math-and-meta

[prisma kraken]

what's ugly is that screw number

that's 2.5 belt's worth of screws

so i have another idea for you

[true junco]

Happy to hear it. But It might not be to bad depending on how i split and merge the belts. Which will entirely depend on how i place the Assemblers. Another option is to still feed the assemblers their screws 1 to 1.

[prisma kraken]

how's this:

[true junco]

I must correct myself. Outside of the workshop and buildables you can only make 3 things out of RIPS. 😆 Crystal oscillators, modular frames and smart plating...

[prisma kraken]

yeah, rips sort of don't go the distance like wire/cable, etc

with the idea of using 2 mf recipes, whether default or steeled, you gain some density, but also some steel savings too

[true junco]

True. But when you need them, they can be very Unwieldy to build at a decent rate. And its definitely handy as a drop in module to feed a local storage of RIPs since they are used in a bunch of buildables. Constructors, assemblers, water extractors, coalgens, smart splitters, light switches and some signs...

[prisma kraken]

i'm really thinking along the same lines atm

[true junco]

Honestly. I could see plopping down one of this BP with regular storage to feed local construction materials.

Like. Centralized storage is a thing... but when a handful of BPs can make all the basics at a good enough rate, it would save a lot of trips.

[prisma kraken]

i may be a little ahead of you on that:

that's left-to-right: rotors, rips, mf's, each taking 120 ore

iron only recipes though, so i don't get the steel efficiency

what i'm trying to do right now is consolidate the ideas i gathered from that into a single 32x32 bp

[true junco]

Well. Life has been messy for me this week. Spent several days taking apart my rear bunper assembly because i noticed the bar where the hitch yoke is mounted was badly corroded. Got it all apart and removed the siezed and broken bolts, started welding it up and found out my grandfather has had a bad turn and i havent seen him in years so booked a 1 way flight last minute.... so yeah. Sitting in a hotel waiting to get a rental car in the morning. FML. 😆

[prisma kraken]

sorry about that all, hope everything gets better

i really like the 'build yard' bp concept

i've been using adhoc variations of it for a while now

it saves a LOT on resupply travel

just 8 constructors set to concrete saves so much inventory space if you carry the bp rather than the product

[true junco]

It wont. Lol. My life has been very consistently a slog since forever. Ive accepted it, and ive accepted that when i explain it every one reacts like its pretty messed up. So its almost funny to me how stupid my life has been.

But anyways...

Yeah. Applying "locally sourced" to Ficsit pioneering efforts is a thing I appreciate more and more. Lol 😆

[prisma kraken]

(as such i have a lot of little dorky concrete factories littered around, lol)

[true junco]

Hilariously i do that but with wet concrete. Its a bit silly what 3 refineries at 250% can do...

[prisma kraken]

yeah, wet concrete is pretty good, but just 8 constructors processing 360 limestone/min gives you plenty of concrete for building

its just so easy to build & deploy

when i was building my first hmf line, i did so in the NF spot with the 6 pure iron nodes

rather than try to use wet or rubber, i looked around and saw all the normal limestone nodes... built 6 concrete micro factories for 200/min each, and just used a tractor to round it all up

i find it hilarious that i'm pushing 1200/min with a tractor

[true junco]

Simple enough.

Definitely simpler than the 3x250 refinery concrete... that takes 900 limestone, 750 water and makes 600 concrete... yeah. Those numbers are dumb.

[prisma kraken]

i thought about doing the wet concrete

[true junco]

Its actually not bad if you DONT overclock it that much

[prisma kraken]

there is access to water there in NF, but the extractors don't place nicely, as if the water level is like 12m above the ground

its like 400 h20 for 600 limestone, iirc

have you ever tried placing extractors in some of the NF estuaries?

[true junco]

Now that i think about it and look at it. I had stopped myself from doing the 3x250. Because 3x200 is this chart

[prisma kraken]

...its a little bit special

[true junco]

600 water and 720 limestone is actually in the belt and pipe limits. So its a lot more sensible.

[true junco]

Never tried actually. And dang, it does look silly. 😆

[prisma kraken]

they work, its just that they think the water level is higher

something that wasn't ever fixed after the NF rework in U5

[true junco]

Lol. Might be a good candidate for some sort of structure to hide that.

[prisma kraken]

yeah, i didn't want to bother with it, plus my dorky tractor is cool

[true junco]

Incidentally. All the folks wanting to align easily with nodes... at least ive found that catwalks/walkways snap to the platform at the top of the oil extractor, so its easy to align foundations to them.

[prisma kraken]

yeah, there's a trick to that with catwalks or road barriers

[true junco]

Given how many machines have walkway snapping to their platforms. I would think that will eventually happen for miners.

[prisma kraken]

i personally just snap to grid and fix the mess with a short belt segment

[true junco]

I mean. No trick with oil extractors. The walk ways straight up snap to the top platform. Then I just vertical zoop foundations down from that. And build back up from there.

[prisma kraken]

gotcha

its too much hassle for me, i ran out of interesting ideas for miners about 2 years ago, lol

[true junco]

I used to work at a salt mine... so i know what a headframe over a mine shaft is supposed to look like... so yeah. I always WANT to do that even if i refrain from doing so.

also the fact that oil extractors aren't pump jacks is annoying to me. Lol

[prisma kraken]

hehe

i do like their little flame burst thing though

i'm looking at this and i don't quite know where to start:

[true junco]

I built a couple of flare tips before. Pain in the freaking ass to make. At least the ones that customer wanted. 4 different grades of stainless steel.

[true junco]

Have you heard of our lord and savior "fused wire" and his apostles "pure caterium" "pure copper" and "copper alloy"?

[prisma kraken]

oh, that's going to be fused wire

don't think it won't be, lol

[true junco]

As for the steel pipe... oi. If only there were alts for pipes and beams. The steel shouldnt be too bad to source. I pulled all the surrounding iron into the hole in the western dune forest and made pure solid steel ingots to make pipes and then encased pipes with...

[prisma kraken]

the pipe is actually the easy part

[true junco]

The factory ended up filling the entire hole to the brim. No more hole, just a small factory with a HUGE basement. Lmfao

[prisma kraken]

i mean, i'm giving myself tons of space for this:

pipe goes on the pink squares

the machines after that are rotors, everything else is just temporary

i think this is the geometry i have to go for with it all:

and i just did the math on the sizing of it... that is barely enough space

this build may end me, lol

[frosty owl]

And yet you still don't leave space for machines' inputs outputs to show what they're doing 😭
Are the people who prefer seeing beltwork in/out of machines really that few? 😆

[frosty owl]

If you feel like you have enough space: don't

[prisma kraken]

that build is going to be 180 machines in a balancefold

[ornate echo]

easy way to split 3 x 120 into 2 x 180?

[deft lichen]

split 1x120 into 2x60 and merge

[ornate echo]

ye thankies

[wind spade]

Or use 3x120 and you don't have to do anything xD

[ornate echo]

i wanna split it onto 8 stell maker and due to my belt speed its easier to have 2 x 180

[primal flicker]

Injection manifold.

😝

[ornate echo]

what does that mean

[wind spade]

it's a horrible construction you shouldn't ever use

[supple gazelle]

seems like an odd suggestion in #math-and-meta

[primal flicker]

It's a manifold that delivers more than the capacity of a single belt. Additional belts "inject" material via mergers at the mathematically appropriate points.

[wind spade]

and is just strictly worse than building separate manifolds 😄

[supple gazelle]

“Every machine gets a splitter and merger”, makes expanding super easy! At the cost of late game days trying to figure out where it’s under running (its belt limit, always is)

[wind spade]

counterargument:
don't expand, build new

[supple gazelle]

my automated wiring got way out of control (this building is 1/4 the map long) and I decided I was done with large manifolds. Modularize everything.

expand to where lol that’s a quarter of the map

[ornate echo]

im not smart enough to get the joke still

[wind spade]

I personally never connect factory to other factory. Every factory makes final product out of raw resources. Makes everything small and constrainted to one place where the resources are

[wind spade]

it's not a joke, it's just kinda inefficient way

[delicate chasm]

Injection manifolds make sense with pipes but it's extra engineering with belts than not doing it and that's the difference.

[wind spade]

I'd say with pipes it's even more bad because pipes want to be simple

[delicate chasm]

The 3:8 is an injection manifold and is tiny and simple.

[supple gazelle]

not even with trucks/trains/drones? What about the endgame stuff that needs almost every mat

[oblique hollow]

technically yes, pipe wanna be simple,, but the classic coal generator setup is an injection manifold

[wind spade]

  G  G  G  G 
E-+--+--+--+
E-+
E-+--+--+--+
  G  G  G  G

? 😄

[oblique hollow]

that is in fact an injection manifold

[delicate chasm]

It's not exceeding capacity to either side but the network isn't directional, so it IS an injector.

[supple gazelle]

Pipe sloshing makes manifolds harder, gotta make sure you never hit 90% capacity if you do that

[wind spade]

or loop the pipe

[oblique hollow]

with mk 2 pipes at least

mk 1 is perfectly fine

[wind spade]

no, not even lategame. There's plenty of places that have most if not all materials available. And if not, I can always bring the materials with trains

[supple gazelle]

ahhhh interesting, I’ve been trying to avoid shipping raw materials if possible. It’s only efficient with caterium (ingots first, ship those)

[wind spade]

efficient?

the only thing shipping with train takes is power and power is practically infinite

[supple gazelle]

1 ingot is 3 ore, steel is 2:1 but iron/coal isn’t rare enough to be worth shipping besides for quantity I would think

[wind spade]

if you mean "space efficient" in terms of space taken by materials in the train, then you wouldn't be able to ship anything other than the most advanced product 😄

otherwise I have no problem adding a few cars if it means my factories are completely isolated and not dependend on each other

[supple gazelle]

rn I’m shipping computers out to quartz/caterium to make supercomputers there cuz there ain’t enough in any spot for all of that

Mostly all the plastic. The oilfield near caterium isn’t enough

aluminum is so far from everything else despite being centralized, I can’t get around shipping my aluminum stuff on train 😦

[wind spade]

@fierce ruin see #math-and-meta message for alt recipe picking

[oblique hollow]

i literally pinged them with the wiki article but they said they "wanted to know opinion on the best recipe choice"

[wind spade]

if only they knew 😄

||there is no best||

[delicate chasm]

Linguistically, is it not different/distinct to apply the opinion to the selection itself, rather than the choices presented?

[wind spade]

I'm just trying my best to teach people to do their own research instead of relying on random reaction from a stranger that just presses 1️⃣

(and if they still want to hear opinions, at least put it somewhere where we can comment on our choices and reasons)

and at the same time, the people responding should prefix their answer with something along the lines of #math-and-meta message

because many times people reply "I like X recipe" which the OP translates to "X is best and I should use it always"

[delicate chasm]

What concerns me is that the answers are getting less specific to the problem.

