Here are two related loading arrangements that I don't recall seeing discussed previously (feel free to correct me if they have been) and that seem to work much better than they have any right to: loader30_cropped.png The one on the left completely eats both fast belts of input (i.e. 60/s), despite ...

In other words, if you dedicate a fixed amount of miners to mine the resources needed for mining productivity, you'll never have to adjust that amount. (But they'll be increasingly more idle since mining productivity makes them mine faster, while research takes longer.) Alternatively, you can incre...

I could of course simply stop using pd3 in miners, and drop my pollution by miners close to 0 by switching to eff1 en masse, but I don't think that it counts as fun gameplay, when I am being punished for maximising my production with no way of fighting back. If you have level 3 artillery range you ...

My factory is in standby mode. "Don't defend your factory, defend your pollution cloud." If you do that, the only bugs you have to kill are the occasional party of migrating settlers. If you are not doing that, then you are not ready to go into 'stand-by mode' until you have pushed your d...

With modules, you can also boot strap them, which one frequently does, even in speed runs. Ie, you place PM1, and as production / tech ramps up, you replace them with PM2 (reusing the PM1s of course), and then finally PM3s. Upgrade BPs FTW. Yes, and even if you don't actually do it this way, the co...

mmmPI wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 09, 2022 7:07 am

It could of course be made better with circuit or belt magic so that the first centrifuge doesn't stockpile uranium 235 and let it be available for a second machine. Which is a nice challenge

A nice challenge with a remarkably simple solution discussed at length here .

That totally explains it. I usually set up one or two as soon as I research centrifuges and let it churn away on uranium. Then by the time I have Covarex I likely have the 40 U-235 needed. Well you see, one centrifuge works out to (with a degree of randomness) approximately 40 u-235 in 19 hours. I'...

CaptainSlide wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 08, 2022 3:32 am

If Factorio doesn't join the ranks of legendary games like the ones I mentioned earlier it will be a tragedy.

It already has.

I probably hang on to steel furnaces too long; an earlier switch to nuclear power (before researching Kovarex) and electric furnaces would save pollution. It doesn't have to be either/or. I don't start using electric furnaces until I have nuclear power up and going, but that doesn't mean I scrap my...

Nuclear power without the Kovarex enrichment process is (as you've proved) possible, but I find not worthwhile in practice. I wouldn't try running a large nuclear power plant without Kovarex, but you can quite happily run a 4-core one (ample power for everything up to a rocket launch) on natural U-...

SoShootMe wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 07, 2022 10:21 am

SoShootMe wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 28, 2022 8:23 am

Roughly, at scale, that means nuclear has 70 times greater power density, requires 1/10 the number of entities/tiles to be placed, and is 8 times cheaper to build.

70 times the density sounds about right, but I think the cost of construction is in practice more like 20 times cheaper.

placing a PM3 module in an assembly 3 producing green circuit is more than 9 times better than placing it on a mining drill. Much more than 9 times. Firstly, you can straightforwardly get much better value from the PMs in the assemblers by interleaving with beacons; if you try to do that with miner...

What makes me skeptical is this: with the unmodified railroad map (33% frequency, 300% size); it looks like the total amount of resources in the default standard (100%-100%-100%) map is not equal. In the train map, while a variable decreases by 3 (33%), a variable increases by 3 times (300%), altho...

Sample: 600% frequency, 100% richness, 100% width with this map: 100% frequency, 200% richness, 300% width, Are the amount of resources in these two map settings equal? ​​It decreases by 6 times in rate, while it increases (2x3) in the others. The wiki has only explained what frequency means, what ...

FactorioBot wrote: ↑

Mon May 02, 2022 1:48 pm

• Fixed that cliff deconstruction wasn't issued when the corrected cliff collision box overlapped with ghost entities. (66400)

At last! This has been a recurring irritation, for ages now the only obvious bug in normal vanilla gameplay.

Making, using and tweaking your own blueprints is a core part of Factorio gameplay. Being inspired by other people's blueprints, and learning from them new ways of solving problems or optimising production, is a core part of the Factorio online community experience. Using other people's blueprints w...

Mostly default; it's a well-balanced game. Just two tweaks:- Research queue always on; this should be a UI setting, not an advanced(!) gameplay setting. Starting area size turned up to 150% or 200%; being swarmed by biters when you've only been going for 20 minutes and don't yet have any defensive t...

Tallywort wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:30 am

How is the system we're looking at non-ergodic?

I fear you are taking my tongue-in-cheek comment more seriously than intended.

The assumption of ergodicity is entirely reasonable. Major mathematical kudos if you can actually prove it ...

Tallywort wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 24, 2022 1:17 am

I wonder how those test results stack up if you take into account that you could run that 100 lane test 6 times longer than the 500 lane one.

This assumes that Factorio is ergodic.

Isn´t heav oil more effective then light oil even if the damge would be same? Because you nee less crude oil for it? Yes, heavy oil gives the best damage per real cost. The main downside is that it is produced in a (comparatively small) steady stream, but consumed in occasional tank loads whenever ...