The devs said that "the optimal strategy has to be fun", so if this becomes the optimal strategy, they are probably going to do something about it, especially given that they so far have unironically pretty much always done everything right.
@@MaxWeigel-g5yI doubt it. There are already plenty of playstyles or strategies you don't see in speedruns because the time investment to set them up is too great. And most categories don't allow pre-made blueprints, even your own.
Sorry, I don't agree about the assembler part. I believe that yes, people will use the new automatic assemblers to build a nightmare circuit mall with just 4 of them but for the most part it's gonna be like circuit network is today. Some people will have fun using it. And others don't and those will keep building malls with thousands of assemblers. For me it's a good addition.
Ye, I think the 4 assembler bases will just not be as fast anyway to rival a thousand and if you replicate it to a thousand then you're not exactly gaining anything (other than fan).
I don't share the feeling that they want the players to do something with these quality of life changes in the expansion. Rather I think they want to give the player more options.
ya im trying to think of a spot where a low qty item is needed, like say an inserter or miner or something that requires green circuits and similar inputs you can easily swap this from one to the other that doesnt need much output and you then dont need to spaghetti as much stuff. feels like it could be pretty intermediate player friendly at small scales. Now the big factory like what he is talking about is definitely a problem with 4 assembly machines doing a ton of stuff but only time will tell.
humans have a tendency to sometimes make bad mistakes when given too many options. Several games actually have the pitfall that the most optimal way to play is not the fun way. And that pushes people into a trap. In this case, blueprints are already a mixed bag. Is it more fun to solve the logistic problem or copy from someone who already has? You get more immediate gratification from the latter, but you haven't developed your skills and understanding, and the chance that you will enjoy the next challenge is diminished. (at the same time, on my 3rd playthrough, I don't want to have to solve the same problem yet again.) I think Nilaus's concern is quite valid, though as someone with 3k hours in the game, there is a lot here that I would love to be able to play with.
@@JohnMeinelI don't mind the concerns he has, I just don't share the opinion that the developers want to push these new features as replacements for what we do currently.
my sincere hope is that the additional complexity isn't balanced into the game so that it is available if desired, but not needed to play the game, much like the more advanced circuit designs available now are. You can fairly easily go megabase without complex circuit networks, but it's certainly more interesting to deploy them.
I'm currently using the Craft Combinator Mod (Xeraph's fork) which lets you set recipes, and read ingredients - basically what this FFF does - in my SE run. It has been super fun way to learn circuits, and helps with some of the "oops I forgot this thing" when building on other planets. Basically I have a setup which lets me request raw resources via delivery canons, but only need a single delivery canon per planet. The crafting combinator will set the delivery canon recipe based on what is needed to ship over. Then on the planet itself I have a "generic" mall, which dynamically recursively finds & builds the ingredients for what is missing, including asking the delivery canon for anything missing. The above then combined with the Ghost Scanner combinator mod will start to auto build what I'm missing when I stamp down some new random SE building without me having to add it to the mall, or ship it over. It is slow, if I queue up too much it breaks, it doesn't deal with fluids well - or if something takes multiple recipes (ie SE green circuits), but has made my SE run much more enjoyable. Plus I'm WAY better at circuits now because of it - which has been great fun to learn. I'm looking forward to official support!
I don't think playing factorio is about playing it right, for me it is playing for fun. I like designing my own blue prints (that i never use again). That's what's fun for me in this game. If someone likes to use your blueprints then that's fine, i don't think that's a problem. Using them doesn't make the game less accesible, quite the opposite. Not everyone has time to come up with these designs themselfs. But if you have the time and would like to get deeper into circuitry in factorio, in the new update you will be able to. So in my opinion it doesn't restrict anyones options playing the game, using these advanced blueprints are optional. You can play the game without it.
Does it matter though? I usually do not use blueprints from the internet, but I still have a ton of fun. I may make something like this, but only for a mall, it should be doable, at least if I will split it to several blocks that cycle through few recipes instead of making everything in one big block. I will not be able to have quality assemblers/ modules everywhere? Well, the factory needs to expand then to meet that demand. I honestly doubt even 25% of people will download those blueprints and use them regularly. Most will not care about this mechanic or will use it how they can. Also, I think there should be a special type of backup station, that if train has no path, it will try to go to any of the backup station. Or any station can be a backup station but you can add in train which stations are backups for it, and it will choose the closest one that it can path to (or one with highest priority).
#1 the mentioned balancer issue and automated assemblers. You don't have to use them and you aren't missing out if you don't. People can be creative and play how they want. I think shareable blueprints are more of a hamper to people learning the game. #2 All of these changes seem to be leaning towards flexibility. You are going to have many bases and you aren't going to be able to visit them all and babysit them. Having trains pick up mixed loads, assembler receipes automated, and every inserter is a filter inserter is welcome.
I agree with you completely. Allowing more flexible play is always a good thing IMO. I just did a no belt, no pipe play through, enabling red sci bots. It was super fun rethinking how to design everything because I couldnt use belt or pipes at all. "except 1 piece of pipe in earlygame power per boiler" It made oil a fun nightmare.
It is up to the player whether or not they want to use blueprints and to what extent. No one is really forcing you to use them. There is a point to be made here, however, and that is that circuit setups by design can trivialize a lot of the core game with very little drawback. There's just zero downside to not using them.
As a fairly new player that is on his first proper playthrough after having watched plenty of playthroughs, currently at blue science and started working with bots: Personally I have just started working through advanced oil processing, so it doesn't clog my system with heavy or light oil. I have only a basic understanding of circuit signals and how they work. I have only seen other people use combinators, and would probably need a tutorial to get started on that properly. While I understand the assembler recipe setting is an interesting addition, it would add an unreasonable complexity to an already complicated system. You effectively need a PHD in computer science to work with circuit signals as is. HOWEVER, nobody forces you to use the assembler recipe settings, meaning you can play the game just fine as is and would only come into effect whatsoever when you get into the late mid game to late game. This system would only be there for the absolute top end players to design and high end bases to use and shouldn't be seen as a requirement. Also I believe the majority of the design part of this would be copy and paste once you have a certain level of logic set up. This appears to be a bigger problem than it actually is. Put it on max tier assemblers or a late game science exclusive and call it a day. That way you couldn't bother with it in the early game and in the late game you have those in abundance. I wouldn't even give this functionality a tutorial, since it's just an extension of the circuit network.
I mean, you basically made the couter-point yourself: the "just copy what somebody else did" genie's been out of the bottle for years. Technically since before blueprints were even a thing. It's been possible to play the game by just stamping down other's designs for years. The folks who do that now are the ones who will keep doing it. The ones who prefer to make things themselves from scratch, or who use a blueprint as an example to figure something out are going to keep doing that. And the ones who love to go deep into the weeds are now going to be able to go even deeper into the weeds. The game doesn't actually reward maximum efficiency as much as some folks think. That's a rabbit some players chase hard, but a lot of other players are only interested in making decentralized town bases or sushi belts or trying to make their factory run Doom or whatever. I'm reminded of some of the earlier FFFs where the devs winged about robots and the fact that folks /could/ make full robot bases which were super simple and easy and boring... and how rarely anyone actually does it, because they're too simple and easy and boring.
I don't these kinds of automated assembler systems will break the game too much. Sure it is much cheaper to set up a single peak quality Assembler 3 and 4 peak quality quality module 3s, but when you only have around one good setup, I think it wouldn't take that much longer to just run 3000 copper cables, then 2000 circuits, then 2000 inserters, etc. What I mean is, the automated assembling is great if you want to set it and forget it and come back 10 hours later with 1000 peak quality inserters, but touching it every 2 hours can also have a similar effect.
