Lurker > adjl

Moving copper wire around generally isn't the best idea. One copper plate makes two wires, so you can only fit half as many on a belt/bot as if you belted the copper around and made the wires on site (or, framed differently, you need twice as many belts/bots to deliver what you need). For green circuits in particular, directly inserting the wire between machines makes the most sense, in a ratio of 3 wire assemblers per 2 circuit assemblers.

Lokarin posted...

once I started infinitely expanding my circuit machines sideways I ran into throughput issues I couldn't fix easily

You're always going to run into some throughput issues if you try to expand linearly. Even without modules/beacons, one AM3 producing green circuits will consume 3.75 copper per second (through wires). That means one blue belt of copper (45/s) can only ever supply 12 circuit assemblers, no matter how much spare material you've got on your bus. Usually, my green circuit factories are built with two lines of copper and one iron (the copper each feeding a row of wire assemblers, direct inserting into rows of circuit assemblers that share the iron belt), but for AM3's that's still 2.5 iron a second and the most you can get out of a row like that is 18. Really ramping up production entails having multiple rows working in parallel, since otherwise you're just held back by the throughput of the belts.

Lokarin posted...

Next base gunna do 4 lane right from the start

My usual bus design is 8 lanes each of iron and copper, 4 of green circuits, 2 steel, 2 plastic, 1 red circuit, and 1 blue circuit, sometimes doing stone, stone bricks, and/or coal depending on how I'm feeling (outside of malls, those three are used in pretty limited quantities). I rarely actually use that much before transitioning into a modular train-based design to really scale up (and I don't actually build out all the lanes unless I need them), but it does a solid job of future-proofing my base and means I don't have to upgrade the whole thing to red or blue belts before I move to trains.

ConfusedTorchic posted...

no libs were scared or owned lol

But they think some were, and that's all that matters in the world of Alternative Facts (tm).

Already have a Switch, zero interest in the other two because I've got a PC and that covers pretty much everything that skips the Switch. If I absolutely had to buy a console to keep the $500, it'd be whichever one has the highest resale value.

acesxhigh posted...

pretty epic game, mega confusing button layout

I concur. It's a good time so far, but I've definitely missed several jumps and taken several hits because I sprinted (putting away my shield in the process) instead of jumping. I'm sure I'll get used to it eventually, but hoo boy is this non-standard.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

Tell me, does X3 have the battle announcer that yells out OUTSTANDING and MAGNIFICENT and whatnot? That cab stay forever.

Yes and no. The battle announcements aren't there anymore (though combos still manage to feel just as satisfying without it), but the same voice actor voices what is widely considered to be the best hero character (recruited NPC party members), so the announcer is still effectively around and providing much entertainment to all men of the sea.

"People keep blocking our ads because they're annoying, disruptive, and sometimes downright harmful!"
"Maybe we should try to make them less annoying, disruptive, and sometimes downright harmful?"
"That's stupid, let's just make them even more intrusive so they work better on the remaining people while we figure out how to break the adblockers!"

And so the world turns...

Judgmenl posted...

Ad blocking is not piracy lmfao.
I just lost a lot of respect for you with that comment PO.

Man, it's a good thing the paragraph containing that comment didn't additional sentences in it that explained the analogy in ways that made it obvious that he was not in any way trying to suggest that adblocking is piracy, otherwise you'd look pretty silly right now.

That aside, there is a case to be made that it is. Ad-supported content creators rely on those ads being seen to make money creating their content. In a sense, viewing the ads is the medium by which viewers pay for the content they're consuming, so if you block the ads, you're consuming the content without paying the indicated price. That definitely gets muddied a bit by the number of intermediaries between viewing the ad and paying the creator, as well as by the fact that advertisers know full well that the majority of people viewing a given ad won't go out and buy the product either way and have already taken that probability into account in deciding how much the ad slot is worth, but the core concept of consuming the product/service without paying the requested price still applies. Of course, it's also much easier to justify because the actual monetary component of that price that goes to the creator is so minuscule compared to the time, annoyance, and potential damage the viewer experiences, so it stands to reason that, even if we do call it piracy, it falls into the ream of morally acceptable piracy for most people. Still, the argument can easily be made.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

You seem to be really high on it.

