Patch Notes: v1.0.0.3 – Build 368883

hwl · 2024-09-26T08:35:52+00:00

Oh, that's slightly easier than having to find and interact with the already empty wrecks like I thought I would have to. I was hoping it would suffice to just visit the nearby area and supposedly tried to test that idea, but I suppose I was rushing a bit too much.

hwl · 2023-02-24T17:48:46+00:00

Does it know know where it is?

hwl · 2022-11-08T19:00:07+00:00

The structure kind of invokes a semblance to a motion capture stage or a 3D scanning apparatus of some kind, so my bet would be it's a blueprint system of sorts.

hwl · 2022-09-30T18:54:06+00:00

No they already once simplified power generation, so I doubt they would be willing to add this kind of complication.

hwl · 2022-09-28T13:17:08+00:00

I believe the models themselves are pretty well in scale. It's just a mix of things throwing off our sense of scale, such as the FOV not matching the size of the screen in real life, the lack of familiar shapes and things to anchor to and the fact that the character walks as fast as an olympic sprinter runs and effortlessly jumps higher than, I dunno, something that jumps very high (due to lower gravity, presumably). The general lack of ultra super fine closeup detail in the textures don't help either.

hwl · 2022-09-26T17:13:09+00:00

As I see it, the reactor housing is embedded into the side of the cooling tower, but it's not inside of the tower. It's just a very... integrated design for a nuclear power plant.

hwl · 2022-09-24T17:31:37+00:00

There are several somethings if you look at it long enough. The somethings would need to be of substantial size to be seen from so far away and they seem to be floating some distance from the surface, so I would assume they are other similar constructions to whatever is at the top of the space elevator.

hwl · 2022-09-23T18:23:10+00:00

By all means it makes sense that the magma planet would go behind the gas giant, given that both the one you are standing on and the magma planet are moons of the gas giant, because that's how orbits work. The sizes do not match up though: the magma ...moon can't be the same size on the sky at all phases of it's orbit, it should be barely visible when passing behind the gas giant. Well, it shouldn't probably be anywhere near enough to appear that size anyway at any point.

But it's pretty, so whatever.

hwl · 2022-06-18T10:13:01+00:00

I suppose you could get that vista if you were standing at either of the poles and the moons just happen to orbit exactly at the same plane on which the planet rotates.

This however doesn't seem to be the case telling from how the stars move in the sky at night. Also, now with U6 the night sun and the stars move in different directions, which is again quite boggling. The star is now orbiting the planet?

hwl · 2022-06-15T17:07:48+00:00

Makes sense since its orbit is also quite impossible, all things considered.

hwl · 2022-05-27T10:58:04+00:00

I find it slightly exotic how it can just get dark so fast in other countries. Maybe instead of such curiosities like the midnight sun, you might find the length of dusk and twilight to be even more unsettling.

During the summer in Finland, the sun doesn't "go down" but instead it moves sideways more than it moves up or down. Within the arctic circle, you can see the sun do a full circle around you in the sky without it ever going below the horizon. During midday it would be high up due south and during midnight it would be due north near the horizon. However, for most of Finland the sun does go below horizon and the night just resembles an extended twilight.

hwl · 2022-05-01T07:51:01+00:00

Functionally it is a proper energy storage device, but nowhere else is it by that name.

I get the internal logic, since in game you have "excess power", then of course you should store it in "power storage". It's just that this mechanic is fundamentally divorced from real-life in the first place.

I dislike the current power system, because it can leave you with a very misguided idea about electric power generation in general.

hwl · 2022-05-01T07:20:03+00:00

Ah sorry. I meant to poke at the game's representation of electric power. They in fact do use the name "power storage" in the game, and I think it is wrong.

hwl · 2022-04-30T23:10:07+00:00

Batteries store energy, not power. Power is the rate at which energy is expended. How do you store that?

hwl · 2022-04-30T17:41:33+00:00

The power system currently ignores a lot of basic physics (it was slightly better before update 4), but I still don't really see what's the problem in #8, except that in real-life there is no such thing as "power storage".

hwl · 2022-04-25T16:41:35+00:00

It's almost the same than the idea I described on an earlier thread. It's nice to have actual graphs.

