Octopus Overlords

So I guess the little yellow pointers must be where the drop off point is?
The graphics are kind of small and dark on my PC and kind of hard to see.

If you are having issues, use Lightshot and postimage.io to help us see what's going on. Lightshot is easy peasy, and postimage is also very simple and elegant to use.

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 04, 2018 9:41 am So I guess the little yellow pointers must be where the drop off point is?
The graphics are kind of small and dark on my PC and kind of hard to see.

If memory serves, yes. I want to say what paingod said. It drilled one of whatever it is you wanted drilled, dumped it on the ground and then decided it's "container" was full. If you make a wooden box at put at the edge that the arrow is pointing to then it will dump whatever you are drilling into the box until it full, it runs out of resources, or it runs out of fuel.

Also as Lorini said if you post a screen image, they could probably tell you for sure.

Lorini wrote: ↑Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:01 pm I think you have to be a fan of this kind of game and since there's nothing like it on the market really you'll pay the $30.

I've taken an oath against buying early access anymore, so I'll pay the $30.

It's funny on the discussions of the news item put out by the developer regarding this increase of price and especially that there wouldn't be any sales in future. Steam people get so indignant when a developer doesn't do exactly what they want and apparently stating that they would be raising the price and not having sales has deeply offended some people.

jztemple2 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:45 pm
I've taken an oath against buying early access anymore, so I'll pay the $30.

I've put out an advisory saying as much and so far, I've been pretty good about following it but it's only been six months or so. I still have many games that are still in beta from more'n six months ago and a steam sized backlog of released games that were beta when I purchased them and put them away and never got back to them. I have some non steam beta games that I have long since lost the keys for and never played the full release.

I personally blame Smoove for whoring the Mount and Blade developing release for $5 oh so many years ago. (that I years later had to repurchase on Steam to play the release version) It led me down a long dark path.

I just bought it for $20.

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 04, 2018 1:04 pm I just bought it for $20.

I can't remember the level I'm in at, but I've got it on GOG. For the hundreds of hours I've sunk into it, it's worth whatever I paid.

Early Access is simply a label at the end of the day. Oxygen Not Included is in Early Access and I'd say it's a more finished game than Surviving Mars as is Factorio. Yet if that's your policy then that's fine as well. I look much closer at recent reviews of games than the EA or lack thereof status. Basically the game is finished, as they don't anticipate changes and so will update to 1.0 and the price increase.

Lorini wrote: ↑Wed Apr 04, 2018 2:09 pm Early Access is simply a label at the end of the day. Oxygen Not Included is in Early Access and I'd say it's a more finished game than Surviving Mars as is Factorio. Yet if that's your policy then that's fine as well. I look much closer at recent reviews of games than the EA or lack thereof status. Basically the game is finished, as they don't anticipate changes and so will update to 1.0 and the price increase.

Yet, I still see some EA games where there's a lot of content and people are digging it - then the developers take a 90º turn that leaves their players reeling and pissed. I wish I had a few I could name, but I know it's happened.

I try and avoid EA games as a general practice, but am comfortable making exceptions and accepting risks to play something that seems right up my alley.

I don't know, both of these games have very specific audiences, they aren't meant for the casual gamer nor the gamer who may or may not be interested in this. Yes Rimworld did that for me, they changed it in a way I didn't care for. But Rimworld is in beta now so it's not changing and Factorio is basically in beta as well. ONI could change for the worse, I just hope it does not.

Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Apr 04, 2018 2:36 pm

Lorini wrote: ↑Wed Apr 04, 2018 2:09 pm Early Access is simply a label at the end of the day. Oxygen Not Included is in Early Access and I'd say it's a more finished game than Surviving Mars as is Factorio. Yet if that's your policy then that's fine as well. I look much closer at recent reviews of games than the EA or lack thereof status. Basically the game is finished, as they don't anticipate changes and so will update to 1.0 and the price increase.

Yet, I still see some EA games where there's a lot of content and people are digging it - then the developers take a 90º turn that leaves their players reeling and pissed. I wish I had a few I could name, but I know it's happened.

I try and avoid EA games as a general practice, but am comfortable making exceptions and accepting risks to play something that seems right up my alley.

Clockwork Empire... and after pissing everyone off they abandoned the project and closed the doors. Fuckers.

I would say that's an exception, noting I bought it and got burned as well. Most EA's that have really positive reviews finish and even keep patching. Northgard, Planet Coaster, Offworld Trading Company, to name a few.

It is but I think it's the exception that cooled me off on EA purchases. I was already feeling like I was buying games and never actually playing them in their "release" state and the game I was so very much looking forward to by "they guys who did Dredmore" left such a foul taste in my mouth that it nudged me from feeling like I should wait for "stable final state release" to generally acting.

I have a lot of games that I've barely played but they aren't necessarily EA games, just games that looked better than I could play them .

