I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
-
- Long Handed Inserter
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 2:57 pm
- Contact:
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
I love tools like this, and I haven't seen any of them getting updated, so I forked, updated, and made a pull request. (Well, it looks like there's been some recent activity in this thread, but I only noticed after I put in all the work. )It's up to rubyruy to pull the changes in, but in the meantime, you can use my fork. Just use his original url, and replace "rubyruy" with "antibluequirk". (I'd post a link, but I'm not allowed yet.)
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 10:14 pm
- Contact:
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
Hey folks, I was trying to avoid this until rubyruy could merge my changes, but it's clear the community's patience is starting to wear thin...
I've made a fork of my own which is 0.15.x compatible. Additionally, it has a lot of new features, such as:
I am still working to get my changes merged into the original rubyruy version so hopefully eventually we can go back to that URL.
I've made a fork of my own which is 0.15.x compatible. Additionally, it has a lot of new features, such as:
- Support for adding multiple recipes, which all then contribute to the main total
- UI cleanup to make it more readable
- "Explain" function that tries to educate the user on how the tool arrived at the numbers
- Bulk Import/Export. Enter multiple recipes as text, which you can then save locally as a text field
- Add support for calculating the number of miners needed for ore
I am still working to get my changes merged into the original rubyruy version so hopefully eventually we can go back to that URL.
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 10:14 pm
- Contact:
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
Updated my fork with 0.15.9 given the big changes to the science pack recipes.
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
Thanks. Its very nice that you updated it to 15 version.
Please fix this issue with limited layout rendering
Please fix this issue with limited layout rendering
- Attachments
-
- Capture.PNG (40.53 KiB) Viewed 9806 times
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 10:14 pm
- Contact:
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
OK, I think I've fixed the issue with the layout section being cut off.
If the layout is too big to fit on the screen, it should now scroll horizontally.
Give it a try and let me know what you think!
If the layout is too big to fit on the screen, it should now scroll horizontally.
Give it a try and let me know what you think!
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
Yeah! It works awesome. Good job!
-
- Inserter
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:13 am
- Contact:
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
Thank you!brindyblitz wrote:Updated my fork with 0.15.9 given the big changes to the science pack recipes.
- Justin -
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:24 pm
- Contact:
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
I currently play on the experimental 1.15.x and the info box of yellow belts states a speed of 13.333 items/s. 13.333 * 60 = 799.9999998 items/minute or 800 items/min as also stated on the official Factorio Wiki. The calculator uses a speed of 399.60 items/min for yellow belts. The speeds for red and blue belts seem to be off too. Is this a bug?
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 10:14 pm
- Contact:
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
Mostly, the issue here is what the actual values means, rather than a calculation error.
You'll notice the value you're getting is approximately half of what you expect. This is because the value you're getting, "# Assembly Lines," considers an assembly line to be one side of the belt, rather than both sides. The values you have (13.333) is for BOTH sides of the belt, so therefore these numbers are off by half.
I believe the "Explain" link in the UI should mention the value is for one side of the belt.
I completely understand that whether you interpret "# Assembly Lines" be one or both sides of the belt is basically a toss-up, so I'm open to suggestions on what should be changed to clarify this. Let me know!
In addition, there appears to be slight discrepancies in the number due to rounding (the real number for one side of the belt is 400 items/min, not 399.60). This is due to us inputting the belt speed with just two decimals places of precision. We should fix that.
You'll notice the value you're getting is approximately half of what you expect. This is because the value you're getting, "# Assembly Lines," considers an assembly line to be one side of the belt, rather than both sides. The values you have (13.333) is for BOTH sides of the belt, so therefore these numbers are off by half.
I believe the "Explain" link in the UI should mention the value is for one side of the belt.
I completely understand that whether you interpret "# Assembly Lines" be one or both sides of the belt is basically a toss-up, so I'm open to suggestions on what should be changed to clarify this. Let me know!
In addition, there appears to be slight discrepancies in the number due to rounding (the real number for one side of the belt is 400 items/min, not 399.60). This is due to us inputting the belt speed with just two decimals places of precision. We should fix that.
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
I believe that this discrepancy is intentional. Even though 400/min is the maximum throughput, it is near impossible to reach in practice. Which means your assemblers will be idle some of the time, resulting in an output that is slightly less than what you specified. Reducing the belt capacity by a tiny amount (0.1%), ensures that belts won't be a bottleneck.brindyblitz wrote:In addition, there appears to be slight discrepancies in the number due to rounding (the real number for one side of the belt is 400 items/min, not 399.60). This is due to us inputting the belt speed with just two decimals places of precision. We should fix that.
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
This tool is out of date. To some extent the numbers are correct, however I suspect certainly belt changes have not been taken into account. It is telling me that a normal belt can handle only 10 steel smelters worth of output of copper/iron plate per belt. In 0.16 this is actually 24 smelters worth of output with 12 on each side.
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2017 10:14 pm
- Contact:
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
Looks like you're hitting this issue, https://github.com/rubyruy/factorio-calc/issues/50
This is lame, but you can fix it by switching the belt speed to fast and then back basic again and it will give you the correct results.
Now that someone's complained, I'll try to fix that bug (anyone else with programming knowledge is also welcome to give it a try too!).
This is lame, but you can fix it by switching the belt speed to fast and then back basic again and it will give you the correct results.
Now that someone's complained, I'll try to fix that bug (anyone else with programming knowledge is also welcome to give it a try too!).
Re: I made a calculator for all you OCD planners out there
Here is a patch for updating to 0.17.11 experimental.
It adds the updated recipes, introduces the new belt and drill speeds and sets the default belt speed to the new basic belt.
Sorry, I don't have my github credentials on me.
It adds the updated recipes, introduces the new belt and drill speeds and sets the default belt speed to the new basic belt.
Sorry, I don't have my github credentials on me.
- Attachments
-
- 0_17_11.patch.txt
- (64 KiB) Downloaded 222 times