Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Sjolus
Metafarmers MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 16:37:00 -
[1]
The topic says it all (Well, kinda).
Say I have two facilities that needs Noble Metals. I would like to split the output of four extractors between these two facilities. Without pulling out a calculator (Or if you're one of those human calculator-people) it's virtually impossible to do the math on how much you need to route where from what source to make an even distribution.
The current interface-tab that shows you all routes in and out of a building is also lacking. Would it really be that hard to have the building tally up the amount of each item/material and display it in a nice fashion and then when you route it out be allowed to enter a percentage instead of an amount of items? (Note that this is a question, not an aggressive statement, I actually want to know how hard it is, and for what reasons )
I took math up to quite a neat level but all this fiddling with numbers all over the place still makes my brain hurt.
(Oh, and keep all the flames towards CCP lack in coding ability, my lack in mathskillsor whatever elsewhere please, try sticking to commenting on the actual feature suggestion)
|
Catari Taga
Centre Of Attention Rough Necks
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 16:42:00 -
[2]
Personally I think it would make sense to have a 100% setting that - regardless of your input - always routes everything out. Your problem I do not understand, just route 2 extractors to one facility and the other 2 to the other...
|
Sjolus
Metafarmers MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 16:54:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Catari Taga Personally I think it would make sense to have a 100% setting that - regardless of your input - always routes everything out. Your problem I do not understand, just route 2 extractors to one facility and the other 2 to the other...
a) The different extractors will have different outputs, leading to different amounts of materials being shipped off to the facilities. b) Mostly you keep a Storage Facility in between, which is where I really would like the percentual routage happening.
|
|
CCP Nimbus
|
Posted - 2010.05.08 23:37:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Sjolus
b) Mostly you keep a Storage Facility in between, which is where I really would like the percentual routage happening.
I'm not sure why percentual routing would help. You have, for example, four extractors feeding into one storage facility feeding two process facilities. The way the routes should be set up is routing the max they can from the extractors to the storage, then routing the max they can from the storage to the process facilities. This should give the behaviour you are after.
I think things should become clearer in tomorrows patch - we have fixed some problems with the route creation which should clear things up (the maximum size for route creation should now make sense).
|
|
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 00:08:00 -
[5]
Originally by: CCP Nimbus
Originally by: Sjolus
b) Mostly you keep a Storage Facility in between, which is where I really would like the percentual routage happening.
I'm not sure why percentual routing would help. You have, for example, four extractors feeding into one storage facility feeding two process facilities. The way the routes should be set up is routing the max they can from the extractors to the storage, then routing the max they can from the storage to the process facilities. This should give the behaviour you are after.
I think things should become clearer in tomorrows patch - we have fixed some problems with the route creation which should clear things up (the maximum size for route creation should now make sense).
Then why not remove amount from routes entirely? Extractors know how many they extract, no way they could sent less or more than that to the storage, and you DO WANT everything to reach storage - ergo, the amount on route is pointless. Processor do know how much it need to start working. Remove inner storage from it and let to access storage it linked to, directly. And if there is not enough of ALL reagents, it just won't retrieve it and won't start next cycle. Again, routing amount is pointless. And removing inner storage from processor solves another problem - the problem with processor shutdown. Right now you need to wait at least 2 hours for processor to be empty to change schematics without loosing current minerals. Removing inner storage shortens it more than in half - it will always be less than an hour. More than that, it'll often be instant as long as you don't have enough of material to start processing. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Steve Thomas
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 03:03:00 -
[6]
Originally by: CCP Nimbus
Originally by: Sjolus
b) Mostly you keep a Storage Facility in between, which is where I really would like the percentual routage happening.
I'm not sure why percentual routing would help. You have, for example, four extractors feeding into one storage facility feeding two process facilities. The way the routes should be set up is routing the max they can from the extractors to the storage, then routing the max they can from the storage to the process facilities. This should give the behaviour you are after.
I think things should become clearer in tomorrows patch - we have fixed some problems with the route creation which should clear things up (the maximum size for route creation should now make sense).
The big problem right now is that NONE of the numbers seem to balance
People are telling eachother reguarless of what they intend to do, first run the extractors at the 30 min cycle and the send it to storage and wait untill all mats hit he storage point, then rout from storage to processors so they show the True 6000/6000. otherwise you end up with something like what I have where one of my extractors had a long list of routs one for ~1k, the rest are 10, 12, 75,103,5 and so on, all going from the extractor to the Spaceport.