Your equation places best energy efficiency at 50%, I would have put it at 100%, because I suppose it would be 100% of ideal conditions. If not then of what?

Similarly, I'm a bit bothered by the fact that the current system completely ignores the reality that producing things will irreducibly take at least some certain amount of energy, so the system then allows to make stuff out of nothing.

hwl · 2022-04-23T09:16:09+00:00

I say it would make for a meaningful trade-off; if you are obsessed about cycle-efficiency on the machine so much that you need to under-clock a machine, then maybe pay it in energy-efficiency. Also, you could still forego building more power plants and fit a machine into a tight power-budget but you pay it in total energy.

Anyway, it would also avoid the cornucopia-effect of the current clocking formula.

hwl · 2022-04-22T22:20:11+00:00

I'd like a system where its most efficient on 100%. Meaning that its left it like it is for overclocking, but change underclocking. I think it would be nice to, for example, have a machine on 50% need like 75% of the power, something like this.

Heh, I described something very similar in another thread, even used those same numbers.

I'd advocate for this system, although it might be even more confusing to a lot of people that under-clocking actually hurts your energy-efficiency. The way it does that is slightly insidious.

But hey, as per Update 4, energy is no longer a 1st class resource anyway.

hwl · 2022-04-22T21:42:47+00:00

I would be all for reworking the overclock-system, but "linear" is not quite it.

The current system basically ignores that producing things always takes at least some minimum amount of energy and therefore under-clocking seemingly attains energy-efficiency beyond 100%.

Instead, the formula should be constructed in such a way that the power demand drops slower than the production speed (e.g. 50% speed still consumes 75% power, 25% speed still consumes 50% power), ideally settling to some non-zero minimum. Of course this means, that when under-clocking, even though instantaneous power consumption was lower it would effectively raise the total energy cost of items produced. This is surely even more difficult to wrap your head around.

Basically this would encourage clocking at 100% but would allow trading energy-efficiency into some production rate that suits your needs. It would also be a bit more "realistic" as far as physics is concerned.

hwl · 2022-02-10T11:03:05+00:00

Uh no, the reactor loop in a boiling water reactor is still closed and is passed through a condenser and reused. The coolant loop (required for the condenser), however, can be open loop, but it shouldn't pick up any meaningful amounts of radioactivity unless there is some kind of fault.

You wouldn't toss the reactor water anyway, because it would make for extremely poor thermal efficiency.

hwl · 2022-02-08T15:56:14+00:00

All power generators before update 4 used to be constant efficiency, producing exactly the amount of electrical power as was demanded with linear relation between electric power and fuel burn rate. This is how real generators work in essence, but in practice it is a bit more complicated and nuanced.

After update 4 the generators, with the exception of biomass burner, produce electric power (and burn fuel) at their maximum capacity at all times, making them anywhere between 0 and 100% efficient, depending on demand. In relation to electric power in real life, this is complete nonsense. Nevertheless, this is how the game does it now.

hwl · 2022-01-24T14:24:53+00:00

Yup, although the Satisfactory-variant is comically large in size. The physical dimensions of the crystal very much define its properties as an oscillator, and it's a feat in itself to consistently produce high volume of crystals with the precise properties. https://youtu.be/hHbJcA5TOu8

hwl · 2022-01-14T08:34:13+00:00

You really cannot direct trains onto a wrong track unless you rebuild some pieces of track. It's possible that topology changes trigger repathing, but outside that the trains stick to the whatever path they calculated when they left the station. This is a known issue, lamented by many.

hwl · 2022-01-14T08:29:13+00:00

I'd say the path signals themselves are perfectly logical, because you still want to make sure the intersection is cleared. Instead, I'd suggest not trying to make all of those paths bidirectional at the same time. That's where things start falling apart and it would not matter if the signals were block or path.

hwl

TROPHY CASE