Submit Feedback

Space Engineers PC Support Topic Feedback

This object is in archive!

Stone Prioritizes Survival Kit Over Refinery

Concerned Engineer shared this feedback ago

Submitted

This issue recently got marked as 'Not a Bug/Intended Behavior'. I can only assume the dev that did this doesn't actually play their own game, or they would realize what a pain in the ass this behavior is to anyone that plays survival mode.

The issue: When stone is placed into a conveyor system, it will prioritize falling into the survival kit's inventory, instead of a refinery.

This is a well-documented issue that has been persistent in your game since survival mode's release. There are multiple memes and bug reports that reference this behavior, yet this dev responded to a bug report that is 3 YEARS OLD, their response basically amounting to: "Actually, this is working as intended."

Thread in question: https://support.keenswh.com/spaceengineers/pc/topic/refineries-wont-pull-from-survival-kit

Another thread where someone describes the same issue, albeit less to the point: https://support.keenswh.com/spaceengineers/pc/topic/survival-kit-tested

If this is by design, this is moronic. It makes zero sense for stone to prioritize a survival kit over a refinery, much less a survival kit that doesn't have the ingot recipe queued. I understand this can be circumvented with a sorter. I shouldn't have to waste resources and space to work around your bad design. Please rethink your response to this issue and save everyone that plays survival mode the hassle.

I like this feedback

Replies (2)

QA KeenSWH ●

Hello, Concerned Engineer,

thank you for reaching our forum with this.

However, it is indeed not broken from our POV, thus not a bug.

However, if you feel that it would be good to change this in any way or re-design this behavior, that is Feedback. I am moving this thread now to our Feedback section of this forum.

Thank you for your understanding.

Kind Regards

Keen Software House: QA Department

Reply URL

Concerned Engineer ●

"Not a bug, it's a feature." Actually hilarious response, thanks for the reply.

Would you mind explaining to me why stone going into the less-efficient survival kit is preferable to a refinery? Explain your 'point-of-view', because from the POV of a player, it's a bug at best. At worst, it's an indicator that you don't play your own game.

People think Keen doesn't give a shit about their own game, I'm inclined to believe them at this point.

URL

jthill ●

> I understand this can be circumvented with a sorter.

Some like it the way it is and a huge number don't particularly care but built their grids expecting it to behave as it does. You want to break all those people's grids because why exactly?

> I shouldn't have to waste resources and space

If you've decided to build a new one, what are you even talking about? You've got a full refinery and everything that goes with it. The infrastructure to build and operate that makes the resources and space you're so agitated about a rounding error.

If this is *very* early game, abandoning the small-grid kit and the already-built battery to power it is the real waste, why exactly are you not using the kit you started with? You're going to be building connectors anyway, right?

Reply URL

Concerned Engineer ●

I'm not exactly sure what you're defending, but I'll try and take you in good faith.

>Some like it the way it is.

Do you? Why?

>You want to break everyone's grids

Sorry, I don't understand how a change in stone's default sorting priority would break anyone's grids. Could you please explain it to me?

>It's a rounding error.

That's a matter of opinion, I guess. I'm not a fan of needless wasted space, or needlessly wasted time.

>Abandoning the small-grid is the real waste.

Maybe I'm still too fresh, I was under the impression the small grid that you spawn on was a finite power source, and the need to move to a large, stable grid was necessary for progression. The small kit you start with is grinded down to build the large grid one once it's time, at least for me, typically.

>You're going to be building connectors anyway, right.

No idea what connectors have to do with this at all, please explain.

It just seems like an obvious QoL change that should've been implemented a long time ago. I can't see why you'd be so opposed to a change that, as far as I can see, would only benefit people. Thanks for reading.

URL

jthill ●

> I was under the impression the small grid that you spawn on was a finite power source, and the need to move to a large, stable grid was necessary for progression.

Not seeing the necessity or even attraction of destroying grids that already do what I want. The O2/H2 gen, battery and survival kit in the drop pod do me fine at least until I've got a nice fat iron deposit to chew on. I don't see how the little ones could be cramping your style, was there something specific that impressed this notion on you or what? Small grid rovers rock. Small grid living quarters rock. Connectors connect them to big-grid facilities. (Like power supplies, for instance)

> how a change in stone's default sorting priority would break anyone's grids

grids was the wrong word there, workflow was what I was after. I expect my designs to work how I built them to work. If the refineries are suddenly spending time on whatever stone I bring back while the survival kit that could be chewing on it sits idle, that means I'm waiting for the real ores longer than before. I'd call that an unexpected and unpleasant break in my workflow. If I didn't like the way my grid works I wouldn't have designed it that way, that's kind of the game, of course I like the way it works.

> I'm not a fan of needless wasted space, or needlessly wasted time.

And yet you're doggedly grinding down blocks that already do everything you need and replacing them with much larger, much more expensive blocks that can't possibly pay for the extra effort of building them this early. The opportunity cost here is off the charts, you could be prospecting for ore deposits and building a mining rover instead.

URL

Concerned Engineer ●

You start by stating small grids rock, and the need for a larger grid is unnecessary, then state that you should connect your small grid to a large grid facility.

Rovers actually suck in the mountains, in my experience. (Could be a skill issue on my part, lol)

I've never tried to build a small grid living quarters to be fair, but it seems like it would take far longer than building a large grid.

Your workflow would be unaffected if the ingot recipe was queued, as mentioned in my initial post.

The small/large survival kit costs the exact same. The opportunity cost is not "off-the-charts", it's roughly 20 seconds tops, relax.

You're basically saying "you're playing this sandbox incorrectly." You're defending nothing, and making plenty of assumptions while you do it. If I want to build a large grid for my base, I'll do it. I don't give a shit what you think is best.

You're attacking the way I play a sandbox because I suggested a change for stone priority. What is wrong with you? I'm no longer taking you in good faith, there is none to be found.

URL

Rabiator ●

A limitation in small grids on vanilla games is that assemblers and the wind turbine (best early game power source on planets with air) are available only on large grids. Same for refineries if you want to refine more than stone. So while I love small grids myself, large ones are not always avoidable without mods.

But back to topic, I fully agree with OP's request. I would even say "implement it, see if someone complains". Taking OP's report at face value, I see no advantage to the status quo.

URL