|
And the rocket silo! Yup, I set up a row of 5 concrete assemblers early on and just let 'em run. It doesn't quite keep up when I expand the main concrete slab, but it replenishes in the background and there's always enough for any of the buildings that need it.
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2021 18:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
I just had my first senior Factorio moment: after routing belts and materials to make crushed coal and then carbon with steam and tinned copper wire, I.... didn't remember what I was making them into.  Just clicked on the assembler and went "...wait, what am I working on?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 02:07
|
|
|
StrixNebulosa posted:I just had my first senior Factorio moment: after routing belts and materials to make crushed coal and then carbon with steam and tinned copper wire, I.... didn't remember what I was making them into. First time? Lol... I do that all the drat time!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 02:08
|
|
|
I've been messing around making a self robot making factory where I'm using robots to make more robots then put them in the roboport. Is there some way I can set it up so it keeps a ratio of each robot drone in the network?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 02:27
|
|
|
Maybe read the logistic and construction robot counts out on two wires, one goes to a *-1 combinator, then both into a summing combinator. Then that signal goes to your inserters adding bots into the roboport. Positive means one is behind and it runs, negative, the other. At zero let both go I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 02:58
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:I've been messing around making a self robot making factory where I'm using robots to make more robots then put them in the roboport. Is there some way I can set it up so it keeps a ratio of each robot drone in the network? You need two roboports. Set both to report network statistics to the logic wires. Then have an inserter insert construction bots from a requester into one of them if the available construction bots are below a certain number, I tend to use 50. Have an inserter take logistic bots from this port into an active provider if the available bots are above a certain number which should be below 300. The other port has the same with the other kind of bot. Put those near your storage so bots settle there for removal regularly. You need to take those bots out to make sure there is space for the type you want to insert.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 03:57
|
|
|
It took me a moment to figure out you were suggesting steps to ensure your production-fed roboports only contained the associated type of bot. That's a neat addition to the standard configuration.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 07:36
|
|
|
power crystals posted:My attempts to convince robots to automatically pave a multicolor nightmare pukescape have been far more successful than I ever dreamed Good news, after the application of over 1.1 million asphalt, it's looking much better. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 17:02
|
|
|
Is that a train track you've got running through the water in the south east, or some kind of boat mod?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 18:21
|
|
|
Galvanik posted:Is that a train track you've got running through the water in the south east, or some kind of boat mod? https://mods.factorio.com/mod/cargo-ships
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
Just started a game with my friend and we have this mod installed. Do you also have railroad bridges, or do you use boats for all water crossings?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 18:40
|
|
|
Solumin posted:Just started a game with my friend and we have this mod installed. Do you also have railroad bridges, or do you use boats for all water crossings? For that we're using https://mods.factorio.com/mod/beautiful_bridge_railway. We tried doing a waterworld way back with one of the island generation mods and boats between them and the boats were terrible for that, they're just too slow; there was a latency of items getting around measured in multiple minutes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 18:49
|
|
|
And for completeness, the track blueprints are a slightly tweaked version of ElderAxe's set: https://factorioprints.com/view/-MEnLkmjJCijzcEMlMSm
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 21:46
|
|
|
Lifetime damage/kill stats on turrets is great, I've grown super attached to my four 1,000,000+ damage artillery wagons. And it's very satisfying when one 1-2 train's round-trip time to the reload station lines up with the other 1-2 train's time to fire 100 cycles from the current forward station.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2021 22:52
|
|
|
Been thinking about restarting a world and planning even bigger city blocks. So I've been toying around in sandbox with 6x6 chunks that also form the grid walking paths and chunk align for the rail system. I've also been trying to fit in roboports but nothing works to make it uniform. I don't know if these are too big but even considering laying out like 5 of these in a row seems like it would be a hellalot of work. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
I finally hacked together a mod because it was driving me crazy that I couldn't do this. This is just a super simple signal display combinator, that shows the icon of the first symbol it sees on its input. I might look at integrating this into nixie tubes mod somehow so it looks better. The goal is to use it with state machines so you can see what state they're in, or with stacks and queues to show both an item and quantity. You can sort of get this effect using filter stack inserters, but that only works with items, not virtual signals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2021 16:18
