Friday Facts #128 - Back down to earth

[Ojelle]

^THIS, i vote for this! Really nice!
Just by making it either loading or unloading the total "OP'nes" is gone.

Edit: damn, would this be in 13? I'm going to hate you if it takes long now you got me warm for it

[sillyfly]

For train unloading, you have a inserter direct from the wagon into the loader, which then puts onto the belt.

I think this will make loaders/unloaders miss most of their usefulness. Part of the appeal, for me at least, is having away with the awkward and (IMHO) stupid-looking rows of inserters in train stations. I really hope you will consider having a train loader/unloader (or hopper, or however you want to call it).

[atomic_peach]

New guy from Steam, here, so while I haven't played long enough to reach end game I still feel like I've seen enough streams/videos to understand it.

I would agree that the idea in the blog would be overpowered and would have said no, but the new concept of the loader as part of the chest and only working one way would be a great addition. I feel this concept would only add to gameplay and allow for new ways to optimize factories and other lines. I would say "yes" to this new loader concept.

Thanks for such a great, actively developed game. I hope to pitch in more effectively as I put more hours into the game!

[Klonan]

For train unloading, you have a inserter direct from the wagon into the loader, which then puts onto the belt.

I think this will make loaders/unloaders miss most of their usefulness. Part of the appeal, for me at least, is having away with the awkward and (IMHO) stupid-looking rows of inserters in train stations. I really hope you will consider having a train loader/unloader (or hopper, or however you want to call it).

Well it will still decrease loading/unlodaing times,
The only reason people use long rows of inserters is because of the limitation of inserters placing onto belts one at a time,
I think with the loader you wouldn't have to have huge rows unless you' want to, and it will still simplify the train station designs considerably

For example unloading setups like this could be used

[AliceTheGorgon]

Another vote not to have loaders/unloaders as depicted in the blog post.

I like the general concept of being able to make inserters faster for belt operations, but maybe go with some sort of inserter with a large scoop that is slower but puts/takes multiple items onto/off a belt. Perhaps with upgrades similar to the insterter stack bonus, but for scoop size so it can scoop more items at once when dealing with belts.

Edit: Nevermind, I retract my objection. To have a line of assemblers fed with these would also require more spliters and belts than inserters would, so I think it's probably more balanced than I initially thought.

[Linosaurus]

I've been thinking a long time about this, and i think i have figured out one possible solution.
I think it was someone in one of the earlier pages who came up with the idea,
But in essence its like this,
The loader is a 2x1 'chest' which automatically either inputs from a belt, or outputs onto a belt, I was thinking it could do so at half the belts speed.

Yes! This would be a great addition. Would make belts much more useful late game, and let me keep forests of inserters around. I like forests of inserters.

So for instance a 'Basic loader' unloads at half the speed of a basic belt.
I feel this balances it somewhat, as then you'd need two of them for a full belt, and a splitter, effectively making a full belt setup 3x2.

For a full blue belt you'd need 8ish inserters but this really is not a problem. 8 is a good balance point in between the one loader in the original suggestion, and 38 inserters you need today (if my testing was done correctly).

(Possibly good) ideas:

• Inserters should be unable to put items in the input buffer (and vice versa for output), to avoid creating a 2x1 chest. Such a chest would be very useful, and should therefore be considered/balanced separately.
• Don't actually add yellow and red versions. They are not useful early on before stack size bonuses, and would clutter up the item list. Just add one version you unlock with blue belt research. (I leave it as an exercise to the reader to make it work visually with a belt setup of any color.

[Klonan]

• Inserters should be unable to put items in the input buffer (and vice versa for output), to avoid creating a 2x1 chest. Such a chest would be very useful, and should therefore be considered/balanced separately.
• Don't actually add yellow and red versions. They are not useful early on before stack size bonuses, and would clutter up the item list. Just add one version you unlock with blue belt research. (I leave it as an exercise to the reader to make it work visually with a belt setup of any color.

I think the 2x1 'chest' would be balanced in that it has less storage than 2 1x1 chests, I was thinking the loader itself only has like 10 storage spaces, less than the 16 for a wooden chest, so that its useful, but not useful as a standalone chest.

