Refinery improvements.

That sounds like somethingh a reasonable player would ask for, no matter the platform he plays on.

There seems to be an order by which the refinery decides which ores to process anyway, i see it always favors the higher value ors such as platinum or uranium, rather than low value ones.

i simply ask for an option to change rearange that list in the way that works best for me.

Also i can build as many sorters as my PCU limit allows, but the server is alredy funky, sim speed is almost never at 1, mostly under 0.8 and when the server is full as low as 0.4 or 0.3 so i dont think it needs more stress.

That doesn't meet my observation. From what I have seen, the refinery always takes the first ore available from the list of items in a container or across multiple containers, and does so in "gulps", and only when the stacks become small enough to be smaller than one "gulp" does it start taking from stacks further down in the list. Of course, if those ores are of more precious materials, it can easily look like it prefers them simply because they take longer to process.

Again, the server being inadequate is hardly the game's fault. You yourself call it funky already. If the server and the involved connections can't handle the game and gameworld, that's difficult to blame on the game. System requirements don't exist for no reason, and it's not like they weren't known or communicated. You don't go to Fiat and complain your Punto is somehow not as fast as a Ferrari, now do you?

The server without the game is just hardware. The game is what makes it look inadequate. A badly optimised game even more so.

Also, the server of which i speak is Keen EU2, an officail server. I would guess they chose the right hardware for their own game. And a fast enough conection to it.

As far as the refinery goes, in my eperience i manualy fill it up with stone and keep mining, after its done with that stone it doesnt refill stone on the first spot, it starts processing whatever is on the second spot. Even if it has a constant and steady inflow of fresh stone it will all pile up in storage, while the refinery is taking its time with other materials.

I dont know you but you sound like you are playing a completly difrent game altogether.

Whatever you wrote is all wrong.. It doesnt corepond with how the game runs for me.

I was standing right next to the dam refinery and observing its beahviour for half an hour, only taking brakes to refill my energy. I tried rearanging ore's location in the main storage. It was always the same.

But than again i get strange glitches, like voxel textures dont load so i play with invisible world or half of a vehicle doesnt do animations, all thrusters, drills, gatlings on the left half of my vehicles didnt drill or fire, i mean they did produce ore or consume ammo, just didnt animate doing so.

Well, it's easy and convenient to say "it's badly optimised" as an argument, and while I'm not saying that it's not, and while I'm not saying that the servers that are in place couldn't technically be stronger, it's still not changing anything in the matter that Server X is apparently not powerful to handle game Y under demand Z and that it is still your choice to play or not play on it. It is what it is. Guess all you want about what Keen could'a', should'a', would'a' done, at the end of the day, they are not failing any contractual obligation you could be waving in their face, because no suck obligation exists. It may be in their interest, but you're still not entitled to it. (Likewise, you're not forced to use it.) Not saying you can't make requests, just reminding you of reality.

Anyway. Yes, sorting ore stacks can be a pain, and yes, it takes just one unit of the non-stone ores to get ahead of stone anywhere in the inventory to interrupt its flow, causing a new, low-prio stone stack to be growing. And yes, this is not necessarily helped by a dodgy connection or otherwise less-than-exemplary technical performance, causing (apparent or actual) synchronisation and update weirdness.

But as far as I can tell, there is no deliberate preference for one ore over the other. If anything, it only appears like so (or ends up like so) on account of the significant differences in both processing speed and actual amount being mined and processed between stone and non-stone ores during regular gameplay.

And I believe it would be reasonable to assume that, if it actually were a thing, such preference would have been documented and discussed more prominently across the readily available community sites.

Either way, you have a problem, now engineer a solution, and if sorters are the only means for a reliable remedy, then that's what you'll have to use. Either that, or continue manually shifting the stacks around.

One more thing: depending on the gameworld settings, a fully upgraded refinery can actually process stone faster than it can suck it in, which is another source of split stone stacks and non-stone ore advancing past the stone. So, especially when you have multiple refineries, you might end up needing sorters anyway, simply to force-feed (at about 595 L/s per sorter) the stone into the refineries just to keep their input filled up.

Either way, you have a problem, now engineer a solution, and if sorters are the only means for a reliable remedy, then that's what you'll have to use. Either that, or continue manually shifting the stacks around.