Seems like the idea is shifting away from "can't solve this without a massive amount of information" and more towards "even a complete view of the situation does not lead to objectivity"

opinion on the best recipe choice

there is no best

This isn't the same thing that's been said before, but it's not an improvement either. Best is relative. You or I can use objectivity to determine which recipe we need next, because we have the basis of understanding one needs to use objective metrics to decide. "I will build this next, I will not build that in this save, and I will not need the third part for many tens of hours. The best choice is option 1."

Totally acceptable to not want to sit and ask a dozen questions to then be able to give a 1-word answer, and only THEN maybe have a conversation about why.

Totally understandable too.

[wind spade]

what about instead giving the player the info and letting them decide?

basically what you said in the long msg but without the "the best choice is option X"

(or if you want, we can take this to DMs, since I have some ideas about a project that could "solve" this)

[oblique hollow]

ultimately the thing is "what is the ideal thing to teach people about alts?"
Cause it neither is "listen to others" not is it "research them all"

[wind spade]

"do your own research, pick one you like the most, if you still don't know, ask for opinions but don't blindly follow them, ask people for reasons for their opinions"
that would be my suggestion I guess

which could be shortened even more to "know why you picked this recipe"

(and "people voted for it" isn't "knowing" 😛 )

[delicate chasm]

I'm happy to hear your ideas. I want to see people having opinion-based discussions here (not #math-and-meta but this server) and others respond with their own opinions without feeling the need to argue.

There being such a hard stance in the server culture is kind of polarizing.

It certainly FEELS like the alts are not the same value as one another - no two alts feel exactly as valuable/useful/situational to me. They are all unique enough that an emotional comparison naturally emerges, and that opinion is the thing I want from other people too.

What elicited a reaction from YOU as you played? That kind of thing.

[oblique hollow]

cause arguing is energy and time intensive and you know how people like to optimize their things

[wind spade]

I guess the basis is the thread here https://discord.com/channels/370472939054956546/1034942142092689408
which is what we planned to do on wiki - replace alt recipe analysis with almost-objective list of things about the recipe (what it can do, what it pairs with, etc.)

my project I was thinking about is to take it a step further and make a website where you can browse all these without being restricted to wiki format and data, as well as allowing to generate a link with three recipes to kinda mimic the player's alt recipe selection screen, the link could be sent to player and he can get the info there

as you played
I may be kinda in a weird place. (yes I did play the game long time ago).
When I was playing, I basically already knew all the meta, recipes and math around it, since I've made first calculator basically as soon as I opened the game. So I never was in the situation of "hey three new things I don't know how to value"

[deft lichen]

when I was playing update 2, I thought you could get duplicates in the selection, so I didn't bother getting alts at all to avoid having to keep track of this

[wind spade]

which-alt.com domain is free 😉

[delicate chasm]

You also deal with the data of the game in a way that neuters anything unique or characteristic about a recipe such as cycle time or a weird decimal input on this one single machine you are looking at.

You are more zoomed out, looking at a bigger picture. What I'd stress is that this isn't the right way to view the game. If there is a singular right way (I don't believe there is), it's absolutely not the abstracted god's eye view that solves the issues the game presents theoretically.

It's about actually building the factory and physically supplying it.

[deft lichen]

@delicate chasm not sure how new you are in the community, but alt recipe comparisons have been a tough topic for ...years now
it's important to keep in mind to get how we got to this point

[delicate chasm]

You can't play the game without producing something, but you can play the game without solving any mathematical problems.

[oblique hollow]

we dont want people to consider every recipe possible

but if you wanna do some alt recipe choice the you damn well have to pan out at least a little bit

[delicate chasm]

I joined in mid-April of this year. I understand.
One thing I should probably say then, is that I am absolutely unafraid of people misinforming other people on the internet and feel that doing more than providing good information is a fruitless endeavor in most cases. But I respect the effort that goes in.

[oblique hollow]

3 choices for possibly 3 different items forces you to already take a step back

and then the ever dreaded "which one is the best"

the question itself is fucking stupid

[wind spade]

cycle time is only really useful to know for things like sushi iirc
weird decimals are very much known to me (repeating decimals are pain computing), so I'm very much aware of them and their problems (which basically translate to game problem of "can't have machine exactly as this", but can be "solved" by just clocking the machine 0.0001% more)

I'm aware that some of my views may change as I play the game, but one more thing you have to consider that I'm not just looking at raw data, I'm part of this community since release and I'm looking at what people build, listening to issues they have and helping them solve those, etc. I know it's not exactly the same as playing the game, but it's definitely closer than just looking at raw data.

But yeah I get your point, which is why I mentioned it in the first place. I just don't think it's as far as you make it seem.

[oblique hollow]

rather then getting into a lengthy 5 to 15 minute discussion starting by asking people "what do you mean by best" we'd rather just point to a great read up resource

[delicate chasm]

Essentially what I am trying to say is that countering "which of these is the best choice I can make?" with "best is relative" (my own choice of phrasing, mind you) is making at least 2 logical leaps assuming the person asking lacks an understanding:

1.) assumes they mean best recipe
2.) assumes they didn't already consider it with whatever (limited) knowledge they have of the parts AND/OR their own building plan.

[median heath]

Manifold sushi doesn't care about cycle time. Can confirm 👍

[wind spade]

if we can condense all the info into wiki page/website and then do something like

hey X, read this: which-alt.com/stitched-plate/cast-screw/iron-alloy

and that will lead them to the resource, that shows all the info in the world they could need (obviously more complex and advanced info being somewhere later in the article). That "solves" most if not all of the issues we have currently

• answer is quick
• answer is not assuming anything
• points player to a resource they can study if they want to know more
• gives player all the info to make informed decision
• still leaves room for "idk I've read all and still need help to decide"

(at least that's my view on the problem, I'm happy to hear feedback from other people)

[delicate chasm]

If it is meant to be used solely for linking people who have asked the "which alt?" question, then I'd be happy with that so long as near the top it mentions "Hey if you just wanted opinions on personal favorite recipes from people in the community, make sure you ask what are you favorite alts? "

Reason I want something like that is IMO, every aspect of this should foster MORE discussion not less.

[fierce ruin]

One message removed from a suspended account.

[delicate chasm]

In the same way that the conversation ending with people just saying "2" would be wrong, just a link to where they can decide for themselves takes them away from the community and discussion.

[wind spade]

disagree, but that's the subjective side of alt recipes

[delicate chasm]

Biocoal makes steel require only iron and black powder require only sulfur, wdym?
Explain automated miner though. 🤨 (NOT YOU GREENY!)

[wind spade]

it is meant to give info about alt recipes in general. Basically a replacement for current wiki's analysis, slightly less math, way more word-based explanations of stuff

having a way to link it to player with the three recipes pre-selected is just a nice extra thing

[delicate chasm]

The 3 recipes "quick facts" concept is good. It leaves room to give a different data set than what the wiki demands.

[wind spade]

having discussion here is nice, but nobody wants to explain 200 times why they like caterium wire, if the explanation is written in an article

like the best alternative in-discord I can see is having #alt-recipes with a thread for every recipe, with pinned messages of good points from people about that recipe

don't say best is subjective

the problem I see isn't that people don't want to discuss, it's that people don't want to discuss the same thing all over again with every new person asking

and if we keep it at "just write the same thing again", then opinions of people who have more free time/are more determined will just prevail 😄

[thorny cedar]

sev is 25/8 active and i still hate trucks and sushi xD

[wind spade]

I'm totally fine with having something like

Did you read everything and still have questions? Feel free to drop in to #math-and-meta channel in Satisfactory Discord (link) and ask your question!
on top/bottom/side/somewhere on the page

[delicate chasm]

Efficiency types could be the categories for the info box maybe. The metrics by which you would want to compare chains make the most sense, given that's exactly where you'll find the superlative information and like it or not, that's what people are looking for.

So one of the factoids about caterium wire would be that it is the fastest of the wire recipes but uses the least common of the metal types to make. HEC would mention it doesn't use screws and is the resource efficient version of HMF, etc.

[thorny cedar]

so the first metric is (can it be automated? if not its inferior?)

i dont see this applicable

in another metric biocoal is way superior to biomass but since it cant be automated its shit?

[wind spade]

something along those lines, except we'd have to be careful with things like "resource efficient" in cases we're comparing different resources

e.g.
is using 3 iron ore more resource efficient than using 1 caterium ore? we can obviously use WPs to determine that, but we can also just tell the difference in "uses 1 caterium instead of 3 iron" and let the player weight it themselves

[delicate chasm]

Right. Part of what we seek to avoid is stuff like

CONS: Uses Caterium

[wind spade]

the site would avoid any "pros" and "cons"

[delicate chasm]

Stitched Plate using copper when other RIP recipes don't use any copper - that could be a con! 🤣

[wind spade]

it would simply be a statement "uses more X but less Y"

[delicate chasm]

Yeah.

[wind spade]

it's up to the player to decide what is fine, what's a pro and what's a con for them

[thorny cedar]

but only if u not use ironwire and then we got the problem of multi stacking alt rec

[oblique hollow]

i mean... that alone is a bit odd
Like "quickwire - pro: makes quickwire - con: uses caterium"

[wind spade]

and that's (what Hayli said) another big problem

we should analyse recipe paths, not recipes (which is super hard to do)

so all the "uses more X" or "uses less X" should be carefuly checked whether that's true for every possible path

[oblique hollow]

and we cant analyse recipe paths all the way because thats way to intensive for the little bobby who just got his first 3 recipe choices

[wind spade]

which is why instead we proposed the "recipe combos" section

[delicate chasm]

Presumably, that's why we don't say things like this even when arguing merits from knowingly subjective stances.

[oblique hollow]

yeah the "frequencly combined with"

[wind spade]

so some of the info will be moved to "recipe combos", which would show how the recipe works with other things

the website itself isn't hard to make, what will be hard is filling it with all the data. But I'd say the earlier the website is available, the earlier we can start filling it with stuff?

(and another thing would be to come up with a good way to put the data in it so that it doesn't need a programmer 😄 )

[oblique hollow]

if you could make a mockup of it where you can just... drag and drop boxes around and then add text thats all that we need really

the functionality really isnt hard, designing the UI probably is the most time consuming part

[thorny cedar]

maybe with polls so ppl can vote what kind of alt rec they find better so you just see the % of alts used

[delicate chasm]

Took me a minute to find what you were talking about.
But yeah, they got the joke. Wire can be made from iron so even if you somehow value stitched plate under regular and bolted, you aren't ACTUALLY limited to copper for it.

[wind spade]

yeah that's exactly what I'm trying to avoid

[oblique hollow]

this would probably fall flat with you then since its "uses quartz"
unless the justification for it is what makes it ok

[delicate chasm]

Yeah I don't like that. How is that a drawback?

It has to use something.

[oblique hollow]

other question: what is it then

[wind spade]

a point to consider

[delicate chasm]

An ingredient?

[oblique hollow]

a "side effect"?

[delicate chasm]

An extra logistical consideration potentially?

Not necessarily given you could combine a route?

[oblique hollow]

it definitely falls under complexity because it is an extra resource

[wind spade]

instead of having "benefits" and "drawbacks", have a section called e.g. "things to consider"

people will value things themselves

[delicate chasm]

Yeah something like that would feel better. I don't like the idea of it being a negative that a recipe requires a resource when another alternative doesn't.