It dethroned 1 as my favourite game ever. It's a good time. Opinions do vary quite a bit on it, though, and I can understand why. Delving into that debate would require extensive story spoilers, though, and this is not the place for that, nor would I want to rob you of the opportunity to experience them in-context.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

X1 still my favorite for the story, but I really got into the battle system of 2.

2 is... complicated. Once the battle system comes into its own and you've got all the tools to work with and you've done the necessary grinding to bring all the better blades up to the point of being useful and you've looked up some online guides to take the place of the useless in-game tutorials, it's got a ton of strategic depth and build versatility and is just plain fun to play around with. It just takes bloody forever to get there and nothing about the main story experience actually encourages you to explore it beyond "DOUBLE SPINNING EDGE!", plus it's not intuitive enough for anyone to stumble on that depth without seriously trying to study it (which just means watching Enel's videos, for most people, but still). In the same vein, the story gets really interesting once it starts to focus on developing the characters meaningfully and exploring their motivations and the philosophical themes driving the whole game, but you're like 70-75% of the way through the game by the time you get to that.

There's a lot of really good stuff in 2, but the pacing is terrible and the anime tropes are a little too heavy-handed for me to really enjoy wading through them. I definitely still like it overall, but by contrast I quite prefer 1's more straightforward storytelling and gameplay pacing.

I'd say comfortably upper-middle class and fairly well-off. That's enough money that you don't have to be particularly frugal to avoid financial troubles, but not so much that financial trouble is entirely off the table (which is how I'd interpret "very well-off"), and also not so much that you can live comfortably without working if you're so inclined (which is how I'd interpret "rich").

Revelation34 posted...

A complete ban would be impossible.

Not impossible, except insofar as you can never truly prevent 100% of crimes from happening, but trying to enact it would be a massive undertaking, involve no small amount of bloodshed, and probably wouldn't actually result in any better outcomes than sensible regulation would.

For real, a Pokemon/MH crossover could be pretty amazing.

Presumably off reassuring himself of his enlightened centrism somewhere where there aren't mean people to poke holes in his narratives.

AwesomeTurtwig posted...

I love how adding Mc in front of anything makes stuff immediately funny to me.

That is pretty McFunny.

In theory, if you can handle the boss gauntlet, you can probably beat BotW within 2-3 hours regardless of where you were in the game. You can just walk right in to the castle and go murder Ganon if you want, without doing anything else beyond the Great Plateau. I'd say that's not a great way to play the game, since you skip a lot of content that way, but if you aren't enjoying the rest of it then that's a moot point in your case.

Alternatively, just go for it and be excited for whatever you want. There are plenty of reasons to be interested in TotK even if you had issues with BotW, and you don't really need to let anyone tell you what to get excited by beyond tempering your expectations by reminding you of issues you'll likely have.

Picked up a copy. I actually had to hunt for it a bit; when I went to the mall there was a sizable line outside of Gamestop and from the website it looked like they didn't have any non-preorder copies available, and the other store in the mall that might have sold it also suggested on the website that they didn't have it, so I ended up driving a bit further to get one from Best Buy. I honestly can't remember the last time I had to try more than one store to get a game on launch day, though I guess I don't buy on launch very often.

PK_Spam posted...

I like Xenoblade more than most but 3 is NOT a GotY contender lmao

Indeed not. "Contender" implies that another might qualify, and that's obviously nonsense.

Such silly gooses these transphobes be.

Sonicplys posted...

Already got the 2023 Game of the Year.

That'd be Xenoblade 3.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I thought it was a six-pack, but admittedly, I haven't followed the situation very closely and I could be mistaken.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


That seems exceedingly likely.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

I always give OoT the edge, because it's a "traditional" Zelda game, and generally is longer and has more stuff to see and do than MM.

