Factorio Forums

I have a moderately extensive train network and I am using a system I haven't seen elsewhere. Is there some major flaw that I didn't notice, is it personal preference, or did I finally come up with an original idea?

I like this design because it uses relatively few resources to set up, but can carry a lot of resources at once, reducing the congestion I would have had if I used 1-2s or 1-4-1s.

There is one flaw I noticed, though: stations do not line up so that all the cars stop at the same place (devs, can you change this please?). The first 3 cars fit perfectly, however cars 4-6 are offset by one square and cars 7-9 are offset by three squares.

Note that I only use this for iron and copper, less plentiful resources (everything else) use 1-2 trains.

Train wagons are exactly 7 tiles wide, and stations can only be placed on even tiles. This means odd-numbered train setups cannot line up perfectly.

You can reduce the 3-square error to 1-square by moving the station.

I just looked at it again, and that does work. I thought I tried it in the past and it worked worse, but now I have a feeling I moved the station the wrong way. That sounds like something I would do .
I also noticed that it's not off by 1 tile and 3 tiles, it's off by 1 tile and 4 tiles. When I change it, it's off by 1 and 2.
So...
Yep, I can change it so it's off by 0, 1, and 0.
I feel so silly now.

Anyway, thanks for drastically improving the efficiency of my train network!

If you change it to unload 2 or 4 wagons at once instead of 3, you can position the stations so the wagons won't be offset at all.

Yeah, I'm thinking that when my next base gets up to trains I'll load and unload 4 at a time (trains of 8 or 12) or simply try out a new system, whether it be double- headers or smaller trains.

I like your idea, and I hope you had fun play around with it.

I like this design because it uses relatively few resources to set up, but can carry a lot of resources at once...

A cheaper and possibly simpler solution would be to use fast inserters instead, and load all wagons at the same time. To empty a full blue belt you need 17/10/8 fast inserters depending on stack size bonus. If you place 6 fast inserters per wagon only on one side, then 9 wagons can empty 3 blue belts even without stack size bonus. That will also save you the trouble of setting the additional stations in the train schedule.

That's another interesting idea. That would be especially good to facilitate using trains before you have a good advanced circuit setup.

I was also thinking (probably in a different map, of course) that I could do something where I have 4 or 8 stations surrounding my base which unload 1-2 or 1-4 or 1-4-1 trains, and then load the resources into much larger trains to send to a station in my main base.

You could just put an extra inserter in the gap between wagons to make sure all wagons get unloaded at the same speed. As PetWolverine said, the OCD-friendly version uses an even number of "unload bays", but otherwise, there's no right or wrong about this approach. I've seen it done with LCCCCL-LCCCCL-LCCCCL-LCCCCL trains being unloaded 4 wagons at a time.

As you said, using long trains eases congestion on your rail network. It comes at the cost of needing to set up larger stations and other infrastructure (waiting bays at intersections, stations, train stackers, etc). Cutting the station by a third as you have done is a good way to mitigate that a bit

Other than that, it's very personal. I like compact setups, so I try to keep my trains at 2-6 max size. I think I'll actually try building a satisfying unloader doing two wagons at a time. Should be a nice project.

Xtrafresh wrote:You could just put an extra inserter in the gap between wagons to make sure all wagons get unloaded at the same speed. As PetWolverine said, the OCD-friendly version uses an even number of "unload bays", but otherwise, there's no right or wrong about this approach. I've seen it done with LCCCCL-LCCCCL-LCCCCL-LCCCCL trains being unloaded 4 wagons at a time.

As you said, using long trains eases congestion on your rail network. It comes at the cost of needing to set up larger stations and other infrastructure (waiting bays at intersections, stations, train stackers, etc). Cutting the station by a third as you have done is a good way to mitigate that a bit

Other than that, it's very personal. I like compact setups, so I try to keep my trains at 2-6 max size. I think I'll actually try building a satisfying unloader doing two wagons at a time. Should be a nice project.

Wouldn't it be cool if you had a train combine/split station?

4 LCCCCL trains enter on one side and then on the other side a single LCCCCL-LCCCCL-LCCCCL-LCCCCL exits and vice versa.

Somebody please write a mod that can (programmably) split, join and rearange trains.

That would actually be really cool. I've had ideas of having several large stations a ways out from my base where lots of small ore trains go, then fill up one or two big trains to go to one main station, but if you could simply couple them together instead of having to unload and re-load the bigger train, that would be much faster.

Please go post that in the suggestions form .

mrvn wrote:Wouldn't it be cool if you had a train combine/split station?

4 LCCCCL trains enter on one side and then on the other side a single LCCCCL-LCCCCL-LCCCCL-LCCCCL exits and vice versa.

Somebody please write a mod that can (programmably) split, join and rearange trains.

Hey, that really isn't a bad idea! would be cool to increase long-range throughput for megabases.

Jap2.0 wrote:That would actually be really cool. I've had ideas of having several large stations a ways out from my base where lots of small ore trains go, then fill up one or two big trains to go to one main station, but if you could simply couple them together instead of having to unload and re-load the bigger train, that would be much faster.

Please go post that in the suggestions form .

I thought about doing that too, but then I figured if I have everything unloaded, why not smelt it right there too? :p

Xtrafresh wrote:

Jap2.0 wrote:That would actually be really cool. I've had ideas of having several large stations a ways out from my base where lots of small ore trains go, then fill up one or two big trains to go to one main station, but if you could simply couple them together instead of having to unload and re-load the bigger train, that would be much faster.

Please go post that in the suggestions form .

I thought about doing that too, but then I figured if I have everything unloaded, why not smelt it right there too? :p

I never thought of just turning them into external smelting outposts. Maybe I'll do that, because plates stack higher as well.

Jap2.0 wrote:

Xtrafresh wrote:

Jap2.0 wrote:That would actually be really cool. I've had ideas of having several large stations a ways out from my base where lots of small ore trains go, then fill up one or two big trains to go to one main station, but if you could simply couple them together instead of having to unload and re-load the bigger train, that would be much faster.

Please go post that in the suggestions form .

I thought about doing that too, but then I figured if I have everything unloaded, why not smelt it right there too? :p

I never thought of just turning them into external smelting outposts. Maybe I'll do that, because plates stack higher as well.

And on the way back the trains are empty so you can easily load them up with a bit of wood, coal or other fuel for the smelter.

Only drawback is that you have to destroy and rebuild the smelter as mines get exhausted. Building a smelter at every mine isn't the best idea. But putting it in the middle of a bunch of mines makes sense. Move it whenever the congestion for ore trains gets too much.

Well, I was even thinking more permanent, like 4 or 8 a little ways out from my base. In that case, I wouldn't really need to move them.

I have this design for a megabase in my head where the rocket silos are in the middle. Then outwards in circles are the production facilities so that each item only travels from an outer circle to an inner circle. The ore smelters would be on the outside where there is plenty of space for them. As you go inward there is less space but you also need less. Because more complex items consume multiple items to produce.

Of course, if you built a megabase that way there would be limited space for expansion.

You just copy&paste the whole base.