[oblique hollow]

alright but im keeping benefits
I get not having negatives but nobody ever complained about positives

[delicate chasm]

If it's a complete absence rather than an alternative it's different - see my beef with automated miner.

[wind spade]

exactly. That's why many of the points would have to be moved in "recipe combos"

[oblique hollow]

like, benefits are definitely the things that make you want to choose a recipe, or what this recipe makes does... better?... compared to default

[wind spade]

I mean... only if it's 100% a benefit
"uses iron instead of copper" is not always a benefit
"uses less iron but more machines" isn't either

[oblique hollow]

uses less of the thing it usually needs to make the product is a benefit

"but Plutonium"

i can already see it

[thorny cedar]

is uses more of things but is more efficient a benefit or not how much more efficient need it to be to be beneficial?

[wind spade]

another thing I kinda touched in the thread before is that ideally we don't want to "compare" to base, instead we want to point out what the recipe does

[delicate chasm]

Traits or Characteristics would be fine IMO, as you can have a single table listing the things you should know/consider without adding any subjective bias to what you are offering.

[oblique hollow]

unavoidable imo

[delicate chasm]

Listing the differences without saying whether or not they are good.

[oblique hollow]

you cant remove alt recipes from the base item it makes, and thus the base recipe

[wind spade]

yeah, since why "ideally"
but reducing it to a minimum is possible

[deft lichen]

the problem is trying to split it between "positives" and "negatives", some of the statements are neither good or bad, just facts

it boils down to "facts" and "useful pairings"

[wind spade]

many people wouldn't want to just compare to base, but also to other alts making that thing

[oblique hollow]

aaaand we do not wanna start making cross-alt comparisons if i remember right

[delicate chasm]

I'd rather look at a comparison to base than look at a recipe in a vacuum, personally.

The idea of selection has its basis in comparison.

[wind spade]

I'd personally not have any benefits/drawbacks, just a list of things
"makes more of product per ore than other recipes for X" can just be listed as a point, people will see that as a benefit

I'd rather have comparison to other paths to make that thing, not just base

[oblique hollow]

the paths are banished to the "frequently combined with" section

[wind spade]

classic example: cast screw
it's just "strictly better" when comparing to base
it's suddenly almost pointless when comparing to all ways of making screws

[deft lichen]

there is no way to compare plastic/rubber/fuel without doing a full path comparison

[thorny cedar]

and i dont wawnt to start about uranium

and if u bring energy eff into the mix the system might break appart completly xD

[wind spade]

and this is very important to show to the player. Not only what gain they will get from this recipe compared to base, but what other ways are out there (because that may change how they are feeling about a recipe)

[oblique hollow]

"ultimately, all attempts at simplifying alt recipe analysis are doomed"
i really want outsider perspectives on this tbh

[delicate chasm]

It's also not insignificant that if you have a recipe, you have a side-by-side (well above-below technically) comparison of all recipes that can make that in the codex.

[wind spade]

especially since new players don't do research on other alts, they should be shown other ways to do stuff

[delicate chasm]

Or they could arrive at that point of realization organically.

[thorny cedar]

some ppl dont even know there is a wiki

[wind spade]

oh the website will be filled with wiki links

[oblique hollow]

which is why i like linking that article i made

it is on the wiki and already links to some other pages

[delicate chasm]

The ways in which a person who would find such a comparison useful are not data points in the framing of an experienced player.

[wind spade]

well I kinda wanted to make a thread for this but it's a bit late lol

[oblique hollow]

just pull up https://discord.com/channels/370472939054956546/1034942142092689408 again lol

[wind spade]

but what if it's not for wiki? 😛

[oblique hollow]

rename thread

[wind spade]

not sure we have perms to do that

oh we do

[ornate echo]

with 360 steel ingots per minute, how much should i split it into pipes and beams?

[wind spade]

that depends on how much of each you need 🤷‍♂️

[deft lichen]

even for personal use, most steel ends up in EIB

[ornate echo]

im asking for an suggestion regarding that, i dont need nothing yet

[deft lichen]

so pick based on which EIB recipe you're using

[ornate echo]

an what?

[wind spade]

then don't make anything yet 🤷‍♂️

[deft lichen]

encased industrial beams

yeah, if you're unsure, just make 1 machine of each and store it

[oblique hollow]

Im asking out of curiosity: did you also ask this when you unlocked iron rods and plates?
"how many iron rods and plates should i split my ingots into" ?

[ornate echo]

no, i asked something similar regardign screws but only becuase screw maths are horrible

[oblique hollow]

why not for plates and rods?

[wind spade]

there's no point in making things you don't need yet
just wait until there's need for it and then build it

[oblique hollow]

why for steel

[ornate echo]

because theyre simpler, but its not about that now

[ornate echo]

okay okay

[oblique hollow]

yeah but steel parts are also just "ingot into constructor, part comes out"

[wind spade]

it's not really anything against you, but if you decide now how much of each, there's very small chance of actually hitting exactly the ratio you'll need in the future

so building only what you need (basically "I need 20 motors/min now" -> how much raw resources that needs -> find resources -> build that) makes sure you never have too much or too little

[ornate echo]

how to efficiently split steel beams into getting 48 per minute into one line

[mystic moon]

Overflow

[ornate echo]

what

[spice egret]

What is currently on one line that you want split? Why do you want exactly 48 and what’s the setup?

[wind spade]

--S--S--S--S--S
  |  |  |  |  |

[ornate echo]

i understand not

[ornate echo]

2 steel concrete

[wind spade]

S = splitter
anything else = belt

[spice egret]

That’s a manifold design

So as long as you have at least 48 coming in, it will get distributed after a few minutes

[ornate echo]

but whats the first incoming with

[spice egret]

Any line that has at least what you need

[wind spade]

from the left is your input
bottom is output to machines

[spice egret]

If you have 5 machines that require 10 each, you bring in at least 50 and the splitters will do the work

[ornate echo]

okay other question so i know if i even need an calculation, do i need modular frames for anythign but versaitle frames?

[spice egret]

Heavy modular frames are required some things

[ornate echo]

oh i forgor

[wind spade]

blueprint designer

also these

[prisma kraken]

plenty of mod frames are the thing for HMF->FMF->PCC

[forest socket]

Is it possible to get the full 600m³ per minute oil from an oil extractor to my 20 refinerys all using 30 per minute?
I cant get my last refinery filled and I tried everything that I found.
I mostly used this guide: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MdZ8Xr8P_SF_FL7B6WDjCZGS-x9Cwt-x/view?pli=1
It really don't understand it and I am questioning if its a good idea to set this up using the full 100% from the oil extractor

[median heath]

Did you loop the manifold?

[forest socket]

I tried it with a loop but it seemed like that it did not change anything so I uninstalled the loop

[median heath]

Something as simple as this works for looping, just for reference.

Also, did you let the pipe fill completely before turning the system online?

[forest socket]

This is a good question. I will try to shut it down and let it fill

[median heath]

Can just turn the very first machine off and let it fill, then turn the first one back on.

[forest socket]

Seems to be good on first sight! What a simple oversight on my side 😅 Thank you!

[median heath]

Oh I personally go much further, lol.

I have all the Ref's on their own power circuit with a Switch.
So I let the pipe fill completely, flip the switch for 2s, flip it off, let the pipe fill again, flip it for 2s, flip it off. One more fill then flip.

That way the pipe AND the internal buffers are all full so there are zero fluid issues.

[forest socket]

That sounds really good I have to look into more setups with switches I currently use them very little

[median heath]

Every outpost I make has staged power and a breaker room.
So I have control of everything from Extraction (all miners and extractors on 1 circuit) and then one for each stage like "Smelting", "Basic Production", "Final Product" etc.
And a MASTER switch ofc.

[delicate chasm]

Stuff like that is actually really interesting.

Other than flooding the pipe network, none of what you do is necessary but it details steps that are parallel to real-world startup systems and, like with them, addresses issues inherent to a linear system that needs to be continuous. (which you can address in other more direct ways if you choose to)

But the way you described it if followed as steps would lead to a person who doesn't understand why they are doing what they are doing to building pipes the right way, and that's impressive.

Normally I do a much more boring thing: I just build forward, and turn off 1 or more machines to allow flooding after I'm done piping. And end of the day, I'll never switch any of it off, so it works just as well...

But if I were to just describe the steps I take to build, it wouldn't be nearly as foolproof.

Anyway, point of the ramble: It might be a nice thing to have a section on the wiki similar to in other games a "strategy guides" section, which talks about stuff that you CAN use but don't really NEED to use, to put a spotlight on some things like sushi,, priority/regular power switches, sorting systems, and the like.

It's not really data but it's informative to point out that X is useful for Y, given that Y is not immediately obvious.

[median heath]

If everything I know and do is on the wiki... I have no reason to talk to people 😭

[delicate chasm]

Lock Sev designs behind a paywall, proceeds go to the Alt Analysis Objectivity Fund. 😉

[deft lichen]

taking that personally

[delicate chasm]

In any case I hadn't considered that you could use the switches to control the factory because I never considered that during start-up, you could do that instead of hitting standby switches.

And once the factory is on, there's not a need to control the factory, so it completely slipped by me.

Meta: Having an excuse to build a breaker room actually does make it better.

[median heath]

I do what I do for reasons 🤷‍♂️

[deft lichen]

@median heath this is incorrect, right? there has to be a smart splitter somewhere

[wind spade]

injected manifold is always incorrect

[median heath]

make your tool stop saying u6

[wind spade]

they do, if you switch to latest version

[median heath]

Your program is a "they" now? 👀

[median heath]

It evolved into AI?

[wind spade]

Tools
plural 🙂

[deft lichen]

Sev, everything is AI now

[median heath]

Steam problems

[delicate chasm]

Hey at least my platform is up.

[deft lichen]

now try launching your Steam copy and logging in

[median heath]

Eminem breaking the internet...

[delicate chasm]

Works as it always does. I play with -NoMultiplayer, so I'm always in my PC Pioneer body. ❤️

Hotbars for me, but not for thee.

[wind spade]

what is the problem with keeping old version anyway?

[median heath]

There is no satisfactory outcome to this line of questioning, as you keep old factories to build new, where I wipe everything that is not meant to be permanent from my world.

Same principle. Old things are to be archived for reference, not actively in use. 🤷‍♂️

[wind spade]

I mean there's many people who actively play on U7 due to U8 being broken for them or due to having not enough powerful pc

[median heath]

And they must suffer.

[wind spade]

it's intentionaly kept for those people (and for those who want to transfer production lines from U6/7 to U8)

[deft lichen]

I noticed you added an export/import function, is it possible to transfer between U7 and U8?

[wind spade]

yes, that was one of the main reasons to add it

[ornate echo]

anyone got a simpel plan to make 13 modular frames a minute?

or lets say 14

[median heath]

What alt recipes do you have?

[ornate echo]

where do i see

[median heath]

Codex?

[ornate echo]

i actually just need 11 more

middle one is easiest right?

[median heath]

All of them are the same level of easy.
Also I thought we were talking about Frames, not RIPs?

