Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Regular reports on Factorio development.
Locked
raidho36
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 2:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by raidho36 »

Me gripe with bots is that they remove the challenge. It's true that it's easier and quicker to design and build things that way, but that very aspect is makes it uninteresting. Building a factory IS the fun part of the game, and bots remove it neatly. Bots feel a lot like 100% refined sugar cereal: there's nothing wrong with it, it doesn't tastes bad, and it does everything it's supposed to do. The only downside is that you can't really enjoy it past age of seven.

Rakshasa
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 7:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by Rakshasa »

MeduSalem wrote:Belts are throughput limited and a huge UPS killer, no matter the optimizations you make to them.
The UPS killer aspect is now pretty much gone.

tk0421
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 9:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by tk0421 »

I also play with zero logistics bots for much as the same reasons as in the OP.

construction bots are great, but why play if you are just going to let a bot do everything, no challenge.

User avatar
WIZ4
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 1:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by WIZ4 »

Version 0.16.16

Minor Features
Removing logistics bots from the game
My native language is russian. Sorry if my messages are difficult to read.

User avatar
vampiricdust
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:31 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by vampiricdust »

raidho36 wrote:Me gripe with bots is that they remove the challenge. It's true that it's easier and quicker to design and build things that way, but that very aspect is makes it uninteresting. Building a factory IS the fun part of the game, and bots remove it neatly. Bots feel a lot like 100% refined sugar cereal: there's nothing wrong with it, it doesn't tastes bad, and it does everything it's supposed to do. The only downside is that you can't really enjoy it past age of seven.
So don't use them. I don't find belts to be a challenge, they are just tedious, time consuming, and you still have to build a factory. Your argument is as childish as you tried to make bots sound.

User avatar
brunzenstein
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 2:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by brunzenstein »

Caine wrote:
brunzenstein wrote:It would have been wise not to write this total ......(put here your own slew) FF in first place
- or alternatively save the not really sparkling text to April 1
To say the least in a nice way.
At least they are seeking feedback from the community this time instead of "pulling another fluid wagon".
In recent time Wube tries with effort and dedication in a wicket way to increase customer satisfaction by either taking beloved and long time working features away or annoy otherwise dedicated followers by limiting choices.
This FF is another brick in (or better said out of) a wall.
why not let user decide?
You don't like but, don't use it. Its as simple as that.
Last edited by brunzenstein on Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Omarflyjoemacky
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:56 pm
Contact:

Re: Container belts

Post by Omarflyjoemacky »

TOGoS wrote:The logistic system (but not necessarily the flying robots aspect of it) just make too much sense to take out. The reason flying logistic bots become overpowered is that they take up zero space and pick up/drop things instantaneously. As someone else said they act like teleporters. If we could have bots repulse each other somehow, or have to wait in line to take things out of a chest, that would nerf them in a reasonable way, I think.

As for improving logistics in other ways, there are a lot of good ideas on here, but my favorite is a 'container belt' that carries small (maybe single-stack) containers that are either filterable and/or have an ID that can be read by inserters (similar to trains). That could help bridge the gap between belts (because they would be small and slow) and trains (it would allow sharing a track for multiple items, but in less complex ways than trains do). It would encourage building loops around your factory for non-bulk item delivery.

Or there could be logistic cranes that do a similar job to logistic bots but look like big inserters and are constrained to an area. They'd be able to move only one stack at a time but they'd move the entire stack.
All the users who have made their point and here is an actual dev, still talking about the nerf (is there a reasonable way...I can put a nuclear reactor in my pocket for crying out loud! It doesn't have to be 100% realistic). Listen to your community - it seems that most users like the logistics system the way it is and play the way they want to play.
"And then Bender ran."

GenBOOM
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by GenBOOM »

more on the idea of a 3d belt factorio...

there could be 3 "elevator" objects (more like spiral staircase) that have internal belts that spiral upwards these are 2x2 objects.
one is a single belt version. the belt starts on the left of the 2x2 spiraling to the right, the other version is right spiraling to the left. these input and output 1 belt.
then you have another version that is a helix with two belts on the inside, one going in each direction. these input and output 2 belts

these can all be stacked again allowing you to have hanging belts like hanging train rails.

of course there would need to be something like scaffolding added to support the belts every few tiles, and the upgraded belts weigh more and require more support more often.
this support would be on the lines between tiles to exist with the current belt sprites.
of course the higher you built it, the more expensive it is...but in this way belts would never take more than 2 spaces for input and output and would be an order of magnitude better than they are currently.
Last edited by GenBOOM on Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:53 pm, edited 4 times in total.

ili
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 6:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Container belts

Post by ili »

TOGoS wrote:The logistic system (but not necessarily the flying robots aspect of it) just make too much sense to take out. The reason flying logistic bots become overpowered is that they take up zero space and pick up/drop things instantaneously. As someone else said they act like teleporters. If we could have bots repulse each other somehow, or have to wait in line to take things out of a chest, that would nerf them in a reasonable way, I think.

As for improving logistics in other ways, there are a lot of good ideas on here, but my favorite is a 'container belt' that carries small (maybe single-stack) containers that are either filterable and/or have an ID that can be read by inserters (similar to trains). That could help bridge the gap between belts (because they would be small and slow) and trains (it would allow sharing a track for multiple items, but in less complex ways than trains do). It would encourage building loops around your factory for non-bulk item delivery.

Or there could be logistic cranes that do a similar job to logistic bots but look like big inserters and are constrained to an area. They'd be able to move only one stack at a time but they'd move the entire stack.
I like you belt vision, but I don't understated why the logistic system is an obstacle for making this vision a reality.
You can build that belt base and ignore the logistic robots.
Please explain why it is even considered a problem to you?