Yeah, I've bitten on Quill's or tgb's enthusiams as a preview with no regard for how I'd play them on more than one game. I've learned to temper myself there as well.

OO effect in full, er, effect. Downloading now.

Holy cow this game is addictive.

In the campaign mode, mission 2 of New Hope has you recovering a base. The second objective that pops up asks you to get a ton of items in your and your cars inventory. When i put things in my car, though, it doesn't appear to count against the totals and my personal inventory isn't big enough to hold everything. Any ideas?

Hmm, never did the campaign sorry. Didn't know there were cars in Factorio even

stessier wrote: ↑Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:18 am In the campaign mode, mission 2 of New Hope has you recovering a base. The second objective that pops up asks you to get a ton of items in your and your cars inventory. When i put things in my car, though, it doesn't appear to count against the totals and my personal inventory isn't big enough to hold everything. Any ideas?

There was no campaign when I played but you could increase your (and probably your car's) inventory with tech advancements. Can you still look at through your tech tree? Look at car improvements and suit improvements.

it seems wonky, but only when I was in the car did the right totals show.

map wrote: ↑Sun Apr 08, 2018 5:31 pm it seems wonky, but only when I was in the car did the right totals show.

Yes, that was the fix! Figured it out just before you posted of course. A bit annoying...could have been done hours ago (took 10 hours to complete the mission) but gave me a chance to attack some of the biter colonies. Fun neighbors.

I got to where you were. I like the game, but I don't think I Have the heart to research solar and collect all that material. I always eliminate the neighbors as fast as I can.

Some day I'll have to try the campaigns.

The only mode I've played is the sandbox, and I've been at it for a looooong time with several starts (different versions as they're released).

This thread got me playing again, and I'm attempting a small pile of achievements in one game. No Solar, No Laser Turrets, No Logistics (Supply/Request), and Lazy Bastard (hand-craft less than 111 things). I'm currently setting up a resource harvest on a 3.2m Iron field that should supply me for a while. I'm just getting into things like T3 constructors and T3 (electric) smelting.

For Lazy Bastard, I've built 107 out of 111 things by hand. The last thing I had to manually make was an Oil Refinery.
Apparently it can take exactly 100 hand-crafted items to win, and they give you 11 spares. I thought I was being precise and cautious, but still - I think after the Oil Refinery, there's nothing left I can't automate. This is an annoying one to complete since I'm fond of crafting on the fly as I run around.

Getting by without Solar isn't a big deal. It just means I pollute more and spend more time clearing hostile bases, which isn't a problem since I want to anyway.

For Laser Turrets, I normally ignore critters and deal with them only as I expand, since Laser ammo is mostly free - but in this game I have to hunt them down and wipe them out to help conserve metal spent in the long run. AP Ammo ain't cheap.

I'm really missing logistics, which I use to tie in different high-end productions that take place at opposite ends of my bases. It would also be useful to keep my turrets supplied with ammo, but a giant ring of conveyor belts and a costly ammo factory chain keeps them going well enough.

I started the campaign because that's what I always do. Never occurred to me that most of the comments here have been from sandbox mode.

I'm only two missions in, but I think it is a pretty good way to learn the game. It gives (mostly) clear objectives so you have something to work towards. Learning how to automate trains was quite cool. At first it seemed too complicated so I kept putting it off, but then I had two distant mines going and realized it was just too inefficient to keep driving the trains myself.

Now that I'm done with the mission, I've watched a couple of youtube videos of how others did it and learned a few things. Like, it never occurred to me to automate ammunition production - I just crafted it for myself while walking around. Those combiners seemed to only be able to do specific things because of how the objectives progressed so that I wasn't thinking outside the box enough. Mission 3 should be a lot different.

It was also interesting to see other people's solutions where they went around fixing the layout that was already in place. I just tore it down and repurposed everything to make what I wanted.

Damn, I'm going to have to look at the demo again

jztemple2 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:30 pm Damn, I'm going to have to look at the demo again

It's absolutely worth $20 just to tinker around with. Way better than car mechanic simulator.

I am not sure how I missed the fact there was a campaign. Looking back it seems like it has been there a long time. Maybe it's not in the demo, so I just didn't start out that way?

Edit to add: You have 1 week left to get it for $20 before the increase to the $30 release price which they say will never go on sale.

stessier wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:56 amIt was also interesting to see other people's solutions where they went around fixing the layout that was already in place. I just tore it down and repurposed everything to make what I wanted.

I LOVE seeing other people's designs and thinking about what I'd want to use or incorporate. I've got a little cheat sheet beside my monitor with some ideal ratios - like 1:14:10 pump/boilers/steam engines - 25:21 solar/accumulators - 3:2 wire/green chip production. It helps to have some numbers in mind when designing.