[ornate echo]

why are they so weird nu,bers

[median heath]

10, 20, and 3 are not weird numbers.

[wind spade]

doesn't matter, you can just underclock if it doesn't fit

[ornate echo]

oh no screws are hell, cooper is easy, also i need them RIP's for my frames first

[ornate echo]

its not even, all diffrent

[ornate echo]

all others show normal even numbers, only this recipe is weird

[ornate echo]

i only care about per minute

[median heath]

Well ok then...

[wind spade]

that's a preparation for the future, where every recipe will have "weird" numbers. Better start dealing with them sooner than later

[ornate echo]

why does one manage to be normal and the other doesnt

[median heath]

See greeny's message.

[ornate echo]

i can deal with that, its just confusing and makes it harder to plan

[median heath]

How?

[wind spade]

the math is the same no matter if numbers are weird or not

[median heath]

Like, stop looking at those numbers, how many total do you want to make per minute? (of RIPs since that is what we are looking at)

[ornate echo]

oh my damn, im so dumb

i just realized the numbers are real

[median heath]

As opposed to fake?

[wind spade]

well they are not imaginary 🙂

[ornate echo]

does this mean i need 12 or 60 beams a minute?

[wind spade]

60?

[ornate echo]

oh good so atleast i didnt mess that up

[wind spade]

how would it need 60?

[ornate echo]

it makes, wia tno

[median heath]

It needs 12 per cycle.
Cycle time is 24 seconds.
Which means it needs 30 per minute.

[ornate echo]

wait what

[mystic moon]

Which it also tells you if you just click on the recipie

[wind spade]

it makes 5 output per minute
makes in batches of two
so cycle time is 2.5 times per minute, or 60/2.5 = 24
2.5 times 12 = 30

[ornate echo]

so i just made like 200% more than i needed

[median heath]

Output is 2 Versatile at 5/min
2/5 = 0.4
0.4 * 60 seconds = 24 seconds

12 per cycle, 24 second cycle time, 30/min

[ornate echo]

okay so i just set up 6 foundries because i thught its needed for one versaitile frame a minute

[wind spade]

or use a calculator or some online tools 🙂

[ornate echo]

atlest i wont have to worry about steel now

[median heath]

Between these 2 numbers that you were looking at where did you get "1 per minute"?

[ornate echo]

i just got it okay

okay i need 6 assemblers making modular frames, got it

[median heath]

You need 6 Assembers to make 2.5 Frames?

[ornate echo]

no to make the amount of frames 6 would make

i wanna make 1 heavy and 2 versatile frames a minute, i am already producing 4 modulars a minute wich means i still need 12 wich requires 6 assemblers

is my math right?

[split oxide]

i need some help, i need to split 10pps into 5x 2pps. i don't know how i would go about that. i cannot change the 10pps output with out spending another 3 hours on this. for context i'm trying to make a smart plating factory out of two pure iron veins using mk1 miners and only log mk2. i have made a build plan(it is very bad but best with what i could use on hand.), and i finally got rotors to work after 2 of those hours. please send all of the mathematicians. TLDR: need help with splitting 10 parts per second into 5 machines intaking at 2 parts per second.

[wind spade]

--S--S--S--S--S
  |  |  |  |  |

[prisma kraken]

two ways to do it, either build a 1:5 splitter, or clock the consumers to 125 %

i'm guessing that 10pps is UFR's

[split oxide]

UFR's?

[prisma kraken]

uranium fuel rods

[split oxide]

no

[prisma kraken]

5 way splits can be avoided with clocking to 125% or 250%

[wind spade]

or just building a manifold like I've posted above

[split oxide]

right hand side is rotors and left hand is reinforced

[prisma kraken]

just manifolding the machines is simple too

[split oxide]

guess i was trying to reduce clocking

[prisma kraken]

use a manifold, honestly if this is basic iron

[split oxide]

its just so we can have smart plating production

[prisma kraken]

you'll be tearing the factory down eventually anyway

[split oxide]

prob

[prisma kraken]

but to actually answer how you do a 5-way split, you split 6 ways and loop 1/6 back into the input

[split oxide]

prolly just gonna do more over clock

[split oxide]

saw a vid for that, didnt want a feedback loop

[wind spade]

manifold then

[prisma kraken]

well, you have 3 solutions... manifold, clocking or loopback split

[split oxide]

ill just get 6slugs

[wind spade]

I mean manifolds are great in every case 🤷‍♂️ but you can keep clocking things if you want

[prisma kraken]

i favor the clocking in this case cuz balancing is cool, but for starter iron, it just doesn't matter too much

[split oxide]

well i dont want then last thing to have a 1/32nd chance of getting an item compared to a 50% chance for the first one

[spice egret]

It doesn’t work that way

[split oxide]

would it not?

[wind spade]

that's just until it fills up

[spice egret]

The first machine will back up eventually so as long as your input line equals your total needs it will balance and everything will run 100%

[wind spade]

then all machines work at 100%

[prisma kraken]

it balances eventually once the buffers are full, machines cannot consume more than they can consume when their buffers fill

[spice egret]

It overfeeds the first, then once it’s full it overfeeds the second, etc. Just make sure the input belt equals the total inputs

[wind spade]

you can also prefill to remove the wait

[split oxide]

i guess so, but all working at the same time does look statisfactory

thanks for the help

[spice egret]

^

That’s the downside to manifolds if you care lol

[wind spade]

I mean once they all fill up, they will work at the same time

[spice egret]

Yeah. Just belts are more stalled out looking on a manifold design

Efficiency wise everything works at 100% if your math is good

[prisma kraken]

sometimes balanced splitting is a better option, but 99% of time manifolds are just the simple more pioneer's time-efficient way of solving things

[spice egret]

Yep. For me, they are the simplest most space and time efficient solution for almost every situation

[prisma kraken]

if you are doing things like speed-running, or building on-demand factories that can be flipped on & off, the conversation can change

i personally enjoy the belting and geometry puzzles of the game, so i try to balance things out if it isn't too much effort, or for my own personal satisfaction

there's also an intangible feeling you get when you flip the switch and it all starts working at the same time 🙂

[spice egret]

I personally like function and organization … so if it isn’t clean working and there’s a cleaner way, I tend to pursue that

Less clutter

[vapid nebula]

How would I turn 5 miners into 6 equal outputs

im like brain dead rn and i cant figure it out

[true junco]

While i normally use manifolds to get factories that just run well with reasonable effort so i can move on... the visual appeal of none of your materials ever stop moving while you watch your factory is definitely something I appreciate about good balancers

[ashen stirrup]

This article explains how to make a 1:5 splitter: https://satisfactory.wiki.gg/wiki/Tutorial:Prime_splitter_arrays, so do that with the sixth miner and then merge each of the 5 lines with one of the other miner lines

[vapid nebula]

its 5 miners into 6 equal things

[ashen stirrup]

Yes, that's what I just described 😂

[vapid nebula]

you said 6th miner

im confused

[ashen stirrup]

Oh sorry, you're right. Just turn what I said backwards then

[vapid nebula]

wait so take my 5 miners and make one of them split 5 ways and merge it with the other 4?

im still lost on how that would make 6

[ashen stirrup]

Never mind, I've just been totally misleading you

[vapid nebula]

oh its ok

[ashen stirrup]

The only solution I can think of rn would be to just split one belt into two, then run the whole thing through a 6:6 balancer https://satisfactory.wiki.gg/wiki/Balancer#Alternate_Examples:

[prisma kraken]

so i'm not going to give you the answer, but help you figure it out

if you have 5 miners, what happens if you split each 3 ways?

[vapid nebula]

get 15 outputs

[vapid nebula]

also i rly appreciate this i hate having to come here

[prisma kraken]

what happens if you split each of those 15 2-ways ?

[vapid nebula]

39

30

[prisma kraken]

right, sans-typo 🙂

what happens if you merge each 6 together?

[vapid nebula]

27

[prisma kraken]

30/6 = ?

[vapid nebula]

5

[ashen stirrup]

That would be 5-5 then

[prisma kraken]

i got myself mixed up, lol

[vapid nebula]

oh you said each 6 not just 6

[prisma kraken]

if you grouped them by 5 instead

[vapid nebula]

mb

oh so 6

[ashen stirrup]

It feels like there has to be a more efficient way than that 😭 that's a lot of belts

[prisma kraken]

a lot of the belts can actually be elided

[vapid nebula]

how would i merge it into 5 tho

[prisma kraken]

like if you split a node in half and then each half in 3, 3 of those would end up getting merged back together so you can do each node as a split in 2 and split one half into 3

[vapid nebula]

6*

[prisma kraken]

then just merge 2/6 back in

that should give you enough to figure out the rest

there are other ways of doing it all

[vapid nebula]

so divide each half into 3

and then just merge until i get 6ths

[prisma kraken]

that's honestly one of the uglier ones people have posed

[vapid nebula]

yea it does sound like a lot

[prisma kraken]

its doable

[vapid nebula]

yea it is but if theres a better way id like to learn

[prisma kraken]

what you need to ask yourself though is why you're trying to do that, and perhaps find that you're solving the wrong problem

i.e. your forcing your input to be a fixed size instead of modifying what it is inputing into

[vapid nebula]

ik thatd be easier but id rather learn this now than later

[prisma kraken]

it is also a bit more complicated if each of your inputs is a different size

[vapid nebula]

cause i solved it back cause im trying to get 2 output values equal and i need inputs in sixths for that

[vapid nebula]

ik that thats why i need things in sixths

[prisma kraken]

that's a bit different of a problem then

[vapid nebula]

how, i just like things being even, figured out all inputs needed, now i just need to figure out how to get my 5 nodes into 6 outputs

[prisma kraken]

what speed are you mining them at?

[vapid nebula]

120

mk 2

what difference would that make

[prisma kraken]

so all of them are 120?

[vapid nebula]

mhm

they would be

[prisma kraken]

that makes it considerably easier

[vapid nebula]

im just trying to learn how to get 5 into 6 in a nice compact way

[prisma kraken]

5*120 = 600

[vapid nebula]

ik, i solved all of it

ik the numbers

[prisma kraken]

so you want belts of 100

[vapid nebula]

i know that

i just dont know how

just know i cant go over 270 on one belt due to mk 3 belts

[prisma kraken]

i'm thinking....

if i were in my main save, i'd build it for you

(slumming in a phase 1 world atm)

[vapid nebula]

creative?

[prisma kraken]

no, just a hub0 restart

[vapid nebula]

no, start seperate save real quick with creative?

[prisma kraken]

well i have a good save, might as well just load that

it really isn't that bad to build, its just a little messy

[vapid nebula]

you can just build a little diagram

instead of doing all the messy stuff

or send a link to a wiki article that shows how they work

[prisma kraken]

its fine, i'm loading my world now

(takes a bit)

is your input set of belts vertically or horizontally oriented?