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:... bigger city blocks. ... I was toying with this idea when I first saw Nilaus's 100^2 city blocks, having previously developed my own blueprints for chunk-aligned trains. (I'm sure everyone has one or more of these) Bigger city blocks are tricky, and aligning them to chunks makes this a bit difficult. The key metrics are large power poles, roboports, and chunks. Large power poles reach 30 tiles but cover 2x2 themselves, so get spaced 28 tiles apart. Typically we can fudge the numbers a bit with the space for paths between blocks. Roboports provide logistic supply to a 50x50 area, and must be partially contiguous to to keep it all in one network. Potentially some of the path could be construction area only but the player passing into and out of logistic supply is a less than ideal scenario. Chunks are 32x32, also relevant vanilla Radars provide vision to an array of 7x7 chunks centred on the chunk they occupy. Rails simply require your building blocks are large enough to fit inside them, in addition to being even number of tiles and likely spaced wider than four tiles apart to allow room to dodge roboports. Chunk alignment would mean there's freedom to manoeuvre rails probably anywhere except city block paths which they would have to cross at edges. (IE avoid block intersections) Typically it makes sense to consider the most expensive part first, the Roboports. The smallest perfect multiple of ports and chunks is 800. While perfection appeals, I think a 25x25 chunk block would be impractically big, so we need to accept some overlap of ports because we cannot move chunks. Interestingly this leads to a few close to ideal possibilities, depending on how much we want to overbuild roboports: - Shrinking the standard 100x100 city block to a 3 chunk perfect 96x96 (four tiles of overlap per block edge). This would only really allow for the middle chunk to be rail or rail feature, and cross mid-block. - Try a 192^2 (6 chunks) block and accept 8 tiles of overlap per block edge. This is probably the best option. - Go to 288^2 (9 chunks) block and accept 12 tiles of overlap. This may be too big, but is probably feasible. Lots of room for rail features inside a block this size. - For comedy, 14 chunks square is close to perfect, measuring 448 on a side, making a block of nine roboports on a side. Impractically large. If we're less concerned about roboport overlap, 128^2 (4 chunks) may serve, as might the radar-perfect 7 chunk block, 224 tiles to a side. I might muck about in my current base and see if I can make 7 work. Teledahn fucked around with this message at 03:46 on Feb 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Is there anything even remotely close to Factorio on the Switch? Going on deployment soon and I can't justify buying a laptop just to get my fix.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2021 00:26
|
|
|
Teledahn posted:I was toying with this idea when I first saw Nilaus's 100^2 city blocks, having previously developed my own blueprints for chunk-aligned trains. (I'm sure everyone has one or more of these) Thanks for the ideas, I started another world and may change my mind as I get to the plop down the city blocks point but even that takes alot of set up. So far I am planning the 6x6 chunk blocks that are so big I have made blueprints for the corner and 4 chunks along the sides, making it take 8 blueprint placements to make the block. The other problem I saw was with perfect roboport placement would always be awkward. In nilauses 4 large power pole design I used in my last base puts them in lines of production for the city block which is most likely workaroundable but weird.  The top and bottom row of roboports are in the path of where you would put down production buildings. This can be fixed though by moving the roboport to be between the large power poles but then you start going into alot of overlaps.  It may only be a concern if you want to make every city block its own robonetwork or if you want them to bleed everywhere. I was reading that having huge robo networks is bad for the lag though. I have a new problem on this world and what the gently caress are these red circles?!?!?!  Is it because I pressed f5 to look at chunk lines? Tenzarin fucked around with this message at 00:39 on Feb 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2021 00:27
|
|
|
looks like you accidentally turned on some debugging info, yes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2021 01:50
|
|
|
When I did city blocks I actually kept the roboport networks intentionally disconnected, since large networks tend to bog down in terms of bot latency (due to travel distance) and you end up spending a lot more power on charging (generally not a big deal, but a factor). My design had 8 logistics-connected train stations per block (one of which was just for taking in fuel input and mall supplies) and everything was moved between blocks via trains. If I needed a larger block for something I'd just combine two, and add in an extra pair of roboports to bridge the gap if I needed to (although most of my blocks were belt-based). Maybe I'll try it again, I haven't touched a design like that since like 0.14.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2021 01:59
|
|
|
If I'm doing city blocks I keep the logistics network connected and only use it to construct the factories and rails. All of the production is belt based. Copy paste to expand if I need more of a thing, and I don't then have to go all the way out to a spot to build it myself. I've never actually done a logistics bot driven factory. Maybe I should sometime, it'd be different.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2021 02:13
|
|
|
Roflex posted:When I did city blocks I actually kept the roboport networks intentionally disconnected, since large networks tend to bog down in terms of bot latency (due to travel distance) and you end up spending a lot more power on charging (generally not a big deal, but a factor). My design had 8 logistics-connected train stations per block (one of which was just for taking in fuel input and mall supplies) and everything was moved between blocks via trains. If I needed a larger block for something I'd just combine two, and add in an extra pair of roboports to bridge the gap if I needed to (although most of my blocks were belt-based). Maybe I'll try it again, I haven't touched a design like that since like 0.14. Yeah this is what I do too. Main base constructs the most complex stuff, and is all bot based. Any outposts or other high-volume work is disconnected and constructed to keep bot travel times as low as possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2021 08:22
|
|
|
Modders please... ...actually maybe I don't want to debug those jams.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2021 21:23
|
|
|
If you want that experience just play farm sim.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2021 22:45
|
|
|
Krastorio 2 game, so I have somewhat more advanced weaponry than in a vanilla game, so I also have significantly tougher biters (armored biters with everything turned up to 150%,). This is one of several places that I just call The Path of Tears.. assuming biters can cry.  The hordes keep getting larger, and the evolution is up to 96% and they actually make it to the walls and destroy stuff sometimes now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 06:42
