Change huge asteroid explosive resistance to 100%

[konage]

I see the same: dozen of hours and 20 round trips without any damage, then suddenly one hit with my much smaller prom ship as well, but I was never able to see the reason.
When I switched to the platform one second after the alert, there was no asteroid any more, so it wasn't a huge asteroid. Not a single asteroid nearby, so the defenses aren't overwhelmed in general. The platform reported damage, so it was asteroid damage and not splash/aoe damage from a too near exploding explosive rocket. There was never an autosave near enough to reproduce. No ammo shortage alert or visualization.

There is a mod for this , it pauses the game as soon as a platform takes damage, so you can investigate : https://mods.factorio.com/mod/freeze-frame

So in my opinion, changing asteroid resistance isn't the solution. This isn't a solution, it's a workaround. I assume a better solution is changed targeting: prioritize near asteroids, ignore hitpoints/damage ratio. However I don't know the side effects of this, this needs thorough testing work.

I agree the whole reasonning is about turret priority, the change of resistance supposedly would be an indirect way to achieve it.

Also one other solution for the railgun problem, if you wanna stay unmodded, but still want a relatively optimal ship, is to place some q1 quality railguns BEHIND your q4/q5 railguns. They will only shoot if an asteroid gets too close. They will kill some of your stuff, but its better than the huge asteroid hitting you. yes, its very cursed

It's hard to believe this is necessary in an optimal ship. It sound like a fail-safe for a situation that doesn't occur if you have enough railguns in the first place. If the defense fails occasionnaly it isn't optimal to me, it is insuffucient.

ok buddy, when you make a UPS optimal prom ship, get back to me

[mmmPI]

ok buddy, when you make a UPS optimal prom ship, get back to me

When i look at the ship you posted on reddit, it doesn't feature the second layer of low quality railgun designed to pierce thru the higher quality level of railguns in case an huge asteroid isn't destroyed : https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... biter_egg/

From there i have hard time believing the advice you give is genuine and not an exageration, or i would have to understand the ship you posted is suboptimal. I think it's not only semantic, if the ship occasionnaly fails, it's not "optimal" , the defense is too thin. I have yet to see a case where someone do use that second layer of railgun for the allegded problem you mention.

[konage]

ok buddy, when you make a UPS optimal prom ship, get back to me

When i look at the ship you posted on reddit, it doesn't feature the second layer of low quality railgun designed to pierce thru the higher quality level of railguns in case an huge asteroid isn't destroyed : https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... biter_egg/

From there i have hard time believing the advice you give is genuine and not an exageration, or i would have to understand the ship you posted is suboptimal. I think it's not only semantic, if the ship occasionnaly fails, it's not "optimal" , the defense is too thin. I have yet to see a case where someone do use that second layer of railgun for the allegded problem you mention.

ok buddy, when you even attempt to make a UPS optimal prom ship, get back to me

[mmmPI]

ok buddy, when you even attempt to make a UPS optimal prom ship, get back to me

I understand you don't want to argue, but the nature of your dismissal just goes to show that you easily consider the matter very niche and requiring expertise, only valid in a precise scenario, the UPS optimisation, and yet you propose to change the resistance of asteroid to 100% for everyone, when really what you describe is turret priority.

I've been tyring to reach solar system edge with only rockets and laser, it's fun and would not even be something to attempt with your suggestion which would have questionnable UPS impact, since there were some changes in the game since this discussion was started ... A constructive way to participate could be some feedback on your mod , a demonstration of the UPS improvement you claim it would provide.

Not even asking for an actual ship with 2 layers of railguns of different quality with the second to act as fail-safe for the first one. I think it was just a joke at this point.

[konage]

ok buddy, when you even attempt to make a UPS optimal prom ship, get back to me

I understand you don't want to argue, but the nature of your dismissal just goes to show that you easily consider the matter very niche and requiring expertise, only valid in a precise scenario, the UPS optimisation, and yet you propose to change the resistance of asteroid to 100% for everyone, when really what you describe is turret priority.

I've been tyring to reach solar system edge with only rockets and laser, it's fun and would not even be something to attempt with your suggestion which would have questionnable UPS impact, since there were some changes in the game since this discussion was started ... A constructive way to participate could be some feedback on your mod , a demonstration of the UPS improvement you claim it would provide.

Not even asking for an actual ship with 2 layers of railguns of different quality with the second to act as fail-safe for the first one. I think it was just a joke at this point.

Already I made a mod that doesn't change your beloved 99% explosive resistance. But of course you keep arguing about this as per usual. I explained this before 20 times to you re: why I mentioned resistance indirectly for turret priority, instead of turret priority directly.

The two layers of railguns isn't a joke suggestion. I won't bother trying to explain to you why a ship that NEVER takes damage is suboptimal UPS-wise or otherwise. In short: (a) you want to destroy asteroids as close to the collectors as possible, which makes it more likely to take damage, (b) you want to maximize the number of collectors which compete for space with railguns, which also makes it more likely to take damage. Getting a ship to be 100% safe, the way the algorithm for railguns currently works, requires you to go way beyond what you should need. You can have a ship that takes 0 damage for 200 hours, destroying billions of huge asteroids, only to then get unlucky with the railgun targeting priority and the health of those asteroids and one sneaks through. Are you gonna double the number of railguns? Go from 3-1 collector-railgun ratio to 3:2? 2:1? Instead you can just add q1 railguns behind which does not affect the very important asteroid collector "real estate".

Even from a non UPS-standpoint, you can understand at least point (b), because it gives more throughput, more asteroids collected per trip.

The mod removes the health issue, so there is no need to change resistances after all. When I first made the post I didn't expect it to be that easy to change it, so I recommended the resistances. There is no need to demonstrate UPS impact of the mod. "Definitionally", it makes ships less prone to destruction, so you can get away with fewer turrets, so you can have more throughput.

I'm sure my explanations again, still aren't sufficient for you, you'll want me to do 100 tests and explain 100 hours more. Which is why ->

Get back to me when you've made even an attempt at a UPS-optimal prom ship

[mmmPI]

Already I made a mod that doesn't change your beloved 99% explosive resistance. But of course you keep arguing about this as per usual. I explained this before 20 times to you re: why I mentioned resistance indirectly for turret priority, instead of turret priority directly.

"changing resistance isn't a solution it's a workaround, what you really want is a change in priority" => I'm arguing this because that's my opinion and it also appears to be literally is the thing that you are saying, you explained why you mentionned resistance indirectly, that is what a workaround is.

The two layers of railguns isn't a joke suggestion.

ok