I think what people want is for the Routing module to simply look at the begining and end points(tally up how many pins it goes though if you want to) and simply send everything created at the starting point and drop it at the end point. If you have to make it illegal for any extractor to send to any thing but storage. Im sure most of the people on Sisi will understand and virutaly noone live will even give it a thought.
To be honest im almost to the point that if you want to add anymore tweeks to the system you probably should nuke all worlds just to be sure
*.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.* a (Long) Guide to Pi
|
Sjolus
Metafarmers MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 06:39:00 -
[7]
Originally by: CCP Nimbus
Originally by: Sjolus
b) Mostly you keep a Storage Facility in between, which is where I really would like the percentual routage happening.
I'm not sure why percentual routing would help. You have, for example, four extractors feeding into one storage facility feeding two process facilities. The way the routes should be set up is routing the max they can from the extractors to the storage, then routing the max they can from the storage to the process facilities. This should give the behaviour you are after.
I think things should become clearer in tomorrows patch - we have fixed some problems with the route creation which should clear things up (the maximum size for route creation should now make sense).
What I'm looking for is not the percentual routing of each individual input/output-entry, but a percentage of the total input. When I have four extractors inputing to the storage facility it'd be VERY convenient to only have to create ONE outbound route with a percentage of the total input of a material rather than a number of the input from just one extractor.
This would also remove the highly annoying aspect of "Oh, my extractors output just changed, and if it increased, I have to make a new route for it. And after I made that new route I have to fix the one coming in/out from the storage facility"
Instead it'd just be "Oh, My extractors output just changed, cool, as the routing is percentual it'll still be 100% going to the storage, and 100% (or if it's divided up 50 or 33% or 25% or... well you catch my drift) going from the storage to the facility, I don't have to change anything.
I understand that this could be a way for you to force people to interact with planets for them to be able to profit, but the selection of new resource deposits should be enough to do that, shouldn't it?
|
Sturmwolke
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 10:58:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Sturmwolke on 09/05/2010 11:00:20
Originally by: Sjolus What I'm looking for is not the percentual routing of each individual input/output-entry, but a percentage of the total input. When I have four extractors inputing to the storage facility it'd be VERY convenient to only have to create ONE outbound route with a percentage of the total input of a material rather than a number of the input from just one extractor.
What you're basically trying to solve, if I read and understand what you wrote above correctly, the gist of it - is eliminating waste by feeding exact amount of materials to processors and saving the materials excess (if any) due to the dynamic nature of the supply. In cases where there may not be any excesses, although unthinkable, this "percentual routing" will divide these materials evenly amongst the processors according to the "percentages".
I think there are several other better ways to do this, one of the simplest perhaps is to emulate how a storehouse works if you've ever played The Settlers - pretty much mirroring several players' suggestion that processors draw these resources automatically as per demand rather than having them pushed towards the processors.
Also see Page 6 and 7 on the V4 thread for my comments on preferential routing.
To end this, automated routing has been suggested pretty much from day one of PI, but I don't think these CCP guys are listening much ... imo tbh based on the last update.
/edit : grammar fix |
Sjolus
Metafarmers MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 12:45:00 -
[9]
You're quite correct sir.
|
daremo shirnai
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 13:55:00 -
[10]
|
|
Steve Thomas
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 16:21:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Steve Thomas on 09/05/2010 16:24:15 Edited by: Steve Thomas on 09/05/2010 16:23:26 they listen, they tend to just keep doing what they are doing anyway because thats what they have in mind and they are convinced that they are right.
BTW thanks for at least making the draw from Storage to processors 6000/6000 40/40 and so on
now can you make it so that the draw from Extractors to storage does the same thing(IE auto set to the maximum posible output of the extractor) that WOULD solve the entire problem in one go and solve the problem the players are having with your push system
thanks.
*.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.* *.* a (Long) Guide to Pi
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2010.05.09 16:31:00 -
[12]
What I'd like to see with routes is: - on extractors: routed amount is always equal to the extracted amount. So you don't need to update the routes every time you survey again
- option to have the route transport items only when the specified amount is available, e.g. storage routes 6000 raws to the processor but not anything less (unless the processor is partially filled.
- option of processors to only draw new resources when they have just finished a cycle, so they stay empty while processing. This will allow people to cut the route to the processor before disposing of it without losing material.
The first one, i want the most, the other two are just convenient. --------
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |