Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Asteroid mining would be cool.
Did you know you can rename planets?
Of course, that's not really what I meant though.
Being able to selectively turn factories on or off, control whether or not railguns should shoot solar sails into orbit, alerts on storages/logistic stations content running low, setting logistic station priority dynamically, etc.
There are so many basic improvements to be made. Even cloud saves would make a big difference. And real actual signalling to bring the production lines up to at least on par with where Minecraft was 10+ years ago.
You can put a spray coater right onto a conveyor belt, but you can't do the same with a piler or a splitter even on a straight belt.
Moreover, if you put a spray coater onto belt so the end of the spray coater matches with the end of the belt, you won't be able to continue building the belt and link it to the one under the spray coater, it will display "colliding with object". Meawhile, if you put the spray coater over a belt so there is one empty tile underneath, you can connect the belt.
But there's more.
The auto-elevation when building belts is unconsistent, If you let the game build the slope, it will be a long gentle slope, while you can have steeper slopes when connecting two different height manually. Why so ?
Building a belt that crosses another one automatically makes a half-height bridge. If you delete one tile of that bridge, you can't connect it anymore, you have to demolish the bridge then let the game automatically generate it.
And as stated above, I'd love to have logic wires.
I like the idea of some type of infrastructure positioned in space but as of now there's no logical reason to do it aside from the cool factor. All the Mining and Factory work is covered already with on planet resources. Agreed, this is the way to make asteroid mining actually fit into the game. Maybe a complete overhaul of the resources and recipes through the entire tech line to make gathering from asteroids actually make sense. Some elements are easier to find in large quantities from planetary remnants (asteroids) than from an outcrop on a planets crust. I don't think the current game is complex enough to warrant a logic system. If the Devs reworked a bunch of the recipes and added more resources to make the game more complex I could see it, but right now there's very little you could want to do with logic that you can't already do with a little creativity and belt shenanigans. Outside of the logistic network anyway, the Dev's definitely need to rework it's priority system. Storage alerts can be done currently with the traffic monitors. If you can think of some examples of things you believe you can't do currently I'd love to hear them. I'd like to try to come up with a solution currently workable -- I love a good brain twister.
Instead of a manual logic solution I think the EM-Railguns should have a check box option built into them named "Create Swarm." This would let the railgun fire continuously while checked and when unchecked only fire when the solar sail will be immediately absorbed into the Dyson Sphere. I think it's silly to have to try to manually rate limit your railguns to the Sphere's absorption rate to avoid "waste." I'd like to see the auto re-targeting mod added to the base game too. Combat has always been a planned and promised feature. You expect your whinging is going to convince them to give up on it just because the game is already fun and playable without it? If you bought the game without being aware that combat was on the table I suppose the Dev's could update the Steam page description but the earliest FAQs all addressed the feature. All the latest news state you'll be able to leave combat off though and all the optimizations and game improvements that come with the Dark Fog Combat update will still be available to you. The last Dev log was almost entirely about how they were optimizing the game to make the Dark Fog playable. You can probably safely expect some good improvements even with the combat turned off. Yeah kind of a bit of an annoyance, but there's a mod for this already so making it work is possible. I'm sure it'll get added to the base game at some point.
I think the reason it doesn't work now is that the piler and splitter change how the belt connects while the spray coater just modifies what is flowing down the belt. The piler and splitter both have internal in-line buffers that get connected to the belts. New logic needs to be added to the belt mechanics to get things to auto-connect.
This is the same for the buildings that connect directly to belts like miners, oil extractors, pumps, energy exchangers, ray receivers, and logistic stations. I think the solution could be as simple as, "Delete all colliding belts, place building, attempt to place belts back down using the current belt connect mechanics." The problems/bugs/quirks pop up when you throw in belts at different heights or multiple colliding belts. You know, all the edge cases. We'll have to wait to see what they do.
Select a 2 grid section of belt and paste it onto the end of the one under the spray coater and repeat until either you've hooked the belts together or you've moved it far enough from the spray coater to connect up normally after exiting blueprint view. (You could also copy a length of belt that exactly fits the gap - but a 2 segment belt always fits; and this way I don't need to try to count :D)
But speaking of belt blueprint mechanics I wish you could paste down a belt into a 2- or 3-way belt merge (note, a corner is treated as a 2-way belt merge) if that would create a valid 3- or 4-way belt merge. But no, you have to force place which leaves a 1 grid gap due to the collision mechanics.
I also wish it'd merge belts together when you force place it because you've got more than a 1 grid overlap; instead of leaving that 1 grid gap due to the collision mechanics.
I have an ILS/PLS importing, say, silicon which is feeding multiple belts into columns of smelters; and I would like to know if the ILS/PLS silicon buffer starts running out (ideally get warned once it dropped to say 20 or 25%).
The issues with traffic monitors for this scenario are:
a) they'll only see a decrease in material on the belt after the storage hits empty; rather than warning that it is getting low.
b) the ILS/PLS doesn't load balance output belts, so if just enough material is coming in for 1 belt you'll get 1 belt at full output and all the others at zero output; so you need the monitor on the lowest priority belt; but the game doesn't tell you which one that is -- so now you need to set up monitors on all output belts (leading to multiple alarms if the one ILS/PLS runs out of material).
c) flow rate on the belt might drop because of lack of supply or because of surplus of production (full output buffers). I don't want an alarm from that monitor if there's overproduction which is causing the supply buffer to be full.
Alarms set for 'fail and no cargo' can kind of adjust for that; but if resupply is almost keeping up, that alarm will flicker on and off, only appearing in the instants when cargo isn't immediately present.
What could address 'c' is an alarm mode that was more intelligent than simply 'pass cargo' and so could alarm if fail & no belt backup within the sampling window. That would completely suppress alarms due to oversupply, but would generate alarms if the belt was steadily flowing outside the target parameter rate. But that doesn't fix 'a' or 'b'.
That said, traffic monitors are still vastly better than nothing -- they were a very useful addition to the game. I just wish I could also set storage level alarms in an ILS/PLS.
So this can be solved with just a splitter and a storage box. I kind of overbuilt this example, presuming that you would use a full belt output. If the ILS in this picture ever empties out the alarm triggers, and the splitter storage starts to empty. Once the ILS resupplies the double belt fills up the splitter storage faster than it can output thus filling the final buffer back up. The percentages aren't exact, but you can get the idea. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2982911444
This one can be done with just splitters. If the output is above 1 belt of throughput the high priority monitor won't trigger and if the output is ever at 4 belts or below the low priority monitor will alarm. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2982910023
This can be solved with the belt priority example above too. A full output belt would stop up all 5 input belts while a lack of supply means the low priority belt will be empty and would trigger an alarm.
Like I said, most things can be already be done with a little creativity and belt shenanigans. A few extra bits to place down, but not a huge undertaking. Having the logic built-in would be nice but I still think the game is just not complex enough to need it.