Friday Facts #428 - Reactor & Logistics circuit control

[GregoriusT]

Will there be some easy way to get bots out of the system for upgrades?

Many mods have multiple tiers of construction and logistics bots, and upgrading them is a huge headache.

Roboports will be able to set min/max requests for specific robots inside them. That way you can make one roboport request all lower tier bots into itself, where they can be removed from the network by inserters.
Funnily enough, they already used this exact example when introducing it.

Pretty sure that Quality will also apply to the Bots, meaning there is a concrete example in the Game where replacing Bots is needed without any third party Mods.

[CyberCider]

Pretty sure that Quality will also apply to the Bots, meaning there is a concrete example in the Game where replacing Bots is needed without any third party Mods.

The smarter robots fff came out before the quality reveal, that’s why they didn’t bring it up. But I think they did subtly hint at it by saying “higher quality” instead of “higher tier”

[ThePiachu]

Since we're talking about logistics, would be nice to get a "passive requester chest" / separate option to "request from storage / provider / buffer chests" - viewtopic.php?p=593619#p593619 .

[malecord]

All in all a set of very awesome changes, as always

The reactor thing is nice, although I am not sure if the thermal mass of reactors, pipes and heatexchangers is enough to make sure nothing is wasted, but we will see, the last sentence was quite interessting

Anyway... reading the heat and contents from the reactors may prove to be quite useful when you get to the final planet.

We already know this one is going to be cold, so is there something going on like in the Arctic Biome in Anno 1800?

Importantly (or unfortunately), it does not include items needed to build ghosts (construction requests). This is mostly a technical restraint on our behalf, as logistic networks do not track ghosts in a way that would make it performant to include.

That's quite sad, but I am sure there is a way to engineer around this in the game, any ideas?

Well... in vanilla we use a constant combinator to output the desired amount of stuff we want available in the network and the we subtract what is already available there. The result is the request. It's not ideal, you need to manually set each base, but I guess do it 5 times once per planet is bearable. Now we have to do it for each disconnected outpost

[jockeril]

this is not clear to me - is the condition enabling or disabling the chest ? I'm reading this as disable because that is what makes more sense to me, but I'm asking because I'm not sure

And - why not use clearer text like "disable if" or "enable if" to avoid this kind of confusion ?

[againey]

this is not clear to me - is the condition enabling or disabling the chest ? I'm reading this as disable because that is what makes more sense to me, but I'm asking because I'm not sure

And - why not use clearer text like "disable if" or "enable if" to avoid this kind of confusion ?

In the current game version, entities that have "enable/disable" logic use that text for the control that activates this ability, but then the condition itself is labeled as "Enabled condition".

inserter-enable-disable.png (4.67 KiB) Viewed 1425 times

Maybe Wube just needs to do a consistency pass on the localization text for the additional entities that have acquired this ability? Unless what we see in this dev diary is already the dubious result of game-wide text adjustments.

In any case, I assume the actual logic will be the same for all entities just as it currently is, including the logistics chests: If the condition is true, then the chest is enabled. If the condition is false, then the chest is disabled.

[XT-248]

I am going to chime in about the Nuclear Reactor's circuit connection.

It is nice to finally have something 'other' than steam fluid level to control the input for nuclear reactors.


Depending on how it plays out once Space Age is released, I may end up with a slightly tweaked variant.

Code: Select all

If( SteamFluid < Large_Steam_Number_Here & Nuclear_Reactor_Has_Less_Than_One_Fuel_Cell & Heat_Level < 750 & Time_Since_Last_Inserted > 200 seconds)

Then enable_fuel_cell_inserter_to_move_one_fuel_cell_to_nuclear_reactor

Then, I would like to try to figure out if I can do it in a way that doesn't 'rely' on electric energy. That will be an exciting engineering challenge!


I wonder if I can do the same for Fusion Energy (FFF #420).



I just want to address a topic of conversation that I often see here and elsewhere regarding nuclear energy and what is the 'right' or 'wrong' way to do it; what is wrong with people trying to decide their own way is the only right one and enforcing it on others who disagree? Especially when they are playing offline or are NOT in a multiplayer session playing with those who do check nuclear energy's steam level?

[mmmPI]

Then, I would like to try to figure out if I can do it in a way that doesn't 'rely' on electric energy. That will be an exciting engineering challenge!

This is already possible in game, and nothing that would change it was announced

[FrozenPaper]

Five weeks left till my factory grows past the planet and into space. Five. Whole. Weeks.

So close I can almost taste it. So far that I yearn for it.

