Yay, you spent some time to do a homeworkptx0 wrote: Thu Dec 23, 2021 4:08 pm we've been over this before. vanilla doesn't have that requirement. if you want a "true puzzle", how about you play the game without asking for more energy consumption to suit an arbitrary reason?
. That change would not break any suit abilities, just requires maintenance. If you don't agree, go and post your reply in that thread.
Thanks. And yeah, LH inserters are definitely not a bottleneck for this setup.coppercoil wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:40 pmViolet science 600 spm, this setup was pretty challenging.FuryoftheStars wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:01 pm Hey, btw, would you be willing to share a BP of the layout you don't think could be better compacted etc?
(Color emphasis mine.)coppercoil wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 8:40 pmYou can see I have few additional rules: design must be slim, material input is strictly on the one side, and I never ever take or place items on an underground belt or splitter.
(If you don't have any stack bonuses for non-stack inserters researched, then yes, a standard inserter will become a bottleneck.))Could be one of those quirks with the game, causing perfect inserter operation in some cases. Kind of like how sometimes feeding 2 fully compressed belts of two different items into a splitter that then outputs to two belts can be different from time to time (sometimes it mixes, sometimes it passes them straight through, and sometimes it causes them to wholly change belts on output).coppercoil wrote: Fri Dec 24, 2021 10:31 am Thanks for explorations. For me it runs at 620 spm. I don't know why.
IMO, I'm against this philosophy. This is how games don't advance. The addition of features are perfectly capable of "breaking" things (fluids didn't used to exist in this game when first released, then at some point they were added as a required workflow item. They probably didn't have fluid flow simulation at first release, either, and this was added later. And imagine if they added the "feature" that nuclear reactors had a meltdown if they hit or were left at 1000 degrees for too long...), and bugs should not be left because it might ruin someone's workflow (obligatory comic referencecoppercoil wrote: Fri Dec 24, 2021 10:31 am There's one general rule: don't break anything, if possible. This rule is not limited to inserters, it is not limited to Factorio. It is not limited to software. It is not uncommon that some known bugs and legacy functions are kept forever - to not beak anything for people you don't known. There are people who use bugs regularly (e.g. integer overflow in C++
).And this only further drives that point home. If there were never any changes made to the game because it's not how someone else plays with it, then there would never be any changes made.coppercoil wrote: Fri Dec 24, 2021 10:31 am I think almost every non-novice player has his own rules. If some performance change would be ok for me and you, itmaydefinitely will break things for some others. There are thousand different playstyles, why do you focus on red inserters? Other players may have different considerations to use them.
Sure, if you want to advocate that change, go for it. I wouldn't support it for the reason that LH inserters can substitute that, though. I might under the philosophy that there's a super structure in the way.coppercoil wrote: Fri Dec 24, 2021 10:31 am Can I say "remove ability to take items from an underground belt because this can be substituted by LH inserters"? Hell, yes, I say, you use underground belts in a wrong way, and LH inserter is a right way. In other words, "you use X wrong, use Y for that".
Haven't you said that?
Technically speaking, even a power consumption change can "break" someone's setup. Think of a scenario where someone has optimized their power usage, maybe have just enough reserve power generation to deal with defense surges. Now all their LH inserters consume more energy, it's going to eat into this and potentially put them over the top. Now they need to expand power generation, but maybe they have no room left in their current factory.maxim13 wrote: Fri Dec 24, 2021 11:46 am When I wrote this post, I didn't want to break anything.
It was strange to me that a long inserter is the most energy efficient, but it transports objects over long distances and faster than a regular one.
So I just suggest only increasing its power consumption. I still think 24 kW would be a good idea for this.