Hahaha, I finally comprehend the *why* of your masterclass designs - I'll still be using those instead of some hypercondensed circuit design because my brain just doesn't work that way
I am not a beginner anymore, but for me it was pretty fun figuring stuff out when i first encountered it. Also i found it very useful to use simle circuit networks rather early (priority for old splitters with no priority) and theb built more conplex things by figuring stuff out, just going step by step
I share your fear that it might get overboard with "make anything" blueprints, but I do have the hope that the sheer need for quantity supersedes all circuit controlled setups. you CAN make a setup that first crates, green, then red then blue circuits, but a classic approach makes so much more of them with way less space and even less headache.
The ideas would be that this would be for a limited recipe set, limited production system, limited pollution, or limited footprint system. I can't think of how it'd be used for dealing with the quality mechanic. A simple application is simply the basic belt mall, or dealing with building the various military items (yellow and red bullets, or the variants of the grenades).
If not for you, I'd never be able to enjoy Factorio. So it's a valid concern that the game can become too hard. But your 1.0 playthrough going from the beginning to the megabase has taught me a lot to get started
I've also never really played Vanilla Factorio because I don't see a point. I'd rather do modded playthroughs because the recipes are different and make for a new puzzle experience for me
9 місяців тому+1
It's super nice to not have to use a combinator to set train limit to 0 but yes, skipping may be annoying. Before train limits were available I was hacking it by having a signal before intersection going to the station and force the station to enable when there was a train behind the signal. Avoided the problem but created some new ones 😃
I think the devs are going to remain committed to what they have said in the past, that the game will be beaten without using the circuit network. I agree with your overall thoughts that most people are just going to use a blueprint and be done with it, but I think the intention of an addition like this is for the few people that dig that super deep level of additional automation... I think it was added to appease a niche part of the player base. EDIT: Also, I hope you can use the circuit network to adjust train station priority. So, if one station is requesting 5 trains, but all my trains are going to a station that require 2, we can balance that load.
Totally agree that circuit assemblers are going to make the game more INACCESSIBLE. The average player is going to either ignore the feature altogether or copy someoneelse's blueprint at which point their entire save game will be trash when an inevitable hotfix / patch changes anything in the blueprint as they will be unable to fix it themselves.
I like this series where you provide your opinion about the friday factorio facts. Although I do not share your opinion a 100% on all dev diaries, I like your take on the changes because you simply have a (lot) more time in the game than me. Keep it up!
Allright I know you don't read comments, but this still bugs me a lot I fully disagree with your stance on the assembler circuit controls; you are not the sole person the game is made for, and I'm willing to bet most people don't know how to use the circuit network, so the challenge changes depending on your skill level, which i think is absolutely fantastic since it keeps the game fresh and replayable: Inexperienced players will have to make decisions for where to use the expensive, high-quality assemblers. Experienced players will have to create and engineer a design using (seemingly) massively complex circuit networks to make these assemblers do what you want. Based on how the current recipe combinator mod works, this isn't a complex feat as you describe it, though more complex use-cases would naturally become less accessible for more casual players. This is, assuming neither group just grabs blueprints from the web w/o proper understanding of how they work, but that's beside the point. Blueprints are an issue in themselves that I feel needs some looking at. Also, if you say you think this is unhealthy, don't contribute to the problem. Don't say "most players will download this as a blueprint and that's bad" and then IMMEDIATELY turn around and state that you'll facilitate exactly that.
Interrupts and items identified for trains is a good idea, and I don't think it'll be an issue with traffic or over abundance because you can limit a station to 1 train, or disable the stations as people do now. It'll be a good change once it goes live. I agree on the circuit network complexity for the assemblers though. I'm a programmer, but I don't 100% get how to chain a series of equates and math functions (in Factorio) to accomplish something like that. I've just recently learned about memory cells and can set up sushi on my own (75% of the time). But I feel like something equivalent to "scan the network and if you have less than X of a thing, change these assemblers to build more of those things" without it spazzing out and rapidly swapping between different items is going to be beyond me.
I think this could work well with certain builds. For instance, purple science. Where we need iron rods and iron circuits, they get the same input, Iron Plates, but they can switch back and forth depending on the need.
I disagree on changing the assembler recipes. This simply allows flexibility that is not hard wired into the factory and the player may choose how they may like to use it. A more realistic example may be a 2-3 step production process. That takes in raw resources, uses one set of assemblers, builds the first item, stores the items, then switches to the next production step, and repeats for each step. This should be doable without over complication. In some cases this can reduce the logistics, number of assemblers and allow players to make "smarter" factory layouts in place of spamming more assemblers to the level or ability of the player. Giving the player the flexibility is not a bad thing.
ok so i paused at 11:33 after you talked about your concern with trains all filling with copper, and i had the same worry, but after thinking about it and talking with people i dont think that is as big a concern as you might think. So yes i suppose it could happen if you have the schedual or train stops set up wrong, but if you have it set up right, meaning train stops set with train limits and your inturupts in your schedual set up to only send the train to the depot if its empty and doesnt have a place to go, then the train filled with copper ore just sits at the copper ore pick up until a drop is open. no more trains go to fill up on ore and can go to other stops. now if a train is set to go to a depot any time it doesnt have a stop to go to, even when it has items, then yes its possible to fill all trains up with one type of item and then sit at the depot waiting for a stop to open then yes you can dead lock your system.
setting the recipe for a max-quality assembler is only ONE use-case for assembler-logic circuits. But that doesn't mean that won't be the most useful element....there is still a LOT about the expansion we don't know.... HOWEVER.... one thing we DO know is that physical space on the ship-platform is expansive and LIMITED...making the ability to have FEWER assemblers on that platform quite VALUABLE. By being able to change the recipe an assumbler is crafting using circuits, you can have a better factory aboard your spaceship. IA single assembler can craft gun turrets, ammo, , solar panels, circuits, fuel, etc.... cycling through each recipe AS needed... And sure, you can also maximize the value of your top-tier assemblers by having them craft high quality items, but i also think the "set recipe" function will be more valuable in places where space is LIMITED.
i could see the new train stop interrupts and station features being very confusing and daunting towards newer players as well like the circuit controlled assemblers. plenty of factorio players that already don't understand trains as is.
I think people that were going to use online blueprints (or only certain online blueprints) would already just "plug-and-play" big malls with very little to no additional thought or tinkering. Yes, I do think that I could build both of these options (big mall vs micromall) personally but I'm usually not looking for either anyway. If I start making a "mall" in a game, it's gradual and evolving. If I want to stick down a blueprint, it's probably because I have a larger endgame goal in mind that I'd rather just paste it and continue forwards. I also think this won't end up being the "optimal way" even if those machine are high quality. I totally understand your concern though, especially considering we haven't seen everything and the impact these decisions have with everything else. I generally trust the developers considering they are constantly playing with and evolving this stuff. They're not perfect, obviously, but again I think the whole "someone will blueprint online and paste this" is kind of a moot point when compared to the current state of things.
There was a mod for flipping the inputs and outputs of buildings a long time ago. Not sure why they devs couldn't get it in, but at least its coming now.
Making something like a dynamically adjusting smelter array that detects being low on copper relative to iron and swaps rows to smelt copper dynamically would be sick. Useful - i mean not enormously - but so much fun. I totally understand the criticism of the omni assembler just makes everything being pretty lame - its essentially taking the drone style gameplay that just negates half the game and blowing it out further, particularly if its just some blueprint you got, totally got it, and yeah very negative interact with the quality system.