I think the yellow red version would be alright, their usefulness in the early game isn't to be underestimated, and they would become more useful as you research stack size. I think locking the loader behind late game research is unfairly limiting what can be done with it in the early game.

[Kalabint]

Hi, here are my 2 Cents:

I think something like this:


Is a bit overpowered, because it doesn't need more space than this Solution here for the chest loading and deloading part and it makes things much more easier than this Solution here:

I think, a part of Factorio is, experimenting, how things work, and how to solve them as good as possible, and when the Materials are limited, the Solutions become a bit more creative...

Here is a closer look on the Loading Part

And deloading Part

But it would also save me the mess of all this above.

*Edit:

This setup is capable of taking almost 2 Express belts in, and something arround 1 Expressbelt out

[Zeblote]

You've just shown why they're a great idea - so we don't need to build that garbage in your last images.

[AliceTheGorgon]

You've just shown why they're a great idea - so we don't need to build that garbage in your last images.

We already don't have to.

That image was a setup designed to move items with chests and inserters faster than transport belts can move them.

Loaders and unloaders wouldn't make belts move faster, and so some people would still want to build setups like that.

[Klonan]

Hi, here are my 2 Cents:

Is a bit overpowered, because it doesn't need more space than this Solution here for the chest loading and deloading part and it makes things much more easier than this Solution here

That's not a good argument IMO,
you could say the same thing,

Splitters are overpowered and not needed because they make this:


Into this:


Which ruins all the fun, doesn't it?

My point is, just because something can already be done in the game, using inserters and chests, doesn't mean this loader won't introduce new interesting gameplay, and will increase the utility and flexibility of peoples designs.
I mean nobody will force you to use loaders, and your old chests setup will work just as it is

[Neotix]

Quote Klonan

[quote="Klonan"][quote="Kalabint"]Hi, here are my 2 Cents:

Is a bit overpowered, because it doesn't need more space than this Solution here for the chest loading and deloading part and it makes things much more easier than this Solution here[/quote]

That's not a good argument IMO,
you could say the same thing,

Splitters are overpowered and not needed because they make this:


Into this:


Which ruins all the fun, doesn't it?

My point is, just because something can already be done in the game, using inserters and chests, doesn't mean this loader won't introduce new interesting gameplay, and will increase the utility and flexibility of peoples designs.
I mean nobody will force you to use loaders, and your old chests setup will work just as it is[/quote]

Wrong. Splitters have much more complex behavior then simple splitting belts and you can't replicate it only by inserters.

[Ojelle]

Quote Klonan

Hi, here are my 2 Cents:

Is a bit overpowered, because it doesn't need more space than this Solution here for the chest loading and deloading part and it makes things much more easier than this Solution here

That's not a good argument IMO,
you could say the same thing,

Splitters are overpowered and not needed because they make this:


Into this:


Which ruins all the fun, doesn't it?

My point is, just because something can already be done in the game, using inserters and chests, doesn't mean this loader won't introduce new interesting gameplay, and will increase the utility and flexibility of peoples designs.
I mean nobody will force you to use loaders, and your old chests setup will work just as it is

Wrong. Splitters have much more complex behavior then simple splitting belts and you can't replicate it only by inserters.

You can do nearly everything with inserters (wich splitters can do), granted, some things would take a lot of place. But I still think his point is valid .
And give a few examples, be constructive. What you post isnt exactly usefull

[portres]

I would love that

[deef0000dragon1]

I find that the loaders would be very useful for things like max output copper coil assemblers. I find having to use 9 fast inserters to output to be absurd for something like this.
I really think that so long as the area that they take up is large enough, loaders could be balanced in any situation.
I also believe that inserters will not lose their place because you really wouldn't need to use loaders/unloaders for anything that outputs less than once a second.

I think that this is a good time for the devs to get a good external "alpha" program going.
If they add the loaders/unloaders as an included mod, people can chose to play with them or to leave the game as it is before it (or any other "alpha" idea) is added to the beta.
This would allow for testing of more than just the whole game, as it allows for testing of new parts of the game through more than just the devs.

