Absolutely, yes, please! I suppose as someone else just mentioned there are spidertrons, but I still feel an actual train would be more fitting (if the pathfinder can be setup to work for this, of course).Kyparos wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 12:59 pmI think the ultimate thing for making remote control of your factory while you are away is a drone hub cart for trains. Just think of it, it already possible to spread your logistics network by placing new drone posts on the edge of it, but it would make process simply annoying to reach distant ore patch.
With a drone hub cart you can easily build station for providing supply for new outpost and initial drone post and then develop outpost in a usual way. Railway fixes also would be easier when you are away with this feature.
Allowing trains with a drone cart to build route on a ghost rails and stop’n’go whenever end of build track is reached would make building rails roads much more streamlined process. Here also comes new system of interrupts, when there are not enough of rails go back and get some. This would require a double headed train and something like a crisscross lane change (if you use right-/lefthanded rail system), but still sounds like a new interesting task on a way of global automation.
I support this!againey wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 1:05 pmGoing further, if it is a toggle, then there's no need to even use modifier keys. There are other keys bound to contextual actions make no sense while placing rails, and thus can be reused while in rail placement mode. For example, F or G. F is already overloaded for different contexts (pick up items on ground, flip blueprint); might as well add another special context to its binding.
This would avoid issues where Shift+R is used to reverse rotation, but Shift also toggles rail placement mode. A developer can try to smooth over the rough edges of that situation, but it's never perfect. For example, I might press Shift in preparation to rotate, but then I change my mind. I release Shift and now I've toggled my placement mode. That has annoyed me in numerous applications/games in the past.
Considering we can drive them backwards manually anyway, why wouldn't we be able to with remote?
I'd imagine it does the same thing now when you're not out of fuel. That said, if the one in front of you is out of fuel, too, it sounds like you have a pretty major problem. But, you can also always couple the trains together....
My guess would be because of the way the game engine is written (remember: this is actually a 2D game with some faking for 3D looks). The devs have already mentioned that the ramps are as long as they are because of multiple trickery affects with the layer system that has to be done to allow trains to work on the elevated rails. Allowing players, and thus biters, on these would probably make things even more complex (especially when you consider you now have to somehow allow the player to path within and back out of the bounding box from the ends, but not from the sides).
Imagine dropping this bombshell as a throwaway line at the end of the FFF!Genhis also just finished up Super-force building support for the Rail planner, so crusading over lakes is easier than ever.
Just ask the energy shield what it thinks about the laws of inertia, when it stop an entire train.
Which is 38 (403-365) FFFridays ago. But more important, why change something when august is not that far anymore.Qrt_La55en wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 12:29 pmThis was discussed in FFF 365 (https://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-365)Salzig wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 12:24 pmWith more and more stuff coming to 2.0, it feels more and more like a big-bang release I'm not used to with factorio, and I'm also not sure if I like it. Switching from 1.0 to 2.0 will get quite overwhelming I believe. And I'm not even talking about the expansion.
Have you thought about selling "Early Access" 2.0 to let users experience the iterations again?
I second that. Adding a visual indicator that somebody is riding that railcar would be awesome. Finding somewhere to add the graphic of the rider would be difficult though, especially since you'd have to keep the scale the same so it feels right. No magically shrinking to half height when you hop onto a train! Maybe sitting on top? Riding it like a horse? Taking a nap on top? The "sniper lying down" pose? Something to indicate that he's interacting with his built-in VR interface to manage the factory?Zarphos wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 12:52 pmSince you've added manual pushing of wagons, I would love if you could I update the wagon model slightly. Adding a ladder at the end like North American boxcar, that our engineers would hang off of when riding them would be very amusing to me and hopefully others.
I would never to manual drive anymore anyway otherwise.Please please PLEASE make the locomotive/cargo wagon go faster if you're wearing lots of exoskeletons!"Players can push locomotives with their feet, flintstone style".
There's a setting in game for this.
Almost nobody talks about the ability to couple and uncouple wagons on the track. If a train gets stuck with no passenger onboard, it will be possible to drive another train onto the bridge, couple to the stuck train, and push or pull it off. If you can couple/uncouple by remote, then this will be solved.
I'd love to see a catapult mechanism in the game sitting atop a supply chest that would request both fuel and drones to be loaded in!GRAND TRAIN!!"Players can push locomotives with their feet, flintstone style".
Kinda, spidetron doesn’t allow to automate thinks rather then just make manual additions. And spidetron is an endgame content, I think there would mid-game solutionChefOfRamen wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 2:16 pmYou have just described a spidertron.Kyparos wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 12:59 pmI think the ultimate thing for making remote control of your factory while you are away is a drone hub cart for trains. Just think of it, it already possible to spread your logistics network by placing new drone posts on the edge of it, but it would make process simply annoying to reach distant ore patch.
With a drone hub cart you can easily build station for providing supply for new outpost and initial drone post and then develop outpost in a usual way. Railway fixes also would be easier when you are away with this feature.
That said, a "roboport wagon" could be interesting.
Maybe, but wouldn’t be a cart with modules grid be a better solution? Some things like train pumps could be added to dis-/charge the cart, and we getting accumulator cart and laser turret cart as a bonus. Not saying that module grid is a already working framework for transport (so potentially there shouldn’t be that much of a trouble implementing it ) so adding new modules in the future would add even more possibilities, not saying about mods.FuryoftheStars wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 2:41 pmAbsolutely, yes, please! I suppose as someone else just mentioned there are spidertrons, but I still feel an actual train would be more fitting (if the pathfinder can be setup to work for this, of course).Kyparos wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 12:59 pmI think the ultimate thing for making remote control of your factory while you are away is a drone hub cart for trains. Just think of it, it already possible to spread your logistics network by placing new drone posts on the edge of it, but it would make process simply annoying to reach distant ore patch.
With a drone hub cart you can easily build station for providing supply for new outpost and initial drone post and then develop outpost in a usual way. Railway fixes also would be easier when you are away with this feature.
Allowing trains with a drone cart to build route on a ghost rails and stop’n’go whenever end of build track is reached would make building rails roads much more streamlined process. Here also comes new system of interrupts, when there are not enough of rails go back and get some. This would require a double headed train and something like a crisscross lane change (if you use right-/lefthanded rail system), but still sounds like a new interesting task on a way of global automation.
But it may be more fitting to have it as a special locomotive vs a special wagon. The construction bots would need recharging in some way and I feel allowing a nuclear reactor into an equipment grid which you then can't use to power the train would be wrong. Instead the bots should probably get their energy straight from the locomotive(s), burning through fuel faster, and thus the need for more fuel slots may be relevant. As an offset, too, so these don't become the defacto locomotives with just all around better capabilities (or as a wagon, a defacto inclusion to any train), they should probably have a much lower top speed (like half, at least).
Of course, for them to be really useful, there'd have to be some way for them to automatically detect damage/breakage in the rails lines and automatically dispatch to repair.
---------------------------------------------------
I support this!againey wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 1:05 pmGoing further, if it is a toggle, then there's no need to even use modifier keys. There are other keys bound to contextual actions make no sense while placing rails, and thus can be reused while in rail placement mode. For example, F or G. F is already overloaded for different contexts (pick up items on ground, flip blueprint); might as well add another special context to its binding.
This would avoid issues where Shift+R is used to reverse rotation, but Shift also toggles rail placement mode. A developer can try to smooth over the rough edges of that situation, but it's never perfect. For example, I might press Shift in preparation to rotate, but then I change my mind. I release Shift and now I've toggled my placement mode. That has annoyed me in numerous applications/games in the past.
---------------------------------------------------
Considering we can drive them backwards manually anyway, why wouldn't we be able to with remote?
---------------------------------------------------
I'd imagine it does the same thing now when you're not out of fuel. That said, if the one in front of you is out of fuel, too, it sounds like you have a pretty major problem. But, you can also always couple the trains together....
---------------------------------------------------
My guess would be because of the way the game engine is written (remember: this is actually a 2D game with some faking for 3D looks). The devs have already mentioned that the ramps are as long as they are because of multiple trickery affects with the layer system that has to be done to allow trains to work on the elevated rails. Allowing players, and thus biters, on these would probably make things even more complex (especially when you consider you now have to somehow allow the player to path within and back out of the bounding box from the ends, but not from the sides).