My biggest problem is never getting big enough. It becomes so cumbersome to tear down and rebuild that I don't and as my base organically grows, it becomes a disorganized mess. If I can beat the game and get these four achievements, I'm going to start over and see what it's like to build a mostly Logistics-driven base instead of conveyor belt-driven. Massively power-hungry, I'm sure - but very clean.

stessier wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:56 amI'm only two missions in, but I think it is a pretty good way to learn the game. It gives (mostly) clear objectives so you have something to work towards. Learning how to automate trains was quite cool. At first it seemed too complicated so I kept putting it off, but then I had two distant mines going and realized it was just too inefficient to keep driving the

While I'm okay with using trains, for some reason I'm not big into them. Maybe I haven't ever gotten far enough for them to really be a requirement. I tend to just build massive beltways to distant outposts and let the resources come to my base in their natural time and as a steady stream instead of on a herky-jerky train schedule. I'll even use an oil fill station at one side and an oil dump station at the other and have barrels move down one belt and back up another.

Paingod wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:04 pm

stessier wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:56 amI'm only two missions in, but I think it is a pretty good way to learn the game. It gives (mostly) clear objectives so you have something to work towards. Learning how to automate trains was quite cool. At first it seemed too complicated so I kept putting it off, but then I had two distant mines going and realized it was just too inefficient to keep driving the

While I'm okay with using trains, for some reason I'm not big into them. Maybe I haven't ever gotten far enough for them to really be a requirement. I tend to just build massive beltways to distant outposts and let the resources come to my base in their natural time and as a steady stream instead of on a herky-jerky train schedule. I'll even use an oil fill station at one side and an oil dump station at the other and have barrels move down one belt and back up another.

It ended up being a pretty steady stream as I wasn't using it as fast as it was coming in. Each car could hold 2k. I had grippers unloading the cars and storing in boxes and then other arms moving it to conveyor belts. After the first run, the boxes never ran out, so the trains moving was invisible to the process (well, would have been but I messed up one of the boxes and it delayed the car unloading - but the theory was sound even if the execution was shoddy ).

Paingod wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:04 pm

stessier wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:56 amIt was also interesting to see other people's solutions where they went around fixing the layout that was already in place. I just tore it down and repurposed everything to make what I wanted.

I LOVE seeing other people's designs and thinking about what I'd want to use or incorporate. I've got a little cheat sheet beside my monitor with some ideal ratios - like 1:14:10 pump/boilers/steam engines - 25:21 solar/accumulators - 3:2 wire/green chip production. It helps to have some numbers in mind when designing.

My biggest problem is never getting big enough. It becomes so cumbersome to tear down and rebuild that I don't and as my base organically grows, it becomes a disorganized mess. If I can beat the game and get these four achievements, I'm going to start over and see what it's like to build a mostly Logistics-driven base instead of conveyor belt-driven. Massively power-hungry, I'm sure - but very clean.

When last I played, big enough mean to just keep moving and adding more belts, in a pre-detrermined linear path. by the end I had bots cutting massive areas of tree to keep the lines growing to add more lines. I think by the time I was creating batteries, my production line for components was 16 belts wide, with two copper and two steel carrying belts with a separate line for research and a separate line for oil based products. I eventually had open a second oil field and rather than redo my enormous production line, I learned how build a rail line and when I got that running smoothly I felt accomplished. I launched some rockets and put the game away.

This was before fusion energy, I think. This is no my list of "get back to it" games and OO is beginning to take hold.


My key to a long long (always horizontal from vertical feeds. I don't know why. The side scrolling history of video games, maybe?) production line was always to have two line spaced by three line worth ground and then two more lines. This way, each line could feed in or off shoot at will, so for copper plates could offshoot and become wire. wire could feed back in and then the two could become whatever they needed to be make an arm. The arms would then come back so they could upgraded to another arm, etc.... Every offshoot also had a series of boxes within bot range to move them around or call them to me as necessary.

And now I'm missing the game...

LordMortis wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:20 pmAnd now I'm missing the game...

I try and keep belts open for "high volume" goods.

I have the lines coming in for raw copper, iron, coal, and stone. Coal runs straight through to my power plant and I use splitters to break off lines of it for my smelting processes. Stone gets split between creating landfill and stones. Those other smelting areas have long rows of furnaces on each side of double-belt down the middle with iron/copper & coal on each. Behind those lines, plates move out to start the basis of the rest of everything.

I split the main line once and send off one line to make microchips in all shades because there's NEVER enough of those. The rest gets split again and again to create separate production lines to make the different science goods and products. My belts tend to get woven together here and there, often combining so two different goods are on different sides of one belt and that runs parallel to a second belt that's also carrying two kinds of goods - so I've got four things running down 2 belts. I never put copper wire on a belt since it's used in such high volumes. Some things, like pipes and gears, might sit side-by-side on one short stretch of belt to feed into a row of engine factories - but I don't try and move that around to other places; I'll just create another short belt elsewhere and feed it from raw goods.

