math-and-meta

[willow harbor]

but that seemingly isnt the case

[quaint condor]

That's fair. That's the part I genuinely love the most. I am loving the recent bridge posts in #screenshots and some on reddit, they are awesome.

[willow harbor]

the other part

[quaint condor]

The iron plate seem backed up?

[willow harbor]

its 60 plates per min on a mk1 belt

[quaint condor]

What's the assemblers say?

Efficiency wise.

[willow harbor]

well...

it seems to have fixed itself

It appears I was impatient

[prisma kraken]

is your plate line backing up and causing the middle plate constructor to pause?

[willow harbor]

No its running 60 plates a minute on a mark one belt

[quaint condor]

Or I was going to ask if that lift the screws are going into was a mk1

[willow harbor]

YAY! This is the first 100% efficient setup I have ever made myself 😄

[quaint condor]

But yeah, it can take a bit for machine numbers to average out.

[prisma kraken]

sometimes full output buffers can cause machines to stutter

[willow harbor]

no the last three lifts are mk 2

[quaint condor]

Oooh, should check how that BP is still running ... it's been a few 😏

[willow harbor]

I think what was happening is the machines were losing that efficiency on startup and just needed 15-20 minutes to recalc the average to 100%

Thank you for helping me regardless

[quaint condor]

Sweeet, I think I am confident enough with this design to see what happens with the rest of them.

Though, it's going to be a bit annying with the 1.1 lift/floorhole bug or whatever

[willow harbor]

Is there like a "common practice" way of load balancing conveyor belts? Here is my method of combining a 120 belt with a 60 belt for two 90 belts but it seems clunky.

dont mean to spam im just new to the game

[vapid gorge]

unless you do some serious planning and clocking to manipulate things that just tends to be load balancing

one of the reasons people do manifolds almost entirely.

it can get wild trying to do it for multiple steps

[willow harbor]

Ahh, makes sense. I foresee my chase for 100% efficiency in all things to die here soon lol

[vapid gorge]

manifolds are 100% efficient

[willow harbor]

assuming you have a belt with a high enough capacity right?

[vapid gorge]

yeah but that's a requirement for all belt systems

manifolds + clocking = trivially easy perfect systems

[willow harbor]

That's how I was doing it in my first world, started another now that I kind of know what I am doing.

Want to progress smoothly the whole way through so far after four hours I am where I was around hour 75 lol.

[vapid gorge]

if you like load balancers go for it, but it's purely aesthetic.

the sole mechanical benefit you could have with LBs is with radioactive materials to make an area somewhat less radioactive

however you'll still need a suit and filters anyway and it's a non issue automating them so personally I don't see much of a point

[slate pagoda]

On the first one my numbers are wrong? Sorry for language barrier

[prisma kraken]

from a brief look at your table, it seems like your power yields are very low for what can be built. depending on how you do nuclear, you can get well above 1tw of power from it

[slate pagoda]

Which I am on both, no?

[prisma kraken]

i don't understand, sorry

[slate pagoda]

Both my tables show power iutouts "well above" 1tw

[vapid gorge]

I think what they mean is that there are other recipes available that can change your numbers

for example you can use SAM ore to create more uranium and you'll have more waste

[slate pagoda]

Ye ofc

[vapid gorge]

cool 🙂

a variable is other factors that can alter a situation

in case it wasn't making through the language barrier

[prisma kraken]

perhaps i wasn't reading it correctly, sorry

[slate pagoda]

No i didnt know discounting could mean that soneone is doing math wrong. At least thats how I understood it in that context. Im just used to the nornal defenition of subtraction

[prisma kraken]

i meant not taking into account things like slooping ficsonium production

[slate pagoda]

Oh yeah, i wasnt that far in practice, like I said in the conversation of that thread, i was wrong about my premisses and I havent fully thought the thing through

But thanks for the tip ill think about sloops when i get there👍

[willow harbor]

Hi again! Why is my assembler going idle for a couple seconds after every completed assembly?

It is causing things to back up 😦

[frosty owl]

One of the inputs is not coming fast enough.
You can infer which even just from the picture you sent, but looking at the UI for a whole production cycle (while the issue shows) should make it obvious.
If not, do feel free to ask for more details, I'm just trying to push you in the right direction rather than spoonfeeding you ^^

[willow harbor]

So I thought that could be an issue and to test it I filled both the screws and rods sides and it still paused for around 4 seconds after completing

[crimson moat]

If it starts to pause at all, it will pause for those 4 secs. If you have materials loaded for multiple build cycles though (before the first cycle finishes), that pause shouldn't happen

[frosty owl]

To be perfectly clear, there's 3 reasons a machine may go idle:

1. Lack of input (one input inventory has less items than needed for the production cycle)
2. Output inventory can't fit more items
3. Hoverpack bug

[willow harbor]

Well, its none of those three. So that means I fucked something up earlier in the machines

Time to go hunting!

[crimson moat]

That would still mean that it's #1

[willow harbor]

thats a solid point lmao, im a little sleepy

[frosty owl]

As Aeryn said: an issue in prior productions should translate to an issue with the machine's input. Ie: point (1)

[quaint condor]

My first thought is to check screw production

[frosty owl]

If none of the three applies, you may have encountered a never-before-seen bug...
Unlikely, but I like to list all possibilities 🤷‍♂️

[quaint condor]

Thorough at least 😏

[opaque quartz]

What belt speeds are feeding this machine?

[opaque quartz]

planning a new post-game project: ballistic warp drive factory for sink points. targeting 4/min which will be slooped to 8/min
having to make a dang spreadsheet for this, lol

[plucky tusk]

Sounds fun

[unique cypress]

you don't have to make a spreadsheet

[slate pagoda]

Whats your biggest bottleneck so far?

[opaque quartz]

still working my way backwards from the end product - I have enough sloops for the TPRs (so I only have to make 2/min instead of 4), singularity cells (10 instead of 20), and pasta (0.5 instead of 1)

going to look at using some alts I haven't used before, such as turbo pressure motor and heat fused frames

[slate pagoda]

Heat fused frames is something ill look into once I run out of aluminum, so lemme know how that goes

[opaque quartz]

I'm planning on using the SW coast spot that has 3 pure iron, 1 pure copper, and 2 pure limestone, and using train/drone to bring in other raw resources

haven't yet determined if this will be my chance to try out the quartz purification chain

[slate pagoda]

You going for the silica recipie?

[opaque quartz]

I like the silicon alts for HSC and circuit boards. Don’t know if I’ll use them here

I have to work out what raw resources I could cut out completely. quartz is unavoidable anyways

[unique cypress]

without conversion, you can only get rid of Caterium, Coal, SAM and Sulfur.

and Uranium obviously lol

[slate pagoda]

What do you guys think about the compacted steel recipie? Im not using any sulfur for fuel, just for uranium, and have that suplly covered. Hence I feel like using all the other sulfur loosely.

[unique cypress]

it makes 10/min/foundry...

[slate pagoda]

Ye

[unique cypress]

it's painfully slow

[wind spade]

you just build more machines 🤷

[slate pagoda]

God that looks awfull, as in ingame but also as in picture wise. Im sorry guys😭😭

At least that way ill always find my steel factory

Guess ill build 306 more foundries

[opaque quartz]

I’m using it to make some steel for SAM fluctuators w the compacted coal byproduct from my ionized fuel production. A niche use

Since compacted coal is a byproduct in rocket and ionized fuel production you might as well use it for something useful instead of sinking it. my other use is fine black powder for munitions

[vague ibex]

I just realized something. Satisfactory has a somewhat realistic model for fluid physics, so does that mean hard bends in a pipe reduce flow rate? Bends like this

[crimson moat]

No. They take into account the size of the pipe (m3), the % full, and some other vars that i don't fully understand

but bending like this, as far as i know, has no meaningful difference in flow

i say meaningful because like, compared to a straight pipe, this one may be like 6m3 instead of 5m3 and that changes flow slightly, technically, but not in a way that really does anything good or bad

[vague ibex]

Thanks

[prisma kraken]

no, there's no concept of turbulence in the pipes. each section of pipe is essentially just a discrete container with a volume based on its length in terms of what is simulated

i'm somewhat amazed at how the simplified simulation does actually model some real life behavior, but it only goes so far

[vapid gorge]

@faint lagoon if you just want 3 pipes of 60 fuel pm just make 3x packager > refinery > unpackager , and then don't merge them. Each unpackager can easily do 60pm and you can just overclock the refinery a bit to put out 60

why do you need to split it in 3x 60 anyway?

[faint lagoon]

I want 3 merged outputs of fuel to feed 8 refineries for turbofuel

so 12 loops feeds 32 refineries in total

[vapid gorge]

?

top down view, red is packager , black refs

[faint lagoon]

I'm just trying to space it out nicely so getting the hor and water into the loop isn't a massive headache.

[vapid gorge]

Ok? Sorry your description of what you need and end result is very confusing

like there's obviously a ton of info in your brain you know that would give context to all this

[faint lagoon]

I think I figured it out, your stacking idea works quite well actually 😄

[amber igloo]

ive worked out this factory that i can make in earlygame, but id like to ask, how do i properly use splitters to make these specific amounts of iron going to different machines

[deft lichen]

are you using the "maximize" option?

