Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 8:52 pm
I mean the pictures name is referenced in a quote. I can't change it, it's on the server.
Factorio Forums
www.factorio.com
https://forums.factorio.com/
Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Page 14 of 15
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 8:56 pm
I don't understand what you are trying to ask me, and why me ?
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 8:59 pm
Just ignore the trollShulmeister wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 8:56 pm I don't understand what you are trying to ask me, and why me ?
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:02 pm
I mean, if we must all be held to such a high standard. Then neither of you meet it. Because you did not check the quality of your information before coming to this discussion.
Granted, if I'm angry, I can make mistake. I can also tighten my accuracy. Admitting where it wouldn't be accurate due to machine variation is reasonable. I'm not necessarily innocent. But an effort is being made.
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:36 pm
That does not explain the discrepancy 200/250 though, now i'm curious
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:46 pm
the setup is VERY easy to understand, when the mining drill produce too much ore for the recycler it can clog, which won't happen before 200 level of mining productivity, then you need a slower module on the beacon, but if you reach the 250's level, then you gonna need to move the beacon so it also touches one of the recycler, not just changing modules for a slower one, i'm surprised you ask me to explain this because it seems your copy of my great coal upcyler has already this change includedShulmeister wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:36 pm That does not explain the discrepancy 200/250 though, now i'm curious
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 10:06 pm
coffee-factorio wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 8:52 pmI mean the pictures name is referenced in a quote. I can't change it, it's on the server.
Shulmeister wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 6:49 pm
I think 250*4 is around similar value of the property for plastic and unaware of the surrounding, it appears simplistic, even useless or purposeful
That's the thing mmmPI, the picture's label was clearly enough to confuse poor Shul since 250=250. So he assumed initially that the value on the picture was 250 also. If I'm being very generous in my assumptions.Shulmeister wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:36 pmThat does not explain the discrepancy 200/250 though, now i'm curious
Such a discrepancy from someone who demands absolute accuracy from others, renders their ability to accept criticism very questionable.
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 10:14 pm
Indeed, i made the change because it appears the only way for the setup not to clog, i learned this trick from 123768mmmPI wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:46 pm the setup is VERY easy to understand, when the mining drill produce too much ore for the recycler it can clog, which won't happen before 200 level of mining productivity, then you need a slower module on the beacon, but if you reach the 250's level, then you gonna need to move the beacon so it also touches one of the recycler, not just changing modules for a slower one, i'm surprised you ask me to explain this because it seems your copy of my great coal upcyler has already this change included
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 10:27 pm
Ah good example of a topic flooded with crap by the same troll ! I wonder how it's possible not to understand the simple coal upcycler after spending so much time trying to explain haste/waste to other people x)Shulmeister wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 10:14 pm Indeed, i made the change because it appears the only way for the setup not to clog, i learned this trick from 123768
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 11:06 pm
ichaleynbin wrote: Mon Dec 16, 2024 8:51 am
I'mma be honest coffee, your posts are getting more and more deranged, and less understandable. Is this an AI sockpuppet of Romayne's, or just ESL? I don't understand half of this last post. It's all english words but they're not being combined quite right.
A train car was never part of that conversation. You've revealed your position to others in conversations with myself and others. You're no better than the man who got banned in December because I demonstrated he was a fool without a sense of humor. Moderators have a right to slow me down or stop me. You don't.mmmPI wrote: Wed Jun 11, 2025 7:57 pm
I was asking to Tertius because i don't understand most of you what you say, it seem generated by robots to me.
That's the difference with the duck !coffee-factorio wrote: Wed Jun 11, 2025 5:00 pm I really don't like what that number 40 does to my conversations.
( i can put up some random words together too, that has been done in the past by comedians )
The last time that thread got necro'd by you. mmmPI. You got a hint when it was taken down.
You are not a moderator. And you have no right to play at being one. I have never had an experience with this community, this badly except for here and with the individual in question. If I was in the wrong, I was either told off or ignored.
You don't have to get banned. You just have to removed from a position where you can provoke me. And no, putting you on a foe list is not enough. If you follow me around to a conversation about what I'm demonstrating. It would not matter. I don't have to look at the progress of your mods in your channel, but if you're following me around provoking me you aren't minding your house.
If it were just me. But I had to watch others be put through the same grinder. So no. I believe the responses are going to be in public from now on.
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 11:20 pm
This is non-sense, and the rest is personnal attacks, why ignore all PMs ?
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 11:24 pm
Just ignore the trollmmmPI wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 11:20 pm This is non-sense, and the rest is personnal attacks, why ignore all PMs ?
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 11:26 pm
Yeah right x) but who's gonna debunk all the bullshit ?
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2025 11:37 pm
Ok we try something different: mmmPI you will not post in this topic again. Everyone else go back to topic.
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2025 12:27 am
Your machine is different thoughcoffee-factorio wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 8:50 pm No, it starts to happen at mining productivity 238 on my machine.
