The blueprint doesn't include the turbines; that image was just an example where I was using it and I didn't need that much power (which is why I put in the exclusion lines). As I wrote earlier, you can knock off heat exchangers to save on building costs if you don't need that much power initially ...

Finally did some heat tests, and adjusted the steam trigger to 20k/tank to improve steam buffering and flow behavior. Even with 6 exchangers missing and no steam drain, reactors do not overheat. Blueprint and text in first post updated.

That's not a deadlock, it's just saturation of the intersection (if the cargo wagon at the exit were a train and moved away, everything would clear up).

The intended behavior is how the train paths in the 3rd image: the reserved block restriction should render the path directly through the ...

Did it end up stopped in the roundabout where I showed it? It doesn't always give the "no path" message when it's stopped there. The main problem is it stopping in the roundabout where it isn't supposed to.

See 71371

Hate to have to keep bugging (hyuk hyuk) everyone about this issue, but it's not quite fixed. I found another case where trains will ignore the reserved block restriction and go the wrong way. Here is the test setup:
test.png
It's similar to the last topic in that it has a circuit ...

The 'stacks with ammo' is just a general label for all turrets (And it does stack with the damage bonus from using light oil as the 'ammo')

I should clarify that this was my understanding as well, but it's inconsistent with the number shown (+140.4, which corresponds to 60% applied twice, not 60 ...

The problem as I see it is two-fold:
① The 90 damage tooltip doesn't make much sense, since
・flamethrower turrets do damage 3 different ways, not just a flat number,
・I'm inclined to believe Bilka's recent update to the wiki, especially since the wiki used to say 90 too, and
・I can't figure out a ...

No, because the pathfinder should prioritize exiting the chain sequence into an unreserved rail block above anything else (at least according to the rule), and there will always be at least one exit from the chain blocks that fits that description: the path that the train originally reserved to ...

And with your 10% variability in the output proposal you just slightly increase cost and area and don't actually make any big impact that would make people consider other forms of power generation. It would make solar 10% more annoying to use and that's it.

What if the variability were more ...

There is one more factor that needs to be considered (though not always applied) as both a player-time cost and "fun", and that is the design process. In actual gameplay, this will only be relevant if you are not using a ready-made blueprint, but if anything, I think this factor should be weighed ...

Yeah, I meant the deconstruct ghosts part, but also remove given deconstruct orders (without restoring blueprints for already executed ones). You'd want to ignore bots en-route since the point is to interrupt jobs assigned to base bots further away. As you said, not automatic, but it would be as ...

Construction is less easy to solve unless you don't want half blueprints...


Just fooling with ideas here, but if there were a "cancel/stop" function that worked similarly to Ctrl+Z, except that it only undid things that the bots had not already done, the construction half would be just as easy.

There are cases where overwriting colors is useful, but are there any that also use one of the colors as the condition on the lamp? I can't think of any instances where flexibility would be lost with the proposed implementation, because it would have to be a situation where
① the lamp is exposed to ...

I've discovered that the pathing behavior changes strangely depending on where the reserved blocks are. I've been shuffling the cargo wagons around and trying to figure out the rules, but it's as clear as mud to me. Here's a case where even the circuit-controlled train repaths incorrectly:
another ...

My case isn't that they're just OP, it's that they're too simple and boring to set up and run for the amount of power they generate. If their setup were more involved, I'd be perfectly fine with an appropriate buff to their power delivery.

You implied that megabase players should only use inexhaustible ore fields.
I simply refuted that use of exhaustible ore fields is normal.
Then you try to make it sound like I advocated the EXCLUSIVE use of exhaustible ore fields.
Who's twisting words and making straw man arguments now?

I did very well address it. Megabases do not start at the "edge of the map" (not sure where that's supposed to be), unless you go out of your way to put them there. By default, they start right near your starting point, where richness is at or near base value. Until you go far enough to find those ...