[Neotix]

Quote Klonan

Hi, here are my 2 Cents:

Is a bit overpowered, because it doesn't need more space than this Solution here for the chest loading and deloading part and it makes things much more easier than this Solution here

That's not a good argument IMO,
you could say the same thing,

Splitters are overpowered and not needed because they make this:


Into this:


Which ruins all the fun, doesn't it?

My point is, just because something can already be done in the game, using inserters and chests, doesn't mean this loader won't introduce new interesting gameplay, and will increase the utility and flexibility of peoples designs.
I mean nobody will force you to use loaders, and your old chests setup will work just as it is

Wrong. Splitters have much more complex behavior then simple splitting belts and you can't replicate it only by inserters.

You can do nearly everything with inserters (wich splitters can do), granted, some things would take a lot of place. But I still think his point is valid .
And give a few examples, be constructive. What you post isnt exactly usefull

To replicate splitter behavior you will need not only inserters but also smart chests, and combinators with complex logic. It can be done but building that everywhere when splitter is needed would be too complex for players. Because of hidden behaviors, splitters have place in game puzzle. Loader don't have complex behavior behind and it can be easily replicate with inserters. It will only make simple solutions, even simpler.

Combinators are great addition to game. Very simple but allow to build very complex structure and that is Factorio spirit, not simplification.

[Kalabint]

I mean nobody will force you to use loaders, and your old chests setup will work just as it is

This is true. As i stated at the end:

But it would also save me the mess of all this above.

I am not totally against it, I am a bit splitted over it. I know, it will allow more things, and will make allot of things much easier, so, well, I can't really decide.

After thinking a bit over it, i don't really find it a stupid idea... but i also find it sad, that it will become simpler to build some of the Constructs. But never mind that... There are enough Questions to answer.

• Do they need Power?
  • And if yes, how much? Why not ca (8x33kW Fast Inserter)=264kW?
  Are they Capable of loading directly from a Chest into the next Chest?
  Or Deloader, and then a Loader? See this Post here
  Possible to load/unload Trains?
  Usable also for Assembling Machines? Would be useful for Copper Wires
  

Its a Tool, which moves quite much in only a short time through whole Chests, like a Buffer. But what I know, is, that it needs to be enough expensive that its not a good idea to build whole Storage Systems (like my one).

One of the Balancing Acts is also the size of the Loader:

I find that the loaders would be very useful for things like max output copper coil assemblers. I find having to use 9 fast inserters to output to be absurd for something like this.
I really think that so long as the area that they take up is large enough, loaders could be balanced in any situation.

Part of the "Oh noo, please don't do this" Effect is also, that allot of effort which went into finding those tricky solutions would be almost for nothing, I think.

[Drury]

Oh, I like copper wires. I like having a lot of them for blue science.

[deef0000dragon1]

I think something that may need to be discussed is the idea of in line processing. one in one out recipes like copper coil and gears would be nice to be doable inline, but it must also be brought up if multi input recipes should be doable through inline processing.

[MeduSalem]

I think something that may need to be discussed is the idea of in line processing. one in one out recipes like copper coil and gears would be nice to be doable inline, but it must also be brought up if multi input recipes should be doable through inline processing.

You mean like the Star Wars Episode 2 droid assembly lines?

Where there is a main belt and the items move from one assembly step to the next with changes being made to it inline?

1.jpg (34.04 KiB) Viewed 13378 times

With additional source items being added to the items on the main belt with Inserters grabbing from parallel belts?

Like the heads or arms that get grabbed from parallel belts and added to the droid's torso in the SW factory:

2.jpg (149.25 KiB) Viewed 13378 times

The thought has crossed my mind more than once in the past 2 years, but it would require a lot of changes and it would fundamentally alter the way Factorio works. Don't know if the devs would ever consider such a drastic change of direction, but probably not at this stage of development with the final stretch in sight.

I think that it might be something to consider for Factorio 2 in the far off future.