A solution could be to increase the time required to create basic buildings such as assemblers, inserters, etc. It makes no sense that the mk3 assembler takes 0.5s to craft, and the engine takes 10s. This will eliminate the potential problem with one circuit controlled assembler = manufactoring hub for everything.
time gating isnt really a solution when you get to requester chests in factorio, you're well into lategame and can just plop down more assemblers, or just beacon everything, plus making assemblers 10s to craft would make the early game a slog, the reason engines take so long is the devs dont want you hand crafting them, the crafting time is encouragement to automate making them, the reason assemblers take so little time is its expected of you to craft _a lot_ of these by hand. but by the time to get beacons and requester chests time gating isnt a an obstacle, its more of a "how big does this thing need to be", once you can effortlessly scale crafting times become basically meaningless.
I feel like a big part of the challenge and fun of games like this is designing creative solutions from limited materials and options. I’m afraid that adding too much functionality just makes it less interesting and more like work instead.
I'm looking forward to train stop priority, solely to try balancing Vitamelange consumption in Space Exploration. Currently whichever stop is closest just eats everything and the other never gets anything...
If it's any consolation to you I don't recall ever using your blueprints ;-) I agree that the circuit-assembler-monstrosity-gif the devs used to show off assembler switching did not impress me. When playing Space Exporation I had a similar feeling about part of that mod that demands some hardcore use of circuit networks. I wasn't a fan of this design choice, but mods are by definition not mainstream and so I plodded through (you will find this part yourself later on in your own SE playthrough). I think we need to start making sure that the devs know that not everyone likes combinator networks - we already need them a bit for oil, but more is definitely less in this area of Factorio for me, unless they go whole hog and put a more complete suit of combinator items in.
the only circuit network stuff you need from oil in base game is wiring pumps to turn off and on to crack with simple "x oil too high" you dont need any complex conditionals for the base game because the way science costs work in base factorio is you will never deadlock on not having enough light or heavy oil, unless youre like on a deathworld using light oil for flamethrowers and also building a fuckton of blue belts while doing lots of lategame research, and even then you can just plop down a few fluid containers.
Personally, i don't use blueprints unless i can understand what it's doing. With balancers, it's actually not hard to make a decent balancer. The hard part is optimizing and compacting it, so I don't feel as bad copying them, though i do still prefer to design my own. With something like this? Ya, there's no chance I'd actually copy a blueprint like this. I might try to design something like it on a smaller scale (or use it for a sushi base), but I will not just download a blueprint from something like it. Designing blueprints is literally the most fun aspect of factorio for me, so downloading them is literally removing the most fun aspect. Also i just wanted to mention that the build shown only makes inserters. It would take a lot of work to modify it to support other products or expand it to more products. If you just need inserters, then yes it would be plug-and-play, but otherwise you'd need separate visually identical blueprints for every type of product.
Unless they make other aspects of the game dependent on this by making size limits on bases or something else, this can just be a creativity opportunity instead of being necessary. However, I'm still scared it may end up being more necessary
I am a newbie. I bought the game after playing the demo over and again for nearly a hundred hours, and after three days of the full game, the demo was more fun. Trains, Oil, Uranium, and wires are all nightmare fuel. Powerline upgrades come so late that I just stick with the wooden posts out of spite. I kinda love the basic game, not so much the parts that I need a degree in engineering to understand.
I think you need to isolate the parts a bit more. As a newbie myself, a lot of those things seemed intimidating at a glance, but I think I was just scared of the game itself because I knew what it could look like. All those parts are actually quite simple, and once I spent a few minutes on them I kicked myself for thinking they'd be so difficult.
Circuits as such are mainly not used by newcomers but this is according to me for the Factorio-nerds :). So as such it could be a game-breaker for the wannabe nerds but not for newcomers or real nerds :)
well, that's mostly the point. Why have something that applies and will be used by so few people due to how unfun it is to set up and how impossible it is for 99% of people? It just creates a scenario where everyone just uses a blueprint they don't understand because it's the best way to do it. It's like creating circuits for train networks, but you make it as simple as possible to copy/paste and alter slightly, you do the work once then never do it again
The assemblers look really complex, not really sure I’ll use that. I only take blueprints of stuff I could make myself. The other things looks cool so far.
its big but simple if you think about it just get signal of the all the network content make constant negative signal of how many you need hook it all to the assembler 😁
I think factorio is quite complete as it is, I was hoping the expansion would introduce "only" new planets to explore, maybe more science, that's fine, elevated rails? ok why not. But I'm starting to think this is too much. Actually, what I was hoping for was that at some point playing the game the local population would evolve to a new state, were a intelligent mind appears (like the overmind from starcraft1), and then the dynamic of the game changes, now, you have to produce war machines and send them to the front to fight with this overmind. You should just take care about production and the IA that plays on your side would take care of were to push and were to defend. Just the game would turn into a production/fight game, were you have to fight like hell to breach the front lines and expand to a new ore location.... sending t800's walking, on the jeeps or thanks or even on the spidertrons... with your aireforce and your orbital nuke strikes.... that should could be madness, like, you don't have to beat the game, just survive the longest you can, or just keep expanding but a higher cost. man... I would love to see that... can you imagine?
I disagree about the book of balancers analogy. A balancer book is nice, but it's ultimately unnecessary because studying the belts is simply more effective. It's nice targeting exact production amounts but you can do well enough by just making more. This will help me in certain scenarios but most places I'll just scale up instead
im expecting the circuit assemblers to be optional, something to play around with on the side, not a core part of my factory..... on the other hand, you only need the logic part one time and can then drive hundreds of assemblers off of it.... nah, probably need to seperate the recipes into clusters or you would end up with hundreds of assemblers making the same item at the same time, all the time.
You're not wrong that it might ruin the game that if you don't build parts yourself but you also have to look at it from the perspective of making things better for the future generations. I look at it as a programming language standpoint. Not everyone needs to learn assembly language if you're a computer science major. You know the problems with trying tow work with it, using registers and the lower level area is difficult. Barely anyone uses the assembly language, however, everyone uses the language & structure that were built on top of it. I see the designs here as the assembly language components. Not everyone needs to learn all these parts and most likely, there will be a big book on balancers, or this type of complexity... But once people get those designs, they can make wonderful things from it.
Problems breed solutions. Solving all problems leads to not needing solutions. Factorio draws in people that like finding solutions. Are the proposed changes too much? Who knows, I guess we'll see.
I think streamlining the process isn't solving problems. I don't really get where this thought process comes from. And with the new planets each having a challenge and new complexity being introduced with quality, etc, I don't really see what problems won't be left to solve.
@@jayjasespud There is no question that it eliminates some problems. It also creates some at the same time. The only thing that is debatable is if it is an improvement or a detriment to the enjoyment of the game play. I'm undecided.
Factorio is basically becoming EU4, the reason I stop playing EU4 was because Paradox kept adding more more more every patch making the game ever more complex for no reason other than to satisfy that 0.00001% of hardcore players while alienating the rest. Hope Factorio doesnt go to far and know where to stop the scalation.
I've made it to the rocket silo barely using circuit networks at all. Yes there are people who will download optimal schematics and plunk them down without fully understanding them. But they've been doing that since back when you had to make purple science when you're killing biters. If they want to ruin the game for themselves, or if they enjoy some other aspect and don't want to engage with that aspect, then that's their business. And I agree with you that this setup sweeps the legs out from under the quality system... so I'm just not gonna use it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I think it's fine for a game to have systems not all players can use so long as they have plenty of fun to be had by players who don't use those systems. In it's golden age, World of Warcraft had huge percentages of players who never set foot in a raid and had no intention of ever doing so. They seemed to be having more fun than the raiders were.
i hope the do the beacon change. and not just skip to spite you, hehe. it would definitely make builds so much more interesting to look at. beacon rows just look boring and generic, boxes or rows.
