt gonna do it.
Even tho i like the idea (i thought about that myself). It would make nuclear more popular. What better excuse can you have?

.) Anything that isn´t a placed entity isn´t realy likely to make it into the base game. Controlling that is far beyond what manageable for a casual player. Thats something for mods.
.)Even without moving, it would be such a huge leap from the base game, that i don´t think the devs would like the idea.
That being said, its not out of the question, but it should be made into a mod. If anything, that would be a proof of concept and can be looked at and finetuned.

Im still in favor of small things that can be used, but shouldn´t be needed. Just this afternoon i found an intersting "rant" about catalysts at Bob´s section of the forum, that i think is about the same thing when you look at it from a wider angle.
Just making another entity isn´t gonna cut it, this is about a bit more of complexity.

GrumpyJoe wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 5:25 pm

Rjskeet wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 4:56 pm

Bauer wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:59 amWhat we need is a sexy idea how to introduce a new concept that is adequate for late game. I'm sure that a 20x20 miner is not the answer.

I understand where you come from. However you should know that, adding just 1 bigger mining drill wasn't the intention, adding multiple levels of excavators Going from basic electric miners to massive machines( I say massive in a 100x100 mine-able area bucket wheel that moves along a set path) that have crazy recipes all needing a quantity of the previous tier miner to be built. These miners would move late game mining from simply placing the same deposit blueprint over and over to placing 1 massive object that generates tons of pollution(being something you have to defend because its a large investment). But also outputs ore at a scale that the logistics of moving it would become an even bigger challenge(maybe it outputs more then a blue belt and you would need to feed tape train cars for it). this would help the ups issue, and yes i know that feeds right into your " they will only build it bigger" point However that is Factorio in a nutshell, the ability to build your factory and always expand with an ever increasing arsenal of tools, machines, and weapons.

I think even a 100x100 miner, built from 1500 steel(+stuff) that needs a nuclear plant to run isnt gonna do it.
Even tho i like the idea (i thought about that myself). It would make nuclear more popular. What better excuse can you have?

.) Anything that isn´t a placed entity isn´t realy likely to make it into the base game. Controlling that is far beyond what manageable for a casual player. Thats something for mods.
.)Even without moving, it would be such a huge leap from the base game, that i don´t think the devs would like the idea.
That being said, its not out of the question, but it should be made into a mod. If anything, that would be a proof of concept and can be looked at and finetuned.

Im still in favor of small things that can be used, but shouldn´t be needed. Just this afternoon i found an intersting "rant" about catalysts at Bob´s section of the forum, that i think is about the same thing when you look at it from a wider angle.
Just making another entity isn´t gonna cut it, this is about a bit more of complexity.

that is a good point, but as it stands outpost construction is still very cute and paste I think we can all agree, breaking up the monotony of the late game is the overall goal. Also there is a mod ( https://mods.factorio.com/mod/BigDrills/downloads )this is what really inspired me to make the post because using it feels alot better then making outpost that look all the same.

Bauer wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:59 am Factorio a game about automation. (Hand-crafting --> (assembly) machines)
And about the automation of automation. (Hand-placing --> blue prints/bots)

Mining and alien annihilation are the only things in late game that cannot be "level 2" automated.

The artillerie is a move in the right direction for the alien thing. It doesn't move your defence line automatically, though.
For mining, we have nothing. When a patch is empty, you have to develop a new patch in mid-game style. By walking there and placing blueprint "fragments" and adding a lot of stuff manually. Even if you use bots to bring the stuff from the miner to the train staition.

What we need is a sexy idea how to introduce a new concept that is adequate for late game. I'm sure that a 20x20 miner is not the answer.

I think we should get something more mobile. A mobile ore harvesting unit. Slow enough that you would still need trains to transport the ore, but fast enough to make a handful of them at least as efficient as electric miners. Replacing a whole ore patch of miners with a handful of harvesters would be a real ups reducer. Of course they would need to be cost balanced.

Something huge like this: https://www.starwars.com/databank/sandcrawler

I'd be happy with a miner that takes 4x the resources to build and covers 4x the area at 4x the speed. Then another that's 16x both.

Maybe with a filter so you can tell it to only mine ore of a certain type, as you're just asking it to overlap ore patches if it's big enough.

Maybe with some extra resources to build to add that filter.

Tip: For end game mining use the minimum density. That way the patches last longer and you maximize the ore gained per click.

Individually placed mines is a lot of clicks! The pure row of miners is the best setup for all circumstances.
- Run down a row of miners
- run up a belt
- Run down a row of miners
- Run up a row of poles
Done. Four clicks.

bobucles wrote: Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:02 pm

Tip: For end game mining use the minimum density. That way the patches last longer and you maximize the ore gained per click.