|
|
|
I'm about to crack my first Krastorio 2 game, but I'm paralyzed with indecision on map settings etc. My 2nd game (after a vanilla victory) was Rampant + a couple enemy mods + a dark night mod and it was meant to be an epic struggle against nights filled with biters but instead it was just thousands of pissy little acid spitters just dying in droves against basic turrets. I quit just after I got oil going because I wasn't seeing anything other than the one type of enemy. Dunno what happened there. Anyway, previous poster and others, should I play Krastorio 2 with or without biters? Add Armored Biters mod? Default resources/map settings? I'm wary of starting a potentially hundred hour marathon without putting some thought into the parameters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 06:54
|
|
|
Chadzok posted:I'm about to crack my first Krastorio 2 game, but I'm paralyzed with indecision on map settings etc. I honestly don't put that much thought into my setups. For this game I went pretty much with the list of things suggested on the K2 mod page, plus my usual QoL stuff like squeak through, and I used construction bots until I had real bots, and I'm using mining drones instead of regular miners. Other than that, just set the starting area larger because it's my first real K2 game to give me some time to breath, and used railworld settings for ore and clicked on the random preview until I had a map that looked good to me. It was later in the game when my normal line of gun-turrets were stopping everything cold that I cranked up the settings on the armored biters mods as I wasn't seeing the point of even having the biters when I never even had to look at the defenses. I've played without biters and with biters on peaceful, just depends on how I feel. Oh, and I turned cliffs off because I hate cliffs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 07:09
|
|
|
Note that biters off in K2 requires enabling peaceful mode in the mod as well, which makes military science way more expensive but possible without biter creep.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 07:16
|
|
|
necrotic posted:Note that biters off in K2 requires enabling peaceful mode in the mod as well, which makes military science way more expensive but possible without biter creep. Yeah, having to go out and harvest biter nests for creep was a surprise to me in this K2 game!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 16:37
|
|
|
 Reject efficiency, embrace spaghetti. Ugly and probably improperly ratioed but I finally actually have a continuous flow of red circuits now. (Copper on the left assembly was fixed later. I know there's four spare lanes each, that's just kind of the way things worked out, I honestly forgot I wouldn't need all 8 lanes of copper per side.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 17:06
|
|
|
Diagonal belts are illegal. I would be wary about posting such obscenities.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 17:19
|
|
|
Majere posted:Diagonal belts are illegal. I would be wary about posting such obscenities. I will make it legal. At least I'm not belt weaving any more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 17:21
|
|
|
SkyeAuroline posted:
Interesting layout. While I know I can use undergrounds to feed assemblers from in between like that, for some reason it never actually occurs to me to build that way even when I'm struggling to figure out how to get enough belts into a build with beacons. I desperately need to build a large-scale prod mod facility as that's my bottleneck for making new builds right now using modules. I've got speed modules done at least. This LDS build would have actually benefitted greatly from your undergrounding system and the end ratios would work better, but instead I used the evil belt-weaving to make it work.  I just continue to fall into the 'drop a line of assemblers and then figure out how to get stuff to them' design approach rather than thinking more creatively.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 17:40
|
|
|
The Locator posted:Interesting layout. While I know I can use undergrounds to feed assemblers from in between like that, for some reason it never actually occurs to me to build that way even when I'm struggling to figure out how to get enough belts into a build with beacons. At some point it clicked for me that undergrounding belts like this may make the arrangement longer, but a) it's thinner, b) in a lot of configs I can still fit beacons that hit everything, c) it gets me what's normally 5 belts of supply instead of 2 or 2+slower 2 from running belts along the outside. I do a lot of my bulk assembly this way now. Green circuits are similar, three undergrounds running copper and iron in one direction and green circuits out the other, with a circuit assembler in-line and a pair of wire assemblers offset to one side pulling with long-handles. The biggest limit I run into is that this inline construction doesn't unload onto both sides of a belt, so even if my input can run far enough, I get output-limited first with some materials. (Allowing loaders to unload onto both sides of a belt they're loading end-on would solve this, but... Factorio) Otherwise it's been a big help to realize this works. A lot more to untangle now that red circuits are working...
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
 I use a setup like this to weave in two belts without using long inserters. Uses a lot less undergrounds than traditional weaving; blue splitters are way cheaper on iron than blue undergrounds; and you can use all the same speed belt if you need to (and you don't have to worry about a misplaced upgrade planner misconnecting undergrounds). Main downside is you can only put beacons on the output side, but by the time you're doing big beaconed builds the other methods are more accessible. You could run the outer input belt underground between the splitters to fit a few beacons in on the input side if you really wanted to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
e: nvm
the tingler fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Feb 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 02:48
|
|
|
Are "True Diagonal"belts possible as a mod?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 07:20
|
|
|
boo_radley posted:Are "True Diagonal"belts possible as a mod? No, the grid system won't allow it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 07:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
necrotic posted:No, the grid system won't allow it. Down with the grid system https://mods.factorio.com/mod/PlaceableOffGrid
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2021 07:39
|
|