But I put MM right up there for the opposite reason- how different and dark it is, the insane music, the atypical combat with masks, etc. They are both very different games in ways, which makes me.love both equally. Or nearly equally.

I can fully agree with this. MM is a very different sort of Zelda game, and while I love it through and through, I can understand why somebody who wants a more traditional Zelda might not be a huge fan of it.

That said, the people that hate the time limit because it pressures them too much just need to git gud.

Black_Crusher posted...

If it counts, I had the GC adapter that went on the bottom and let you play gbc / gba games.

Playing Kirby's Tilt n' Tumble on the GB player was a delightfully idiotic experience.

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

That and MM literally just reused all of OoT's assets and managed to make a remarkable and very different game off of it.

I'd even go so far as to say they made a better game, but that's me.

Selling well means they were popular. How liked they were is another matter, one which you'd have to look at sales patterns to determine (namely, looking at how sales dropped off once people got the games and were able to comment on how enjoyable they were), but as a question of simple popularity, sales figures are all you have to look at.

Jen0125 posted...

Yeah I agree but better safe than sorry when you're in a high ranking position that is highly based off of your ethical integrity

Indeed. Realistically, given that she could easily buy her own bagels and lox, it's more the thought behind the gift that matters, and turning it down for ethical reasons doesn't really count against that at all.

In practice, there should be a code of conduct that outlines a minimum cost threshold over which gifts must be disclosed (probably like $20) and a second minimum cost threshold (probably like $500) over which gifts must be refused. Toss in some means of adding them up so you don't get somebody buying a judge 40,000 $10 gift cards, and you make sure judges can have normal social lives while still making sure they aren't taking bribes.

Jen0125 posted...

On the flipside:

https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-elena-kagan-rejected-bagels-clarence-thomas-paid-vacations-2023-5

I think that might be taking ethical concerns a bit too far, but I do have to respect the commitment to integrity.

How have they made that clear? Up until the Switch - which physically can't be backwards compatible with any other systems due to its fundamental design concept - every handheld has been backwards compatible by at least one generation, and the Wii and WiiU did the same (the GC also physically could not have been expected to). To my knowledge, they haven't announced anything on the matter, so aside from their general reluctance to make old games available digitally (which is generally quite bothersome) the only reason I might expect not to see backwards compatibility next generation would be if they change up the storage medium such that Switch cards won't work.

argonautweakend posted...

edit: though, something else: this could have the double whammy of pissing of their core customers but pro LGBT customer DONT get on board because a) Bud Light is disgusting and b) they recognize it as pandering.

More than just recognizing it as pandering, the whole saga has brought to light the scale of AB/InBEV's donations to Republican causes, including a whole lot of stuff that hurts LGBTQ folks, as well as drawn attention to to just how many different brands they own. Speaking personally, I have never had nor will ever have any particular desire to drink Bud Light, but unless that donation situation changes pretty radically, I intend to pay closer attention to who's backing what I buy for the sake of avoiding AB-InBEV altogether. I'm a little torn on whether such a boycott is actually going to be helpful, since the bottom line is that I'm avoiding their products as a consequence of their pro-LGBTQ marketing campaign, and pro-LGBTQ marketing is generally a positive thing (even if it's blatant pandering, it helps to normalize the concept, which is better than not normalizing it, so I'm happy to encourage it), but I think I'm falling on the side of not buying the things.

BeerOnTap posted...

So its okay for a judge to not recuse herself from a case in which she received millions of dollars from one of the involved parties?

Provided those earnings are disclosed and neither the plaintiff nor defendant is concerned that they might present a conflict of interests? Sure. If everybody knows what's going on and nobody involved has a problem with it, there is no problem. If those earnings aren't disclosed or an involved party is concerned that it might bias the judgement, then that's reason to call the verdict into question.

In the case of Thomas (and other, more analogous cases), however, the bribes he has taken present a conflict of interest for every single case over which he presides for which those who bribed him have a preference as to the outcome. One must question whether he voted to overturn Roe v. Wade because of his personal interpretation of the law or because people who bribed him wanted it overturned. Because he has accepted bribes, one must ask that question for every single decision Thomas weighs in on moving forward, which completely undermines his professional integrity.