Individually placed mines is a lot of clicks! The pure row of miners is the best setup for all circumstances.
- Run down a row of miners
- run up a belt
- Run down a row of miners
- Run up a row of poles
Done. Four clicks.

This is exactly what the problem is, do that about 300 times and then you wonder why you do it and that it's about 1/3 of your game is doing the same action over and over.

Isn't the *click on a blueprint* *plonk the blueprint on the ore patch* faster ?

Rjskeet wrote: Fri Feb 01, 2019 4:56 pm I understand where you come from. However you should know that, adding just 1 bigger mining drill wasn't the intention, adding multiple levels of excavators Going from basic electric miners to massive machines( I say massive in a 100x100 mine-able area bucket wheel that moves along a set path) that have crazy recipes all needing a quantity of the previous tier miner to be built. These miners would move late game mining from simply placing the same deposit blueprint over and over to placing 1 massive object that generates tons of pollution(being something you have to defend because its a large investment).

Pollution or cost of infrastructure are not issues at megabase phase. If you see statistics, you can notice that only few percents of mined materials are used to build things. In my opinion it is bad balancing and the game would be more interesting if building would actually cost something. Also the biters are not real threat at late phase. It is easy and cheap to build double wall and line of laser turrets and there are no enemies in vanilla game which can break through such a line. I think that most megabase builders turn off biters and pollution because they need CPU cycles.

However that is Factorio in a nutshell, the ability to build your factory and always expand with an ever increasing arsenal of tools, machines, and weapons.

OK, I understand that, even I like to have more complexity than simple tiers to produce more. But in my opinion base game is quite well balanced and have good amount of content. When advanced players want more challenge they have versatile options to mod their game to fit their personal preferences. There are mods for higher tier production facilities, like huge miners, and crazy expensive research things. And also mods for complexity, advanced automation, reality based and fictive things etc., almost whatever you want.
On the other hand, superminer would not probably need huge programming effort and it would fit well to megabase philosophy, which is probably the most common playstyle for advanced players. There are no very good reasons to actively resist it, if devs want to add it.

Koub wrote: Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:50 am Isn't the *click on a blueprint* *plonk the blueprint on the ore patch* faster ?

Yeah I was thinking the same thing.

Once you get to a certain point in the game, "plonking down BPs" is just the scale that the game ends up being. Which is also why I enjoy using Whistle Stop Factories (lol.)

I suggest 2 alternatives:
Conbot research - Expensive (and end-game) research that lets you decon planner an ore patch. Each construction robot would pick up "RobotCapacityBonus" amount of ore from each tile, and deliver it to the logistics network chests.

Deployable Drill Traincars - Large deployable area drills (14x14) which feed ore directly into adjacent cargo carriages. The size of the drills must be at least 14 wide, due to the center of the adjacent traincar being 7 tiles (inclusive) from the centerpoint of the drill car. This would let you plunk down a trainstop, in which you sacrifice train capacity for ease of ore deposit placement. Trains are logically the next scale for the game, and would reduce the number of active entities significantly.

Deep mining

a big drill, that needs to be placed in a unique place on the map, which can only be found by launching a satellite
you can upgrade it, every upgrade gets more expensive and adds for example one blue belt of ore as constant output.
power drain will be insane, pollution will be massive and the biters will hate it.
each ore type wil have one drill spot, of course on the other end of the map

benefits:
saves ups for lategame
transport, defense and exploration will be challenging

JimBarracus wrote: Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:39 pm a big drill, that needs to be placed in a unique place on the map, which can only be found by launching a satellite
you can upgrade it, every upgrade gets more expensive and adds for example one blue belt of ore as constant output.
power drain will be insane, pollution will be massive and the biters will hate it.
each ore type wil have one drill spot, of course on the other end of the map

This kind of an idea would be quite interesting. It would bring some new elements and solve need of huge resource flow. There could be more spots, for example dedicated uses, but not more than one in 10 square kilometers and no spots less than 5 km from spawning point.

Koub wrote: Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:50 am Isn't the *click on a blueprint* *plonk the blueprint on the ore patch* faster ?

Indeed it is, but putting down a blueprint and waiting 2 min( depends on a lot of factors I know) for your bots to place everything is still quite boring.

JimBarracus wrote: Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:39 pm Deep mining

a big drill, that needs to be placed in a unique place on the map, which can only be found by launching a satellite
you can upgrade it, every upgrade gets more expensive and adds for example one blue belt of ore as constant output.
power drain will be insane, pollution will be massive and the biters will hate it.
each ore type wil have one drill spot, of course on the other end of the map

benefits:
saves ups for lategame
transport, defense and exploration will be challenging

I really sympathies with this idea purely because it adds late game content and more purposes to the rocket, that being by adding more satellite options, for example the research satellite, survey satellite( surveying for density or something), and lastly the observation satellite( basically massive active radar with a timer on it ).