How do I optimize my feelings to be less aggravating?

[GregoriusT]

Five weeks left till my factory grows past the planet and into space. Five. Whole. Weeks.

So close I can almost taste it. So far that I yearn for it.

How do I optimize my feelings to be less aggravating?

I can anti-optimize them for ya, you likely will need an entire day before you get the resources to go to space! xD

[XT-248]

Then, I would like to try to figure out if I can do it in a way that doesn't 'rely' on electric energy. That will be an exciting engineering challenge!

This is already possible in game, and nothing that would change it was announced

Apparently, what I said went unnoticed.


I plan to do two different solutions.

One that uses electric energy to run.

Then, another unique solution where various entities are swapped in/out so as not to need any electricity.


The latter is an exciting engineering challenge. The former isn't.

[mmmPI]

Apparently, what I said went unnoticed.

It's because it's already possible in game so i didn't care all that much

[cheetahrunout]

Getting really excited for the release....
Btw are you running a sale on the basegame? It could draw in loads of new players. (who then buy the expantion, because thats a nobrainer).

[Jap2.0]

Getting really excited for the release....
Btw are you running a sale on the basegame? It could draw in loads of new players. (who then buy the expantion, because thats a nobrainer).

This is extremely unlikely—the dev team has been adamantly against running sales in the past.

[malecord]

Just a thought. All these changes to logistic, trains and automation in general we saw in the last months, they are awsome but they make me wonder if those features should be unlocked "incrementally" with different research.

I'm not new to the game, so probably for me and most people here it might even be annoying to not have everything available right from the start. But I'm thinking to new players, maybe all these options at once might be overwhelming and an incremental unlock with research can help make sense of the endless possibilities. The issue here is to obtain a truly new player feedback...

[XT-248]

Apparently, what I said went unnoticed.

It's because it's already possible in game so i didn't care all that much

Curious.

If you think it is possible to do three if-and conditions without electricity and don't care much.

Why say something?


The last time I tried doing so, not that long ago, it wasn't possible without electricity (circuits). It is possible to create an electricity-free clock/timer. Three conditions? Not so much.

[mmmPI]

Why say something?

You quoted me saying you didn't manage to do something, i didn't know what to say, but i wanted to answer because you quoted me.

I think you should try with splitter logic, you can make logic gate with them, it's also possible with trains, those do not require electricity.

You can also wait for the expansion so that you can read temperature from the nuclear reactor with circuit. I'm not sure what you can do with this without electricity that you couldn't beforehand, but you seem excited , so that's nice.

[XT-248]

Why say something?

You quoted me saying you didn't manage to do something, i didn't know what to say, but i wanted to answer because you quoted me.

I think you should try with splitter logic, you can make logic gate with them, it's also possible with trains, those do not require electricity.

You can also wait for the expansion so that you can read temperature from the nuclear reactor with circuit. I'm not sure what you can do with this without electricity that you couldn't beforehand, but you seem excited , so that's nice.

I tried to build a circuit with three conditions without electricity (see attached screenshot). It is not possible.

Using splitter as a logic gate... To count up to a number and then pass a boolean to the next component is not possible, not in the way I had envisioned it.

Train... Now, someone is overthinking. There are too many variables to be reliable, even in an isolated rail network.

09-17-2024, 12-13-28.png (98.17 KiB) Viewed 771 times

[mmmPI]

I tried to build a circuit with three conditions without electricity (see attached screenshot). It is not possible.

Using splitter as a logic gate... To count up to a number and then pass a boolean to the next component is not possible, not in the way I had envisioned it.

Train... Now, someone is overthinking. There are too many variables to be reliable, even in an isolated rail network.

quick google search show it is in fact possible :
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... ?rdt=62887
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... t_network/
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... splitters/

I like to overthink that's my playstyle, i prefer than the opposite, but i get everyone is different, maybe you will produce new original solutions !

[XT-248]

I tried to build a circuit with three conditions without electricity (see attached screenshot). It is not possible.

Using splitter as a logic gate... To count up to a number and then pass a boolean to the next component is not possible, not in the way I had envisioned it.

Train... Now, someone is overthinking. There are too many variables to be reliable, even in an isolated rail network.

quick google search show it is in fact possible :
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... ?rdt=62887
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... t_network/
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... splitters/

I like to overthink that's my playstyle, i prefer than the opposite, but i get everyone is different, maybe you will produce new original solutions !

Those examples do not fulfill what I wanted to do precisely and often are overcomplicated unnecessarily.