[amber igloo]

yep

[deft lichen]

those are pretty ugly numbers

[wind spade]

don't 🙂

just use items/min

[deft lichen]

maximize doesn't really work well if you use it on more than 1 product

[amber igloo]

noted

[wind spade]

it works "well" - it doesn't break or anything

but it makes same amount of each, which probably isn't what you want

e.g. you probably don't need as many screws (or any), but you could get more RIPs and plates

[wind spade]

also for your original question, there's several ways, one I'd recommend the most is to make separate groups of machines and clock the groups so that they make the amounts you need, so you never have to "split" it

[deft lichen]

https://www.satisfactorytools.com/1.0/production?share=WG0xbOY506aUe1gmhiXO compare with this

much cleaner numbers to work with

and yes, you never have to deal with equal/ratio splits

[amber igloo]

that happened to be the exact numbers i just changed things to

how lucky

[wind spade]

but the advice I've given above always applies, even if you have nicer numbers, it's much easier to have it separate from the start, than to merge it and then think how to split it later

[deft lichen]

as for screws, produce them directly and separately for each machine that uses them

you need 1.5 screw constructors per 1 RIP assembler

my approach would probably be to build 3 constructors, split one in half to merge with the other 2 and send that to 2 assemblers

[wind spade]

you can also clock the constructors or assemblers to make it 1:1

or use a different recipe(s) for different ratios

[slate pagoda]

Dead chat😭 how about we discuss how bad ficsonium is again

[open patrol]

Or how goated Encased Pipes are

Encased pipe my beloved

[slate pagoda]

Why do you love encased pipe?

[slate pagoda]

Im working on pipes rn so before i build bs pls enlighten me

[open patrol]

Encased Pipes is an alt to the Encased Industrial Beam main recipe. It greatly shaves down coal usage (by reducing steel needs) at the cost of slower production speeds per machine (which isnt horrible)

Also allows coal free Industrial Beam production via the Iron Pipe alt (simpler than using steel ingots for pipes but trades off a huge increase in base iron)

take for example @slate pagoda

this is the base recipe, utilizes 1200/min of coal, iron, and 1800/min of limestone for 100/min pipes

the alt recipe encased pipe on the other hand

900/min iron+coal and 1500/min limestone for the same quantity of pipes

[wind spade]

it isn't tho

[open patrol]

a beautiful sight to behold.

[slate pagoda]

Oh you said encased pipes i thought you meant steel pipes

[open patrol]

when none of my homies got me, i know that encased industrial pipes got me.

i might be excessively glazing encased pipes

[unique cypress]

it is tho

[slate pagoda]

But by prioritizing ficsonium production over uranium you lose ~120000mw

[wind spade]

depends on recipes

[unique cypress]

you should glaze heavy encased frame. that one deserves it the most lol

[open patrol]

encased frame and encased pipes. truly made for each other

my last playthrough, i had me a pretty nice encased frame setup. too bad it was iron pipe alt, which in hindsight was kinda cringe.

[slate pagoda]

Show me your work pls so i can understand what your used recipies are🤙
I calculated 1.26tw with plutonium proritized over uranium, uranium yields 1.47tw.
2100 input ofc

[open patrol]

i do unfortunately have the refinery influenza where i just spam refineries for almost all my ingot needs.

[wind spade]

that assumes some things (e.g. you're trying to convert all uranium into power)

ficsonium has use-cases and is good in scenarios, obviously if you define a single scenario where uranium shines, ficsonium won't be "best" in that scenario

e.g. you can use resource inefficient plut recipes to reduce SAM cost of ficsonium

[slate pagoda]

Hmmm

[wind spade]

all depends on your goals

[open patrol]

yuh

and heck, some people eschew nuke of all flavors for simple gas guzzling rokit fuel power

we love me some pollution, and oil too!.

[slate pagoda]

Well the only use case is power generation. And I believe that since its further down the line of complexity, the power yield of ficsonium should be prioritized over uranium power (from a game balancing standpoint).
But I feel like the numbers dont reflect the complexity.

[wind spade]

usecase of ficsonium is wasteless plutonium power

[slate pagoda]

Prioritizing plutonium over uranium still doesnt make up for the power lost in uranium fuel rods. So prioritizing plutonium over uranium is also doodoo

[unique cypress]

and what's the usecase for wasteless plutonium?

[wind spade]

wasteless power generation without sinking

[unique cypress]

and why would I care about not sinking?

[wind spade]

you? idk
some people? have their reasons

[slate pagoda]

This thread isnt about wasteless grneration.
Its about the fact that the most complexity doesnt give you the most power.

[wind spade]

well, nothing says it should

[slate pagoda]

Shouldnt, in a game like satisfacotory, more work be rewarded?

You alwqys do the extra work because the game rewards you for it, thats the whole point no?

[wind spade]

well again, for some people the reward is "clean wasteless sink-less power"

[unique cypress]

that's rocket fuel too lol

[wind spade]

everything in this game is an option and you're free to use whatever

[wind spade]

sure

[slate pagoda]

Yes I know but its about the balancing not about sinking stuff

Its wasteless either way but the easier wasteless way gives you more power

[wind spade]

not sinkless

[slate pagoda]

Ye you know what i mean wasteless whatever

[unique cypress]

I'm of the opinion that if something is unlocked later, then it should be better at least in some way than everything else unlocked earlier that can achieve the same thing

because if it's worse in every way, then why tf would it exist

for power generation, ionized fuel and ficsonium are both worse than rocket fuel and uranium, which are unlocked 1 phase earlier

[wind spade]

it can do something that no process before can 🤷

[slate pagoda]

Hmmm

[wind spade]

whether or not is that something you like is up to you

[unique cypress]

what, suck as a power source? truly, no other process before does that

[wind spade]

make wasteless sinkless power from uranium

[slate pagoda]

So your point is that even though its complex af and that the power generation is ass, the complexity justifies wasteless power nit just power?

[wind spade]

it's primary purpose isn't to be "better power source" so yea

[unique cypress]

that's what it is right now. but do you not think it should be cheaper? and actually be viable source of power in general, not just in this very specific example that 99% of people don't care about

[late hedge]

can train sustain 1-1 ?

[wind spade]

no, I don't feel that way

[late hedge]

need to move plastic and rubber to my factory

[wind spade]

I think there's much worse balance issues than ficsonium

[late hedge]

can it maintain 120 produced and 120 consumed with no downtime? or will there be delays in the middle

[wind spade]

depeneds how the route is set, but if set correctly, what you put in on one side, you'll get on another side

[slate pagoda]

Eg?

[wind spade]

DF, HEF, ...

[slate pagoda]

greeny is a HEF hater????😭😭😭😭

[wind spade]

no, I think the recipe should be tweaked

[slate pagoda]

Up or down? Do you believe its too broken?

[wind spade]

down

[slate pagoda]

Im happy so its balanced🤪🤙

[unique cypress]

default HMF should probably be cheaper instead. there's a much bigger gap between def HMF and HEF than Flexible and HEF

[slate pagoda]

Whats DF?

[unique cypress]

diluted fuel

[slate pagoda]

Oh ok

[unique cypress]

it's tier 7 so i'd say it's fine if it's better than DPF from tier 5

[wind spade]

99% of things in the game are not "better", but "alternative"

idk why DF needs to stand out

[slate pagoda]

Yeah ig. I mean we've had the discussion about WP and what not.

[wind spade]

WP is just one metric. Obviously there are things that are "better" in terms of WP, but those in 99% of cases have tradeoffs that make it at least in some way more effort or more costly

and yeah, if you only care about WP, you won't see those tradeoffs as relevant

[slate pagoda]

At early to mid game I also chose recipies by what was available so i understand when mist people do the same. End game really just becomes a spresheet/WP optimization sim.

Or cool builds, but im lazy lol

[wind spade]

I feel that it's just one group of players that does that

[slate pagoda]

Spectrum members where?🫡🫡🫡🫡

@unique cypress is one too for sure

[merry kernel]

DF isn't -strictly- better than DPF, note. It's simpler, though, and in most cases this will win out.

[unique cypress]

I am literally making a mod to trying to make ficsonium balanced and have spend an ungodly amount of time looking at Satisfactory Optimizer's output comparing different recipes

[merry kernel]

For example, if you're going to sloop one of the two recipes, sloop DPF, since it consumes fewer sloops per fuel unit generated, and also you get free packaging.

[slate pagoda]

Whats your diagnosis? Mine is just regular autism🤕

[unique cypress]

officially Asperger's, ADD and anxiety I think?

[wind spade]

in which property it isn't better?

[slate pagoda]

Sick

Except for anxiety thats not so cool

[merry kernel]

The power consumption slightly favors the blender after packaging and unpackaging, but only if water is available where you're producing it without pumping; if you need to pump the water, depending on the scale of operations, packaging + conveyer lifts may be cheaper.

At which point the balance shifts in favor of HPF

[wind spade]

eh, I don't think that argument "I'll build it in a bad place so that I need a lot of pumps and DPF is better" is a valid one

[merry kernel]

Also slooping favors HPF

DPF*

[unique cypress]

and i don't think "sinkless wasteless power" is a good argument for ficsonium either lmao

[wind spade]

sure 🤷

slooping is a fair argument I guess

[merry kernel]

I'd favor the blender just because they tile better, mind. Refineries are too tall.

[late hedge]

why are these alts even a thing

[wind spade]

why not?

[merry kernel]

Those are the best recipes for making plastic and rubber. Especially once you have diluted fuel.

[wind spade]

(for clarity: "best" means "most product out of oil, in combination with other alts")

[merry kernel]

Also the fastest

[wind spade]

there's a difference between "somebody may care about this property" and "I'm gonna intentionally build in a non-optimal way in regards to this property, so that I skew the results in favor of the other recipe"

[oblique hollow]

Maxed out nuclear with maxed out ficsonium is their issue

They wanna be able to max it out with ficsonium because otherwise its pointless

[wind spade]

like, I could build everything clocked at 250% with one recipe and everything clocked at 1% with second recipe, and say that second recipe is much more power efficient

[oblique hollow]

I do think the main argument for ficsinkum IS wasteless plutonium. Sinkung the plutonium rods feels wasteful.

Ficsonium "should" be the answer to that.

How good it is at being this answer is the main problem many seem to have. "Its too costly to be a solution"

[merry kernel]

It's not about intentionally building non-optimally, so much as lots of players build heavily vertically, and this can situationally change the optimal recipe.