[vapid nebula]

just go with horizontal

nothings setup, just planning

[prisma kraken]

there's other ways of doing it, but you're essentially pulling 1/6th of each input off and merging them together

that method of doing it lends itself nicely to being vertically stacked and should fit into a 2 foundation width space

(tbh, i don't quite see how to do these things myself until i actually start building them, lol

[vapid nebula]

im a little lost, left side seems to be 1/2 of the original taking 2/3 of the right side

wait im slow

nvm its exactly that

just had mental math wrong

[prisma kraken]

yeah, you're splitting 1/6 off of each line and combining them into their own line

[vapid nebula]

yea thank you

[prisma kraken]

you can do it some other ways, but that seemed the easiest to belt

and of course, you can tighten the spacing up a bit to make it more compact

you can also remove one of the mergers on each line if you route the 3-splitter's output to the unused output on the other splitter

i opted not to do that b/c it would have made the design wider

[stray yarrow]

anyone smarter than me explain any use cases of making balancers rather than using manifolds?

I have one idea (being balancing multiple inputs that don't add up to 270/s

but even then you could just add another input belt where applicable further down the manifold

[prisma kraken]

someone posed a question the other day where they needed 4 equal input lines of 275 split into outputs of 450, 360 and 290 for different production lines

because those numbers are kind of fugly together, the balancer made more sense than any other method

well, toss up btw injected manifold or balancer

[stray yarrow]

right didn't finish reading the wiki page. didn't know there was a term for that

[prisma kraken]

another place where you don't necessarily need a balancer, is to ensure a train station with multiple frieght platforms of the same item all drain at an equalized rate

[stray yarrow]

right, again could go through a sushi belt and sorted accordingly

but at lower teirs would be useful

(I assume you get trains b4 sorters. i forget lol)

[prisma kraken]

what balancers do is pool lines together so that the rates of input and output of the balancer are always proper

sorters i unlock in phase 1, lol

[stray yarrow]

yeah, but unlike factorio you can just use a manifold in every circumstance I can think of

[prisma kraken]

ehh, injected manifolds get pretty fricking messy when you're dealing with 4+ 780 lines

the other thing about injected manifolds is that when you pick an injection point, you're kind of locking yourself in to the factory working a certain way

... if you decided to oc a few machines to save some space, your injection point would change

if you've ever had to do reconfiguration work in a logistics floor you made a while ago, it isn't the most pleasant task 🙂

i'm sounding pro-balancer, which i'm actually not, but presenting all sides

[stray yarrow]

same goes for a balancer redesign

I love balancers cus they are a fun challenge

but I

am lazy

[prisma kraken]

for that problem i was talking about with the 290/360/450 numbers, this is what i came up with:

[stray yarrow]

that is majestic

[prisma kraken]

pretty bulky, tbh

[stray yarrow]

but neat

so eh

[prisma kraken]

they're pretty cool to watch moving items

i feel like that one could be made smaller, but i'm not sure how yet w/o clipping

ehh, i see it

just not as attractive of a design 😦

[balmy bolt]

do i ask about best alternate recipe choice here

[wind spade]

Read this first #math-and-meta message

[wind spade]

@quartz gulch read ^ as well 🙂

[quartz gulch]

ok

[wintry finch]

uh... trying to figure out how many of these i can get made with a belt of 480 iron ingots a minute but im not sure i understand this calculator...

i have the cast screws, iron wire, stitched plates or bolted iron plate , and bolted frames recipes

[kind cairn]

I'm not sure which tool you are using here, but with https://satisfactorytools.com/production what you are trying to do can be done:

1. Create new production line
2. In the "Items, Input" tab, add in 480 iron ingots, and remove all iron ore.
3. Select the alt recipes you wanna use in the recipes tab
4. Back in production tab, select modular frames, and set rate up max

[wind spade]

if you want to use iron wire, then it's roughly this

https://www.satisfactorytools.com/production?share=9SPPviTKeaMaxeCCjajZ

you can get more if you don't use iron wire and use copper instead

[wintry finch]

well i could use copper but that requires finding another copper source nearby or i can just use a belt of 480 iron ingots a minute im not doing anything with currently. plus i know of 2 or 3 untapped pure iron nodes right next to each other

[wind spade]

(for the future, I'd recommend planning based on what you need, not what you have)

[oblique hollow]

generally, if you want to find out "if have this many ingredients, how much product can i make?"

1. Pick a random target rate for your product (in this case, modular frames, lets say 1 assembler at 100%)
2. Solve the production for this backwards all the way to the raw ingredients
3. Scale the entire production up or down by a constant factor so you use all the ingredients you want

backwards solving and then scaling up always works and is less of a headache than directly starting with your raw ingredients and trying to find out how much you can make

[oblique hollow]

@drowsy glacier heres a snippet

machine weight W is calculated as:
Machine volume divided by (resource efficiency + speed)

[drowsy glacier]

Am I seeing then that quickwire cable is amazing?

[oblique hollow]

basically

[drowsy glacier]

I honestly wouldn't mind a copy

[oblique hollow]

very unfished due to there being little interest, but here you go

[drowsy glacier]

Oh wait, I think I didn't think that true, the actual final result in all these cases is "machine weight w"?

[oblique hollow]

that is the weighted machine space

literally just "how space efficient this recipe is in this machine"

If a constructor is 640 m³ and a Refinery is 6200 m³ and the Refinery recipe is twice as efficient and fast as the constructor, then the Refinery volume will only be counted as a quarter of the original value

so 1550 m³

in that case, 5 constructors would be equivalent to 2 refineries in terms of "Volume efficiency"

[cinder perch]

Hi all, quick question, if I do 80% clock speed. Will the power be 80% too? (Say 4MW to 3.2MW?)

[oblique hollow]

for constructor or similar? no

it will follow a power function curve

[cinder perch]

this is for constructor

power function curve?

[oblique hollow]

if it was 4 MW at 100%, at 80% it will be:
4 * (80 / 100)^1.32192
= 2.98 MW

[cinder perch]

what

interesting.... what ^1.32192 come from?

[oblique hollow]

its an equation of the form X^A

1.32192 is the log2 of 2.5

its just a constant the developers use for this

[cinder perch]

I see, so if you do say 40%, the calculation would be 4 * (40 / 100)^1.32192 ?

[oblique hollow]

yes

[cinder perch]

Thank you!

[oblique hollow]

the only buildings who are linear with clocking are generators

[cinder perch]

interesting, I just finished phase 2, and now considering to make a map to organize my production line. Do you all have good suggestions about what to use for the calculation besides excel?

[oblique hollow]

theres a website that calculates production lines for you if you want

so you can compare your results

[cinder perch]

I just found one, that is amazing!

legorin.github.io/satisfactory-calculator

[kind cairn]

just fyi, this is outdated and does not have all the current items
This is my favorite, but a few days ago it started breaking (missing icons). It's great cuz it'll let you plan out multiple lines of the same product, so you can make groups of 100% clock machines or make each node a machine if you want. Tricky to get used to tho, and the missing icons make it even worse.:
https://satisfactory-planner.vercel.app/

Next best, and most popular:
https://satisfactory-calculator.com/

And finally the most easy to use that I've found:
https://satisfactorytools.com/production

[cinder perch]

I love those resources! Thank you so much for sharing!

I do want to build a nice product line, but given my current development, I feel that I will have to destroy them later for the update. I am thinking about unlock everything with unorganized patter first, just get the phases finish. When I finish all the research and phases, then I will start make good planning. How did you all balence this part?

patter *pattern

[oblique hollow]

https://u6.satisfactorytools.com/production
another commonly used calc

[kind cairn]

thats what i did tbh and i felt comfortable with it. i started off thinking it would do me well to set up factories to be able to upgrade them later on as i unlocked more stuff, but quickly realized that its best to just make new factories and instead build stuff to suit the stuff you have access to now

so like, if you have a Mk1 miner on a node, just build a complete factory using the max output you can get on it, then once you get Mk2 miners, just expand by making a new factory next to it instead of rebuilding....

basically: dont set yourself up to need to rebuild things later on

[kind cairn]

why the u6 version? 😮

[oblique hollow]

cause u8 is basically equal

the production lines havent changed at all since U6

you can just toggle the ecxperimental U8 but its basically identical

[cinder perch]

I feel that i would have to remove everything after unlock all the phases and rebuild things nicely.]\

[oblique hollow]

Rebuilding old factories is actually counterproductive

[prisma kraken]

quick asterisk about the water cost for nuclear waste

[kind cairn]

ah i see, i have an issue that it "saves" different configurations: (U8)

U6/7

[cinder perch]

The reason I am thinking about a rebuild is because my current production line is very messy, say some parts got over produced, and some parts builds super slow\

[oblique hollow]

rather than tear down and rebuild, just build a new factory

you can tear the old one down later on

but for now, the old one serves a critical role: it keeps supplying you with parts for building

[cinder perch]

I agree

[kind cairn]

you can if you want! dont let anything stop you from playing how you wont. however you will most likely enjoy just starting a new project and keeping the old stuff "for memories sake" x)

[prisma kraken]

or you can start a new world and keep the old one as a lab, etc

[kind cairn]

this cant be stressed enough lol
dont tear down producing factories unless you already have a hefty stock of that item and/or already have another production line set up

[prisma kraken]

agreed, that paints you into a corner

[cinder perch]

Yeah, I have got stuck not knowing what to do from the previous run and I restarted everything lol, it is painful to spend hours remake things. Becuase the poorly planned product line, I sometime just leave it running for overnight or even days to get the parts needed - -

[river chasm]

quick question: how many plutonium fuel rods can I make with 1600 uranium waste? (assuming I have enough of everything else)

im struggling with the math tbh

[oblique hollow]

https://www.satisfactorytools.com/production?share=j2xY7MGQxnQ8Z78UxkYd

apparently, 42.6666

[river chasm]

I forgot that existed, thanks

[oblique hollow]

but thats with fertile urnium

disabling that, you get 14.2222 /min

and without the fuel unit alt, it gets lowered even more, down to 9.481/min

[prisma kraken]

i think if you do instant cell vs plut pellet that increases as well

[river chasm]

I'll only have 642 uranium left after making fuel rods, so I probably can't do that

[oblique hollow]

then 14.2222 or 9.481 is your limit

[river chasm]

that's fine

[kind cairn]

so, is this considered a bug exploitation?

logically, i wouldnt expect that to function irl, so.... yes, right?

(not that i think theres anything wrong with exploiting bugs unless it affects fellow player experiences)

[mystic moon]

I don't think it's a bug as much as a quirk

[median heath]

Valves working as intended.

[prisma kraken]

it has always bugged me that doing that for a water tower works, lol

[oblique hollow]

technically no longer works from what i heard and whatnot

[kind cairn]

thats what i was worried about (if bug, it might get squashed)

[true junco]

I feel inclined to believe that is a good thing. Since that is just not how valves work IRL anyways. Not that Valves in SF work like any valve i've ever seen. Freaking weird ass combo of a check valve and a gate valve, and a flow gauge.

[oblique hollow]

its just a non-return gate valve then

non-return plus pressure limiting doesnt seem that outlandish

it can be thought of as a non return and a gate valve in series

[prisma kraken]

that stuff really hasn't worked right since u6 was in experimental, i used to play games with headlift to save on pump power and just kind of gave up when it sometimes worked & sometimes didn't

[true junco]

I was thinking about it and thats ultimately it. The SF valve is the same as a seriea of real valves and devices. But irl ivenever seen a single device that was all 3 at once.

