Cliff explosives

[Sworn]

Yah, sure you understand the meaning of the "technically"... It is definitely not as before.

Sorry i mean you can "literally" play the game you used to play the 1.1.

Technically you do no want to play as before, you want to play the space age, but with only certain features... if only there were a settings to disable those .... x)

Jezz, really.... to be perfect clear, before, I had cliffs, and they were no issue, because I could get rid of them in Navious, very fast when getting to blue science, deal with them to get to blue, then get rid of them later.

Now I can't, its not the same, and I don't want to disable as you suggest, simple. How hard is for you to see it is not the same thing.
We are talking about balancing for everyone, not disabling everything....

Stop braging about disable it completely, that is not "technically" the same thing

[mmmPI]

i think this had no chance to ever be changed due to the fact that you can reduce the cliffs with various different level before disabling them completly if the reworked cliffs from 2.0 are still too annoying for you despite the elevated rails

Like if this is the balance for "everyone", it makes little sense to me to make the default what you propose with then no way for all the players who play with cliffs as devs intended for a fun challenge to have them. The "i don't want to have cliffs but i also don't want to disable them".

You can already get rid of cliffs in Nauvis if you nuke them, no need to go to Vulcanus.

Can you explain why you don't want to disable cliffs ?

[Wappinhat]

+1 OP

I started a fresh map with cliffs for the first time and discovered how annoying they are 10h+ hours into my build, far too late to restart

It doesn't make sense why you need to go to another planet to unlock the tech, just make the other planets require a special cliff explosives unlock from Vulcanus

[AileTheAlien]

I had cliffs, and they were no issue, because I could get rid of them in Navious, very fast when getting to blue science, deal with them to get to blue, then get rid of them later.

Now I can't, its not the same, and I don't want to disable as you suggest, simple. How hard is for you to see it is not the same thing.
We are talking about balancing for everyone, not disabling everything....

The devs already rebalanced cliffs for the majority of players. Cliffs are longer, less of a maze, and don't need to be destroyed. You don't need to disable them, just tweak the settings for your world. Can you provide screenshots of your base, or some blueprint strings in [ code ] blocks? You haven't provided a compelling argument as to why the current cliffs that have in fact been changed from your previous games, are a big enough problem to let players destroy them early.

You can already get rid of cliffs in Nauvis if you nuke them

I forgot they added that feature! Problem solved!

[quineotio]

i think this had no chance to ever be changed due to the fact that you can reduce the cliffs with various different level before disabling them completly if the reworked cliffs from 2.0 are still too annoying for you despite the elevated rails

.....

You can already get rid of cliffs in Nauvis if you nuke them, no need to go to Vulcanus.

I think the cliffs on Nauvis are fine. I'm ok with cliff explosives being late Nauvis tech.

Like if this is the balance for "everyone", it makes little sense to me to make the default what you propose with then no way for all the players who play with cliffs as devs intended for a fun challenge to have them.

If it's a fun challenge then don't destroy them.

i think this had no chance to ever be changed due to the fact that you can reduce the cliffs with various different level before disabling them completly if the reworked cliffs from 2.0 are still too annoying for you despite the elevated rails

Can you explain why you don't want to disable cliffs ?

I don't want to disable them at the options screen, I want to disable them in game after setting up production of cliff explosives without having to first go to Vulcanus. My complaint is that cliff explosives too heavily influences the path through the game.

Factorio is most fun to me when I have all the basic tools. I consider cliff explosives to be a basic tool. All of the other unlocks are basically just upgrades to things I can already do. I also find it annoying that requester chests and Kovarex enrichment are locked behind space tech, but it's not that big a deal because there isn't much time between wanting those things and setting up space science.

Needing to essentially finish an entire planet just to get one basic thing is annoying. I don't think locking to cliff explosives to Vulcanus adds anything at all - it makes the game worse.

Other people are talking about landfill on Fulgora, but I don't think this is the same thing. Fulgora is designed around a particular set of constraints specific to that planet. But cliffs are NOT part of the design of Fulgora and Gleba, because you CAN have cliff explosives upon arrival... if you visit Vulcanus first. Why do I HAVE to go to Vulcanus first?