Conflicts of interest are bad, certainly, but when it's something like "I've worked for these people in the past" or "I'm related to this person," their potential harms can usually be pretty easily identified and the scope tends to be limited to the issue at hand (making them fairly easy to correct and/or accept if those identified harms aren't significant enough to constitute a problem). When somebody accepts a bribe, however, the extent of the conflict of interest that creates becomes pretty much impossible to determine, especially when the details of the bribe are not disclosed. By accepting the bribe, every single decision that person makes in the future has the potential to be compromised by the bribe, and there's no real way for anyone else to figure out when that is and is not the case. Any semblance of professional integrity and accountability goes out the window when a bribe is accepted.

That's mostly what it comes down to: Accountability. Conflicts of interest for which those involved can be held accountable are okay, because that means there's an opportunity to prevent or mitigate any harms it might cause. Conflicts of interest for which it's impossible to hold the conflicted party accountable, however, can cause all sorts of problems purely for the personal gain of the conflicted party. That's bad.

Lokarin posted...

it's cuz i use the Q key for almost everything :D

I remember the days before Q. Dark times indeed.

Lokarin posted...

Rocket's Away!!!

First Victory, 44 hours 18 minutes (in game time)

Congratulations!

Now the factory must continue to grow.

BeerOnTap posted...

Not once did I use the word bribe to describe the situation. All I said was she received a boatload of cash, and she did indeed.

You said she "*took* a boatload of cash," a word choice which overwhelmingly suggests it was a bribe, gift, or something other than a business transaction for services rendered. Why would you choose a wording that is likely to misinform those not familiar with the situation instead of just saying that she had received revenue for a book she published? That's a pretty crucial piece of information for characterizing the money received, after all. The only reason I can see for leaving it out is a disingenuous effort to make people think it was more than just a question of professional conflict of interests.

At this point, the only possibility for a "Switch Pro" is going to be a backwards-compatible successor. We're over 6 years in now, which is the longest that any Nintendo console has gone without news of a successor (the WiiU aside because it lasted less than 5, pretty much every console has come out 6 years after the previous one, give or take a month), so there's every reason to expect that the next hardware announcement will be a new system and not a revision. The OLED is the closest you're going to get to a "pro" model.

Ozmose posted...

First of all that is an outright f***ing lie.

Your position was literally "it doesn't happen often enough to be worth worrying about it," presented with the intent of shutting down efforts to do something about the problem. Whether it's what you intended to say or not, you were 100% modded for saying that child murder wasn't a big deal.

Ozmose posted...

Second, I only had three posts in that topic, every single one was modded. Feel free to go look for yourself.

It was only one the last time I looked, but given that your other posts were doubling down on insisting that children dying at a massively inflated rate isn't indicative of a problem, I'm not overly surprised.

Ozmose posted...

I was making the point that the way it was being portrayed is total fearmongering.

And you did that by downplaying the fact that the risk is still way higher than it should be. Nobody in that topic was saying "I'm afraid to send my kids to school." Everybody was saying "this happens too often." You invented a position nobody was expressing, shot it down in a way that dismissed a very real problem in the process, and now are wondering why your conduct was deemed unfit for civilized discussion. Child murder isn't the time to break out strawman fallacies.

Regardless of how likely it is for any given child to be shot, guns are the #1 cause of mortality for those between the ages of 1 and 19 in the US. That's a problem. School shootings are only a part of that (iirc, the breakdown is something like 5% accidents, 30% suicides, 65% violent crimes, with mass shootings falling into the last category), and they do indeed get a disproportionate amount of media attention and public reaction for the level of risk they present, but the problem to which they call attention is a very real one. You can acknowledge and look past the shock value of a mass shooting (though who's really shocked at this point, with 1-2 happening every day) while still recognizing the actual scale of the problem. You didn't, entirely for the sake of pushing the agenda that there should be no improvements to American gun control regulations because you don't want to have to give up your toys (despite the fact that you're already compliant with most of the new regulations people suggest and therefore woudln't have to give up anything except filling out a bit of extra paperwork). That's why you got modded.