[stone delta]

Has there been a recently development with shared head lift or is this still not working in update 8?

[true junco]

Good question. I know somebody was talking about how somethings changed. Im not concrete on it myself tho.

[glacial saffron]

it's a bug in that it does not take into account flow rate of sources to evaluate the head lift
for instance one pump pushing at 50
and a lot other pipes with pump to 25
then at 30 the flow "should" drop to only one pipe worth
because only one pipe go over 25 head lift
so in the case of the valve
only the valve input would go to enough head lift
so you'll get the full flow of .. 0 m3 at that level

[prisma kraken]

i really don't think it has worked since around update 6

[oblique hollow]

as far as im concerned it seems to be the new permament state in order to crush some old bugs

[forest walrus]

this one is gonna be a dumb split that i need help with, i have 147 copper in one input, and it needs to end up in a 2 output split with 27 going in one direction and 120 in the other, how do i go about this

[delicate chasm]

Unless they're needing to split to separate truck stations or something...a single splitter.

It'll feed 73.5 in both directions but the one needing only 27 will back up and the remainder will go the other direction.

If you must though, you can do it with a smart splitter overflowing 27 units (output to a mk2 belt), or build a balancer that merges parts back onto the belt and splits several times.

[forest walrus]

im overthinking this, there's a 2nd copper deposit at blue crater that i forgot about, i can use the impure to get the 27 and the normal for the 120

everything else in the line im working on is divisible by 2 or 3, now that i know ive got another copper to work with, it does mean ill have to deal with a few more belts but atleast the math works out

[delicate chasm]

Just making sure you understand that I am saying the math does work out here too, and that you don't even need to account for the difference between the two belts, right?

It could also be that you need 80/60/27 and a regular splitter doing a regular 3-way split onto 3 of the same kinds of belt will eventually balance itself. :)

[forest walrus]

the 147 copper needs to go into 120 for copper sheets 27 for wire

[delicate chasm]

Are you gonna just split the 147 or going ahead with the bigger build?

Oh you said impure to get the 27, nevermind.
If you're already able to get all of the copper you need from 1 node though, I would just stick to that personally.

[forest walrus]

well preferably i would like to stick with just one, but im wanting to keep the factory at full efficiency, and seeing as each side of the split is going to a different product i would have to sacrifice efficiency from one

[delicate chasm]

Why would you need to sacrifice efficiency?

[ashen stirrup]

147 is divisible by 3, it's just 3 * 7 * 7

[delicate chasm]

If you feed 73.5 units of something when it can only accept 27 units, what happens?

[ashen stirrup]

The line backs up

Nothing bad really happens

[delicate chasm]

27              120
^                ^
73.5 < Split > 73.5```

And when it backs up...it backs up all the way to the splitter, which is still getting 147 units but now is forced to put EVERYTHING to only one side when there's no room.

So the backed up side only accepts 27/min once backed up, and forces a full 120/min down the other side.

[forest walrus]

suppose that could work, would be alot easier then running another belt across blue crater

[delicate chasm]

It's only unbalanced until it fills the slow belt. You can always speed up the process by stuffing some ore into the machines yourself, if you happen to have any laying around in a box for instance.

[prisma kraken]

well, finished the iron build yard bp

getting 4 smelters, 11 constructors and 3 assemblers into a 4x4 wasn't easy

pretty nice rates coming out of it though:

couldn't quite get belts not to clip a tad, but i'm pretty happy with the belting

...just almost enough space 😛

[heady vine]

quick question: best™️ recipe for turbofuel?

[median heath]

Baseline is the most oil-efficient.
Blend is the most sulfur-efficient.

Pick which matters more to you.

[heady vine]

oh, right. i need sulfur effeciency because... idk why
both are used elsewhere for some things

[wind spade]

if you're doing turbofuel for power, I'd personally recommend to skip it and go straight to nuclear
diluted fuel gives you enough power to reach nuclear

[heady vine]

how much power gen you suggest to reach before that?

also, funny, when i exited discord i was thinking "what's the benefit of turbofuel anyway?.. i still need same amount of fuel gens, but it complicates logistics"

[wind spade]

yeah, turbofuel is basically "save oil at the cost of sulfur and coal"

and since oil is pretty common, it's usually easier to just build one or two oil nodes worth of diluted fuel, which can carry you to nuclear

(obviously depends a lot on how much of other stuff and other gens you've built)

but you can always add more power, so it doesn't matter much 🙂

[heady vine]

damn, i don't have dlued fuel yet on this save. time to go talk to stingers...

[wind spade]

you'd want diluted fuel even if you would use turbofuel anyway, that's usually a pretty good pick 🙂

[heady vine]

yeah, yeah

[heady vine]

6 coal gens. that's all. and i feel like with fuel gens is the moment to automate all the little things (Cause what's the point of doing so after nuclear?..)
so i probably need some power capacity
(yeah, quite some considering that will also support phase progression)

[wind spade]

automation is imo always good, even at coal stage
and automation after nuclear is still useful, you can have your own goals like X sink points per minute

[heady vine]

X sink points per minute does not grant me a luxury of not crafting rifle ammo manually

[heady vine]

i'm trying to do as few early stage things as possible

[wind spade]

why tho?
anything you automate will save you time in the long run

if you handcraft, you're just delaying the problem and making it worse

[heady vine]

essentially, because it needs power.
secondly, cause it might be of poor organization.

so its not so much aout handcrafting, as placing few manufactures that you manually feed various things when there's enough power (i'm over dramatizing about power)

[wind spade]

well if it needs power, build more power first. 6 coal gens is really low, most people do 24+ before fuel

[heady vine]

simply i don't yet have logistics to produce heavy modular frame - so i do it myself 🙂

[heady vine]

for some reason on second run i hate coal.
i had 6+6+24 in my first run, but that was when i got to fuel at 150hours... too slow

[wind spade]

I mean you'll still need decent amount of power to kickstart fuel

[heady vine]

i already have 2 gens running, so i dont expect more fuel to be a problem

i think a thing that saved me some power is less storage for items

[wind spade]

huh? item storage doesn't cost power

[heady vine]

but producing stockpiles of costy items - does

[wind spade]

producing stockpiles also makes sure that you have resources to build stuff, like more power 🙂

[heady vine]

difference is that i only store 4 stacks of rotors instead of 24

[wind spade]

(I'm not here to tell you that you're playing the game wrong because there's no wrong way to play a sandbox. I'm just suggesting that you may rethink some of your approaches since that may be benefitial to you later)

[heady vine]

yeah, no problem.
I simply explained different option 🙂

[heady vine]

why does calculator refuse to make factory for rifle ammo?
(sometimes satisfactory ecosystem is confusing...)

[wind spade]

doesn't for me 🤔 https://www.satisfactorytools.com/production?share=r6fjmBid5lWd56KfVLTg

[heady vine]

oh, i disabled oil, haha

maybe i don't need rifle ammo anyway 🙂

[primal flicker]

You don't need a rifle.
You need explosive rebar and cluster nobs.

[heady vine]

are cluster nobs so much better than usual ones to be worth adding oil to the mix?

[primal flicker]

More booms

[heady vine]

i remember rifle being needed only as a means of dealing with hatchlings before they cut the distance

[primal flicker]

You can kill crabs with boom box.
You can snipe hatcher with rebar before it hatches any crabs.

[heady vine]

perfect. i don't need rifle

[tired viper]

Is stitched iron plate any better than standard?

[snow dove]

it uses wire instead of screws, produces more rips per machine

[river night]

stitched is more resource efficient then standard or bolted, and also simpler then bolted i believe, especially since bolted needs a tier3 belt-level of screws

[wind spade]

depends what do you define "better" as 🙂
it's a tradeoff like every other recipe

[river night]

honestly stitched has very little downsides

especially if you throw iron wire at it

[wind spade]

depends on what is a downside to you 🤷‍♂️

some people don't like the increase of machines with iron wire
some people don't like weird numbers stitched have
etc.

[river night]

increase in machines compared to .. making screws from rods? or are we allowing for cast screws? 😄

[wind spade]

compared to copper wire

(and we can also allow for steel screws)

like there's so many options that people can take, that comparing recipes in vacuum is almost impossible

and usually hides the bigger picture

[primal flicker]

Could be reduced machine count if you use fused wire tho

[radiant lance]

hi yall, I'm playing again for the first time in about a year, and I'm wondering what sort of steel production scale to go for atm. I'd like to future proof the design relatively well, so I'm gonna unlock mk3 belts and miner mk2s before properly making the factory, but i'm not sure if I should go with 240/m coal & iron or 480/m. obviously gonna use solid steel ingots, though I also am not sure what ratio of beams and pipes I should make. I'm coming to the realisation that you actually need tons of pipes for other recipes while beams tend to be used for stuff you construct yourself and probably need a lower number per minute

[wind spade]

personally I'd say that future-proofing is super overrated. I'd suggest just building for what you need now, and later when you need something, you build that after you know how much you need

[radiant lance]

that does totally work but at the same time I very much like building aesthetically and it'd be a real pain to have to tear up a detailed factory to improve capacity

I think I can manage with a decent amnt though

[wind spade]

then don't 🙂 if you need more, build more (different factory)

what I'm suggesting is building factories and never touching them again

[radiant lance]

yeah I love doing that lmao

[primal flicker]

Plan the future factory, and build the "good enough for now" factory using a fraction of the eventual footprint.

[wind spade]

how do you plan future factory if you don't have everything planned at the start tho?

you either have to plan everything or accept that you can't future-proof

[radiant lance]

tbf you can plan the math and the buildings & such but downscale to the belts & miners available at the time

[wind spade]

but how do you know how much you need to produce in the future?

[primal flicker]

You can plan a factory that uses 720/720 coal/iron, and only build 120/120 of it to start with.

[wind spade]

oh, so you plan from raw ores, instead of planing based on what you actually need 😄

[primal flicker]

Iron out the details of how much to produce of what, when you get there.

[radiant lance]

yea I should be able to manage things now

tyty yall

[wind spade]

I recommend to plan from end product instead to plan based on nodes around 😄

[radiant lance]

my last save file I planned things out in a kinda silly way where I completely forgot about the idea of logistics and just made each factory produce things from scratch

it was not very pleasant by the time I got to supercomputers.

[wind spade]

I mean I very much like and recommend this approach

[primal flicker]

I do this, but I make a factory with multiple products.
Still learning which products to group together, and which not to.

[wind spade]

I group factories as well, but "grouped" factories aren't physically connected

[heady vine]

subjectively, is there any reason to use "better" recipes for Mall, or just go with simplest factory?

[wind spade]

I mean everything is being produced to storage

unless it's for direct sinking

[primal flicker]

Clear as mud, I'm sure 😅

[mystic moon]

Multioutput factories 😔

[heady vine]

unless its in the context of previous conversation, i don't understand

[primal flicker]

Anyway I just finished booking up all the mfr inputs for gas masks. Now to start laying out fuel gens.

