Factorio Forums

meganothing wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2026 3:53 pmAnd just like almost all the problems of Nauvis in 1.0 could be almost trivially solved as well through throwing more area and machines or more time at it, the space platform problems are trivially solvable with a crude design just copied or extended a few times. But nobody wants to do this, we all want an efficient effective beautiful design to some degree. The developers seem to agree when they initially made quality a requirement: "This was somewhat intentional, when designing 2.0 and feeling out the balancing, we knew some things would be tougher if you didn't have quality items, such as Space platform design. Having a few high quality solar panels, accumulators, or such, made a big impact on the effectivity of Platforms.". Instead of using quality panels for example just more panels would solve those problems as well, but nobody seems to accept this as a good solution.

Don't underestimate memetics. People just learn that you're "supposed" to do quality ship components because they're so much more powerful, and they just accept it as their baseline understanding and then spread the behavior to other people.

But I can at least understand panels since they take up so much space and it can be annoying to have to stretch out a ship if you didn't allocate enough space for them in the first draft.

The one that really flummoxes me is people talking like asteroid collectors are worthless without being higher quality. I mean, sure I can see that the arms would give them a lot more throughput, and maybe that would be important in specialized industrial platforms, but my platforms are drowning in asteroids with just the common variety collectors and I'd gain almost nothing by making them higher quality.

Hurkyl wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 6:20 pm Don't underestimate memetics. People just learn that you're "supposed" to do quality ship components because they're so much more powerful, and they just accept it as their baseline understanding and then spread the behavior to other people.

But I can at least understand panels since they take up so much space and it can be annoying to have to stretch out a ship if you didn't allocate enough space for them in the first draft.

The one that really flummoxes me is people talking like asteroid collectors are worthless without being higher quality. I mean, sure I can see that the arms would give them a lot more throughput, and maybe that would be important in specialized industrial platforms, but my platforms are drowning in asteroids with just the common variety collectors and I'd gain almost nothing by making them higher quality.

It is really funny before 2.1 where you basically had rocket silos dumping 10 asteroid collectors per batch if left unattended, meaning you get way more asteroid collectors than you would ever need, with just one Rocketload.

The ships that Speedrunners use for the early planets, have like one singular Common Asteroid Collector on them, sometimes a second one off to the side, and sometimes JUST the one off to the side. (fun fact: space age is almost sub-200-minutes by now)

You get way more Asteroids on the Planet Routes than you would ever need for even a big ship, so there is nothing to worry about with the Collectors. All that Quality does is make your ship more compact, resulting in maybe a single Rocketload less of Space Platforms and that is it.

And yeah, the reason space casinos were too damn popular was because all the famous Youtubers just HAD to show off the exploit after it was declared as "to be patched" by the devs, yet the devs are the ones that get blamed for removing it, BECAUSE it became popular afterwards...

GregoriusT wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 7:09 pm And yeah, the reason space casinos were too damn popular was because all the famous Youtubers just HAD to show off the exploit after it was declared as "to be patched" by the devs, yet the devs are the ones that get blamed for removing it, BECAUSE it became popular afterwards...

And now they are showing how to void fluid by rapidly changing receipe on LDS shuffle

mmmPI wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 7:17 pm

GregoriusT wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 7:09 pm And yeah, the reason space casinos were too damn popular was because all the famous Youtubers just HAD to show off the exploit after it was declared as "to be patched" by the devs, yet the devs are the ones that get blamed for removing it, BECAUSE it became popular afterwards...

And now they are showing how to void fluid by rapidly changing receipe on LDS shuffle

Which is funny because now stack inserters work well enough with lava.

GregoriusT wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 8:00 pm

mmmPI wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 7:17 pm

GregoriusT wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 7:09 pm And yeah, the reason space casinos were too damn popular was because all the famous Youtubers just HAD to show off the exploit after it was declared as "to be patched" by the devs, yet the devs are the ones that get blamed for removing it, BECAUSE it became popular afterwards...

And now they are showing how to void fluid by rapidly changing receipe on LDS shuffle

Which is funny because now stack inserters work well enough with lava.

Sorry for my confuse wording, that's 2 different exploits, you void fluid when you want legendary stone, that's an exploit that was in the game and is still here. That's part how those that were left alone and that youtubers are showing new players.