For me, this does not resemble a factorio.... Most factorios produce a single product or a specific kind of products, this example can make anything at any time.... But it is cool. I know that I am not going to play with that. :-) but the actual useful part of this, is to me a bad hard to see. You can expand your base. expansion for me is part of the challenge and fun. And it negates the need to expand the production of moduls.... If that is what I wanted then I would have played in sandbox mode.
seems he forgot people dont need to play the same eh.. some do city blocks some do spagetti some do both some know circuit some dont some use train some dont... its okay.. if you have fun... you dont need that blueprint and its okay to not have it ... -.-"
There is a huge amount of people playing this game almost exclusively with copied blueprints. All it'll take is one person uploading some autocrafting prints to change the game balance forever
@@astrogat and does it even matter, play the game the way you want to, theirs a reason the games moddable, theres a reason you can tweak so many options, besides playing purely vanilla to get achivements there really isnt a correct way to play, you arnt a better factorio player because you dont use online blueprints, because factorio isnt a competition
Who cares? More people playing the game is a good thing. Complaining people can download blueprints is gatekeeping. If you don't want to play that way, it's as simple as not copy-pasting a string.
I don't see how a 95% maybe 99% solo player game could even remotly become unaccesable for new players due to complexity... whitch can't happen in the first place until one starts to mess up the installation with hundreds of "optional!!!" mods. those few tweaks to th base game can't do anything like that on their own. The bigger issue imo is, that there are hundreds or thousands of mods that litteraly do the same thing and nobody does, will or can clean up the mod portal because nobody pays for this work.
I disagree about autocrafting. There is lot of optional puzzles in Factorio - for example oil cracking, Kovarex progress and even trains, that you don't really need to build. Autocrafting will be amazing puzzle to build. Personally I think blueprints are cheating and cheesy, but it is everyones choice how to play your games.
I think your points on the circuits and changeable building recipes has little merit. 1, in that people who don't understand circuits already don't use them, or copy existing blueprints that have circuit behavior already defined. By making more things circuit aware does not change this fact. 2, Having a feature is not the same as using said feature. I for the life of me have never used the train stop read train inventory function. I know several people who don't like the Korvex process and never bother unlocking nor using it. Sound warnings? Only few people use those, as far as I can tell from base reviews/viewing others bases. 3, I disagree with your belt balancer example as an example of just using someone else's blueprint. Even a simple recipe like smelting, where you take in fuel and ore, and return a product, has so many different concerns and limitations that even though the factorio community has pretty much decided the 12x2 smelting line is pretty optimal, there are still a tonne of different designs for smelting. However, for belt balancing, no matter the load, no matter the belt type, hell, even space requirements, you still want to balance x amount to x1 amount. Unless I'm mistaken, or someone is trying to balance from ridiculously big to small or vice versa, belt balancing is a solved problem, and trying to solve the same problem is pointless. And even if you re-solved it, at worst, it sorta works, and at best, you just came up with almost exactly the same solution that already existed. That isn't gameplay, that's just rote memorizing. And instead, people just prefer to use blueprints.
Re-solving the same problem is not the same as rote memorizing. I'm pretty much incapable of rote memorizing something _unless_ I can re-solve it. Coming up with the same solution that already existed is not in my opinion a waste of time. At best, it gives a better appreciation for and understanding of the design in question.
@@angeldude101 So, you've solved/re-solved a 4/4 balancer. Does your balancer ever change? Have you implemented several versions of your balancer, in different factorio games?
@@stefsmurf Sometimes it might get flipped, with the middle balancer either before or after the undergrounds. It's not a meaningful difference, but it's enough to be noticeable to me and also clear that they're structurally the same despite being slightly different blueprints. The important part is that the act of re-solving it makes it easier to understand why the existing blueprints work and why they're optimal. 8x8 balancer? I'm more likely to design or redesign my own since it's less obvious how everything connects and why or that it's optimal. I know I designed a custom 8x8 specifically for turning corners. And then there's the fact that the typical designs are ultimately optimized for the most common usecases and aren't actually perfect in every sense. Look up Universal Balancers for some completely overkill designs that take way too much space, but have interesting and potentially desirable properties that the standard designs don't have. Oh, I have actually made an actually original 4x4 balancer specifically for two of the lanes go in the opposite direction to suit the specific use-case of a bi-directional bus (which sacrifices 50% of your throughput for the flexibility of being able add to and remove from the bus at any point; great for when you're bad at planning ahead). Keep in mind: for me, designing blueprints is literally more fun than actually playing for the most part. Using the same design for everything and copy-pasting it everywhere kills the enjoyment of making weird specialized designs for silly niche usecases or that optimize for unconventional properties. That's the biggest reason why I'm so excited for 2.0. Quality, rail changes, and everything else give so many new opportunities to design new blueprints rather than just using the same ones that everyone's always used.
I always compared factorio to programming. In the programming world you have some stuff that is just... why reinvent the wheel. If you get why it works and could maybe do it in some reasonable way alone, just copy the better design and learn from it. But if you don't know how that specific thing works, and you still copypaste it, you will be robbing yourself out of the experience gained from creating such thing, and when it breaks you will have NO idea as to why. With circuit enabled assemblers i feel the same way. If you know how such thing works, go copy it. But i find it rather hard to believe that you will know unless you have extensive knowledge about circuitry.
I see zero reason to even create that monstrosity. A couple lines of assemblers with a loop-back for failed quality does the same thing but faster and with less buildings. A LOT less buildings, and a LOT faster.
@@Waggabagaboo By then you cannot even automatically set the circuit up, which you can do for the assembler, so, more like 2 buildings and a half if you think about it.
The devs said that "the optimal strategy has to be fun", so if this becomes the optimal strategy, they are probably going to do something about it, especially given that they so far have unironically pretty much always done everything right.
Ive only just started playing factorio, man i swear i shouldve gotten into it sooner, its awsome
This will change speedruns forever
@@MaxWeigel-g5yI doubt it. There are already plenty of playstyles or strategies you don't see in speedruns because the time investment to set them up is too great. And most categories don't allow pre-made blueprints, even your own.
Sorry, I don't agree about the assembler part. I believe that yes, people will use the new automatic assemblers to build a nightmare circuit mall with just 4 of them but for the most part it's gonna be like circuit network is today. Some people will have fun using it. And others don't and those will keep building malls with thousands of assemblers. For me it's a good addition.
Ye, I think the 4 assembler bases will just not be as fast anyway to rival a thousand and if you replicate it to a thousand then you're not exactly gaining anything (other than fan).
I’ve never seen a mall with thousand assemblers bro…
I don't share the feeling that they want the players to do something with these quality of life changes in the expansion. Rather I think they want to give the player more options.
ya im trying to think of a spot where a low qty item is needed, like say an inserter or miner or something that requires green circuits and similar inputs you can easily swap this from one to the other that doesnt need much output and you then dont need to spaghetti as much stuff. feels like it could be pretty intermediate player friendly at small scales. Now the big factory like what he is talking about is definitely a problem with 4 assembly machines doing a ton of stuff but only time will tell.
humans have a tendency to sometimes make bad mistakes when given too many options. Several games actually have the pitfall that the most optimal way to play is not the fun way. And that pushes people into a trap.
In this case, blueprints are already a mixed bag. Is it more fun to solve the logistic problem or copy from someone who already has? You get more immediate gratification from the latter, but you haven't developed your skills and understanding, and the chance that you will enjoy the next challenge is diminished. (at the same time, on my 3rd playthrough, I don't want to have to solve the same problem yet again.)
I think Nilaus's concern is quite valid, though as someone with 3k hours in the game, there is a lot here that I would love to be able to play with.