[wind spade]

sure, but I don't feel like that's something that should be included in comparisons, similar to how you don't include "what if I want to clock it this way"

[merry kernel]

If we exclude logistics from the equation, then we should exclude the power cost of packaging and unpackaging, though.

[opaque quartz]

make sure to buffer your train platforms on both sides. an industrial container connected to the platform w/ two belts. this compensates for the ~30 seconds the platform does not move materials during the load/unload sequence

[wind spade]

packaging and unpackaging in case of DPF aren't due to logistics, but due to the recipe requiring packaged thing 🤷 they are part of what any planner will tell you

[opaque quartz]

the recycled plastic/rubber loop is great. one of the more fun production chains in the game (and highest yield for plubber per oil)

I'm building another recycled plubber setup right now, in fact

[wind spade]

you're not required to build vertically, but you're required to provide packaged water in case you use DPF

I'm not saying it's a point that should be ignored, but I don't feel like argument "the recipe isn't always worse in terms of power" should include logistics added by choice

[oblique hollow]

Packaging in DPF is not a choice

Its a requirement

[wind spade]

yeah

[oblique hollow]

Required machines and recipes are to be considered in the math

[opaque quartz]

it's even right there in the name!

[merry kernel]

Everything should be considered in the math

[wind spade]

that depends if you're comparing two recipe paths to a product, or two actual builds

in 99% of cases, we're here talking about recipe paths

[merry kernel]

The recipe doesn't exist until it is substantiated in a build

[oblique hollow]

The heck is that supposed to mean

[wind spade]

but the build is variable enough to be pointless to include in math-based conversations

"recycled plastic and rubber suck because I chose to move everything by trains and they eat tons of power"

[merry kernel]

It isn't pointless if you're actually building it, it's only pointless when discussing the pure abstractions

[wind spade]

if you're comparing "I've built this thing" vs "this person built this thing", sure. But we don't usually do that here. We practically compare outputs of planner(s)

[oblique hollow]

Its simple:
Not in Tier 7 yet? Pick DPF

In Tier 7? Continue using it or find a hard drive with DF

[late hedge]

why is it even this complicated to produce 40 rubber 30 plastics

[oblique hollow]

Thats what you get for using recylcing recipes

[wind spade]

because you chose to use the most resource-optimal recipes

[oblique hollow]

Want simple ? Use default recipes

[unique cypress]

and then you pay 4.5 times more oil

but it's a choice you're certainly allowed to make

[oblique hollow]

Duh. Go with simple and expensive or complicated and resource efficient

Im not about to max out any node ever so i know that i wont go for max resource efficiency builds unless i feel like it

[late hedge]

ok so with 40 plastic 40 rubber produced is it possible to combine them in one belt perfectly

one after the other

[slate pagoda]

Wdym? Iguess you can merge bouth outputs but why would you wanna do that?

[late hedge]

to put into train

yk what

i'll just smart splitter and sink it

[slate pagoda]

Ive made the experience that merging different resources is alwqys a bad idea because the splitter will block the resources if the one of them runs full. Just build two belts and two freight platforms

[wind spade]

Just put them in twobseparate cars

[wind spade]

It's not always a bad idea, just requires some knowledge and extra care. Simpler builds are usually more recommended because it's harder to break them and that's what counts for new players. Advanced players will do whatever they want 🙂

[quaint condor]

Ooof, didn't realize the gif shows up here, would've been fine with the link lol.

doesn't consiider himself advanced iin any way either, just wanted to poke a bit of fun

[harsh mason]

whoops! Noticed one of my quartz supply trains wasn't being fully unloaded at the quartz processing plant. Traced the problem all the way through everything to discover I hadn't overclocked the nitrogen well, so the whole thing was running at about 40%

[vapid gorge]

cause the yare really good?

[frozen willow]

Just completed phase 4... tempted to like nuke everything and rebuild to enable success for phase 5...

[carmine salmon]

Also use your existing base to build your new one. Only tare it down once you are producing items for buildings somewhere else.

[frozen willow]

Thats a good idea. So with that strategy, should upgrade power first.

End game seems to require nuclear?

[vapid gorge]

You can manage on diluted fuel pretty easy, but nuclear is fun

I wouldn’t bother tearing everything down though. Decide after you finished the tiers

[prisma kraken]

i'd generally say that if you're not going crazy, making 100-200gw of power is comfy for phase 5. that's a bit more than you'd be able to easily make with dilluted fuel or turbofuel alone. both rocket fuel and nuclear are a magnitude more power than what the older fuel power tech provides, and they'll get you to that comfort point

i'll also note that ion fuel doesn't provide the same magnitude of gain as rocket fuel does, and as such, the power cost of making it doesn't really justify its use unless you are both utilizing the compacted coal byproduct for power and/or using it to make dark matter crystal

[merry kernel]

Or if you're using somersloops

[prisma kraken]

quick fact: you cannot sloop ion fuel production. it doubles the cycle yield from 16 m3/cycle to 32m3/cycle and the output buffer for the refinery is only 50m3. if you sloop it, the machine pauses until the buffer drops to 18

[merry kernel]

I'm wildly aware. It makes calculations very annoying

[prisma kraken]

in theory you could sloop dark ion fuel, but that recipe sucks ass

[merry kernel]

You can still sloop it, it just doesn't run at full efficiency

[prisma kraken]

yeah, but if you can't predict the uptime for a machine, it makes it rather difficult to generate stable power

[merry kernel]

I just overproduce it, package a bunch for my drone network, and some gets sinked

[prisma kraken]

i guess that works if you aren't counting on the stable prod rate

[merry kernel]

Since it fuels my drone network as well I can't really rely on stable consumption rates anyways

At least until I convert all that over to using plutonium rods, but that's future me's problem to deal with

[prisma kraken]

yeah, how are you finding it as drone fuel compared to other types?

[merry kernel]

I don't notice much of a difference from rocket fuel except the consumption rate is slower

Rocket fuel I did notice a difference from regular fuel, but probably it would have been less noticeable if I hadn't skipped turbofuel as an intermediate fuel

[prisma kraken]

i did some testing of long trips with it and didn't really see a compelling difference to use it

my limited use of drones so far is just running off of yellow fuel

[merry kernel]

Mostly I started using it because it meant I didn't have to ship sulfur to my fuel facilities

I did need to transport quartz crystals, but those were being produced near my drone hub anyways, so that was quick

[prisma kraken]

i ran a test with ion fuel from paradise island to dune desert to see the max/trip consumption which appears to cap out at 11/trip

[merry kernel]

Yeah, unfortunately due to poor planning on my part I use my fuel delivery to deliver stuff back to the fuel depot from the drone hub, so until I fix that I think more gets sinked than consumed, lol

[prisma kraken]

i'd like to do some more testing of it all with shorter distances and see whether it changes calculus on the number of ports needed for moving ores and ingots (which for batteries or comparable fuel is 3 ports for 600/min)

[merry kernel]

The consumption rate is negligible

The speed compared to batteries is ~18% faster, I don't know if that affects the docking time though

[prisma kraken]

it took me a while to figure out the math on it all, mostly because the in-game stats are sometimes misleading and sometimes wrong. What i realized is the most important variable is the frequency with which a drone needs to make a trip

[merry kernel]

It took me a while to realize the drones only transport 9 stacks per trip. I ignored drones entirely for a long time and only started playing with them in my 1.1/experimental save, so it's been a learning experience

[prisma kraken]

what peaves me is that the fuel/trip number on the drone port is sometimes incorrect

[merry kernel]

lol, that's great. Haven't observed that, but I wouldn't be able to the way I currently have it set up

[prisma kraken]

i thought i was mathing bad at one point until i fed the port from a crate with a known number of items in it

that's an area i need to experiment more with to see if there's any rhyme or reason to it

[merry kernel]

I did notice the drones will pick up fuel from -both- ports, up to whatever the game thinks is the cost of a round trip, which threw me for a while.

[prisma kraken]

yeah, never supply fuel at both sides

[slate pagoda]

Wait why? Does that make it consume double the fuel?

[merry kernel]

I don't think so, but it does make it hard to figure out your logistics properly

[prisma kraken]

it sometimes does. been a bug with the game for quite some time

[slate pagoda]

Have you reported it?

[prisma kraken]

it has been reported, yes. many times over the past few years

[frosty owl]

Yeah, moonchild. When was the last time you reported something, huh? -.^
||Taunting tone||

[prisma kraken]

don't think i ever have. takes some time to set up a testbed for such things

[frosty owl]

Wow.

[slate pagoda]

[viral maple]

For blueprints of a big recycled plastic/rubber setup, do you guys prefer to pair rubber/plastic on the small scale (e.g. alternating refineries) or run tons of plastic machines that feed into all the rubber machines?

[frosty owl]

I tend to prefer blueprinting small but "complete" setups

[slate pagoda]

I just spammed refineries and balance the items below and the fluid above

[viral maple]

I started with the latter, but considering just changing my blueprint to 2+2 refineries that feed each other

[prisma kraken]

for this, i broke down a while ago and bp'd with the help of mods a 10x10 complete 300->900 loop

[slate pagoda]

And underclockin the first bit of refineries really helps cause you ll the be able to gradually overclock each refinery to match the previous output

[viral maple]

Thankfully the numbers align pretty well between the recipes!

[slate pagoda]

Yeah

[prisma kraken]

there's just more fun things to do than make the same oil build over & over

[viral maple]

Nice!