The LDS being another one, that was made easier to use with that change you mention where inserter void into lava faster, so you can use it for easy legendary copper or steel and void the other faster.

GregoriusT wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2026 7:09 pm And yeah, the reason space casinos were too damn popular was because all the famous Youtubers just HAD to show off the exploit after it was declared as "to be patched" by the devs, yet the devs are the ones that get blamed for removing it, BECAUSE it became popular afterwards...

Who are we to blame for that though? Showing cool features and builds is kinda what the youtubers do. I dunno it's like removing blueprints from the game because Nilaus shares his blueprints so too many players copy them which is potentially an undesirable play pattern.

That's an interesting point, i found myself preventing player joining my multiplayer game to import blueprint recently because i find it more interesting to redesign using the new mechanics of 2.1, lane swiching for inserter changes a lot of things to me in the little details, and the circuit "else" and the ability to choose color wire has so far been the most impactful changes. Unfortunatly some players didn't read or respected the description, so i had to take action to avoid "undesirable play pattern "

I have noticed Nilaus was redoing a serie for 2.1 with new blueprints, i have no doubt players will use them at some point, those are quite popular but i personnaly think it's more interesting to learn how they are made , by watching the series rather than using the actual blueprints. And i'm not saying that just because Nilaus explained very well how space casino are fun and interesting to make. I watched the other videos too "how to make quality without space Casino" by several youtubers, to have an idea of what a person seeking for walkthrough or tutorial may find on the internet nowadays. I feel they will be presented with LDS a lot, recycling iron chest, or pipes. And to develop a bit more about the fluid voiding : you do quality on Vulcanus and not in space anymore, so you mine the calcite and upcycle it stone, voiding the molten fluid. You do EVERYTHING from lava on Vulcanus without needing much logistic since you can create lava with nukes near large calcite deposit.

mmmPI wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 12:26 amNilaus was redoing a serie for 2.1 with new blueprints

I have watched Nilaus for quite a while and his blueprints honestly feel like they get worse with every generation of his masterclass series. Like he clearly knows plenty of space saving and efficient belting techniques, but seems to forget about them completely in the next iteration, resulting in much bigger setups for the same end result. He does not even try to make use of the better Rail curves to make his train stations smaller, in fact they are huge now compared to what he did before.

What i dislike most about the internet blueprints is, that people dont even frikkin know what it is that they copypaste into the World. You cant just have a Bufferchest Logistics based upcycler in a Storagechest based Logistics Base, especially not one that eats up literally all the Tungsten Carbide >.>

There definitely should be more options for preventing importing of blueprints without blocking stuff like smaller blueprints (like the grid aligned landmine, or the Turret with Ammo inside, or the pre-fueled Car)

GregoriusT wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 1:56 am

mmmPI wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 12:26 amNilaus was redoing a serie for 2.1 with new blueprints

I have watched Nilaus for quite a while and his blueprints honestly feel like they get worse with every generation of his masterclass series. Like he clearly knows plenty of space saving and efficient belting techniques, but seems to forget about them completely in the next iteration, resulting in much bigger setups for the same end result. He does not even try to make use of the better Rail curves to make his train stations smaller, in fact they are huge now compared to what he did before.

What i dislike most about the internet blueprints is, that people dont even frikkin know what it is that they copypaste into the World. You cant just have a Bufferchest Logistics based upcycler in a Storagechest based Logistics Base, especially not one that eats up literally all the Tungsten Carbide >.>

There definitely should be more options for preventing importing of blueprints without blocking stuff like smaller blueprints (like the grid aligned landmine, or the Turret with Ammo inside, or the pre-fueled Car)

With the caveat that I don't follow his series so I don't know if any of this applies, one might care more to optimize for ease of building, and so prefer a larger print that is easier to build by hand over a more compact but complicated to build print. Or one might prefer to optimize for composability: a set of prints designed to smoothly fit with one another to reduce effort in placing things. Or a small collection of prints that let you quickly solve lots of problems less efficiently than a larger collection of stovepipes that are more efficient builds. One might prefer transparency so if you go back to look at a build 6 months from now you know instantly what everything does rather than having to navigate through a more complicated, compact build.