-Or come to official support site and propose a improvement as i am doing now.

As per upgrades, my refinery has 2 speed modules and 2 yield modules. By my calculations with only 2 speed modules it should not process ore faster than it can be provided, i could have old values tho, i didnt check dates on them.

Now pls stop writing back, i only made a sugestion, now its up to keen to read it and decide if yes or no.

Asemblers have many options on what to asemble and how many pieces etc, survival kit has the same and more, like how many stone would you like refined ...i only sugested some more options with refineries.

And you expect adding a sorting function will not have a computational cost just because it's stuffed into an existing block? Besides, what will you do in the meantime until the suggestion gets MAYBE implemented? Continue to torture yourself with less-than-enjoyable performance nobody forced you to?

All I'm hearing is "Keen, fix my individual problem I'm unwilling to address myself, as an in-game Space Engineer or a real-life player alike". Might as well ask to add an assembler function to it, too. And thrusters. And lights. And a drill and thrusters. In fact, have Keen custom-build you a one-block-does-all spaceship. With a PCU cost of only 25 so that you can run it on a coffee mill.

Add some PCU usage to it, ofcorse.

Are you otherwise ok m8, did you forget to take your pils this morning?

You are getting too emotional about this issue. And you are starting to halucinate. And nobody asked you for your opinion in the first place, i made a sugestion to Keen, are you them?

Yeah, and the players who don't need to rely on everything handed to them on a silver platter now have to live with the extra PCU added to save YOUR personal inconvenience, thank you very much.

If you don't like your opinion met with others in a public forum whose very purpose it is to meet opinions with others publicly, perhaps don't post them in a public forum.

Its a sugestion part of the support site and i made a sugestion. Silver platter..lmao XD

Any PCU added to refinery to enable it to sort what materials to refine and what not would shurely save a lot of PCU on sorters.

The survival kit has such options, refine so much stone, produce so many plates...etc. Shurely it wouldnt hurt if refinery had some such options too. Why would this only be my personal convenience? Everybody would benefit from this. This way you could circulate ores, or set what amount of what you need to refine. Cant do that with sorters, they can only allow a materila to pass or block it. Unless you maybe also use timer block.

Why are you so against it. There have been many improvements made to the original game, why would you not be for this?

> would shurely save a lot of PCU

In your own words: "Keen, are you them?"

You don't know whether that "shurely" would save a lot of PCU. You can't know.

Why I am against it? Because your suggestions are based largely on personal, individual, incidental inconveniences. You CHOOSE to build on a "crappy" server and connection you yourself not only deem but also experience to be subobtimal for your gameplay, you CHOOSE to make certain building and production decisions, you CHOOSE to not make the necessary expense in PCU to address the incurred and very much not secret or unforseeable side effects, and you're wanting to make everyone but yourself bear the consequences of your choices, including all other players who should this request get implemented, will have to use a refinery with a new functionality and new computational cost regardless whether they actually need it, regardless of how potentially convenient that functionality may or may not be.

Who do you think you are that your choices can outweigh everyone else's?

I was wondering when you woud come back again...

I am the one making the sugestion. Not the decisions.

Keen is the one making the decisions.

Also all suggestions are based on personal experience. People get an idea or see somethingh glitching and come here to make a suggestion or report a glitch. Thats how it works.

In my opinion everybody would profit from this improvement, wel lapart from you, but that is just another reason i hope it gets implemented, so i can know you are forced to use a new, better refinery and it makes you sad and angry.

I would laugh like a maniac knowing you suffer using the new refinery XD Jk lol.

Also we have a ton of blocks that we dont need and nobody asked for, and still they are ingame. Its for the player to decide what to use and what not.

I will now stop replying to you, its a waste of time.

What is sad is that you would see disagreement and presenting of reality as signs of sadness and anger. But you're mistaken if I would be "suffering" from any such implementation, let alone "suffering defeat" to your suggestion, not least because this never was about your suggestion as such but your reasoning out of self-indulgence, greed, laziness, an overinflated sense of entitlement, and projection of your personal issues onto everybody else behind said suggestion.

The verdict remains: You want all the functionality, all the convenience, and none of the necessary responsibility and expense.

Goodbye.