[prisma kraken]

those are making recycled plastic. the recycled rubber is very similar except you change 2 of the refineries making plastic over to making rubber and adjust the clock rates

maybe it is 4 refineries, i forget, lol

here's the numbers for plastic

and for rubber

[slate pagoda]

This would be incomplete i believe

[viral maple]

I do the same path, and working on the refinery floor of my skyscraper. Currently have one side making rubber and the other plastic, but realized it's much more elegant to combine

So building a BP right now with the 4 Refineries feeding into each other and only do the overflow out on the primary bus 😄

Time to replace that floor

Does mean I have to manually start each set with some "seed plastic" tho

[slate pagoda]

How much crude oil is feeding into this system? It should be 1/3 of the rubber output. Im jsut cobfused by the weird decimals

[prisma kraken]

most of the belting is done in a 4m subfloor

[prisma kraken]

for each of the tables i listed, 300 crude input and 900 rubber/plastic output

[slate pagoda]

Okeee🥳🤙

[prisma kraken]

how i belt it all for simplicity is use one smart splitter on the dominant output to prefer going to the recycling and overflow out of the loop

one thing i'll note about my design for it is that it needs mk5 belts since the intermediat product exceeds 480/min. if you only have mk4 belts, you have to do things in a different way

how the bp is structured is that 300 oil comes into 4 hor refineries, and then each 2 of them outputs a separate line to each half of the bp. from that point on, the two sides are independent working with 150 oil->200 hor -> 400 fuel

as such, you could make a version of it that does half plastic and half rubber

i beleve there is also a configuration that you can use that will kick out 225 rubber + 225 plastic per side, but not something i've ever built

[viral maple]

Ok, I've got this now.
Only 2 refineries at the time coupled and then just overflow down to a central bus. No big lines of intermediates, but have to manually kick-start each

[prisma kraken]

if you feed the residual rubber byproduct into the recycled rubber's output line, the system will start itself

[viral maple]

They do feed each other, but directly. I wanted to keep it simple. e.g. Refinery 1's input is only connected to the output of Refinery 2

Obviously could connect them all if I wanted

[prisma kraken]

yeah, i've built the loop in a lot of different ways over the past few years, after a lot of iterations, i think i've converged on something that is about as simple as it'll get

the other thing that is a design constraint for me is that i wish to minimize machines, size, belting and how many smart splitters are used

[viral maple]

Yeah, my design requires one smart splitter for each machine. Doing a big manifold that feeds off the main output should be fewer parts.

[prisma kraken]

so i got to drawing up a couple of possible layouts for a train station and the needed roundabout for it and looking at it, design A seems to be superior to B

the red arrow points to a set of tracks that would cross and be very problematic to get signals to do the right thing

[wind spade]

You can just move the exit track in B more to the right and they will be identical

[prisma kraken]

not quite. i'm not sure exactly how to mathematically describe it, but the dependency chain if signals are installed on how many trains the system can support concurrently is a bit different

i'm still trying to understand that

perhaps they're identical, idk

i believe that A is less prone to deadlocking, but its late and i'm having a tough time reasoning why

[wind spade]

You can also rotate stations 90 degrees and have single shared entry/exit point

[prisma kraken]

yeah, i have that design in some places where i need to support more stations

[wind spade]

But deadlocks shouldn't happen unless there's multiple trains coming to a single station

And that means your network and throughput is shit anyway xD

[prisma kraken]

it can still happen if the stations share a piece of egress track where they can stop upon and you don't have the signalling quite right

[wind spade]

Actually, not even then

[wind spade]

Well yeah I'm assuming correct signalling

[prisma kraken]

it can and does happen. trust me, lol

usually because a train is longer than a signalled section of track

[wind spade]

Then that seems like wrong signalling

Welll there you go 🙂

[prisma kraken]

yeah, tough to always get that correct

one thing i will say without hesitation is that if you leave the game running long enough, any problem you could possibly have happen will eventually happen

[wind spade]

Sure, but also if you build the system well enough, it won't break 🙂 (unless game bugs out)

[prisma kraken]

that's like saying write bugfree software, lol

its really difficult to get such things right without some sort of mathematical formalism

[wind spade]

Well what I mean you can build a proper system, it just can break if a new bug is discovered/introduced

And usually you do not consider possible future bugs in your designs 😉

As then you couldn't build anything 😄

[unique cypress]

I'd probably do this

[vapid gorge]

that seems far more clunky, you have all that space in the middle

[unique cypress]

deadlocks won't happen as long as you don't send more than one train to as station, or add a long enough waiting bay

[vapid gorge]

and why not this at least???

this is very weird

[unique cypress]

you can just bring the tracks closer together before/after the stations. the total width is the same as moonchild's design

[unique cypress]

bottom is the exit side. those red tracks do nothing

[slate pagoda]

Sf tools♥️

[unique cypress]

can't wait for tools 2.0

[slate pagoda]

Is greeny working on something??

[unique cypress]

yep

though no release date sadly

well, other than "probably this year"

[slate pagoda]

Sick

[unique cypress]

a tools rewrite from scratch

[slate pagoda]

What for?

[unique cypress]

to make it better

[slate pagoda]

Whats it lacking?

[unique cypress]

a lot of things, frankly

at least imo

mod (custom recipe) support, custom resource weights, maybe different optimization functions, maximize mode is a lil broken, a toggle for all resource conversion recipes, recipe toggle options on node hover

[slate pagoda]

Plausible

[unique cypress]

that's what I'm missing

tbf no other calculator has all of these so tools is still the best

but it def could be better

SF logistics comes close, but it's unusably laggy

[slate pagoda]

Im gonna have to ask here cause i cant load Savegame map thingies...
Which part of the map has the most copper

[fallow siren]

mod support is huge

[vapid gorge]

it's pretty much everywhere.
just look at teh SCIM map w/o a loaded save

[slate pagoda]

Ty

[unique cypress]

and there's SF optimizer, but it's text based

calculation-wise it's the best

but absolutely sucks to use lol

[vapid gorge]

how is it 'best' in calculations? it either does the math right or doesn't

[unique cypress]

has the most customization options

[slate pagoda]

Guess im placing the mega copper ingot factory in the swamp

[vapid gorge]

really? there's very little copper comparitively

[slate pagoda]

Water tho, and ill belt the copper from the top right quadrant there so ill need all of it

Only the green nodes there ammount to 12k ore

[deft lichen]

why not just this but extended further to the side

[fiery jackal]

All right maybe someone here could help me I've tried doing my own research and it's not going well

So I'm setting up my whole Steel production line meaning steel pipes steel beams and encased industrial beams and I would like an even output of Beams and pipes with encased industrial beams being produced on the side

i have 360 ingots to work with

(this is probably already known but I'm gonna List It Anyway beams = 60 > 15, Pipes = 30 > 20, encased = 18 steel beams > 6)

The reason why I'm asking for assistance is because usually I end up with way too many pipes and not enough beams

[oblique hollow]

Why not start at the end product and work out how much they need?

You know the recipes.

You can start with "ok i'll make 30/min Beams and Pipes, how much steel do i need in total for that"

And then if thats not enough you can just scale it up

Or down if its too much

Same goes for the encased beams of course

[fiery jackal]

ok so if the end goal is even output of beams and pipes

With a goal of 12 encased beams per minute so quick math is 30 beams 120 ingots just for encased beams (with the additional 6 coming from another beam)

That leaves 240 for the rest of the production line - 60 for the required third beam machine which leaves 180 an even production of pipes and beams so 2 machines for beams and 2 for pipes leaving the final production line at

40 pipes per minute, 39 beams per minute, and 12 encased beams per minute

Which means the final number of machines would be 5 Constructors making beams 2 making pipes

[prisma kraken]

i use that design pretty often in larger stations and it suffers from deadlock problems if you don't have long enough turn-offs from the main rail to accomodate waiting trains. The two sections i highlight must be long enough to fit a train:

[unique cypress]

have waiting bays before stations?

individual, I mean

[prisma kraken]

i mean, you can and that would allow you to have 2 trains per route. when the count goes to 3 it still can deadlock

[unique cypress]

have a longer waiting bay?

[prisma kraken]

yeah, how much space do you want to use for the train station though?

[unique cypress]

as much as it takes

[prisma kraken]

the problems are solvable with enough space, sure

[unique cypress]

a waiting bay for 2 trains takes about as much space as a station if you snake it along it

[prisma kraken]

(and also if you enforce more granular or less granular signalling of the station's shared rails)

in really large stations that have a lot of traffic, there's always some critical number of trains above which you'll deadlock

[wind spade]

Usually that number is also "you have no throughput" number

[unique cypress]

with a waiting bay long enough to fit all of them, no, you'll never deadlock

[unique cypress]

not if you set them to only depart when empty/full

then you get all the throughput

[prisma kraken]

i encourage you to try that in a busy station and see how much of a mistake it to be

[prisma kraken]

the comment is pretty unhelpful. once a deadlock happens, all your rail traffic starts backing up. of course throughput drops to zero.

[unique cypress]

I have built a 418 reactor nuke plant that's supplied exclusively by trains

and a 252 reactor plant that's supplied mostly with trains

I have plenty of busy stations

whenever I have multiple trains going to a station, I add a waiting bay long enough to fit all but 1 train

and they're all set to only depart when empty

[prisma kraken]

yep, and you built things well enough to avoid the problems. for your given use pattern your solution works, but if the usage pattern were to change, say by adding another train to a route, your solution may not end up being very robust.

[unique cypress]

if I added another train, I'd've needed to extend the waiting bay, yes

have done that once or twice

But I usually plan my routes, so this only happens when I make a mistake planning

[deft lichen]

It can only deadlock if you place more signals than those shown

I know this because I had it deadlock for that exact reason

[unique cypress]

deadlocks only happen when a train wanting to enter blocks a train wanting to leave and the train entering can only proceed if the leaving train leaves

[prisma kraken]

you can still end up with a deadlock. just put a train on every section of signalled track

[deft lichen]

That's not a flaw of the design but the capacity of the railway

[unique cypress]

you'd still end up with the exact situation I described

[prisma kraken]

if you construct the rails & signalling so that a train can always move out of the shared station track, you shift that capacity problem to the rest of the railway

often that is good enough of a solution to avoid the problems

[wind spade]

And none of the train throughput

[wind spade]

I meant "trains visiting often decrease throughput due to locking of input"

[unique cypress]

you don't know how "depart when empty/full" works, do you?