@@JohnMeinelI don't mind the concerns he has, I just don't share the opinion that the developers want to push these new features as replacements for what we do currently.
Inb4 the next dosh vid "can you beat factorio using only 1 Assembler"
You probably already can with recursive blueprints...
@@AbsoluteHuman I believe there was a video or a thing i read on the Factorio subreddit where someone already did that longtime ago with recursive
Well you need refinery and chemical factory too.
I'm going to go with, yes, but not very quickly.
my sincere hope is that the additional complexity isn't balanced into the game so that it is available if desired, but not needed to play the game, much like the more advanced circuit designs available now are. You can fairly easily go megabase without complex circuit networks, but it's certainly more interesting to deploy them.
I'm currently using the Craft Combinator Mod (Xeraph's fork) which lets you set recipes, and read ingredients - basically what this FFF does - in my SE run. It has been super fun way to learn circuits, and helps with some of the "oops I forgot this thing" when building on other planets.
Basically I have a setup which lets me request raw resources via delivery canons, but only need a single delivery canon per planet. The crafting combinator will set the delivery canon recipe based on what is needed to ship over. Then on the planet itself I have a "generic" mall, which dynamically recursively finds & builds the ingredients for what is missing, including asking the delivery canon for anything missing.
The above then combined with the Ghost Scanner combinator mod will start to auto build what I'm missing when I stamp down some new random SE building without me having to add it to the mall, or ship it over.
It is slow, if I queue up too much it breaks, it doesn't deal with fluids well - or if something takes multiple recipes (ie SE green circuits), but has made my SE run much more enjoyable. Plus I'm WAY better at circuits now because of it - which has been great fun to learn.
I'm looking forward to official support!
I don't think playing factorio is about playing it right, for me it is playing for fun. I like designing my own blue prints (that i never use again). That's what's fun for me in this game. If someone likes to use your blueprints then that's fine, i don't think that's a problem. Using them doesn't make the game less accesible, quite the opposite. Not everyone has time to come up with these designs themselfs. But if you have the time and would like to get deeper into circuitry in factorio, in the new update you will be able to. So in my opinion it doesn't restrict anyones options playing the game, using these advanced blueprints are optional. You can play the game without it.
Does it matter though? I usually do not use blueprints from the internet, but I still have a ton of fun. I may make something like this, but only for a mall, it should be doable, at least if I will split it to several blocks that cycle through few recipes instead of making everything in one big block. I will not be able to have quality assemblers/ modules everywhere? Well, the factory needs to expand then to meet that demand. I honestly doubt even 25% of people will download those blueprints and use them regularly. Most will not care about this mechanic or will use it how they can.
Also, I think there should be a special type of backup station, that if train has no path, it will try to go to any of the backup station. Or any station can be a backup station but you can add in train which stations are backups for it, and it will choose the closest one that it can path to (or one with highest priority).
#1 the mentioned balancer issue and automated assemblers. You don't have to use them and you aren't missing out if you don't. People can be creative and play how they want. I think shareable blueprints are more of a hamper to people learning the game.
#2 All of these changes seem to be leaning towards flexibility. You are going to have many bases and you aren't going to be able to visit them all and babysit them. Having trains pick up mixed loads, assembler receipes automated, and every inserter is a filter inserter is welcome.
I agree with you completely. Allowing more flexible play is always a good thing IMO.
I just did a no belt, no pipe play through, enabling red sci bots. It was super fun rethinking how to design everything because I couldnt use belt or pipes at all. "except 1 piece of pipe in earlygame power per boiler" It made oil a fun nightmare.
It is up to the player whether or not they want to use blueprints and to what extent. No one is really forcing you to use them. There is a point to be made here, however, and that is that circuit setups by design can trivialize a lot of the core game with very little drawback. There's just zero downside to not using them.
Then: "I've built a mega base!"
Now: "I've built a micro base, which makes everything"
A lesson in minimalism. It takes forever to make 1 thing.
A lesson in minimalism. It takes forever to make 1 thing.
Yeah, can't wait to see what DaveMcW does with this!
@@fasddfadfgasdgsNot with a Foundry surrounded by speed modules.
this sounds fun and intresting af
As a fairly new player that is on his first proper playthrough after having watched plenty of playthroughs, currently at blue science and started working with bots:
Personally I have just started working through advanced oil processing, so it doesn't clog my system with heavy or light oil. I have only a basic understanding of circuit signals and how they work. I have only seen other people use combinators, and would probably need a tutorial to get started on that properly.
While I understand the assembler recipe setting is an interesting addition, it would add an unreasonable complexity to an already complicated system. You effectively need a PHD in computer science to work with circuit signals as is.
HOWEVER, nobody forces you to use the assembler recipe settings, meaning you can play the game just fine as is and would only come into effect whatsoever when you get into the late mid game to late game. This system would only be there for the absolute top end players to design and high end bases to use and shouldn't be seen as a requirement. Also I believe the majority of the design part of this would be copy and paste once you have a certain level of logic set up.
This appears to be a bigger problem than it actually is. Put it on max tier assemblers or a late game science exclusive and call it a day. That way you couldn't bother with it in the early game and in the late game you have those in abundance. I wouldn't even give this functionality a tutorial, since it's just an extension of the circuit network.
I play Factorio “on the shoulders of giants”. You and others have done the hard work, so I can benefit from it.
Ditto. I am so unoriginal on games like this and Captain of Industry. I use a LOT of blueprints.
I mean, you basically made the couter-point yourself: the "just copy what somebody else did" genie's been out of the bottle for years. Technically since before blueprints were even a thing. It's been possible to play the game by just stamping down other's designs for years. The folks who do that now are the ones who will keep doing it. The ones who prefer to make things themselves from scratch, or who use a blueprint as an example to figure something out are going to keep doing that. And the ones who love to go deep into the weeds are now going to be able to go even deeper into the weeds.
The game doesn't actually reward maximum efficiency as much as some folks think. That's a rabbit some players chase hard, but a lot of other players are only interested in making decentralized town bases or sushi belts or trying to make their factory run Doom or whatever.
I'm reminded of some of the earlier FFFs where the devs winged about robots and the fact that folks /could/ make full robot bases which were super simple and easy and boring... and how rarely anyone actually does it, because they're too simple and easy and boring.
I'm just excited to make a disgusting sushi belt mall with sushi assemblers
I’m waiting for the one assembler factory. One assembler, a sushi belt, one furnace and one small oil setup to feed a rocket.
I don't these kinds of automated assembler systems will break the game too much.
Sure it is much cheaper to set up a single peak quality Assembler 3 and 4 peak quality quality module 3s, but when you only have around one good setup, I think it wouldn't take that much longer to just run 3000 copper cables, then 2000 circuits, then 2000 inserters, etc.
What I mean is, the automated assembling is great if you want to set it and forget it and come back 10 hours later with 1000 peak quality inserters, but touching it every 2 hours can also have a similar effect.
Hahaha, I finally comprehend the *why* of your masterclass designs - I'll still be using those instead of some hypercondensed circuit design because my brain just doesn't work that way
I am not a beginner anymore, but for me it was pretty fun figuring stuff out when i first encountered it.
Also i found it very useful to use simle circuit networks rather early (priority for old splitters with no priority) and theb built more conplex things by figuring stuff out, just going step by step
I am completely happy with the auto assemblers.. I have my own ideas for playing around with them. I find all of these FFF inspiring!
I share your fear that it might get overboard with "make anything" blueprints, but I do have the hope that the sheer need for quantity supersedes all circuit controlled setups. you CAN make a setup that first crates, green, then red then blue circuits, but a classic approach makes so much more of them with way less space and even less headache.
The ideas would be that this would be for a limited recipe set, limited production system, limited pollution, or limited footprint system. I can't think of how it'd be used for dealing with the quality mechanic.
A simple application is simply the basic belt mall, or dealing with building the various military items (yellow and red bullets, or the variants of the grenades).
If not for you, I'd never be able to enjoy Factorio. So it's a valid concern that the game can become too hard. But your 1.0 playthrough going from the beginning to the megabase has taught me a lot to get started
I've also never really played Vanilla Factorio because I don't see a point. I'd rather do modded playthroughs because the recipes are different and make for a new puzzle experience for me
It's super nice to not have to use a combinator to set train limit to 0 but yes, skipping may be annoying.
Before train limits were available I was hacking it by having a signal before intersection going to the station and force the station to enable when there was a train behind the signal. Avoided the problem but created some new ones 😃
I think the devs are going to remain committed to what they have said in the past, that the game will be beaten without using the circuit network. I agree with your overall thoughts that most people are just going to use a blueprint and be done with it, but I think the intention of an addition like this is for the few people that dig that super deep level of additional automation... I think it was added to appease a niche part of the player base.
EDIT: Also, I hope you can use the circuit network to adjust train station priority. So, if one station is requesting 5 trains, but all my trains are going to a station that require 2, we can balance that load.
Totally agree that circuit assemblers are going to make the game more INACCESSIBLE. The average player is going to either ignore the feature altogether or copy someoneelse's blueprint at which point their entire save game will be trash when an inevitable hotfix / patch changes anything in the blueprint as they will be unable to fix it themselves.
I like this series where you provide your opinion about the friday factorio facts. Although I do not share your opinion a 100% on all dev diaries, I like your take on the changes because you simply have a (lot) more time in the game than me. Keep it up!
Couldn't agree more. The blueprints for auto crafting are gonna get out of control
Allright I know you don't read comments, but this still bugs me a lot
I fully disagree with your stance on the assembler circuit controls; you are not the sole person the game is made for, and I'm willing to bet most people don't know how to use the circuit network, so the challenge changes depending on your skill level, which i think is absolutely fantastic since it keeps the game fresh and replayable:
Inexperienced players will have to make decisions for where to use the expensive, high-quality assemblers.
Experienced players will have to create and engineer a design using (seemingly) massively complex circuit networks to make these assemblers do what you want. Based on how the current recipe combinator mod works, this isn't a complex feat as you describe it, though more complex use-cases would naturally become less accessible for more casual players.
This is, assuming neither group just grabs blueprints from the web w/o proper understanding of how they work, but that's beside the point. Blueprints are an issue in themselves that I feel needs some looking at.
Also, if you say you think this is unhealthy, don't contribute to the problem. Don't say "most players will download this as a blueprint and that's bad" and then IMMEDIATELY turn around and state that you'll facilitate exactly that.
Yeah the hypocrisy behind the blueprint thing bugged me too.
Interrupts and items identified for trains is a good idea, and I don't think it'll be an issue with traffic or over abundance because you can limit a station to 1 train, or disable the stations as people do now. It'll be a good change once it goes live.
I agree on the circuit network complexity for the assemblers though. I'm a programmer, but I don't 100% get how to chain a series of equates and math functions (in Factorio) to accomplish something like that. I've just recently learned about memory cells and can set up sushi on my own (75% of the time). But I feel like something equivalent to "scan the network and if you have less than X of a thing, change these assemblers to build more of those things" without it spazzing out and rapidly swapping between different items is going to be beyond me.
I think this could work well with certain builds.
For instance, purple science. Where we need iron rods and iron circuits, they get the same input, Iron Plates, but they can switch back and forth depending on the need.
oh boy i really really hope we will see a new base/megabase in a book series again with the new dlc sometimes in the future :)
I disagree on changing the assembler recipes. This simply allows flexibility that is not hard wired into the factory and the player may choose how they may like to use it. A more realistic example may be a 2-3 step production process. That takes in raw resources, uses one set of assemblers, builds the first item, stores the items, then switches to the next production step, and repeats for each step. This should be doable without over complication. In some cases this can reduce the logistics, number of assemblers and allow players to make "smarter" factory layouts in place of spamming more assemblers to the level or ability of the player. Giving the player the flexibility is not a bad thing.
Could you imagine if we could switch belt direction with a circuit?
ok so i paused at 11:33 after you talked about your concern with trains all filling with copper, and i had the same worry, but after thinking about it and talking with people i dont think that is as big a concern as you might think. So yes i suppose it could happen if you have the schedual or train stops set up wrong, but if you have it set up right, meaning train stops set with train limits and your inturupts in your schedual set up to only send the train to the depot if its empty and doesnt have a place to go, then the train filled with copper ore just sits at the copper ore pick up until a drop is open. no more trains go to fill up on ore and can go to other stops.
now if a train is set to go to a depot any time it doesnt have a stop to go to, even when it has items, then yes its possible to fill all trains up with one type of item and then sit at the depot waiting for a stop to open then yes you can dead lock your system.
I want the train station priority for DSP.
Good god yes!
setting the recipe for a max-quality assembler is only ONE use-case for assembler-logic circuits.
But that doesn't mean that won't be the most useful element....there is still a LOT about the expansion we don't know....
HOWEVER.... one thing we DO know is that physical space on the ship-platform is expansive and LIMITED...making the ability to have FEWER assemblers on that platform quite VALUABLE. By being able to change the recipe an assumbler is crafting using circuits, you can have a better factory aboard your spaceship. IA single assembler can craft gun turrets, ammo, , solar panels, circuits, fuel, etc.... cycling through each recipe AS needed...
And sure, you can also maximize the value of your top-tier assemblers by having them craft high quality items, but i also think the "set recipe" function will be more valuable in places where space is LIMITED.
i could see the new train stop interrupts and station features being very confusing and daunting towards newer players as well like the circuit controlled assemblers. plenty of factorio players that already don't understand trains as is.
After finishing the arcospheres in SE I'm not afraid building a wonderfull mall with hundreds of decider combinations, this will be fun ;)
Guess you are right. I had to stop myself to not only use (for example) your megabase blueprints but try get solution of my own...
I think people that were going to use online blueprints (or only certain online blueprints) would already just "plug-and-play" big malls with very little to no additional thought or tinkering.
Yes, I do think that I could build both of these options (big mall vs micromall) personally but I'm usually not looking for either anyway. If I start making a "mall" in a game, it's gradual and evolving. If I want to stick down a blueprint, it's probably because I have a larger endgame goal in mind that I'd rather just paste it and continue forwards.
I also think this won't end up being the "optimal way" even if those machine are high quality. I totally understand your concern though, especially considering we haven't seen everything and the impact these decisions have with everything else. I generally trust the developers considering they are constantly playing with and evolving this stuff. They're not perfect, obviously, but again I think the whole "someone will blueprint online and paste this" is kind of a moot point when compared to the current state of things.
Very much agree with this sentiment.
There was a mod for flipping the inputs and outputs of buildings a long time ago. Not sure why they devs couldn't get it in, but at least its coming now.
I love watching your FFF opinion videos because you almost never have the same opinion as me. The FFF reviews are just preaching to the choir
Making something like a dynamically adjusting smelter array that detects being low on copper relative to iron and swaps rows to smelt copper dynamically would be sick.
Useful - i mean not enormously - but so much fun.
I totally understand the criticism of the omni assembler just makes everything being pretty lame - its essentially taking the drone style gameplay that just negates half the game and blowing it out further, particularly if its just some blueprint you got, totally got it, and yeah very negative interact with the quality system.
@Nilaus
U should suggest to have quality items only on intermediates!
This would erase that problem, while still keeping both features.
I’d rather watch you read these and input your opinion rather than read it myself. Keep doing these ❤
A solution could be to increase the time required to create basic buildings such as assemblers, inserters, etc. It makes no sense that the mk3 assembler takes 0.5s to craft, and the engine takes 10s. This will eliminate the potential problem with one circuit controlled assembler = manufactoring hub for everything.
time gating isnt really a solution when you get to requester chests in factorio, you're well into lategame and can just plop down more assemblers, or just beacon everything, plus making assemblers 10s to craft would make the early game a slog, the reason engines take so long is the devs dont want you hand crafting them, the crafting time is encouragement to automate making them, the reason assemblers take so little time is its expected of you to craft _a lot_ of these by hand. but by the time to get beacons and requester chests time gating isnt a an obstacle, its more of a "how big does this thing need to be", once you can effortlessly scale crafting times become basically meaningless.
I feel like a big part of the challenge and fun of games like this is designing creative solutions from limited materials and options.
I’m afraid that adding too much functionality just makes it less interesting and more like work instead.
Always nice to have a critical point of view for the average player.
I think the fluid input flip is the best among them in this 2 FFF
great breakdown !
I'm looking forward to train stop priority, solely to try balancing Vitamelange consumption in Space Exploration. Currently whichever stop is closest just eats everything and the other never gets anything...
Uhm, ever heard about circuit logic & LTN? ^^ it’s doable with some exp.
If it's any consolation to you I don't recall ever using your blueprints ;-) I agree that the circuit-assembler-monstrosity-gif the devs used to show off assembler switching did not impress me. When playing Space Exporation I had a similar feeling about part of that mod that demands some hardcore use of circuit networks. I wasn't a fan of this design choice, but mods are by definition not mainstream and so I plodded through (you will find this part yourself later on in your own SE playthrough). I think we need to start making sure that the devs know that not everyone likes combinator networks - we already need them a bit for oil, but more is definitely less in this area of Factorio for me, unless they go whole hog and put a more complete suit of combinator items in.
the only circuit network stuff you need from oil in base game is wiring pumps to turn off and on to crack with simple "x oil too high" you dont need any complex conditionals for the base game because the way science costs work in base factorio is you will never deadlock on not having enough light or heavy oil, unless youre like on a deathworld using light oil for flamethrowers and also building a fuckton of blue belts while doing lots of lategame research, and even then you can just plop down a few fluid containers.
Also, Factorio is also about starting small and end up big, not start small and end up with 4 factories. xD
I hope they implement the change in beacons from Space Exploration... soooo mutch better, less beacons and more modules and more machines
I don't use belt balancer blueprint book. I will maybe use this so switch smelters.
we have this mod called crafting combinators' i use it and its awesome to play with.
Personally, i don't use blueprints unless i can understand what it's doing. With balancers, it's actually not hard to make a decent balancer. The hard part is optimizing and compacting it, so I don't feel as bad copying them, though i do still prefer to design my own.
With something like this? Ya, there's no chance I'd actually copy a blueprint like this. I might try to design something like it on a smaller scale (or use it for a sushi base), but I will not just download a blueprint from something like it. Designing blueprints is literally the most fun aspect of factorio for me, so downloading them is literally removing the most fun aspect.
Also i just wanted to mention that the build shown only makes inserters. It would take a lot of work to modify it to support other products or expand it to more products. If you just need inserters, then yes it would be plug-and-play, but otherwise you'd need separate visually identical blueprints for every type of product.
Unless they make other aspects of the game dependent on this by making size limits on bases or something else, this can just be a creativity opportunity instead of being necessary. However, I'm still scared it may end up being more necessary
interesting point
I am a newbie.
I bought the game after playing the demo over and again for nearly a hundred hours, and after three days of the full game, the demo was more fun.
Trains, Oil, Uranium, and wires are all nightmare fuel.
Powerline upgrades come so late that I just stick with the wooden posts out of spite.
I kinda love the basic game, not so much the parts that I need a degree in engineering to understand.
I think you need to isolate the parts a bit more. As a newbie myself, a lot of those things seemed intimidating at a glance, but I think I was just scared of the game itself because I knew what it could look like. All those parts are actually quite simple, and once I spent a few minutes on them I kicked myself for thinking they'd be so difficult.
Circuits as such are mainly not used by newcomers but this is according to me for the Factorio-nerds :). So as such it could be a game-breaker for the wannabe nerds but not for newcomers or real nerds :)
well, that's mostly the point. Why have something that applies and will be used by so few people due to how unfun it is to set up and how impossible it is for 99% of people? It just creates a scenario where everyone just uses a blueprint they don't understand because it's the best way to do it. It's like creating circuits for train networks, but you make it as simple as possible to copy/paste and alter slightly, you do the work once then never do it again
The assemblers look really complex, not really sure I’ll use that. I only take blueprints of stuff I could make myself. The other things looks cool so far.
its big but simple if you think about it just get signal of the all the network content make constant negative signal of how many you need hook it all to the assembler 😁
I think factorio is quite complete as it is, I was hoping the expansion would introduce "only" new planets to explore, maybe more science, that's fine, elevated rails? ok why not. But I'm starting to think this is too much.
Actually, what I was hoping for was that at some point playing the game the local population would evolve to a new state, were a intelligent mind appears (like the overmind from starcraft1), and then the dynamic of the game changes, now, you have to produce war machines and send them to the front to fight with this overmind. You should just take care about production and the IA that plays on your side would take care of were to push and were to defend.
Just the game would turn into a production/fight game, were you have to fight like hell to breach the front lines and expand to a new ore location.... sending t800's walking, on the jeeps or thanks or even on the spidertrons... with your aireforce and your orbital nuke strikes.... that should could be madness, like, you don't have to beat the game, just survive the longest you can, or just keep expanding but a higher cost.
man... I would love to see that... can you imagine?
sounds like you want a game that isnt factorio, have you tried mindustry
There are mods that make the game more combat heavy, as well as Deathworld etc. But, as the other comment suggests: Have about a different game?
You're way more normal and better looking than I expected.
I disagree about the book of balancers analogy.
A balancer book is nice, but it's ultimately unnecessary because studying the belts is simply more effective.
It's nice targeting exact production amounts but you can do well enough by just making more.
This will help me in certain scenarios but most places I'll just scale up instead
im expecting the circuit assemblers to be optional, something to play around with on the side, not a core part of my factory..... on the other hand, you only need the logic part one time and can then drive hundreds of assemblers off of it.... nah, probably need to seperate the recipes into clusters or you would end up with hundreds of assemblers making the same item at the same time, all the time.
I think they're going to get rid of beacons.
The image they used to show off the removal of the hard crafting speed limit showed a foundry surrounded by speed beacons. I doubt it.
Dinosaurs are sweet.
You're not wrong that it might ruin the game that if you don't build parts yourself but you also have to look at it from the perspective of making things better for the future generations.
I look at it as a programming language standpoint. Not everyone needs to learn assembly language if you're a computer science major. You know the problems with trying tow work with it, using registers and the lower level area is difficult.
Barely anyone uses the assembly language, however, everyone uses the language & structure that were built on top of it.
I see the designs here as the assembly language components. Not everyone needs to learn all these parts and most likely, there will be a big book on balancers, or this type of complexity...
But once people get those designs, they can make wonderful things from it.
Problems breed solutions. Solving all problems leads to not needing solutions. Factorio draws in people that like finding solutions. Are the proposed changes too much? Who knows, I guess we'll see.
I think streamlining the process isn't solving problems. I don't really get where this thought process comes from. And with the new planets each having a challenge and new complexity being introduced with quality, etc, I don't really see what problems won't be left to solve.