Don't believe me? Feel free to check the posts in which I acknowledged how low the risk is at an individual level and agreed with that part of what you were saying. They haven't been modded. Clearly, it's more than just that message that got your posts deleted, so maybe instead of throwing yourself a pity party while insisting that that was all, try thinking about how you can express your opinions in a manner more conducive to civil discussion.

Depends how much bath oil you put on them.

I genuinely don't understand why Sonic Team hasn't put out a Chao Garden mobile game. The concept is an excellent fit for the platform and there's huge potential for monetization even without getting super scummy about it.

Ozmose posted...

I think you're confusing running away with getting my posts removed by mommy mod because your feelings got hurt by the truth.

You had one post modded for saying that child murder isn't a big deal, threw a tantrum over it and left after everyone refused to give you sympathy for that intolerable assault on your free speech and statistics started showing up that conflicted with your desired narrative. You're not fooling anyone by trying to play the victim here.

Yellow posted...

Yeah unless their development time problem is solved, this probably won't be good

I think this is actually a decent opportunity for them to avoid that problem. By and large, Pokemon games are rushed because they have to meet merchandise release schedules, a problem that's growing as the transition into making 3D console games means the games just plain take longer to make (compounded by a lack of experience working on such games meaning they can't be as efficient as some other studios can) while the merchandise release cycle has stayed the same. Making something that isn't Pokemon and can have a more relaxed development timeline (with room for delays if needed) will probably be good for them.

Now, will the game be good? Who knows? Probably not, given how far outside their usual area of expertise it is. But it does at least have the potential to be a project on which they can take their time to get it right.

Conner4REAL posted...

and Trump has many other more serious cases that a statement under oath in this trial can be used against him elsewhere.

This is probably the biggest thing. It's easier to effectively settle for a $5 million payout than to risk tanking Trump's bigger cases by letting him say something stupid here.

Nichtcrawler-X posted...

One of those is not a Nintendo Exclusive.

I applaud your unconventional thinking.

which was illustrated by artist Kazuma Koda, known for his work on games like Nier: Automata, Bayonetta 2, Pokmon: Lets Go, Pikachu!, and Fire Emblem: Three Houses.

One of these things is not like the others...

papercup posted...

Well maybe Game Freak will learn how to make games finally

It'll probably be good for them to not have merchandise schedules to work around.

The annoying thing is that a complete ban isn't necessary (or even helpful, arguably), but because the NRA has whipped people into a frenzy over the slightest hint of regulation, they see it in such black-and-white terms. Most of what's needed is just codifying into law what responsible gun owners already do. Those that are responsible shouldn't have anything to fear. Those that aren't shouldn't have guns anyway, so their complaints can be ignored.

If you're splitting LDS between yellow science and the rocket, whichever one is left will likely seed up a bit once the other finishes. Your rocket won't launch automatically unless you tell it to and it has cargo, so don't worry about letting it sit there for a bit if you want to wait to add a satellite and get something meaningful out of it. The satellite is also going to take another 100 LDS and 50 rocket fuel, so you can start collecting that if the science isn't ready yet.

Not well, but a little. She's ~150-160 lbs, I'm 180ish.

Ah, makes sense. I don't think I've ever done it without quite a few machines making all three of those parts, given how long the recipes take, but where that's an excellent way to realize just how little steel and plastic you're actually producing and it gets a lot harder to prod mod them all, I can understand taking it more slowly. You might still want to consider some speed beacons, assembler upgrades, and/or extra machines to hurry things along, though. A single Assembler 2 with Prod 3's in it produces one LDS every ~32 seconds, so the 714 you need for a rocket will take about 22,500 seconds to produce, or almost 6.5 hours. RCU's and rocket fuel are even worse, at ~48 seconds per craft and nearly 10 hours of crafting time to finish them all.