[wind spade]

I do know, but my point is that at that point you may start running into trains waiting too long, and other trains doing full loop

[unique cypress]

adding more trains with that setting extends the maximum round trip time at which maximum platform throughput can be maintained. So if you have a long-ass route with multiple stops, and want high throughput, adding more trains will be beneficial. Up to a point, where the extra trains will only create a queue behind one of the stations

[wind spade]

I was under the impression that OP had multiple routes going to a single station

which is where the thing I'm talking about would cause problems

[unique cypress]

I don't see how that'd cause issues. the extra trains would keep the unloading station topped up.

[wind spade]

would cause issues in loading stations

[unique cypress]

they just wouldn't have any trains in them

if the unloading station is full, what's the issue?

[wind spade]

no I mean if multiple train lines go to a single loading station

and then you get a queue of trains

that usually means that all lines get longer roundtrip time due to waiting in queue, so reduction of throughput

[unique cypress]

using the default setting wouldn't help, though

[wind spade]

I'm not saying it would

[unique cypress]

if you can't maintain throughput, the station is just too short

[wind spade]

my whole point was (while being under impression that we're talking about multiple different lines, since you were talking about deadlocks) that too many trains can lead to lower throughput

[unique cypress]

I don't think it'd lead to lower throughput. you'd just hit the ceiling at some point

[wind spade]

and ceiling is basically sum of throughputs, so yeah, adding another train to a line or a new line can lower throughput of all the other lines 🤷

[unique cypress]

I guess that's true. If you divide the same throughput between more lines, you get less per line

[prisma kraken]

it is more of a function of how much time the trains spend in contention for the same rails that lowers throughput

[edgy leaf]

wouldn't this lower the throughput because more trains go to the station and you'd hit the reload limit?

[unique cypress]

not with "depart when empty/full". Trains will only do 1 animation every full wagon, which is the least often you can do while still moving any items. adding more trains than the station can process will only lead to a longer queue and max out the station

[quaint condor]

Hmmm, how do I get 1 4999999/5000001 refineries .....

[unique cypress]

you do 2

[quaint condor]

Lol, I know, I't's just funny that's the number modeler gave me. Maybe not enough 6's in my 166.66667% clock rate 😏

I am messing around and making some of my production blueprints as Outposts, so I can just drop them in.

[unique cypress]

you can just put in 500/3 in the clock speed

[quaint condor]

Does that work in Modeler as well? ... Let's see..

Nope, guess not. But yeah, I know I can do that in game

[unique cypress]

you literally can?

[quaint condor]

Breaks the math for mine. Maybe because I have the input from the refinery under the box piped back in

Oh, Ok

[unique cypress]

it's probably because you set something for exactly 166.66667%

[quaint condor]

It was because the other number was still set on those refineries. Put in a 2, and it's all hunky dory now

[unique cypress]

and the math doesn't work out now that it's 166.(6)

[quaint condor]

But cool, good to know I can do that here too, thanks.

[unique cypress]

unfortunately, I don't think entire formulas work. only fractions maybe 166 2/3 will

[quaint condor]

The 'other number' being the number of buildings.

[unique cypress]

but like 2/3*100 doesn't work

[quaint condor]

as in, trying for two thirds multiplied by one hundred?

[unique cypress]

yeah, 2/3*100 doesn't resolve to 66.(6)

but 66 2/3 does

[quaint condor]

What was the formula for when you know how much you want it to consume, but need to set the clock rate to match that? Somthing with taking the original amount, times the new amount, divided by 250% or something? (probably way off)

[unique cypress]

new divided by original times 100

or rather, new input, divided by previous input times previous clock speed

in case your don't use 100 clock speed as original

[quaint condor]

Er.. 🤯

Lol

OK, so for example, machine takes in 60 pet coke by default @100%.. And... nevermind, I asked this damn question before, just need to look back at my post history. My brain is mush today apparently.

OK, yeah, so that's what I did, but how am I getting 291.666...

[unique cypress]

look into the machine, take the current clock speed and divide it by its current input. then multiply by the input you want and you get the clock speed you need

[quaint condor]

So, If I wanted the machine to only take 175 pet coke,175/60 = 2.916666666666667*100 ....

[unique cypress]

100/60*175=291.(6)

[quaint condor]

Same number ..

Heh, but that doesn't work since I can't do over 250 ...

OH nevermind, I'm a dumbass.

goes back to his hole for a while.

[quaint condor]

If you have multiple containers filled with many random items, how does it prioritize the items it feeds?

[merry kernel]

How does what prioritize?

Belts going in fill top-left to bottom-right; belts going out consume from the bottom-right to the top-left. First in last out

[quaint condor]

So, I have about 9 ISC filled with all sorts of items, copper sheets, quartz, aluminum, and much much more (stuff from a 'lost' dismantle crate in 1.1). Anyhow, I have them all connected basically end to end, feeding all the items via a single belt to a whipped up storage sorter.... Now, I know the first couple containers were filled with encased beams, and aluminum wasn't until like 3 containers back, but when watching the items come across the belt, it was like a little encased, a whole bunch of aluminum stuff, then some randomness, more beams, etc.

[quaint condor]

It seems that when running it end to end like this, the items from the back containers are fillling the first spot of the first container, then out. Nothing else in the first containers is moving except for whatever goes in that last spot.

[opaque quartz]

Containers are last-in first-out (LIFO) I’m pretty sure

[quaint condor]

Gotcha. Not a situation I ever see myself in anyhow, I was jut curious. I was assuming the first container would empty out it's contents while the ones behind uploaded, etc.

[prisma kraken]

the behavior always seems a little funny when you're draining containers connected in sequence 🙂

man, tonight has been a fix-my-sins sort of building session

on top of that, i messed up a train route and ended up with plates all over my hmf's factory's belts. that took forever to flush

[quaint condor]

Heh, least it sounds like you got something done lol. I have been mucking around with that bs from before and slowly rebuilding a waterfarm because I keep getting distracted by other stuff lol

[quaint condor]

Doh, hate when that happens 😦

[prisma kraken]

my hmf factory is really big. some of the belts coming in off of trains are extremely long

i was playing whack-a-mole with the lifts for about 2 hrs

all because i decided to move a train station a half meter forward, lol

[quaint condor]

I mean, I guess it's not funny, but sometimes you just have to laugh at stuff like that some times. I've done it enough for sure. My first go around with nuke was fun for sure. Kept wanting to change things, then mess up something else... oof. Though it would never end.

[prisma kraken]

yeah, happens

what actually happened is i forgot to set a filter on a train's pickup to only grab the mf's out of a station and not the plates

[vapid gorge]

@modern vault for example for sloppy electrode this is one way to clock things for a 600 or 780 line

[modern vault]

600 is good because I can double.. it to fill a MK6 belt

[vapid gorge]

kind of. You can't clock the top refineries to 280

you'd have to rearrange the numbers and add extra refineries for 1200

[modern vault]

so bottom row is solution and top scrap?

thanks I will have a play

Hmm I am not gettign the same numbers, sure that is sloppy/electrode combo?

[vapid gorge]

yup

[modern vault]

ah yep got it

[vapid gorge]

working example

[modern vault]

Thanks :))

a pity it is such an inefficient utilization

[vapid gorge]

just because you can't over clock to 250?

because the processes are 100% efficient

[modern vault]

well they are way down at 140,120 etc

yes I eman space wise, I know I can just use mroe floor space.. which I will do

[vapid gorge]

you could merge the ones that are 105 into 210 if you want? otherwise that's as compact as you can get processing 600 bauxite

[modern vault]

true, thanks

[vapid gorge]

and I think you can probably only add 2 refineries to process 1200 pm

[modern vault]

oh it already gives out 1200 I think

[vapid gorge]

1200 bauxite

[modern vault]

ah ok

I basically want to ba able to maximsie the clock speed and keep the concept the same, not fussed about input/output rates, I can load balance them

I just HATE load balancing water hehe

[vapid gorge]

good thing you essentially can't load balance fluids

[quaint condor]

I'm currently doing an all bauxite processing build and decided to go with a mk2 BP. Spits out 500/min ingots/min from 500 baux, 200 pet coke, and 150/min water and uses the waste water. Handles stalls perfectly and everything is at 100% in about 5 or so minutes it seemed. Takes 24 of those and another under clocked to handle the remaining 300.

[modern vault]

nice

[quaint condor]

Pretty simple design as well.. instead of all the excess piping and such #math-and-meta message

[modern vault]

Yeah I think I will just scale that up, thanks

[fallen isle]

I have a manifold problem that i dont unterstand. I have 16 smelters. 12 runs at 100%, but the 4 that marked with an X runs at 60%. They dont get the iron out, and i dont understand why.

[unique cypress]

Are you actually removing the ingots from the system at 480/min?

[fallen isle]

Nope, i found the problem. i used 470 and not 480. Thanks for the tip

[crimson moat]

Okay, crazy questions time

Lets say i want to complete the entirety of project assembly 2-5x per hour because 1x is just too easy. What's the best way to power that insanity (300-1000gw) without unresolvable resource conflicts?

[unique cypress]

https://www.satisfactorytools.com/1.0/production?share=f1nMtaiozJBq0acXRgSB

would need a few augmenters but should work

P5 4.8 times per hour

[crimson moat]

[wind spade]

ah, a normal day in Satisfactory

[crimson moat]

This would definitely break everything

i think i will make it modular

so like 5% of the factory can run fine by itself, and it's just tiled from there

and when it breaks, it breaks

although greeny IDK why it wants to make power shards here

[wind spade]

most likely optimising the dark matter shenanigans

tbh I don't really know from memory how the recipes work there, but this is often done in order to "sink" excess DMR or something

[crimson moat]

Ah i see

it's probably considered the most resource efficient way with leftover resources to make DMR or somethin

[wind spade]

classic black magic solver

[crimson moat]

You can make all Assembly parts (all phases) 5x/hr on rocket fuel without underclocking. Technically

that breaks down and becomes unsolveable between 5 and 6 times per hour

closer to 5

[unique cypress]

I left all recipes enabled so ig that's what it does.