In this case, the gas masks and fabric are to-sink byproducts.

[wind spade]

everything you produce goes either to storage (and overflow to sink) or to sink directly

[heady vine]

yes

[wind spade]

so I don't understand the question about using better recipes for storage

since everything goes into storage 🤔

[heady vine]

ah

let's pretend i will conenct smart splitters and overflow will be sinked

so question is more like "considering that all machines will be online 100% of time, and mall doesn't consume that much raw resources, is there any real gain in using optimal (by any mean except power and space) recipes for the mall?"

when put like that seems like obvious "yes"
than what calculator can help with that? (there' s always backup option of going through wiki and picking compact/energy-efficient recipes)

[wind spade]

I'm still a bit confused tho 🤔 I'm assuming mall = storage
and since you agreed with "everything you produce goes to storage", then the question is basically "should I use optimal recipes"

[heady vine]

[primal flicker]

This is the mess that results from "automate all of the ammo" 😆 (except gas )

[heady vine]

i am confused by what's the alternative

[primal flicker]

Once again, it boils down to "WHAT do I want to optimize through recipe choices?"

[wind spade]

well, I'm confused why are you specifying "for storage", since all things end up in storage

if it was just a question of "should I use resource efficient recipes", then my answer would be "if you want to, sure". But since you specified "for storage", then I'm a bit confused why the specification is there, if it anyway applies to all recipes

[heady vine]

because its a low volume production

[celest juniper]

@primal flicker What software do you use to make your diagrams?

[wind spade]

and what other production is there? 🤔

if everything goes to storage anyway

[heady vine]

unlike when you do it for power generation or phase unlock

[primal flicker]

That's from SFTOOLS, all credit to @wind spade here

[wind spade]

(wrong greeny)

[primal flicker]

Goddammit

[celest juniper]

thanks <3

[primal flicker]

Well the wrong greeny got ghost pinged

[heady vine]

and batteries (idk what else is constantly used, hope nobody cares with turbofuel for vehicles)

[wind spade]

I mean in most cases the "small amount" production for mall actually uses way more resources than any power production

(in total)

[heady vine]

fair (unless its not sinked)

[wind spade]

anyway to your question, the basic answer is basically "up to you"

some points to consider:

• you'll most likely never run out of a single resource (with maybe uranium being the exception, or sulfur if you do tons of turbofuel)
• you'll never run out of space
• you'll never run out of power (assuming you do build nuclear power)

so in the end, most recipe choices boil down to "how much time I'll spend on X vs Y recipe" or "how much I want to deal with X or Y recipe" or "how much fun it is to do X or Y recipe". But of course you may have your personal goal be something like "save as much resources as I can" or "have smallest footprint factories" or whatever.

[heady vine]

i need to remember to not ask question of "better" but to ask "what to consider".
same msitake 2 years after...

[primal flicker]

I know more or less what I want to produce for a mall at this stage (next stage), but not how much of each thing. Ideally, it should keep up with my use of building materials, and only minimal overflow rates to the sink. But I'm blind guessing on those numbers based on stacks-per-hour accumulation 😅

[wind spade]

I mean it wouldn't change my answer

[heady vine]

basically i asked for that last line, aka: what's a strategy to build mall asap, without realy caring of power, resource usage...

[wind spade]

personally, mall (storage) is what I'd spend most time on, because it's the thing that will stay forever and will be used all the time. So I wouldn't cut corners and build it properly

[heady vine]

properly as in?..

[wind spade]

use whatever recipes I prefer (which for me is resource efficiency, but it's purely my personal goal and nothing to do with actual game/map limits)

[heady vine]

small note: for now i don't care about routing outputs (final products) into single place because of the mode i use

[heady vine]

oh ok

[dawn jungle]

If I wanted to max out energy production of those three oil nodes (two normal and one pure IIRC, all overclocked to max) on the beach on the west coast, is my optimal formula the blended fuel alternate and then one of the turbo fuel recipes? I know it would take an insane amount of refineries and blenders....

I had it semi worked out on paper for a prior game but I'm not even sure if my math was correct

[wind spade]

yeah, though I'd just use diluted fuel and don't bother with turbofuel

[dawn jungle]

It might not be worth fooling with but I need at least one turbo fuel thing so I can make turbo fuel and the ammo and get the other unlocks

[wind spade]

well turbofuel isn't required for anything iirc

[dawn jungle]

You need turbo fuel to unlock turbo rifle ammo in the MAM now, I think. nice to have.

[wind spade]

sure, but that also isn't required for anything 😄

my point though is that you don't need any mass production of turbofuel, you can just do something small, and for power use normal diluted

[dawn jungle]

Well that is true.

And I do remember that blenders eat a whole bunch of power so wouldn't want to overclock those, much more sensible to make more unless there's a space constraint and there's all that empty space over the water to use

[wind spade]

space is never an issue, unless self-implied

[dawn jungle]

Once I was going to build a butt ton of coal refineries down below the edge of the map near that big lake but I kind of lost interest in the project after a while.

[primal flicker]

iirc turbo blend uses less power than default turbo fuel, but also uses less sulfur and yields less capacity per crude input.

[dawn jungle]

Ahh so that's a big factor. I'll have to look at the different turbo fuel recipes again cuz I definitely don't remember

[median heath]

Baseline recipe is the most oil-efficient.
Blend is the most sulfur-efficient.

Decide which matters more to you and that's the one you choose.

[primal flicker]

I went with the blend alt because less buildings and no coal input.

Not sure what's the hypothetical use case for turbo heavy...

[dawn jungle]

Yeah the coal was a hassle but I figured you need less of it if you completely migrate away from coal power to fuel generators and then if you move to nuclear from turbo fuel then the sulfur consumption is less of an issue right?

[primal flicker]

Or you skip turbo altogether because you can just get as much fuel power as you need.

[dawn jungle]

True. I might make just enough turbo fuel for the jetpack and vehicles and ammo and otherwise just not bother and go straight to nuclear

[median heath]

hastagBiomassTilNuclear

[primal flicker]

We're gonna need a bigger BMB...

[sacred orbit]

Is it “meta” to put a Smart Splitter on a resource node to try and squeeze >100% out of one? Like, my bomb factory is using 240 iron ore for solid steel for the pipes. If I put a Smart Splitter on the input and set one output to overflow, would I be able to use excess from the manifold being full to produce other things, albeit much slower?

[median heath]

Not really, but it's completely fine to do that.

[heady vine]

so essentially its better™️ to underclock production buildings, trading space and contrsuction cost for power consumption

[delicate chasm]

Discounting the one-time investment of building materials, it saves resources by not demanding as much power, yes.

[delicate chasm]

It's very simple to just add coal instead of making petroleum coke, with the byproduct HOR from initial rubber & plastic. Small footprint, simple layout.

Other than the convenience of building, I don't think it's good personally. Have only used it once, as described above.

[true junco]

Pretty much how I do things now honestly.

[true junco]

Yeah but its also more load on the computer you are running and higher UObject count for the same production. Because it requires more machines, more belts, more splitters and mergers etc.

[sacred orbit]

have you figured out how much excess you can draw at once? or do you think it's case dependent?

[heady vine]

another crazy idea: underclocking to match production rate - less splitter/merger, just straght belts

[prisma kraken]

so i was just doing a little math, thinking more about the topic of build yard blueprints, specifically with the context of making steel parts, and realized that one stack of wood + some iron can be turned into 10 stacks of steel pipes

where i'm heading with the idea is maybe it would be possible to make motors somewhere remote without access to coal

possibly HMF's as well, but that's a heavier lift

[hybrid star]

https://www.satisfactorytools.com/production?share=iEHDcD7oNhCOcaDYZfN4 this is a link to making Uranium Fuel Rods in a planner. Its fully using one Uranium node, 600 per minute. Have I missed a beat? It says it makes 14.4 rods per minute. Is the math right on this or have I missed something basic thats going to make me sigh

[vapid gorge]

Missed what? If you have the right output it’ll use the the right resource

[hybrid star]

Perfect, the only component I'm missing is the cells which I will build away from everywhere else. I was concerned when I looked at the wiki and it was talking about 1 per minute or 60 per minute, the latter I didn't think was possible

[true junco]

The wiki says that the 60/min shown isnt possible. Its just for comparison because all comparisons on the wiki are for 60/min.

[prisma kraken]

yeah, it normalizes rates of everything to 60/min for comparison

not sure if that is the most useful way of looking at things, but at least it is a standard

@true junco is it you or @delicate chasm that was interested in the build yard blueprint concept?

[oblique hollow]

better / more reasonable normalization on the wiki would be nice

[prisma kraken]

perhaps de-normalization is what would be useful; idk

[oblique hollow]

individual normalized values per item

[prisma kraken]

lets take rotor for example, just to pick on something simple

[oblique hollow]

modular frames? 10, 20, 30.. anything goes really

[wind spade]

I'd go for "resources to make 1 of item"

no reason to put /min in there

[prisma kraken]

the recipes for it ouput 4, 5 and 11.25 for rates

[oblique hollow]

these abstract factories are nit helpful in visualizing how complex it really is

[prisma kraken]

might make sense to normalize that at 45 or 90 instead of 60

[wind spade]

normalise to 1 = best

[oblique hollow]

most abstracted form of normalization

[prisma kraken]

i disagree, harder to see what the numbers really look like if you're dealing with .001 rod/min

[oblique hollow]

normalization should make all production values easy to view and understand

and should contextualize it

[wind spade]

I don't think there's a recipe with 0.001 rod/min

normalisation to 1 makes it easy to compare costs per item

[oblique hollow]

1/min Screw is not reasonable, not easily contextualized and not nice to look at

[prisma kraken]

i was just pulling something out of my rear

[wind spade]

1 or 10 then

[prisma kraken]

what would be somewhat useful is for recipes like copper rotor or default hmf/coputer, to list in a column steel beams/min

[wind spade]

though I'm not sure if we even need the normalisation given that the only thing you compare are recipes for one item, which is basically just the recipe table

[oblique hollow]

it should be on the level of reason that we apply to the coal generator ratio

i mean, we sorta settled on 3 to 8 for no reason other than "no clocking needed and its the smallest ratio"

We could just as well have said "screw ratios just clock all extractors to 75%"

[prisma kraken]

well, its also mk2 belt tech's limit

[oblique hollow]

so? get more miners and belts

we picked arbitrary limits but we adhere to it like a golden standard

so if we do that we should do the same for all builds, really

[wind spade]

it's just smallest integer ratio (at same clock speed)
it's not "build 3 X and 8 Y". it's "build them in 3:8 ratio"

if you build 4 gens and one extractor clocked at 150%, you build them in 3:8 ratio

[prisma kraken]

i'm pretty ambivalent to it being a rigid unwaivering standard, what i do think the wiki could do a better job of is helping you to figure out what recipes work well together

[oblique hollow]

then surely we can find some common smallest integer ratio for all recipes

[wind spade]

ratio of what? 🤔

I guess I'm a bit confused on what the original topic is

[prisma kraken]

stuff like 'if you clock an ai limiter assembler to 90%, you can direct belt in steamed sheet and fused qw'

[wind spade]

there's like infinity of these tho 🤔

[prisma kraken]

some aren't readily apparent

[oblique hollow]

so are the infinite sizes for the 3:8 coal gen ratio. 6:16 and so on

[wind spade]

no I mean, like infinity combination of recipes

[oblique hollow]

just pick one and see how well it goes

Didnt we say we wanted to kick the optimization the wiki does regarding resources out?

so like.... we use iron wire whenever we show something that uses wire

just kick all of those odd choices out of the wiki recipe showcase

[wind spade]

well we have two options:

• show all possible ways to make wire (not practical)
• just show amount of wire (not ideal)

but in the second option, the player can then go to wire and check what is happening there

[ashen stirrup]

It's very nice that solid steel ingots makes a foundry output the same as 1x beam constructor input or 0.5x pipe constructor input

I about cried with joy when I realized this factory wouldn't actually require any wacky manifold stuff to get ingots to beams

[vapid gorge]

'wacky manifolds'?

the simplest and most direct way to get items between machines?