mmmPI wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 12:26 am That's an interesting point, i found myself preventing player joining my multiplayer game to import blueprint recently because i find it more interesting to redesign using the new mechanics of 2.1, lane swiching for inserter changes a lot of things to me in the little details, and the circuit "else" and the ability to choose color wire has so far been the most impactful changes. Unfortunatly some players didn't read or respected the description, so i had to take action to avoid "undesirable play pattern "

I have noticed Nilaus was redoing a serie for 2.1 with new blueprints, i have no doubt players will use them at some point, those are quite popular but i personnaly think it's more interesting to learn how they are made , by watching the series rather than using the actual blueprints. And i'm not saying that just because Nilaus explained very well how space casino are fun and interesting to make. I watched the other videos too "how to make quality without space Casino" by several youtubers, to have an idea of what a person seeking for walkthrough or tutorial may find on the internet nowadays. I feel they will be presented with LDS a lot, recycling iron chest, or pipes. And to develop a bit more about the fluid voiding : you do quality on Vulcanus and not in space anymore, so you mine the calcite and upcycle it stone, voiding the molten fluid. You do EVERYTHING from lava on Vulcanus without needing much logistic since you can create lava with nukes near large calcite deposit.

I mean I don't use anyone else's blueprints myself aside from odd balancer here and there. Still borrow some ideas from the builds I like, but that's besides the point. The point was that if every time a portion of playerbase does something that might be considered as 'wrong' play pattern they'd remove it as a feature, then blueprints would be gone next, because apparently there's some players that copy blueprints instead of designing their own.

That's why this crackdown on "misused" features is bothersome to me. I understand patching out things like "if ship is too long then asteroids don't spawn" exploits in closed beta, but after 1.5 years of release flipping the switch casinos just doesn't sit well with me. Honestly even 'ablative armor' for ships with landmines was a strange decision, because to me that felt like "no fun allowed, you will build platforms the intended way or not build it at all", but at least that was more or less a hotfix.

In general it seems like taking down the "exploits" is a priority even over maintaining smooth gameplay experience like the passthrough port change shows, which to me feels backwards.

KuuLightwing wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 7:06 am

mmmPI wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 12:26 am That's an interesting point, i found myself preventing player joining my multiplayer game to import blueprint recently because i find it more interesting to redesign using the new mechanics of 2.1, lane swiching for inserter changes a lot of things to me in the little details, and the circuit "else" and the ability to choose color wire has so far been the most impactful changes. Unfortunatly some players didn't read or respected the description, so i had to take action to avoid "undesirable play pattern "

I have noticed Nilaus was redoing a serie for 2.1 with new blueprints, i have no doubt players will use them at some point, those are quite popular but i personnaly think it's more interesting to learn how they are made , by watching the series rather than using the actual blueprints. And i'm not saying that just because Nilaus explained very well how space casino are fun and interesting to make. I watched the other videos too "how to make quality without space Casino" by several youtubers, to have an idea of what a person seeking for walkthrough or tutorial may find on the internet nowadays. I feel they will be presented with LDS a lot, recycling iron chest, or pipes. And to develop a bit more about the fluid voiding : you do quality on Vulcanus and not in space anymore, so you mine the calcite and upcycle it stone, voiding the molten fluid. You do EVERYTHING from lava on Vulcanus without needing much logistic since you can create lava with nukes near large calcite deposit.

I mean I don't use anyone else's blueprints myself aside from odd balancer here and there. Still borrow some ideas from the builds I like, but that's besides the point. The point was that if every time a portion of playerbase does something that might be considered as 'wrong' play pattern they'd remove it as a feature, then blueprints would be gone next, because apparently there's some players that copy blueprints instead of designing their own.

That's why this crackdown on "misused" features is bothersome to me. I understand patching out things like "if ship is too long then asteroids don't spawn" exploits in closed beta, but after 1.5 years of release flipping the switch casinos just doesn't sit well with me. Honestly even 'ablative armor' for ships with landmines was a strange decision, because to me that felt like "no fun allowed, you will build platforms the intended way or not build it at all", but at least that was more or less a hotfix.