[crimson moat]

checking nuclear in a bit

[unique cypress]

you can probably tweak them to not use screws

[crimson moat]

[unique cypress]

there's plenty of iron left

[crimson moat]

I did too dw 😄

and yeah it seems basically impossible to run out of iron or limestone

[unique cypress]

I'd do steeled frame and steel rotor to save on constructors and assemblers

[crimson moat]

The point is kind of an excuse to build 10k machines and have them actually be doing something

so dont mind that

[unique cypress]

power shards are actually to generate DMR without costing SAM

[wind spade]

yeah as I said, I have no idea how the chains work around there 😄

[slate pagoda]

cause the power shard ouput is higher then dmc imnupt right🦧?

[unique cypress]

yeah, same with Oscillators and AI Servers

but Shards are lowest WP without SAM

[slate pagoda]

But then how do you handle the power shard storage though?

[unique cypress]

ionized fuel and burn or sink

[wind spade]

Tools don't care about that

[unique cypress]

or matrices ig

[slate pagoda]

You can sink shards?

[unique cypress]

no

[wind zinc]

💀

[wind spade]

@ruby otter pick any that you want. There's no wrong choice, all recipes are useful in some scenarios.

if you don't know, flip a coin or keep them for later

[finite wasp]

guys how can this happen someone please explain. I do have Particalaccelerators, but this shouldn't effect the max power consumption

[open carbon]

Building here next playthrough.

[slate pagoda]

Recently used up all the ieon there for steel, its a nice place

[open carbon]

I’ve past it quite a bit previously and I have finally decided to actually build my base near it.

[frosty owl]

If you change the clock of a machine while already attached to power but idle, the max power draw won't update until (iirc) the first production cycle is completed

[finite wasp]

thanks, nice to know

[opaque quartz]

Same thing when adding sloops

[amber igloo]

is there any neater way to split 30 into 9 and 21?

[opaque quartz]

Just use a single splitter

[wind spade]

one splitter

[amber igloo]

heres the idea drawn

[amber igloo]

fr 😭?

[wind spade]

it will self-balance

[opaque quartz]

If you are consuming exactly 9 and 21, it will balance out once the input machine buffers are full

[amber igloo]

omg

[opaque quartz]

!wikisearch manifold

[brisk shore]

https://satisfactory.wiki.gg/index.php?search=manifold

[amber igloo]

oh my god ofc im literally standing next to a manifold too

im so smart

thanks

[fierce cypress]

different design i for some reason have a screenshot of, but seems to be about the same size, single splitter is the best way if you dont need it load balanced though

[vapid gorge]

you can also jsut merge the production of the machines you want going one way, and the others going the other way onto different belts if you don't want to manifold 🙂

[gray flower]

why dis is being a pain

front part

ending side

if i add a pump it freaks out

[vapid gorge]

didn't you say the flow issue was around the fuel generators?

[gray flower]

if i remember yes

half are not getting enuff stuff

[vapid gorge]

then overhead images of the fuel gen layout with the pipes. From higher up

without the pipe panel, that doesn't help

[gray flower]

does not reach to end on dis line

[vapid gorge]

are each of these pipes only feeding 1 branch of fuel generators?

[gray flower]

yes

[vapid gorge]

what does the end look like?

just stops?

[gray flower]

going back into them for now stops i had them on a angel

[vapid gorge]

pic?

[gray flower]

doing tthat one sec

one side

Other side

[vapid gorge]

get rid of all the buffers

[vapid gorge]

where are these pipes going?

[gray flower]

no where now

u want me to get rid of ALL buffers? cobalt

[vapid gorge]

All

[vapid gorge]

so these pipes, before they end, feed fuel generators?

[gray flower]

Not yet but i can do dat if u want me to

[vapid gorge]

ok I need an even higher image of the layout, this is a bit confusing

[merry kernel]

Buffers are situationally useful, but it's unclear what purpose, if any, they are serving here.

[vapid gorge]

it's basically always easier and better to just build the system to avoid buffers in the first place. More reliable

but with gasses you need to avoid them comletely

[merry kernel]

Generally speaking, don't use a buffer unless you have a specific reason for placing it.

[gray flower]

i have a idiot platform in my way to get a air shot cobalt

[merry kernel]

There are cases for them; in particular they can be useful diagnostic tools for flow issues.

[vapid gorge]

they can cause flow issues though. Best diagnostic for flow issue is just flooding the system by downlclocking.

[gray flower]

the fluid buffers where to keep liquid and to test threwput

also dumb server restart is soonish for me 5min i hate it but it refreshes the game

[merry kernel]

I've yet to run into issues caused by them, but I'm also very deliberate in how and when I use them.

[gray flower]

i am doing big project i might have 960 at 600MW fuel gens with 3 power shards from 2250 crude oil line or area

[merry kernel]

(Most underrated use case, IMO: Coal generators. Makes it much less painful to deal with a blown fuse in the early-mid game.)

[gray flower]

before i had pumps eariler for gases

Now i am loosing MW UHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[merry kernel]

If you just destroyed your buffers you'll have some air gaps in your pipes

It'll take a few minutes to recover

[gray flower]

problem 1 not the ending of fuel gens are getting enough stuff

[vapid gorge]

gasses behave extremely poorly with buffers

[gray flower]

do they cobalt

[vapid gorge]

it's best to not use them for liquids, but you need to avoid the mfor gasses

[gray flower]

oh i have buffers at my blenders area cobalt

[vapid gorge]

gut. them. all.

[gray flower]

fyi could that be causing issue

after restart in 5 sec

[merry kernel]

Yep. The issue with gases is that the absence of headlift mechanics means buffers can exacerbate backflow instead of mitigating it

[vapid gorge]

they also try to equalise rather than flow to more empty spots

[gray flower]

after restart of my world ill do that

[vapid gorge]

it's the main reason you don't shpi unpackaged gas in trains

[merry kernel]

Gravity, cleverly utilized, is your friend when dealing with liquids.

[gray flower]

also i have a 3450 oil into 9200 fuel power plant which also has buffers on the input of fluid gens

[merry kernel]

But all the nice gravity-based solutions can stop working or even backfire when gases are involved.

[gray flower]

this project took me 3-4 or 5 months to finish

Should i take out the pictures or is it fine

[vapid gorge]

just leave the images, you'll need more

[gray flower]

so gut all the fluid buffers from gases

[merry kernel]

That's the simplest solution, yeah.

[vapid gorge]

you'll also likely want to feed your generators with a loop like this

I'll be heading off but if you do those 2 things, and flood your system by under clocking a few generators on the manifold it'll likely fix it

[gray flower]

on the side like before i had going up from the pipe cobalt

[plucky tusk]

Just dont max out pipes

[gray flower]

only buffers left for turbofuel and i think i kinda maxed out the pipes for RF

[vapid gorge]

just get rid of all of them. Faster to flood each system and it'll avoid issues

and get rid of any valves while you're at it

[merry kernel]

If you're using the loop design you aren't, at least not where it caused problems!

[plucky tusk]

I dont loop my pipes

[merry kernel]

I'll situationally loop pipes, mostly when I don't feel like solving the problem properly.

[gray flower]

before i forget i also did it to acid

having buffers

[merry kernel]

#screenshots message as an example of a "proper" fix, at least for liquids. (Yes, there are buffers. There's a reason.)

[gray flower]

i love dis game but wow the amount of things and stuff can go wrong in this game

[plucky tusk]

Yeah the loop design is nice if you overlook a problem in planning

[merry kernel]

Technically the purple buffers didn't end up being necessary, though, as I figured out a better way of connecting blueprints after designing the blueprints.

[gray flower]

on to the straghit of pipes or on the side of them going back up?

where to add the going back into there pipe i meant

[merry kernel]

Assuming you're asking how to loop them, you can go above or to the side, either way. You just want to connect at the start and end of your junctions

[gray flower]

i might put them on straghit pecies

oh ya gases don't have any headlift

and 2 idc if the pipes look ugly

and also my compact coal looks a mess

[quick gorge]

I'm trying to make my math aesthetic 💀
I have 9 belts all balanced to have 1133.333.... SAM/m
I'm wanting a circle where there are 9 injection points of equal distance between each other all
I have 23 Slooped (250 oc) constructors and 11 unslooped 250
Those numbers do not go neatly into a division of 9, I can lower the clock of the unslooped but I'd rather not waste the sloops going anything under 250

[gray flower]

holy nuts my compact coal is nuts now

[gray flower]

atm doing at best 420,000MW ish with my fuel pwoer plant ik it will take time also i have some areas with 4-6 pumps in that area is that bad too for water and oil?

[vapid gorge]

use pumps where you need headlift 🙂

[merry kernel]

Run an additional line down the center of the circle and dump overflow into it, feeding your final constructor(s)?

[quick gorge]

🤔

[merry kernel]

Phyrexian SAM

[gray flower]

alrighty waiting game now

i feel in satisfactory it takes a while for a problem to appear

or past me goof up

also @vapid gorge for my fuel power plant should i use buffers or not

and thank you to everyone who helped me @vapid gorge @merry kernel

[vapid gorge]

do not 🙂

[quick gorge]

Time to go into diagram mode on Satis Modeler

[gray flower]

so same thing with my fuel powerplant in spirecoast

update all fuel gens are powered but only having me 430,000MW @vapid gorge @merry kernel

at best

[vapid gorge]

that's more than the 420gw you said you were aiming for?