It's probably slower, but I like the way it looks.

My belts tend to get woven together here and there, often combining so two different goods are on different sides of one belt and that runs parallel to a second belt that's also carrying two kinds of goods - so I've got four things running down 2 belts.

My memory is that I only combined goods on belt on off shoots. This was absolutely required for some of the more complex manufacturing. My memory could be off though.

One thing i have an (un)pleasant memory of is how the needs for some things change. Batteries were the big one. They started out as the low production item, but then they got bigger and I hadn't prepared my production to scale to my need, so I had change everything around. And then they got bigger and I hadn't prepared my production to scale to my need, so I had change everything around. And then they got bigger and I hadn't prepared my production to scale to my need, so I had change everything around. And then they got bigger and I hadn't prepared my production to scale to my need and I had no room to scale any more, so I had to come up with a new facility, which again forced me to build a train structure or trash a system begin enough for me to need 15+ bot stations to cover the whole thing.

LordMortis wrote: ↑Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:54 pmOne thing i have an (un)pleasant memory of is how the needs for some things change.

I think I handled batteries as an offshoot with it's own line and used logistics to tie them back in as needed. As a product, they're easy to achieve with copper, iron, water, and oil and a few facilities.

Not using solar or lasers in this latest run means batteries are a significantly lowered concern.

Redesigning my base is something I enjoy doing, though. I like trying to find new ways to be efficient. Right now I'm trying to imagine a way to create that verticle baseline with horizontal offshoots that you talked about and have the end of each offshoot be it's own science product or building item.

Because I can't hand-craft in this run, I've got facilities set up to continually produce red belts, splitters, and tunnels. As well as mining facilities, factories, etc. Everything I would normally craft myself has a small line for it as a separate run so I'm not forever laying factories and crafting with them on the fly. I might dump iron and copper plates into the line to trigger it manually, but that's it. I look forward to changing it over to blue logistics...

... and then starting it all over to use boosters.

I'm about to get explorers off of Rim World for the first time -- coming back to Factorio next certainly appeals. Oh, and for folks looking into this thread down the road, this game is ABSOLUTELY worth $30 if you enjoy base-building, optimizing, starting extremely small and growing into absolutely huge, and are undaunted by the true title of the game: Refactorio.

Will pick it up when it goes on sale for 10ish dollars, or when I get to a gaming funk and Factorio feels like it'll help, in which case I'll pay full price.

Sounds like fun.

Uh as we discussed they have stated it's not going on sale. It's never been on sale and it's going up from$20 to $30 on April 16. And no, they have no obligation to put it on sale.

Lorini wrote: ↑Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:11 am Uh as we discussed they have stated it's not going on sale. It's never been on sale and it's going up from$20 to $30 on April 16. And no, they have no obligation to put it on sale.

No, we haven't discussed it. You might be remembering our talk in the Rimworld thread about Rimworld. And as we discussed there, the publisher has every right to never put their product on sale, so I think you're comment about "obligation" is weird and out of place.

As for myself, just as the publisher has every right to fix a price and leave it there, I have every right to not buy it at that fixed price. At no point do I feel the publisher owes me anything, and of course, I owe the publisher nothing.

The gaming industry is remarkably robust, possibly the most it has ever been, and competition is fierce for the market's gaming dollars. You can price "wide" or you can price "tall" with the goal being to make the most money possible. Of course if it's good enough and has a broad enough appeal, you can price "tall" and sell "wide", which is like hitting the jackpot for an independent developer.

If any particular developer is satisfied with their units sold and the money generated and from those sales, and would rather have zero dollars from me than 10 bucks (or whatever sale price that would get me to buy), that's their right. Personally, I'm comfortable with that as well.

Truthfully, 10 bucks wouldn't be cheap enough to get me to buy it today, so it sounds like my buy point and the publisher's sell point will never intersect. We'll both live.

You seem weirdly upset by my decision to not buy a game if it's not on sale. Why is that?

I don't think Lorini was trying to be rude/updset. KDH resurrected the thread on the last page to note the pricing model for release, which is what started the whole discussion.

LordMortis wrote: ↑Tue Apr 10, 2018 12:36 pm I don't think Lorini was trying to be rude/updset. KDH resurrected the thread on the last page to note the pricing model for release, which is what started the whole discussion.

shrug.

I get a different vibe than you do, but of course I've already been through this discussion with her about Rimworld, so my perspective might be different.

And for the record, I did *not* know that this particular publisher/developer has decided that sales are a business tool that they will never utilize (which is a weird thing to avoid, but it's their right of course), so my comment about sale price was sincere.

Minecraft was the same and it did ok for that billionaire Notch.