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2025 12:52 am
Look man, I read you. Sorry for the moment. Might have to get my act together. Going to figure out real quick if I can get my head on straight.CyberCider wrote: Tue Sep 02, 2025 5:49 pm
I don’t know, I just see no point to the quality mechanic existing if getting the items isn’t “hard”. Designing recycler lines that are thoroughly clog-proof, scaling up the base to provide the common items (which with itself brings the requirement of designing scalable designs), scaling the base up even more to research Space Age’s many infinite techs that all help in their own way (even the military ones help with promethium!), the positive feedback loop of progressively upgrading things level by level if you can manage the changing ratios… With traditional quality methods it’s also a lot more worthwhile to learn and apply some more advanced techniques, because efficiency matters more. And you of all people must understand how satisfying it is to learn the most advanced possible ways to do things.
Anyway, that’s where I see the fun of the mechanic. The powerful items are nice, but they’re just a measure of success, not the source of enjoyment. They’re just like the SPM number: You don’t build because you want to see a bigger number, you build because you want to see a bigger factory. This isn’t a clicker game, it’s a factory game. The number is just feedback that you built it right.
But, wanna give you a dance step. Because there's going to be scales of factory operation where, what you say is very important. Even if it's like, running a startup build of something other people just don't get. Because you saw a clicker moment.
What do you see as good multipliers. Lets not post sims or mods or who likes what. Because that gives a dev team an idea of "well, the demand is for x at x". And someone else can argue with you, but like, at least we're all getting heard.
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2025 1:18 am
coffee-factorio wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 8:11 pm An alternate configuration it looks like this. Attached is a blueprint so the curious may determine the rate. You may also simply place a mining car on a train track. And judge for yourself.
- broken design.png (906.53 KiB) Viewed 178 times
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2025 2:26 am
I reprocess "wrong" chunks and basic-process the "right" chunks, I'm not that wasteful lol. This way you get to use every epic iron chunk without it turning into some legendary ice chunk and wasted in the 20% of a reprocessor.mmmPI wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 5:35 am I understand why at some high level the basic crushing can be used to upcycle stuff, you put iron chunk you get ore + chunk, so chunk=> chunk , fine. ( that's my plan on the ship i'm working on) but i don't understand why you say it outweight the productivity loss compared to reprocessing, to me it would still appear less efficient to try the basic crushing, when the return rate on reprocessing is twice the one from basic when considering "chunk" without the ores.
Are you considering you upcycle the "wrong" type of asteroid too ? like if you want "iron" you may still allow your platform to grab "oxyde" chunks and then reprocess them until you get "legendary iron chunk". Cuz to me at this stage it would appear more logical not to, just only grab iron chunk, try to reprocess for some quality upgrade, but if turns to coal or ice not even quality, dump them form platform. (uncommon chunks of coal or ice 'should' be reprocessed in the reasonning ).
Also note that reprocessing isn't affected by productivity but basic processing is. At level 26, basic processing returns the right chunk with 20%*3.6=72% chance while reprocessing gives you 40% right and 40% wrong.
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2025 2:31 am
For ore, you need different designs as productivity goes up. You need two speed-moduled recyclers pointing at each other to destroy normal ores instead of upcycling them, then uncommon, then rare.
At 1k+ you need to destroy whatever container you mine into every 1-2 seconds since inserters can no longer keep up with the pace.
At 1k+ you need to destroy whatever container you mine into every 1-2 seconds since inserters can no longer keep up with the pace.
Re: Ban quality modules from asteroid crushers
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2025 2:58 am
Has it occurred to you that this is a VERY NEGATIVE feedback loop? With vanilla upcycling unclogging means you need to destroy some of the high quality stuff you spent a lot of effort making. And if you need a large base to get a few quality assembly machines, the results won't even fit in your base or produce any positive feeling by that point. The way quality items work against belts and inserters make long quality chains decisively unfun.CyberCider wrote: Tue Sep 02, 2025 5:49 pm I don’t know, I just see no point to the quality mechanic existing if getting the items isn’t “hard”. Designing recycler lines that are thoroughly clog-proof, scaling up the base to provide the common items (which with itself brings the requirement of designing scalable designs), scaling the base up even more to research Space Age’s many infinite techs that all help in their own way (even the military ones help with promethium!), the positive feedback loop of progressively upgrading things level by level if you can manage the changing ratios… With traditional quality methods it’s also a lot more worthwhile to learn and apply some more advanced techniques, because efficiency matters more. And you of all people must understand how satisfying it is to learn the most advanced possible ways to do things.
Besides, recycling lines are like the worst method for traditional quality. It's almost always better to recycle into a container like what sane people do in Fulgora. The optimal solution to vanilla upcycling is just building a big dumb bot base and enough yellow chests for byproducts of a life time. Maybe a few rocket silos for blue undergrounds. Why bother with clogging belts without speed modules? Unclogging belts only become a problem with asteroid cycling.
The core of quality is vertical scaling, i.e., do more with less buildings. It shouldn't need any horizontal scaling. If you prefer vanilla upcycling to asteroid shuffling, the right suggestion is to remove the quality penalty of speed modules or making stack inserters less stupid.