[gray flower]

576,000GW 960 times 600MW

16x60 for math

[quick gorge]

If I were to have 2 Slooped and 1 normal on each "arm" I will have 233.3333... overflow.
*9 that is 2100. Make it look nice /3 and that's 700 into a internal ring that has 5 slooped and 2 normal.. that doesn't feel good either

[gray flower]

that pipe is still being a annoying person

[quick gorge]

The layout will be something like this spread 👀

[slate pagoda]

Guys hot take, every satisfactory recipie or factory discussion ends in an meta discussion

[oblique hollow]

Lukewarm take, put it in the microwave for 30 seconds

[slate pagoda]

[lavish geode]

What is the advantage of overclocking non-resource gathering machines if you have the space and materials to build more machines?

[unique cypress]

save time by having fewer machines to place

[opaque quartz]

It can also simplify logistics when you only need 2.5x or less of a machine in a production chain. Saves you from having to deal with splitters and mergers

[wind spade]

I'd say mostly just matching ratios

[prisma kraken]

certain clock rates, while reducing the number of machines also allow for more natural balanced belting

i.e. different nuclear chains often make enough for multiples of 5 reactors. clocking them to 250 reduces that to 2 reactors which allows you to even-split the output and not end up with a ton of radiation

also useful for things like quickwire and aluminum scrap that have a stack size of 500 which causes manifolds to take forever to build

as sort of a degenerate case, oft times clocking machines to different rates allows you to direct belt high volume items into another machine which comes in useful for things like quickwire and screws since their antecedents fit more items per belt

[unique cypress]

not me balancing 20 belts of quickwire so I don't have to do math

[lavish geode]

I see

[merry kernel]

Also, critically: I have a savegame (my 1.0 fresh start) where I severely underclocked every machine I built, and just built a -lot- of them. Performance, uh, took a massive hit, compared to other savegames where I left everything at 100%, and consumed equivalent amounts of resources. This implies that overclocking everything would allow you to do more in the game before performance becomes a limiting factor.

This has been my approach in my 1.1 experimental save, although I got distracted building a massive highway network, so I haven't gotten very far in terms of actually consuming resources.

So far no performance issues, however!

[crimson moat]

Goal: High power, minimal resource usage to get there

Any recipies that i should change in particular?

There is no way to lay this out without spaghetti lines all over. It is what it is 😄

787.5 GW net, 739.2 GW gross (no APA's)

[unique cypress]

I'm having trouble figuring out what you're doing with your plut rods

[crimson moat]

Me too

[unique cypress]

they're neither maximized (for burning) nor minimized (for sinking)

[crimson moat]

I've evaluated the plutonium rod recipe which gives more plutonium rods, and it does give more power, but it costs massively more resources because of the PCC's. For example it takes a quarter of the map's bauxite on top of this

[unique cypress]

I'd switch out copper rotor for steel rotor and coated plate for default plate

other than the plutonium, that's it

[crimson moat]

It's the thing that takes PCC's to give 50% more rods what you were thinking of, yeah?

[unique cypress]

I would't even burn plutonium in the first place

[crimson moat]

If you burn only uranium it makes 30x as much waste, and that means making 60,000 storage containers instead of 2000.

[unique cypress]

do 50.4 uranium, burn it, minimum plutonium (12.6) and sink it

630 GW and no waste

[crimson moat]

will check that out

[slate pagoda]

31.5 uranium rods should lead to 23.625 plutonium rods?

Oh nvm youre using the normal recipie

[crimson moat]

decent option for sure

[unique cypress]

depending on the recipes, you can get 1/4, 8/27, 3/8, 4/9, 1/2, 3/4, 8/9, or 4/3 as many plutonium rods as you did uranium

or anythin in-between if you mix 2 different ones

[crimson moat]

main issues are: less power, where get rest of power? and using an additional 10% of the map's nitrogen

first part may be a non issue, but i am not certain

[slate pagoda]

I mean thats not a lot right?

[crimson moat]

it's not a showstopper but it's worth a mention

[unique cypress]

should be less bauxite, tho, no?

[crimson moat]

neither of them use bauxite

[unique cypress]

and less work

cus you inputted alu ingots

[crimson moat]

ah

dumb mistake sorry 😄 that's old

[wind spade]

or anything other if you use sloops 😄

[slate pagoda]

Or literally anything other if you do it wrong😵‍💫

[crimson moat]

126 less baux yes

it's definitely more resource efficient to burn the rods, but fuck waste

[unique cypress]

not anything. it maxes out at 10 2/3

no, with pellets, it's 24

[crimson moat]

I did this btw because i do not want to use the base aluminum recipe and send its silica to nuclear stuff 😄 😄

[unique cypress]

then just turn it off?

[crimson moat]

Yeah, the intent was to deal with aluminum seperately and just input it to cut it off the chart. I forgot to double check it later and adjust the ingot amount though, so it started doing aluminum beams.

[slate pagoda]

Argg

[crimson moat]

I think i'm gonna use AGS on a new game for No Build Cost (building/customising costs nothing, dismantle does not return any) and Flight Mode, mainly for QOL reasons. I will still stay within what can be done in a normal game, those things just make it less annoying

[opaque quartz]

i've got my 8 BWD/min plan in a pretty good spot. made some tweaks to my recipe choices to simplify the input resources (switching FMF back to default recipe so I don't have to deal with bringing in fuel and making nitric acid). the thing I'm trying to decide now is if I want to introduce caterium to the mix, as i'm not using it currently but there's a pure node right next to where I'm planning to build. would allow me to use AI limiters and HSCs to reconfigure some of the other alts for RCUs and crystal oscillators. decisions decisions

edit: I made a copy of the spreadsheet and math'd it out and decided it's not worth it. I'm not making computers at all due to the RCU alt, so the usefulness of quickwire/caterium itself is pretty limited

[thorn bane]

wait youre using fertile? why

[crimson moat]

Tools is using it, why should i override?

[thorn bane]

default uses more waste so its cheaper to process
also wasting uranium is kinda eh

and if you do want more plutonium then its still better to just make more UFRs

[crimson moat]

That plan is for maximising power while having only plutonium waste leftover (because it comes in far lower quantities)

The other one that i have is for maximising uranium power, and it uses non-fissile recipe to dump the waste into sink rods as cheaply as possible

[merry kernel]

Fertile uses 82.5 uranium waste (equivalent, using a 1 uranium to 1.2 uranium waste conversion factor) to produce 1 plutonium fuel rod (using ideal recipes for uranium consumption); default uses 112.5 uranium waste

Default consumes more uranium waste than fertile

[crimson moat]

ye, which is desirable for max uranium power - but undesirable for max power when you can burn plutonium

because turning less waste into more plutonium gives more power

[unique cypress]

max power from 2100 uranium with burning plutonium involves using the exact opposite of what you're using. Alts for rods and cells, default non-fissile

[merry kernel]

The extra uranium waste consumed is coming from nuclear power plants, whereas the uranium waste equivalent is coming from a mix of power plants and straight uranium; you end up running fewer power plants overall using fertile, assuming uranium is your bottleneck.

[crimson moat]

which alts?

[unique cypress]

there's only 1 alt 1 default for each of them

instant cell and plut unit

[crimson moat]

i just have to search them and i dont know the names so it's a little awkward

[thorn bane]

afaik the uranum you use for fertile could just be used to make more UFRs and get more power

[crimson moat]

Looks like a considerable option, massively higher resource cost though. Uses 26% of the bauxite and 43% of the nitrogen.

whereas other build for example uses 3% and 15%

for less power, but it gets a lot more power-per-resource

i think it was the PCC plutonium recipe that was bad for the resource to power ratio

[merry kernel]

A uranium power plant produces 50 waste per uranium fuel rod; each uranium fuel rod contains half the power of a plutonium fuel rod. Using the default recipe, you run three power plants (two uranium and one plutonium) for 112.5 uranium waste, or, 93.75 uranium, for 80 MW per uranium consumed. Using the fertile recipe, you have 82.5% of a uranium power plant and 100% of a plutonium plant for 82.5 uranium waste equivalent, or 68.75 uranium., for 66 MW per uranium consumed.

(Assuming all my math is correct)

This is making some assumptions about which recipes you're using, but I'm making the same assumptions for both cases, so the ratio should remain constant.

Which is to say, the default recipe produces 21% more power than the fertile recipe

(For a given uranium input)

You're also producing less plutonium waste overall, because more of your power is coming from uranium - 66% of it, compared to 29% of it.

(The ratio is actually slightly better than that, I did make a math mistake)

(Forgot to include the 25% of a uranium power plant providing that last 12.5 uranium waste)

Ooh, there's another mistake, I forgot to double the output of the plutonium. Sigh. I don't want to redo the math.

[unique cypress]

ok, I just checked optimizer, and the lowest WP power is:

alt uranium cells
alt uranium rods
alt non-fissile
default cells (and therefore pellets)
alt plutonium rods

[crimson moat]

by alt non-fissile you mean default non fissile?

[unique cypress]

the item is called non-fissile

so an alt for that, which is fertile

[crimson moat]

ok

[unique cypress]

so that would be this
https://www.satisfactorytools.com/1.0/production?share=cGuXJ8DvcNPWprX3nXRF

[thorn bane]

idk its kinda weird to care for uranium in WP
you either maximise uranium usage or treat it as free
both dont use fertile afaik

[unique cypress]

with uranium being free (and everything else unchanged):

default uranium cell
alt uranium rod
alt non-fissile
default plutonium cell
default plutonium rod

or you could just use optimizer yourself and set your own resource weights and optimization goals

[merry kernel]

Ok, it's ~106 MW per uranium using default, and ~86 MW per uranium using fertile, assuming no other mistakes, which granted is a big assumption.

[thorn bane]

#913174180277649448 message
i remember thinking about it and the resource savings just didnt seem worth but idk its been a while (holy shit 4 years)

[merry kernel]

However, yeah, the non-fertile recipe consumes a lot more nitrogen, sulfur, and quartz.

So you're trading off more power and less waste product against greater resource consumption.

[crimson moat]

Option A (fertile):

23.625 plutonium rods
984 GW gross, 932 GW net
236 waste/min
21% bauxite
22% nitrogen```

Option B (max uranium, 12.6 plut):

50.4 uranium rods
12.6 plutonium rods
630 GW gross for uranium with no waste, or 945 GW gross with 126 plutonium waste/min

5% bauxite
27% nitrogen

Option C (max uranium, 18.9 plut):

50.4 uranium rods
18.9 plutonium rods
1102 GW gross, 1044 GW net
189 waste/min
17% bauxite
33% nitrogen

i have some dumb recipe in the plut on B/C i think

or is that correct

producing rocket fuel on this power scale takes 55% of the nitrogen, so it's viable but i dont think optimal

[merry kernel]

That points at another math error I made, lol. I was calculating as if uranium was consumed at 1/m at 100%, and plutonium at .5/m at 100%.

Sigh. I should use a spreadsheet.

[crimson moat]

Yeah they are very helpful 😄

[merry kernel]

I like my endless nested parenthesis in calculator, though

[crimson moat]

@unique cypress what is "optimizer"

[unique cypress]

satisfactory optimizer. on github

[crimson moat]

What needs the nitrogen that i really have to worry about? Not much, right?

[unique cypress]

nope

bauxite is a much bigger issue when you're building large things, especially T9

nitrogen is mostly used for power, both nuclear and rocket

[crimson moat]

Option B would seem the way to go

[thorn bane]

thermal propulsion units use nitrogen

[crimson moat]

i'm gonna use 1900 of it, tops, for those

and there is 12k

seems like there will be plenty

Thx for the help! Will be continuing to work on even the planning for this for quite a while 😄

[worn glade]

the 25 ura you spend on making plut cell can basically just create all of...0.15 ura fuel rod with the alt recipe, which gives about 2.475 gw of power while if turned to plut rod you can basically make a whole 0.5 plut rod with pressure, which then gives 12.5gw of power. thats if im not wrong

[worn glade]

i cant decipher this

[slate pagoda]

Same power different input is the point made here

[worn glade]

alright which is better?

[thorn bane]

fertile costs 21 uranium to make 10gw
default costs 19 uranium to make 10gw

[worn glade]

ah thats nice. never considered using the default recipe for fertile

[prisma kraken]

little late in reading - you can also do this for 2000 uranium and pull 937 gw off of it

that in turn can be fed into slooped ficsonium to get to 1.5 tw

[south steppe]

I'm tired from work and my math isn't mathing right now.
3600 quickwire from 40 assemblers is supposed to split into 60 assemblers.
Both sets of machines have extra machines for when it starts to overflow.
fused quickwire has 2 extra
quickwire stators have 10 extra

Pic has more info

Please help lol

[worn glade]

join 2 seperate to 3 maybe?

or make a sushi thing and just add and seperate as necessary

[prisma kraken]

how is 14x3x90 = 3600?

[worn glade]

good question

so its 42 ass making quickwire going into 66 ass making stator. it aint mathing right there will be 3 extra ass making stators that wont get enough quickwire, which is a weird way to control for overflow and add bloat but you do you

[prisma kraken]

yeah, honestly your numbers look more like a circuit board or hsc build. quickwire is naturally multiples of 90 and qw stator likes groups of 6 or 8 assemblers. how you got the 7's in there is beyond me

[unique cypress]

i'd just do a balancer 🤷‍♂️

as long as everything is built in accordance with a calculator, it'll just work

[prisma kraken]

you and me both, but that doesn't solve the problem

[worn glade]

depends on how big your factory is. if its too big then it will work theoretically but in action itll take a long time for the back producers to fill up so youll never be at full cap. gotta decentralise

which here id argue its too big

[unique cypress]

I built 1k+ machine factories with balancer managing items between manifolds

including a 20:20 balancer for quickwire

[south steppe]

It's (14+14+12)*90
There are 2 extra machines on top because of overflow and also because that's the blueprint. The blueprint is the entire layer.

[worn glade]

shouldve said so sooner,really confused me for a sec

[south steppe]

I decided to just throw smart splitters on all 6 and let the extra go to the top row. Top row only needs 240 minimum.

[gray flower]

my pumps

@worn glade

[worn glade]

alright thats an abomination

pumps dont stack, if you place them right before one another only the final pump will be working

[gray flower]

how many should i have

[unique cypress]

1 every 45-50 m

[worn glade]

first remove all the pumps from one line except the one at bottom

[gray flower]

which

[worn glade]

then see where theres a blue chokepoint hologram on the pipe when placing the pump. thats the max headlift of the previous pump. try placing either exactly on that or slightly under it

[gray flower]

so top row?

[worn glade]

try it with a single pipe so that you can see how it works

[cinder silo]

Yeah pumps are way too close together.

[worn glade]

all the pumps on a pipe except the bottom one must be removed

[gray flower]

at 54.9m atm

2nd at 54.8m

[worn glade]

the ones on different pipes or right before the one you're talking about?

[gray flower]

i did 1 pump on 1 row at 54.9m

[worn glade]

alright neat

[gray flower]

2 pumps 1 was at 12.7m 2nd pump at 54.9m

[worn glade]

now grab a pump but dont place it on the pipe, follow the pipe up till you see a blue outline on the pipe

[worn glade]

that means its capping its headlift and you gotta place another pump 50 meters up right before the headlift of the previous pump

[south steppe]

Now to combine rotors and stators for 240/min motors

[worn glade]

no oscillators?

[gray flower]

where the pumps go at bottom or

[worn glade]

top

[unique cypress]

why'd you do that?

[south steppe]

Not yet. Rebuilding entire world with alternate recipes. Tore down like 90% of everything including my rail system.

[gray flower]

so top of the my oil wall i showed

[worn glade]

sadism and big numbers mostly. also cuz i got a lotta quartz sitting around so why not

[worn glade]

yes but make sure its right before the headlift and not over it

[gray flower]

i was thinking have 1 pump at bottom one at top

[worn glade]

so did i until i got all the alt recipes in the endgame. worth it

[worn glade]

yes but maybe your top height is at 70 meters instead of 55 as your pump shows, you gotta place the pump before the max headlift of the previous pump or else it just doesnt get the water to pump up

so do i but most people dont understand fluid mechanics

[south steppe]

I wasn't making near enough of a lot of base material and everything was not optimized. So now its about to be. After this, is rebuilding aluminum. Only have about 200k more aluminum sheets.

Getting low on stock

[frail pasture]

I always place mine just behind it, so I don't overload a pump by accident.

[worn glade]

i do the same. good advice

[unique cypress]

yeah, the ring should be at 20/50, but I think it's at 22/55. it really shouldn't be

i keep my pumps between 90 and 100%

[gray flower]

1 pump is at 23.1m near top second is at 49.,5m at best

[unique cypress]

going to 110% dooesn't always work

[gray flower]

I HATE THE Flow indactor that turns to defualt colour when readding pipes

[frail pasture]

We're at the final stage and are about to rebuild everything from the ground up elsewhere. Looking forward to it, but not looking forward to it.

[south steppe]

Yeah, I've spent the last 2o something hours building this. Then there was about 4o hours consolidating everything into a massive temp storage so I'd be able to rebuild.

[gray flower]

power atm at 430,000MW or 441,000MW at best

[south steppe]

Jeez, I'm only at 214,000MW

[worn glade]

alright so you only need 2 pumps. do the same with rest of the pipes

[frail pasture]

We're leaving the current base/spaghetti complex up and running and piping materials into cloud storage. Going to start building up and then rerouting belts, drones, and building trains when we are ready to shut down the old one. Everything from the old one will either get moved over by train, or thrown into the cloud until it's depleted. Then we'll tear it all down.

[worn glade]

i just simply empty them into personal container boxes and reuse them to build up again. but overall its a hassle worth taking

[frail pasture]

We only have a couple of short trains atm, everything else is being delivered by drones.

[worn glade]

seems wasteful

[frail pasture]

Stuff was too far away for me to want to build trains or belts. So I went with drones. We're overproducing turbofuel, so I just bottled it.

JUST got to nuclear power, and that drone is gonna run forever on just one.

[cosmic stratus]

for the purpose of refining alumina using the sloppy alumina recipe, i think i only need to pump in 80 water per refienry provided im using the byproducts of making scrap?

[gray flower]

mk2 pipe looks like its fine going up ill let it run to see

[worn glade]

i think it would be better to burn the turbofuel or the fuel rod, but whatever you fancy is good too

[worn glade]

sloppy needs 200 water, then you'll need another 200 for scrap which gives back 120 waste wate. 280 in total

[cosmic stratus]

scrap doesnt use water

[frail pasture]

The rod lasts forever. 0.04 per trip.

[worn glade]

oh yea sorry got confused for a bit. youre right then

[cosmic stratus]

yay

that should make it far easier

[worn glade]

so a 2.5gw rod lasts for 25 trips. how long is that? cuz im sure trains will use less than that and can handle even bigger amounts. but if its just a single ingred and not much of it then yea its pretty good i guess

[worn glade]

it does and its more efficient... unless you use solid alu ingot recipe which tanks the output without silica

[cosmic stratus]

im gonna be using that

cuz i don like silica

[worn glade]

youll be getting 360 scrap from 200 baux which is a 16.6% increase to then make 180 ingots from it which is a 16.6% decrease...huh thats actually equal and easier

[cosmic stratus]

yar

[worn glade]

i thought the rates would be worse

learning something new every day

[cosmic stratus]

more thanks to Kibitz

[frail pasture]

It's small loads, between the uranium mine cave, and the bay where we built our coal plants, and then built nuclear power on top of. To run a train would suck. Plus, we actually try to minimize our impact on the landscape as we like the views.

[gray flower]

UPDATE @worn glade atm at 424,000MW AT BEST 425,000MW