In general it seems like taking down the "exploits" is a priority even over maintaining smooth gameplay experience like the passthrough port change shows, which to me feels backwards.

Some forum users posts a theory that youtubers might have prompted Wube to nerf or disable space casinos. You now seem to argue as if it was a fact. Isn't that a bit premature?

GregoriusT wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 1:56 am I have watched Nilaus for quite a while and his blueprints honestly feel like they get worse with every generation of his masterclass series. Like he clearly knows plenty of space saving and efficient belting techniques, but seems to forget about them completely in the next iteration, resulting in much bigger setups for the same end result. He does not even try to make use of the better Rail curves to make his train stations smaller, in fact they are huge now compared to what he did before.

I feel this is subjective, to me it's a style that matures, it's different than what speedrunners do, those are videos i watch too, or DoshDoshington, or Trupen , those are (very) different playstyles to me. And also the videos, Nilaus you can follow along, it's relaxing, most players can use the blueprint it would make sense for them, AntiElitz you can't follow along, those are the first factorio video i knew of, you can use the blueprint if you want to but it's unlikely those are the "good" blueprints to follow for most players, it's made for if you play super fast, if you have good knowledge of the game and if the goal is the win screen. You learn different tricks. I do not "watch" megabaser because i feel it's a bit boring to me but i enjoy reading and seeing pictures and spreadsheets lol, i feel it's yet another playstyle which teach different things too. Nilaus blueprints are mostly done "on camera", and it's super hard to do math "on camera", so there is also time "off camera" to pick up the good ideas from the community, that's also what makes youtuber blueprint's "special". I feel if Nilaus "style" was to make compact blueprint, he would have super compact one, because people would tell him during the twich videos. I do not have the same building style as Nilaus, i build more compact and more messy, so i get part of the criticism you make, but to a friend who's on the younger side of me who wouldn't be a programmer and struggle in the game i would 100% recommend them Nilaus videos. Not to copy the blueprint , rather discover the mindset, and the techniques, to understand how to make their own blueprints. Like if they played competitive FPS or MOBA before. It doesn't mean it's what my games looks like, i think the fun comes from the self imposed challenge personnally, my games look like someone had vaguely tried a Dosh idea, but had too many Trupen's moment to complete the task.

GregoriusT wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 1:56 am What i dislike most about the internet blueprints is, that people dont even frikkin know what it is that they copypaste into the World. You cant just have a Bufferchest Logistics based upcycler in a Storagechest based Logistics Base, especially not one that eats up literally all the Tungsten Carbide >.>

I do share the feeling, and i feel it's the worst, because blueprints are great, when "used properly". You mention a very ojective case of failure to use properly the blueprint found on the internet. But most often i even dislike more subjective things, when it's functionning but not aligned with the goal of the map. Since i played "a lot" the game, apart from "now" when it's just new 2.1 reset things a bit, i have changed the settings , added mod, and seek for self-imposed challenge more and more, where the whole point is to not have a ready-to-use-solution from previous game, when i feel they are good enough, like i've peaked, it's too comfortable to use, i have to change the goal to make the "optimal" design different, make a new puzzle for myself. And here when player uses blueprints from the internet, sometimes i recognize it, i have it too, and i have others that i feel are also "genereic" from another youtuber or another serie that would be more appropriate for the particular game/ level of tech / objectives / modpacks. I'd be disliking the use of blueprint "more" when it's not the proper ones. Robots can be in this case more prone to misuse than belts or self contained-blueprint, i can see that But really, it's not about the blueprints, it's about the players with whom you play, and it's sad but expected that the more you play the less you find players that have played as much and have the same feelings about the game.

