Handling zero ls always an issue when using EACH signals. The solution is to have a constant combinator generate a 1 for every signal, so it is never zero. ...And then I can have another combinator at the very end that subtracts 1 of the final output to balance this out. I will experiment with this.

Actually there is one edge case I didn't consider. What happens if one of the wagon loading zones doesn't have enough resources for one whole wagon? It simply does not send a signal at all. 0 isn't accounted for in the system. I can fix this by using another decider combinator for each row of chests...

Alright @DaveMcW, I've implemented your circuit into my 2-4-0 train station. It works amazingly, thank you! I made a couple of modifications: Compacted the design so that it will fit in a narrower space Changed the information signal to the dot signal on all interfaces Increased the integer value to...

Here is a scalable solution. It works by calculating an average, then dropping every signal above average. If it runs out of signals, it sets the average to a large number and restarts. 0eNq9l8uOmzAUhl+l8rIlM5hrQOqil/WsZleNIgInE0tgkDFRo4gH6Ft00Sfrk9SGTAiEm2naTSSI+Tk+3zn/MSe0jQvIGKEc+SdEwpTmyP92Qjl5...

Hi also haven’t done much coding but I think what your looking for is a if/else setup. I’m gonna switch your wagons to numbers because I want the letters for somethings else. Ok here we go. My idea is to used 3 if/else statements to compare and find the lowest chest set. Well call your chest sets 1...

Hi everyone, I really like having a good excuse to break out the combinators for Factorio to optimize the heck out of my setups, particularly with trains. :D A lot of us who have done this before know that you can disable your train stations until they have a full load of cargo, at which point they ...

Without a bot network to replace them automatically, this is a relevant information. How else should the player be warned to replace the defenses (probably by building a bot network)? In don't really see the benefit of a toggling option, considering any option especially for highly specific things ...

Maybe my wording was not precise enough, in my native langage, throughput, flow rate ,bandwidth and others are often translated by the same word: "débit" which makes it difficult to grasp the subtle nuances and use the appropriate word in english :( Well lucky for you, I'm a bit of an eng...

One disadvantage of the double headed trains , that could make them a bit more complicated for unexperienced player, is if you use more than one wagon, or if the different wagon don't share the same content. The train if going from A to B to A to B would end up "switching" its front loco ...

Final words - I personally think this is a matter of opinion, more than a matter of fact. And I don't see your opinion as being correct, especially on the negative gameplay value and overly complex fronts. There is a maxim - If opinion is strongly divided on a balancing matter, then the current sys...

Oh man. You should check out Klonan's mod Flammable Oils.

Yes I've used this before. It's epic, but not for the faint of heart. Drive your car into one pipe and suddenly all of your refineries and storage tanks are exploding. Absolute madness.

Just a few thoughts: Suggestions are about gameplay value. See https://forums.factorio.com/search.php?keywords=Game+value&t=27087&sf=msgonly That means, there is always a consideration: How much more complexity will a suggestion bring in vs. how much more game-play? In simpler words: Added ...

Squelch wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:35 pm

KoblerMan wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:51 pm

I think this is embellishing a bit.

Accepted

Thanks for being honest!

I'm not convinced by the fuel, or running out of, argument. It stands true that running out of fuel is a player design problem, and that they have not provided adequate fuel whatever the train's makeup. Sure, but this ignores the fact that you're still multiplying fuel storage x2 if this gets imple...

If there's balancing concerns just make backwards locos contribute a bit less than full power (60~80%?). Having them be entirely dead-weight is a bit of a strain on my suspension of disbelief too. And above all it's really annoying to have a train stranded because locos in the "correct" d...

There are also other problems when locomotive in wrong direction would contribute: would that mean a train with all locomotives heading into one direction should be able to find a path in opposide direction and travel entirely in reverse? I could be wrong, but isn't this the same thing that already...

I'll be honest, I wasn't exactly expecting 66% of people to try and shoot this down over balance concerns. If you don't like double-headed trains, nobody is forcing you to use them, guys. :) You are correct. nobody is forced, but with the buff, there becomes a single, obvious choice. I'm not agains...

I'll be honest, I wasn't exactly expecting 66% of people to try and shoot this down over balance concerns. If you don't like double-headed trains, nobody is forcing you to use them, guys. :) consuming more fuel No one really cares about fuel use. Except for the people who have a centralized megabase...

I did look at this mod and my one gripe with it is that based on the description, only one of the engines consumes fuel? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but I get that modders have limitations. There is a setting where the fuel automatically balances itself now and then. But it doesn't real...

If this were added, why use single headed trains at all? You are getting rid of a choice (acceleration or space) and replacing it with a “right way” It's not getting rid of a choice, it's essentially just a buff for double-headed trains. Single-headed trains still have some advantages, the main one...