@@jayjasespud There is no question that it eliminates some problems. It also creates some at the same time. The only thing that is debatable is if it is an improvement or a detriment to the enjoyment of the game play. I'm undecided.
Factorio is basically becoming EU4, the reason I stop playing EU4 was because Paradox kept adding more more more every patch making the game ever more complex for no reason other than to satisfy that 0.00001% of hardcore players while alienating the rest. Hope Factorio doesnt go to far and know where to stop the scalation.
I've made it to the rocket silo barely using circuit networks at all. Yes there are people who will download optimal schematics and plunk them down without fully understanding them. But they've been doing that since back when you had to make purple science when you're killing biters. If they want to ruin the game for themselves, or if they enjoy some other aspect and don't want to engage with that aspect, then that's their business. And I agree with you that this setup sweeps the legs out from under the quality system... so I'm just not gonna use it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think it's fine for a game to have systems not all players can use so long as they have plenty of fun to be had by players who don't use those systems. In it's golden age, World of Warcraft had huge percentages of players who never set foot in a raid and had no intention of ever doing so. They seemed to be having more fun than the raiders were.
Engagement.
i hope the do the beacon change. and not just skip to spite you, hehe. it would definitely make builds so much more interesting to look at. beacon rows just look boring and generic, boxes or rows.
For me, this does not resemble a factorio.... Most factorios produce a single product or a specific kind of products, this example can make anything at any time.... But it is cool. I know that I am not going to play with that. :-) but the actual useful part of this, is to me a bad hard to see. You can expand your base. expansion for me is part of the challenge and fun. And it negates the need to expand the production of moduls.... If that is what I wanted then I would have played in sandbox mode.
seems he forgot people dont need to play the same eh.. some do city blocks some do spagetti some do both some know circuit some dont some use train some dont... its okay.. if you have fun... you dont need that blueprint and its okay to not have it ... -.-"
There is a huge amount of people playing this game almost exclusively with copied blueprints. All it'll take is one person uploading some autocrafting prints to change the game balance forever
But does that really change anything? Is a compact circuit based design really any worse than people just plopping down a full mall?
@@astrogat and does it even matter, play the game the way you want to, theirs a reason the games moddable, theres a reason you can tweak so many options, besides playing purely vanilla to get achivements there really isnt a correct way to play, you arnt a better factorio player because you dont use online blueprints, because factorio isnt a competition
Who cares? More people playing the game is a good thing. Complaining people can download blueprints is gatekeeping. If you don't want to play that way, it's as simple as not copy-pasting a string.
I don't see how a 95% maybe 99% solo player game could even remotly become unaccesable for new players due to complexity... whitch can't happen in the first place until one starts to mess up the installation with hundreds of "optional!!!" mods. those few tweaks to th base game can't do anything like that on their own.
The bigger issue imo is, that there are hundreds or thousands of mods that litteraly do the same thing and nobody does, will or can clean up the mod portal because nobody pays for this work.
I disagree about autocrafting. There is lot of optional puzzles in Factorio - for example oil cracking, Kovarex progress and even trains, that you don't really need to build. Autocrafting will be amazing puzzle to build. Personally I think blueprints are cheating and cheesy, but it is everyones choice how to play your games.
I think your points on the circuits and changeable building recipes has little merit. 1, in that people who don't understand circuits already don't use them, or copy existing blueprints that have circuit behavior already defined. By making more things circuit aware does not change this fact. 2, Having a feature is not the same as using said feature. I for the life of me have never used the train stop read train inventory function. I know several people who don't like the Korvex process and never bother unlocking nor using it. Sound warnings? Only few people use those, as far as I can tell from base reviews/viewing others bases. 3, I disagree with your belt balancer example as an example of just using someone else's blueprint.
Even a simple recipe like smelting, where you take in fuel and ore, and return a product, has so many different concerns and limitations that even though the factorio community has pretty much decided the 12x2 smelting line is pretty optimal, there are still a tonne of different designs for smelting. However, for belt balancing, no matter the load, no matter the belt type, hell, even space requirements, you still want to balance x amount to x1 amount. Unless I'm mistaken, or someone is trying to balance from ridiculously big to small or vice versa, belt balancing is a solved problem, and trying to solve the same problem is pointless. And even if you re-solved it, at worst, it sorta works, and at best, you just came up with almost exactly the same solution that already existed. That isn't gameplay, that's just rote memorizing. And instead, people just prefer to use blueprints.
Re-solving the same problem is not the same as rote memorizing. I'm pretty much incapable of rote memorizing something _unless_ I can re-solve it.
Coming up with the same solution that already existed is not in my opinion a waste of time. At best, it gives a better appreciation for and understanding of the design in question.
@@angeldude101 So, you've solved/re-solved a 4/4 balancer. Does your balancer ever change? Have you implemented several versions of your balancer, in different factorio games?
@@stefsmurf Sometimes it might get flipped, with the middle balancer either before or after the undergrounds. It's not a meaningful difference, but it's enough to be noticeable to me and also clear that they're structurally the same despite being slightly different blueprints.
The important part is that the act of re-solving it makes it easier to understand why the existing blueprints work and why they're optimal. 8x8 balancer? I'm more likely to design or redesign my own since it's less obvious how everything connects and why or that it's optimal. I know I designed a custom 8x8 specifically for turning corners.
And then there's the fact that the typical designs are ultimately optimized for the most common usecases and aren't actually perfect in every sense. Look up Universal Balancers for some completely overkill designs that take way too much space, but have interesting and potentially desirable properties that the standard designs don't have.
Oh, I have actually made an actually original 4x4 balancer specifically for two of the lanes go in the opposite direction to suit the specific use-case of a bi-directional bus (which sacrifices 50% of your throughput for the flexibility of being able add to and remove from the bus at any point; great for when you're bad at planning ahead).
Keep in mind: for me, designing blueprints is literally more fun than actually playing for the most part. Using the same design for everything and copy-pasting it everywhere kills the enjoyment of making weird specialized designs for silly niche usecases or that optimize for unconventional properties. That's the biggest reason why I'm so excited for 2.0. Quality, rail changes, and everything else give so many new opportunities to design new blueprints rather than just using the same ones that everyone's always used.
Tbh something like this doesn't work well with mega bases.
I always compared factorio to programming. In the programming world you have some stuff that is just... why reinvent the wheel. If you get why it works and could maybe do it in some reasonable way alone, just copy the better design and learn from it. But if you don't know how that specific thing works, and you still copypaste it, you will be robbing yourself out of the experience gained from creating such thing, and when it breaks you will have NO idea as to why. With circuit enabled assemblers i feel the same way. If you know how such thing works, go copy it. But i find it rather hard to believe that you will know unless you have extensive knowledge about circuitry.
well us switch players are swered
Why would I use someone else's blueprint? that's not fun.
About the first 7 minutes: LOL. He really lives in his own bubble. There are so many points I disagree with.
Lotta negativity about these FFFs. Please open with something positive, and then go into negatives. Not a fan of opening with "bad bad bad"
if he puts the positives first, it'll be like the negatives don't exist, that's an excellent point
@@starbreeze7249 Not sure I agree with that. But its just a more friendly introduction, that can lead into the negatives.
@@starbreeze7249"If he puts the negatives first, it's like the positives don't exist."
I see zero reason to even create that monstrosity.
A couple lines of assemblers with a loop-back for failed quality does the same thing but faster and with less buildings.
A LOT less buildings, and a LOT faster.
… are you counting circuit blocks as buildings?? What?
@@Waggabagaboo You had to craft it, place it and give it power. I consider that a 'building' for the above argument.
@@Waggabagaboo
By then you cannot even automatically set the circuit up, which you can do for the assembler, so, more like 2 buildings and a half if you think about it.
They make Java out of Factorio