GregoriusT wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 1:56 am There definitely should be more options for preventing importing of blueprints without blocking stuff like smaller blueprints (like the grid aligned landmine, or the Turret with Ammo inside, or the pre-fueled Car)

If you are the host / admin you can always put them in the game blueprint yourself What all of this made me think of is that different players used different space casinos. Or should have, it was not always the case that they were using space casino when necessary or a proper blueprint and it was spoiling them from part of the content quality has to offer when using someone else's blueprint 'mindlessly'. But i think this is the case for most quality design or even blueprint in the game. Space casino were too strong , it's replaced by other blueprints where players follow the same pattern sometimes unfortunatly of using the wrong blueprints. And when looking at "what" are those blueprints, the trade off are not seen as a positive to me. Preventing imports is more of a personnal thing, whereas it's also possible to see the effect of "balance" in what builds are shown in tutorials and "how to" . Those have their category of playstyle, who adapts differently, and for those players that experience the game for the first time searching for tutorial and help, the "generic" way being space casino is no more; it's no more that great magnificent legendary spaceship that always win forever. That tricky, no robots, 1 stack-sized chunky asteroids, flying spaggethi. You can still try and make something against the game designed to make it suboptimal "all the time", but that's not something that will be experienced by players struggling to beat the game, it is reduced to a curiosity if updated for 2.1 , and for a moment new players may still see tutorials for space casino, see the two different "walkthrough" video, and decide "naa it's too much they made it for those players that have all the time in the world but not me". Or see the designs and miss the "waow finally ! " feels, the "grand finale" or something

KuuLightwing wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 7:06 am I mean I don't use anyone else's blueprints myself aside from odd balancer here and there. Still borrow some ideas from the builds I like, but that's besides the point. The point was that if every time a portion of playerbase does something that might be considered as 'wrong' play pattern they'd remove it as a feature, then blueprints would be gone next, because apparently there's some players that copy blueprints instead of designing their own.

That's why this crackdown on "misused" features is bothersome to me. I understand patching out things like "if ship is too long then asteroids don't spawn" exploits in closed beta, but after 1.5 years of release flipping the switch casinos just doesn't sit well with me. Honestly even 'ablative armor' for ships with landmines was a strange decision, because to me that felt like "no fun allowed, you will build platforms the intended way or not build it at all", but at least that was more or less a hotfix.

In general it seems like taking down the "exploits" is a priority even over maintaining smooth gameplay experience like the passthrough port change shows, which to me feels backwards.

I don't necessarily share the generalizing tone i feel in the framing of the issue. I feel there are other "exploits" that are tolerated, what is an "exploit" is arbitrary in the end. I think "space casino" as a concept isn't necessarily one, that's the whole point, it's a design exercice in itself. If the balance in the game was different , i can imagine one where it is "on par" with other method, as if you were required to have level 500 of asteroid productvity to reach a threshold where it start being viable compared to other methods, like LDS shuffling that seem acceptable because they require "enough" research for the balance.

They did say in the FFF they didn't want to be fun killers, precisely as they announced a removal intent for space casinos, they are obviously well aware it's no-fun to remove it, probably they think it's even less fun when it's there, for the reason that it was "too strong" according to the FFF, so i feel like there is a whole world for creative propositions, between "it doesn't exist" and "it's so strong it overshadows everything".

For ablative armor "with mines", i'm not too sure how the actual game is, i haven't tried that recently nor understand how the recent changes affect the balance. I feel like you can "always" use "ablative censor" to monitor the speed of your ship, if you have some empty platform ram-like at the front, and monitor damages or platform tile stock in the hub. You can have a smart "slow down" or a progressive initialization for your blueprints where the ship goes faster and faster very slowly until it reaches the first damages and then maintain a safety margin speed. Like an adaptative ship. But i don't know how "efficient/usable" they are at cleaning asteroids . It is a fun and creative concept though. The kind of stuff i feel the game would benefit from having, even if as niche.

meganothing wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 12:10 pm Some forum users posts a theory that youtubers might have prompted Wube to nerf or disable space casinos. You now seem to argue as if it was a fact. Isn't that a bit premature?

I feel like the more consensual idea is that youtubers are "influencers" , people will mimick what they see on the internet, that's even the purpose of some tutorial , they are not representative of ALL playstyles, they don't have the same audience or are made for the same players , but if "most if not all of them" chooses one particular thing over all the other in the game to showcase, it must be very interesting to some extend to showcase it or to use it in game . It's beyond one's personnal preference, it sort of shows a trend or a meta. Which then can be seen as responsible for other players mimicking that particular thing, and not finding it by themselves, causing a need to balance what is no more a "hidden gem" you get with experience that adds replayability,but rather the most well known "secret" shortcut that causes even casual player to skip some part of the game. (unfortunatly ^^ )