Architect Archive
Thread: Week Two Top 5 List
I think I just solved the problem with retriving power.
Once you put the stuff in there, it just becomes "power", but if you retrive it, how is the system going to know what to give you back? It won't keep track of what you originally put in there. With credits, all credits are the same, so there's no problem.
Potential Energy would be a factor, they can't just give you back generic energy, some people may put in power and take it back out to get higher PE, or others may complain about getting lower PE energy back. There's no way the system could keep track of how much of what type of power you put into it.
Even with deeds, when you re-deed it, it's just a generic deed, there's no serial number on it.
That's probably why we can't do it.
Well done Zarcath.
Please add to the factories and crates issue the fact that factories do not remove components from crates. Sometimes they do, but they never take all of them and tend to eat the raw resources when they fail on taking the crate items. Loading structural modules by hand into a factory is very irritating, especially when coupled with the other crate bugs. Also, crates are visible in the craft tool when making items, but cannot be used in those items...you still have to remove the components manually.
Both of these issues were things that were supposedly fixed in beta, but never have worked correctly. The devs need to be made aware that they are still broken.
Zarcath wrote:I think I just solved the problem with retriving power.
Once you put the stuff in there, it just becomes "power", but if you retrive it, how is the system going to know what to give you back? It won't keep track of what you originally put in there. With credits, all credits are the same, so there's no problem.
Potential Energy would be a factor, they can't just give you back generic energy, some people may put in power and take it back out to get higher PE, or others may complain about getting lower PE energy back. There's no way the system could keep track of how much of what type of power you put into it.
Even with deeds, when you re-deed it, it's just a generic deed, there's no serial number on it.
That's probably why we can't do it.
But does it really matter? I would like ANY energy back if I made a mistake or am going to redeed a harvester. For example, I apparently didn't delete the "0" that for SOME reason is placed in the transfer window by default and accidently put in 7550 instead of 755. Now my harvester is going to be going for the next 22 days!!! Except when I move it, all that energy goes poof. Now, I would take 6795 energy back if I could. I wouldn't CARE what type it is. It's energy.
Lamps that sit on tables is another bug still.
Having all our +structure/construction = 100% on master would be nice, be good to see if that fixed the problem with failures.
I really like the idea of using crates in a combine, but I don't know where this lies in dev eyes either..
They've got spegetti coding and so much is so tangled in there for them.
I'd love to hear a response to your first list.. makes aiming secondary lists pretty difficult.
Like to also mention I like your style change in your prose to them. Much cleaner, consice and representative.
-C9-
Deoka wrote:
Well done Zarcath.
Please add to the factories and crates issue the fact that factories do not remove components from crates. Sometimes they do, but they never take all of them and tend to eat the raw resources when they fail on taking the crate items. Loading structural modules by hand into a factory is very irritating, especially when coupled with the other crate bugs. Also, crates are visible in the craft tool when making items, but cannot be used in those items...you still have to remove the components manually.
Both of these issues were things that were supposedly fixed in beta, but never have worked correctly. The devs need to be made aware that they are still broken.
That slipped my mind, I will add it in with the Factory/Crate section, thanks 
Most of the issues in this report (Construction, lots, colorization), may be far off "wish list" items, but they are worded imploringly towards the Devs to shed more light as to how they're "supposed" to work. I'm sure we will get a reasonable response for each topic.
I think the increase in Structure Assembly addresses the crit fail issue, though it is a bigger issue on it's own, the items in the list are as important to me. (Plus, as someone said, Crit Failure Dumbassity was on the Wk1 list.)
I am a Master Architect and I dont even have a ballot box in my schematics???
i have two different types of terminals one of which looks like a ballot box but wants the same resource requirement of a terminal???
The more times they see us put Crit Fails in our weekely reports, the more chances of it actually getting looked at because week after week, the architechs are concerned about it.
One of these days, it will finally get the attention if we keep putting it as our #1 priority.
The logic of... well it was sent in on that first one so lets just forget about ever sending it it again is completely silly. The devs will be more apt to forget about our issues and move on to piddly stuff rather than fix something we all feel should at a minimum be looked at.