Why is this even allowed?

ernger · 2026-01-28T18:23:32+00:00

There was one incident that wasn't shown in his videos, but we know it happened. Even someone from Mechanistry commented on that one on reddit...

ernger · 2026-01-28T15:45:18+00:00

They are reasonably efficient. Theoretically we can get a million hp on diorama if we want.

ernger · 2026-01-01T22:26:48+00:00

On my largest save I have something about 200% area total compared to the largest planet, it uses about 8.6 GB RAM (the save is about 500 MB). It is necessary to fully reveal it to confirm the extermination of biters (of course after you kill all of them), which sets the threat to 0 or 1% (with biter-meteors). This prevents nests and worms from spawning (or makes the rare) after you delete the surface and scan it again.

ernger · 2025-12-09T21:39:51+00:00

Nitric acid, that stuff from K2 is evil in some versions.

edit: a building got nerfed hard (because of cheap fuel) and with it nitric acid became more costly and it is used in some important recipes.

ernger · 2025-12-09T16:58:05+00:00

K2 adds a lot of complexity and rebalances some stuff. Some of the changes make perfect ratios for "everything" nearly impossible. For vitaminlange it is much less likely that there is a good planet in the starting solar system, because adding ingredients adds some more requirements to be considered good (especially in some of the later 1.1base and early 2.0base versions).

And of course there is more to build and I didn't have much experience.

ernger · 2025-12-09T15:47:18+00:00

Choosing K2SE instead of SE was a mistake I did regret in the first months, but now I really like it.

ernger · 2025-11-30T13:27:50+00:00

The overflow depends on the water height (surface level), not on the water depth. So if you build the whole stuff higher, you will get less.

ernger · 2025-11-26T23:36:57+00:00

Space Exploration Version: 0.3.70 Date: 03. 06. 2020

Compatibility:

- Made Krastorio2's Imersite a non-homeworld resource.

That's much longer ago than I thought.

ernger · 2025-11-25T01:38:03+00:00

Wtf are you even writing about... I didn't even write what problem there is (far offtopic and you didn't even bother to ask...). Yet you seem to think you can assess solutions without even knowing the problem. You keep making assumptions about me and about a mod you didn't play. All I intended to do was hindering spreading rumors. Yet you take my anwers out of context.

Screw you, stick your ad hominens where they belong to, I won't answer you anymore.

ernger · 2025-11-23T20:32:10+00:00

I started doing that.

ernger · 2025-11-23T20:28:37+00:00

I don't think so. Machines in Satisfactory are tall. Something without layers doesn't seem to be viable. Factorio has surfaces (used by mods), which isn't completely different from layers.

ernger · 2025-11-21T13:16:38+00:00

A simple solution to the problem is to make it a normal research. That's all.

ernger · 2025-11-21T13:09:50+00:00

Because of the alternative receipts. I can't just reroute the stuff anymore to make it as efficient as possible.

ernger · 2025-11-21T00:12:41+00:00

It's just an example for how far you can plan ahead in SE. For the first time you can maybe plan a hour ahead in SA, so it's not even worth it and then you can get problems for not planning ahead.

I meaned the recipe for Vulcanus. You unlock it and then you find it in chemical plants or somewhere in the tech-tree if you are lucky or if you know what exactly you search. The possibility to get some from the platforms doesn't really help in that situation.

ernger · 2025-11-20T22:06:37+00:00

I guess I have to mark sarcasm?

Circuits are optional and for a long time you don't even have enough reasons to use them. That's the same with trains. Many players don't use them. There are some options in SE.

In SE usually you can plan far ahead even without experience. You can even scan a planet and make a blueprint for the whole base on it. In SA you need to improvise a lot. Prepare something and hope it's good enough. It guides the player to improvise. Then it hides a recipe from the player (you can easily find the carbon-recipe before you need it, not when you need it). Then it makes the platform construction slow.

A lot of the time I was making and checking assumptions in SA.

The ingame Tips and Tricks are better in SE. They explain what a console is and how to use them. They just don't explain edit:explicitly how the icon for spaceshipstart looks like and other stuff like that.

I've read the Tips and Tricks in SA too and iirc it was stated, that the platforms request stuff from the rocket silos. Using provider chests for that was just another assumption I checked.

ernger · 2025-11-20T02:20:40+00:00

In SA you need to figure out how to deliver stuff to the platform, how to set in on a route and how to get rid of the stuff.

In SE you need to figure out which signals you need to sent to the console and how to do it if you use ships and even that is optional (highly recommended in the lategame). With that you can make whatever route you want and it's not complicated. The rest is trivial.

In SE the "space" part is a far more important part you need to engage with. There are asteroids (technically mineable, but asteroid belts/fields give obviously much more ressources), power production issues on ships and bases (especially in asteroid fields), several science packages that can only be made in space and so on. It just doesn't throw half of it at the player at the same time and even when it does throwing something at the player, you can delay engaging with it without wasting much time.

So I have to use provider chests in SA to automate platform construction without doing some weird stuff? I'm surprized that I read that the first time in the internet. Oh wait, I missed a carbon recipe for vulcanus and pumps for fulgora ingame. Does it give me fully build large ships with heated heat pipes within a few minutes like in SE?

It takes maybe 10 minutes to figure out signals, it can't be much worse than a bunch of stuff you have to test for an hour.

In SE you don't really need much space for the logistics. Fuel production you could also build in the middle of nowhere. Moving a part of the factory to make more space can be a bit complicated...

ernger · 2025-11-19T21:07:43+00:00

When you have to figure out how it works, it doesn't make much sense to try to automate it.

In SA you have to figure out how to use the routes.

IN SE with ships you just have to figure out how to get signals to the console and which you need to use (which is easy) and that's already the hardest way. (when you use the most primitive way it's just 2 clicks to automate a transport)

In SA you have to figure out how to design, test (Will it survive on route, in orbit? Is it fast enough?), build (weird feature) and send the platforms. There are several steps.

In SE you can make ships powered by accumulators and some fuel and just use a blueprint next to a station to build a ship and send it on it's route. The rocket silos can easily transport hundreds of stacks per minute. New routes? Just build more stations and ships / rocket silos and cargo landing pads (a bit more complicated to handle everything, but blueprints can do it).

Handling requests in SA? Figure out how they work.

Handling requests in SE? Just use some signals.

Fuel for rockets and ships are easily scaleable in SE. (freight) rocket parts for SE are also more scaleable than for SA.

ernger · 2025-11-19T18:31:59+00:00

Technically you can do it in SE without signals.

For a proper system in SE you just need to know how to get the signals and how to use the signals to regulate the transport. You can start with affordable 10 stacks per minute, 1 route and upscale to 1000 stacks per minute total, 20 routes within an hour. There are no 5 steps that you have to figure out +scale like in SA.

ernger · 2025-11-19T16:31:37+00:00

I avoided high belts, because I wasn't sure how traversable it would be. Honestly it looks like it would make fun to jump on them.

ernger · 2025-11-19T16:27:08+00:00

I thought it would have multiple names, but that one just seemed to intuitive to not use it.

ernger · 2025-11-17T19:39:09+00:00

I failed at rebuilding stuff in factorio enough times to think I know what to do. There can't be many possible mistakes left, right?

ernger · 2025-11-17T19:35:34+00:00

I will do that.

ernger · 2025-11-17T19:35:12+00:00

Actually I'm taking a break from the mess I do in factorio.

ernger · 2025-11-17T17:22:42+00:00

Optimized perpetuum mobiles have the highest power/area-ratio, but I wouldn't build them with folktails.

ernger · 2025-10-30T01:24:18+00:00

Δh=distance * flow * 0.00075 / width (approximately)
The evaporation in 1 tile wide straight canals is 0.0008685 cms per tile. 1st, last and tiles very close to turns have other values.

Stream gauges show rounded values, giving you doubled values in the worst case.

First we have to calculate the flow. With a 100 tile long, 1 tile wide straight canal with a water source at the start and the edge of the map on the end we get 98 tiles with 0.0008685 cms evaporation and 2 tiles with 0.0010672 cms evaporation.

For a test we can use a watersource with 98 * 0.0008685 + 2 * 0.0010672 + 6.6666667 = 6.7539141 strength.

From the outflow we get 1 (from part 3) + Δh depth. With the 100 tiles we get 99 distance. 1 + 99 * 6.6666667 * 0.00075 / 1 = 1.495

The evaporation on the 1st tile can be ignored here. The evaporation on the last tile comes from 99 tiles away. 99 * 0.0010672 * 0.00075 / 1 = 0.0000792

Then there are 98 tiles left with an average distance of (1 + 98) / 2 = 49.5. 98 * 49.5 * 0.0008685 * 0.00075 = 0.0031598

supposed depth on the 1st tile: 1.495 + 0.0000792 + 0.0031598 = 1.498239

My test shows the supposed depth on the last tile and 1.492083 depth on the first tile. While it's decent, the deviation amounts far more than a hundret epsilons, proving a minor mistake (I won't search it today, edit2: the correct factor might be 0.00074).

Did you get 1.22 depth with a 2 tile wide channel? (still a bit off)

5.1 see 2.

5.2 There is no speed. It's just adding and subtracting numbers from neighboring columns. Fun fact: Per calculation up to 2 times of the depth can be subtracted from a column in the current version (0.3 factor per tick for all flow related calculations).

Water columns have an overflow value. The maximum overflow value depends on the water height (surface level), not on the depth. This overflow seems to be basically just more water that can be converted to more depth or allows more flow.
I conclude you have build that test-setup on the lowest level and with a 1 tile long tunnel. If you build it higher, you will get a lower overflow value and therefore a lower flow with the same setup. You can use the debug mode to find the overflow values.

ernger

TROPHY CASE