The silo itself only holds four prod mods (and you should absolutely use them, it takes the rocket cost from 1000 of each component to ~730ish), but the rest can go elsewhere in the chain. If you've unlocked beacons and have spare material production, you can put speed mods in them to help the silo go faster, but that probably won't be necessary for your first rocket.

josh posted...

Great biter home bulldozer too

... until 1 rock you didn't see in the carnage stops you in your tracks

Or worse, a cliff.

Lokarin posted...

I've told this story before*, but I haven't played BotW yet... should I just skip it?

*the story being I have 2 copies of BotW but my mom took one and my bro took the other.

BotW story summary (spoilers, technically, but not exactly anything that'll ruin anyone's day):

• 100 years ago, Link, Zelda, and four Champions piloting four ancient giant robots tried to beat an amorphous evil named Calamity Ganon, except they all got their asses kicked. The Champions died, Link almost died and got sealed away in the fantasy equivalent of cryosleep, Zelda imprisoned herself with Ganon to keep it from destroying everything
• Link just woke up, and now he has to find four new Champions, reclaim the giant robots that Ganon took over, and go stab Ganon in the face to free Zelda and save the world
• Link finds four new Champions, reclaims the giant robots that Ganon took over, and stabs Ganon in the face to free Zelda and save the world

That's pretty much it. There's a lot of lore and worldbuilding material that you can find while exploring Hyrule that fleshes everything out more and is enjoyable enough to be worth delving into, but as far as core story goes, that's all you've missed and all that I would expect you to need to know to understand what's going on in TotK (and that will probably be summarized in TotK's prologue).

Now, BotW's still worth playing, and depending on how many improvements TotK has made on the formula it may be best to play it first so it doesn't feel dated when you do get around to it, but that's your call and I can't really comment on how likely that is to end up being an issue.

Monopoman posted...

Looks like the USA is the only country where kids and young adults from 1-19 die from guns more than any other way.

https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/issue-brief/child-and-teen-firearm-mortality-in-the-u-s-and-peer-countries/

The only *developed* country, at least. I'm sure there are plenty of active war zones where that's also the case, not that that really helps the position much.

Grendel_Prime posted...

Genuinely curious if he can put a number on what he would deem a "worthwhile" number of children being shot before any action is taken to impact the role guns play in these incidents. Where is the line? At what point do we go from "Well, that's just the price of freedom" to "We need gun reform"? How many more children need to be shot to move the needle for you?

Indeed. By framing it as "this isn't common enough to worry about," the implication is made that it could be common enough to worry about if it were to happen more often. One wonders what that threshold is.

Personally (since those of us saying this is too many must also have a threshold that's considered acceptable, and zero unfortunately isn't realistic), I draw the line at being higher than the average among other developed countries. Somebody always has to be above average, so I'm fine with discounting variations that can be explained by random chance, but being nearly 20 times higher is very obviously statistically significant. Comparing countries gets complicated because there are so many factors to consider, but the simple fact of the matter is that when everybody else is able to do a much better job than you, you need to take a step back, ask yourself why you suck so much, and make a serious effort to do better.

Tanks are indeed awesome. There was a time when they were largely useless, but around 0.15 or 0.16 they got massively buffed and now they're the go-to method for destroying bases in the mid game.

Lokarin posted...

my base did come under pollution attack even though there's no visible spawners around

If you turn on the pollution display on the map, you can sometimes see chunks of pollution being consumed, which usually indicates that there's a nest there (especially if it's not densely forested). That can be helpful for avoiding unwanted surprises, if you aren't at the point of maintaining radar coverage.

Lokarin posted...

I made some small radar stations (1 pole, 1 radar, 1 turret, 1 solar panel) and placed them around my perimeter to act as an early warning system.

I might suggest a couple extra solar panels and some accumulators. A radar can consume 5 panels' worth of electricity, and having it go dark at night could let biters slip past undetected. That, or just run big poles out to the radar outposts, which might even be cheaper than one panel depending on how far you're going.