To repeat my original suggestion - make destroying cliff on Vulcanus require specific Vulcanus research, but give normal cliff explosives back on Nauvis - even if it's locked behind space or utility science, and even if you change the recipe to require carbon so that you need a space platform to make them.

[AileTheAlien]

I think the cliffs on Nauvis are fine. I'm ok with cliff explosives being late Nauvis tech.

I don't want to disable them at the options screen, I want to disable them in game after setting up production of cliff explosives without having to first go to Vulcanus. My complaint is that cliff explosives too heavily influences the path through the game.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. If cliffs are fine, then you're not heavily influenced to get cliff explosives. Nukes are still an option if you want to avoid Vulcanus, or delay space-flight.

[mmmPI]

Why do I HAVE to go to Vulcanus first?

you don't have to imo, for the many reason stated already, that you can play fine without cliffs explosive or cliffs, it's not mandadory just your personnal preference

To repeat my original suggestion - make destroying cliff on Vulcanus require specific Vulcanus research, but give normal cliff explosives back on Nauvis - even if it's locked behind space or utility science, and even if you change the recipe to require carbon so that you need a space platform to make them.

You can use atomic bomb to get rid of cliffs without ever leaving Nauvis, consider them the Nauvis locked behind much science , cliffs explosive ?

[quineotio]

I think the cliffs on Nauvis are fine. I'm ok with cliff explosives being late Nauvis tech.

I don't want to disable them at the options screen, I want to disable them in game after setting up production of cliff explosives without having to first go to Vulcanus. My complaint is that cliff explosives too heavily influences the path through the game.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. If cliffs are fine, then you're not heavily influenced to get cliff explosives. Nukes are still an option if you want to avoid Vulcanus, or delay space-flight.

I'm not contradicting myself. You and everybody else defending the status quo are not understanding the basic point. Read the OP before responding.

[quineotio]

Why do I HAVE to go to Vulcanus first?

you don't have to imo, for the many reason stated already, that you can play fine without cliffs explosive or cliffs, it's not mandadory just your personnal preference

To repeat my original suggestion - make destroying cliff on Vulcanus require specific Vulcanus research, but give normal cliff explosives back on Nauvis - even if it's locked behind space or utility science, and even if you change the recipe to require carbon so that you need a space platform to make them.

You can use atomic bomb to get rid of cliffs without ever leaving Nauvis, consider them the Nauvis locked behind much science , cliffs explosive ?

How would the game be worse for you if cliff explosives were unlocked on Nauvis?

[mmmPI]

You can use atomic bomb to get rid of cliffs without ever leaving Nauvis, consider them the Nauvis locked behind much science , cliffs explosive ?

How would the game be worse for you if cliff explosives were unlocked on Nauvis?

I think you can compare it to a sudoku game, where everyone has the solution at the bottom of the page, ( like there is a setting to remove cliff, or you can just put less of them ). But some people complain that there are too many missing numbers at the start, and what is fun in Sudoku is when the grid is finished, so there is no reason to put that many holes in it, and really how worse would it be if there was only 3 or 4 holes to fill in.

I also think your proposition is redundant with the ability of atomic bomb to destroy cliffs.

[quineotio]

You can use atomic bomb to get rid of cliffs without ever leaving Nauvis, consider them the Nauvis locked behind much science , cliffs explosive ?

How would the game be worse for you if cliff explosives were unlocked on Nauvis?

I think you can compare it to a sudoku game, where everyone has the solution at the bottom of the page, ( like there is a setting to remove cliff, or you can just put less of them ). But some people complain that there are too many missing numbers at the start, and what is fun in Sudoku is when the grid is finished, so there is no reason to put that many holes in it, and really how worse would it be if there was only 3 or 4 holes to fill in.

I also think your proposition is redundant with the ability of atomic bomb to destroy cliffs.

That is a bad analogy, and you didn't identify any way in which the game would be worse for you.

[Sworn]

that is what I keep saying, it doesn't change for those who like the way it is right now, but it does change for others.
It doesn't make the game worst to have the option on Navious to deal with Navious cliffs.
Also no, nuke is not an "alternative" to cliff explosive, the production a rate on what you need for it doesn't even begin to compare.
Unless you think blowing up nuclear reactor is also the same as making cliff explosives... what a "great" analogy.

Sodoku... to factorio... Yes, totally the same thing.

[quineotio]

that is what I keep saying, it doesn't change for those who like the way it is right now, but it does change for others.
It doesn't make the game worst to have the option on Navious to deal with Navious cliffs.
Also no, nuke is not an "alternative" to cliff explosive, the production a rate on what you need for it doesn't even begin to compare.
Unless you think blowing up nuclear reactor is also the same as making cliff explosives... what a "great" analogy.

Sodoku... to factorio... Yes, totally the same thing.

Also, they're responding to a thread in which I state that I didn't find the cliffs on Nauvis to be a problem. The problem is feeling forced to go to Vulcanus first. You can't import nukes, and importing tonnes of resources to make them is not a fun and viable alternative to just making cliff explosives available. It also makes the issue even more ridiculous. I mean, I understand how to destroy cliffs with nukes, but haven't figured out how to put the explosives I already possess into barrels I already have?

The people arguing here seem to think they're the devs. The only thing they have authority to do is give their opinion, and I haven't seen one example of someone explaining how my suggestion would make the game worse for them.

[mmmPI]

That is a bad analogy, and you didn't identify any way in which the game would be worse for you.

It would make the game worse as a sudoko grid with only 3 or 4 holes left to fill is bland boring, and isn't entertaining to me, they are not sold this way btw.

I still don't understand what is your problem with using settings to diminish cliffs, or using elevated rails, or nukes, or removing them entirely.

I think the main problem here is indeed "feelings". You feel forced to go to vulcanus but that's a very personnal thing, there are mods for that too.

[Tinyboss]

Other people are talking about landfill on Fulgora, but I don't think this is the same thing. Fulgora is designed around a particular set of constraints specific to that planet. But cliffs are NOT part of the design of Fulgora and Gleba, because you CAN have cliff explosives upon arrival... if you visit Vulcanus first. Why do I HAVE to go to Vulcanus first?

This is a point I strongly disagree about. Cliffs ARE part of the intended Fulgora and Gleba experience. The whole POINT is that you may or may not have visited Vulcanus yet, and so cliffs are an aspect of your experience that will be different depending on the order you chose. You can do a new playthrough in a different order, and the planets will feel different.

That's GOOD gameplay and should not be removed without a very compelling reason, which has still not been presented.

[Tinyboss]

and I haven't seen one example of someone explaining how my suggestion would make the game worse for them.

The threshold isn't "why not?", it's "why?". There are two perfectly valid ways to avoid dealing with cliffs before space. Other than "I don't like them", there has been no compelling argument for making this change.

As well, I have said several times that it reduces the variety of gameplay on the same planet in different playthroughs. So yes, you have been given an example.

[nzer]

The problem is feeling forced to go to Vulcanus first.

For the record I would support cliff explosives being a late Nauvis tech, or having per-planet cliff explosive researches.

But you very much are not forced to go to Vulcanus first. You personally feel the benefit of cliff explosives on Gleba is high enough that you should go to Vulcanus first, and that is not a problem. Other people don't necessarily feel that way, and Gleba is arguably tuned to be done after Fulgora and Vulcanus in the first place. It would be different if you were having trouble with cliffs on Nauvis, but you're not.

Looking at that situation and seeing it as a design problem is odd to me. Like, I've found smart assemblers to be such a useful thing that I'll be bee-lining circuit network in all my subsequent playthroughs. I don't view that as the game forcing me into a particular progression, I view it as me identifying something useful and strategizing to make sure I can take maximal advantage of it. What you're describing is basically the same thing.

[Koub]

The people arguing here seem to think they're the devs. The only thing they have authority to do is give their opinion, and I haven't seen one example of someone explaining how my suggestion would make the game worse for them.

My understanding of the reason why the devs chose to push the cliff explosives after visiting Vulcanus is multi-fold :
1) A combination of factors made the cliffs on Nauvis less a pain in the butt : The new algorithm for map gen generates less (frustrating) cliffs, and the elevated rails can easily step over cliffs, making the cliffs less of a nuisance, removing from the engineer the urge to research for cliff explosives (the same way there would be no need for military research on Nauvis if there weren't biters to fight on Nauvis).

2) Vulcanus is a hell of cliffs, so by the time one gets to Vulcanus, the cliff explosives become mandatory. It is said that the true enemy on Nauvis aren't the biters, but the trees. I would argue that the real enemy on Vulcanus isn't Shai Hulud the Demolisher, but the cliffs. Arriving on Vulcanus with cliff explosives already discovered would remove the satisfaction of vanquishing that obstacle. So, as you pointed out in your first post, Vulcanus' cliffs should need a specific research on Vulcanus.

3) Fundamentally, cliffs are cliffs. It would make no sense to have different cliff explosives for different planets. The cliffs on Nauvis are made from the same stuff as the cliffs on Fulgora, and same goes for those on Aquilo and Gleba. The same explosive should be able to blow them equally.

If my interpretation is right, then the devs will not agree with you in your desire to have cliff explosives on Nauvis, and you'll have to resort to alternate ways to tailor your game experience to your very specific and personal desires.

[quineotio]

The problem is feeling forced to go to Vulcanus first.

But you very much are not forced to go to Vulcanus first.

.....

Gleba is arguably tuned to be done after Fulgora and Vulcanus in the first place.

This is what I'm saying. I don't think it needs to be this way. I don't feel this way about any tech other than cliff explosives.

I've found smart assemblers to be such a useful thing that I'll be bee-lining circuit network in all my subsequent playthroughs. I don't view that as the game forcing me into a particular progression..... What you're describing is basically the same thing.

It's not the same thing to due the amount of commitment. Bee lining the circuit network doesn't require hours of investment, it just requires selecting particular techs on the tech tree while you do exactly the same thing.

It would make no sense to have different cliff explosives for different planets.

This is where I disagree. The cliffs on Vulcanus are just made of stronger stuff.

I understand the Dev's position, I just disagree with the current implementation. I like a lot of the expansion, but one of my complaints is I feel railroaded a bit too much. Some of the "discovered" techs - the ones you unlock by doing an action - get in the way of normal play. And a couple I mentioned before - namely Kovarex enrichment and requester chests. For example, I'd like to set up bots before I set up my rocket area, but it's useless without requester chests, and I want nuclear power also, which means I'd like Kovarex enrichment. It makes the progression a bit annoying having to build things out of order.

But it's not a huge issue because I'm doing all these things pretty close together anyway. On my first save I had a small number of really annoying cliffs on my Gleba base. This is after doing Fulgora and building a large Gleba base producing about 250 science per minute. But then I needed a bit more space for some of the late techs and I didn't want to spend hours re-jigging an entire base. I'd spent 3-4 days on Gleba, but before I'd reaped the full reward, I needed to leave to finish Vulcanus so I could then come back to Gleba... ugh. I ended up cheating in cliff explosives - turned out I needed 18. But it didn't feel right to cheat so I started over.

The whole time - all the way through Fulgora, and all the way through Gleba - I worked around the cliffs, but they were annoying. I can't see myself playing with cliffs on ever again unless I intend to go to Vulcanus first. The current progression doesn't make sense to me - and I admit it's even more annoying knowing that I USED to be able to destroy cliffs.

There's a spectrum between feeling rewarded for gaining something and feeling punished for not having it, and with cliff explosives I definitely feel punished. If the best way to play is also the most fun way to play, I think the design is a failure, because Vulcanus (which I admittedly haven't been to yet) is the least appealing of all the planets to me - Gleba being my favourite.

I made the original suggestion because I think it remains in line with the intention of cliffs, both on Nauvis and Vulcanus, while freeing up progression on the other planets. I feel like I wasted a bunch of days on a save that was lost for a stupid reason.

[mmmPI]

Maybe the current progression would make more sense if you had actually been to Vulcanus. That seem quite weird to me to suggest change in the game in area you admitedly haven't discovered yet.