[ashen stirrup]

I'm limited to mk3 belts, so I thought I would need to inject some of the foundries into the manifold at different points to have the manifold handle the 348 ingots for beams

Don't get me wrong, I love a good manifold. I just didn't want to have to try to figure out at which point I needed to inject the other foundries

[vapid gorge]

dont do injections then

No real point - if you have to do an injection manifold with 1 injection you might as well jsut do 2 independent manifolds

2 injections? just make 3 manifolds

the only possible mechanical benefit is occasionally you might be able to build a 1 or 2 fewer machines

[ashen stirrup]

There'd still need to be some balancing between the two, since it doesn't work out nicely to assign an integer number of foundries to any number of constructors

[vapid gorge]

why? merge the number of ingots from the production end into groups

you can have a ton of control by selective merging items from the output

say you're making 600 ingots pm and have mk3 belts - you could just have 3 manifolds of 200 and group the ingot producers in the right amounts

[ashen stirrup]

This takes up rather little space as well

[ashen stirrup]

Here it comes down to the building 1 or 2 fewer machines, and that the math worked out perfectly for 5 of the 7 foundries to feed directly into beam constructors

The foundry input is manifolded, and the beam constructor output is manifolded, so it'll balance itself if something happens

[vapid gorge]

I mean you can always do that if you clock the machines if you want 1:1 feeds

play around with selective merging and clocking, you can get some very smooth set ups going

[ashen stirrup]

I'll definitely have to do that

[wind spade]

Any injected manifold can be replaced by multiple manifolds.

Merge things to belts until you're close to cap, calculate how many machines to consume from each belt, clock to match decimals, build, done

[true junco]

Yeah. I was organizing manifolds into arrays a while ago. Came up a lot when some production lines were thruput limited on some inputs but not all. So the materials that were the least belt capacity limited ended up being a "manifold of manifolds" which j was referring to as an "array" And then the other inputs were seperate manifolds fed from seperate production lines.

[stoic gorge]

if I reboot my pc i need to create a backup of my worlds or they will be saved by steam?

[snow dove]

they are saved in your files and in the steam cloud

don’t rely on the steam cloud tho

[lethal ice]

I was thinking of pulling all the resources in from my starting area into one factory.

I want this factory to make Iron rods, plates, screws, reinforced plates, rotors, Modular frames, wire, cable, copper sheets. (I guess concrete too)

I was thinking, I would have a line for each listed above, but then once a line became full, I would reroute items (smart splitter) to craft others. So if rods and screws storages were full, they would reroute to make rotors.

Before I go any further, any thoughts?

NGL, I start to sweat when greeny spends this long typing

[wind spade]

first of all, Satisfactory is a sandbox and as such, there's no "wrong" way to play the game.

that being out of the way, the following is my opinion based reasoning and should not in any way be considered "correct", just me explaining how I feel about the game and what do I recommend.

For the "pull all resources to one place" - I don't really like doing that. The game seems to be heavily designed around putting factories all over the map (and is recommended by both dev team and ADA to play like that, as well as generally having better performance when factories are separate over the map). So I'd rather go item by item, figure out what it needs and find a nice place to build it. You can obviously still make multiple items in one place, but rather than bringing resources to a single place and then trying to use them, do the reverse - first figure out what you need, then find a place for it and then build it.

For the "once line became full" - not a big fan of this. If you have a factory that relies on overflow of different factory, that means there's no guarantee that it will ever run (or that it will run when you need it). I'd rather just connect every factory to enough raw resources to run them at 100% and if you want them to never stop (many people don't want their factories to stop), you can overflow resources to sink.

And finally, my recommendation is to not connect factories to each other, meaning e.g. if I you want to make reinforced plates, you make them out of raw ores. If a next factory needs reinforced plates, you make them again from raw ores in that factory. This makes every production separate, which means you can easily rebuild one if you want to rebuild it, troubleshooting becomes easier and your factories don't depend on other factories (so you don't end up with that cycle of "I need more modular frames so I need to upgrade modular frame factory, which will need more reinforced plate factory, which means I have to upgrade reinforced plate factory, which means I need more screws, but there's not much more iron so I have to ...)

hope this is useful 🙂

[ornate echo]

for 200 cables a minute i need 420 (roughly rounded up) wires per minute, right?

[wind spade]

depends on recipe 🙂

[ornate echo]

the normal one

[wind spade]

that needs 2 wire for each one cable

[lethal ice]

I understand, just to be clear, I was thinking the "overflows" would be extra. There would still be a dedicated line for rotors, but if screws and rods became full, it would just make even more rotors.

Eventually If an item couldn't be rerouted to make something useful (totally extra, different from dedicated lines) I would just dump it into the awesome sink.

Does that train of thought make sense? (also we're talking from a very small area of the map with like 9 iron nodes, I'm not pulling from an entire section of the map)

[wind spade]

so unless you rounded 400 to 420 somehow, then no 🙂

[ornate echo]

so i need 400 wires a minute, so about how many there

[ornate echo]

rounded the 6,67 to 7

[wind spade]

what is 6.67? 🤔

[ornate echo]

200 cables trough 30 per minute is 6,67, therefore i need 7 machines making cables, 7 times 60 wires is 420

[wind spade]

I completely understand what you mean with the overflow

but it still means that the factory doesn't run all the time, so for me that's wasted potential. the only real reason I could see why would you do that is to increase your sink point production (if both screws and rods are being sinked, rather make something that has more value), but if you're at the point that you need the sink points so much, I'd rather make a proper production of something straight to sink (e.g. project parts often give a lot of sink points).

and as a separate point - screws are usually not needed to be made, as you need very limited amount of them to progress and then they are not used for anything other than awesome shop (which you usually build just once) and some equipment (which you usually build just once)

[wind spade]

so either you need 420 wire but making 210 cable
or you clock the machine to 66.6667% and you need 400 wire for 200 cable

you can't have 420 wire into 200 cable

[lethal ice]

I guess that's my biggest unknown, I don't know how many basic items I need (screws, rods, wire)

[heady vine]

why would i need that?

[ornate echo]

well i need enough to make 200 cables a minute, i dont wanna play around with clocking to much because that messes up my math

[wind spade]

with the approach I suggested (make all items from raw ores), you usually just make a small amount (30-60 for early items, 10-30 for later items) per minute for storage, because you never need that production to connect to anything else

and for most cases, my answer to "how much I'll need in the future" is "don't care about future, build what you need now, you can always add more later"

[heady vine]

oh wow only now i realised that water tower is a tick to not use pumps lol

[wind spade]

some weird setups, not recommend doing that tbh

[heady vine]

but that raises question even more: why need a water tower that allows backflow during blackouts?

[lethal ice]

Yeah I think I agree more with you, but now I have this giant building I don't know what to do with lol

[wind spade]

I mean you can just keep it and let it run and produce whatever it is making 🤷‍♂️

[lethal ice]

It's empty 😦

[wind spade]

(or you can completely ignore everything I said and play in any way you want 😛 )

[lethal ice]

No, I agree with your train of thought more

[wind spade]

eh, I personally build the buildings after the factory is finished 🙂 you can never plan for the exact space anyway

[ornate echo]

so how much wire do i actually need for it to be constant

[wind spade]

that depends on how much cable you need

[ornate echo]

200

[wind spade]

but yeah if it's already built, you can just keep it and then fill it with factory later when you figure out what to build there (with resources that are either nearby or transported here)

[wind spade]

then you need 400 wire

[ornate echo]

and whats a fluid way to make that please? im messed with math

[wind spade]

you build machines that have total of 666.6667% clock speed

so e.g. 6x100% + 1x66.6667%

or 2x250% + 1x166.6667%

[ornate echo]

how many iron bars will i need for that

[wind spade]

I could tell you that but I'd rather just teach you how to get that info yourself

look in codex on the wire recipe you want to use

[ornate echo]

wait no i need 14 machinees

[wind spade]

it has an output (e.g. if you're talking about iron wire, it outputs 9 wire)
it has an input (iron wire has 5 ingots)

so 5 ingots get converted to 9 wire
then you just do the math on how many ingots you need for 400 wire

[wind spade]

for what?

[ornate echo]

6,7 x 60 cables a minute

makes 400

[wind spade]

you said you want 200

[ornate echo]

i need 13,5 machines making wire

[wind spade]

which recipe are you using?

[ornate echo]

normal

[lethal ice]

So my follow up questions, Where could I learn more about building clean/compact, logistic designs for transporting items throughout the factory.

[wind spade]

well, you need 13.333

[ornate echo]

13,5 easy im set on it

[wind spade]

not sure I understand this? items are usually made in front of next step that needs them

[wind spade]

either you want exact math, or you want to just roughly get it, but then don't ask in #math-and-meta , because we're bunch of nerds here 😄

[lethal ice]

hmm It's hard to explain what I'm asking... I'll try again once I have a screen shot asking for advice.

[ornate echo]

so i need 202,5 coper ingots a minute

[ornate echo]

i do the math, 13,5 is just easier than to set it, im wasting maybe 2 out oof 200 ingots with that

[wind spade]

if you're setting the clock speed anyway, why not just do it exactly?

[ornate echo]

i do set it, so if i do it correctly it actually scales to just 200 ingots a minute?

[wind spade]

yes, if you set it to exact numbers, you'll get exact production

[ornate echo]

good so i need about 6,7 smelters aswell

okay i can work with that

[wind spade]

yeah I already said that here ^ 🙂

[ornate echo]

so i need cooper now

dammit

[ornate echo]

i convert 180 ore into 180 ingots wich i convert into 12 constructors to make 360 wires per minute, wich i feed into into 6 constrcutors to make 180 cables per minute, is that right?

i need that confirmed please i did my math

[wind spade]

codex can confirm it 🙂

or you can use some online tools

[leaden depot]

According to all my calculations, I have a train station that is getting 720/min throughput. Nothing is backed up, and everything is running 100% after wuite a while, so I'm pretty sure its accurate.

But the station still says "718" after a long while waiting for it

is it ever going to show the full 720?

[deft lichen]

did you account for the lockout that happens during docking?

items stop flowing for 27.08 s