FasterJump
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:43 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by FasterJump »

I only use requester chests to cheat the game, like when i'm too lazy to build a belt for the radar production (for the satellite) or the trains refuelling.

Bots are like cheat codes. Your choice to use them or not.

By the way, hyyyyype for the upcoming belt compression fix!

Cgeta
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by Cgeta »

The only way I can see out of that dilemma is to find a way to make bots just as fun and complex to use as belts.
I imagine they would need ways to be managed, just like belts. But I feel like people would hate that though, as it could be seen as nerf

A pretty broad but probably complicated way to handle it would be to make bots able to carry more, but unable to overlap, but I guess this has been considered before and seems like it would be difficult to do efficiently.
Like, make them cost 10x the current price, and their carrying capacity 10x aswell. There would be much less numbers of them for the same throughput, but they would be more complex to manage.
Since the bobts can't overlap it would reduce the speed at which they can place/take out items from chests. For which is why their carrying capacity could be increased to balance it out.
Bases that have a lot of bots could require the player to set up something like sky roads via pylons to ensure good traffic, which essentially just turns them into something similar to belts, only that bots can enter and leave it wherever they need to.
Skyways could give them a speed bonus, but it would require them to use some pathfinding to be able to figure that out. But since the total numbers of bots is reduced, it might just be worth it maybe?


Alternately, instead of broad researches that improves all the bots all once, the player might have to upgrade bots on an individual basis. Maybe with modules.
When the bots are returning into a roboport, the game doesn't keep track of the individual bots. But it can still keeps track on the upgrades themselves which the bots brought in as they returned. When a new bot is sent out, it always gives it whatever the highest upgrades are or something.

Frightning
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 807
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by Frightning »

I think ultramn's base proves that bots do add something to the game: Trying to build a 1000SPM base without them would be so much less compact and inelegant (not to mention UPS intensive) without bots. With that observation made, there's already reason not to remove them. I do think it was a good move to gate them behind late game tech, because they are, undeniably, better than belts for anything of non-trivial scale (which most of what one is interested in doing late game is of non-trivial scale). The idea that bots are 'too good' is imo, misguided. They do actually have limitations that you really need to consider when building to the kinds of scales that they can support. For instance, it is important for the efficiency of a bot setup to think carefully about your layout and where (and how many) roboports to use, as well as where to place what production processes (placing your iron smeltery on the other side of your base from your iron ore off-load point, for instance, is poor design and will result in needing more bots/roboports to handle the same throughput).

If your complaint is somehow rooted in how most endgame production areas 'look about the same' then that really isn't even logistic bots' fault, but rather the fault of modules and beacons and how they (currently) work.

Mimp
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 8:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Container belts

Post by Mimp »

TOGoS wrote:...but my favorite is a 'container belt' that carries small (maybe single-stack) containers that are either filterable and/or have an ID that can be read by inserters (similar to trains). That could help bridge the gap between belts (because they would be small and slow) and trains (it would allow sharing a track for multiple items, but in less complex ways than trains do).
I've often wondered why we can't have stack items: "Iron Plate Stack". Put those items on your belts and you've improved throughput immensely. Make it so bots cannot carry said stack items. To me this feels very much like fluid barrels do but possibly without the necessity to assemble/disassemble the stack items. (Although having loaders spit out stacked items directly or having stack building inserters that do the process in a simpler fashion might be an idea.) It'd be nice to be allowed to dump the stack item into an assembler and have it unstack automatically filling 100 iron plates in the internal buffer at once.

TOGoS wrote:Or there could be logistic cranes that do a similar job to logistic bots but look like big inserters and are constrained to an area. They'd be able to move only one stack at a time but they'd move the entire stack.
I love this idea, having huge looming cranes operate over a production area of a factory. I'd imagine they'd have to be limited in an area so you couldn't just stamp down hundreds of them. Maybe make them have collisions with each other so they could deadlock if you try to abuse them, or simply have an area of operations that they cover, like a roboport and not permit any others to be built/active in that same area at the same time.
Last edited by Mimp on Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Cordylus
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by Cordylus »

I will remind my idea about ropeway conveyors:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7977
Image

This system could replace the logistic robots. The ropeway wagons loaded with the cargo (stored inside like in the chests) would be just moving along the line, and they will be able to unload by the long inserters. Basically the conveyor belt with the chests that interact with the ground in the minimal way.

Image

Just the logistic bots are moving along the predefined line. It would be also perfectly fit the Factorio style.

Matthias_Wlkp
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 11:28 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by Matthias_Wlkp »

I'm sure this was mentioned before - the same way you have barreling, why don't you have packaging? Put a stack of items into a "box" and then send boxes on a belt? In case of metal plates, that would increase the belt throughput 100 times.

Azirphaeli
Manual Inserter
Manual Inserter
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2017 7:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by Azirphaeli »

Honestly, I like the bots in limitation and I personally am capable of limiting myself. I think that people calling for the removal of the bots because they think it's broken or cheap are a bit selfish. If you don't like it, don't use it. It's not like bots are needed in *your factory*.

As for solutions, I agree with coming up with new ideas and ways to make the other systems more interesting, potentially strong, and viable.

The stack inserter was one big idea that worked well.
The updates that made trains easier to use and understand (and better) were also welcome.

This "stacked belt.." is interesting. If a 2nd or 3rd layer were added to factorio (we already have "height" now with the cliffs right?) that allowed for elevated belts and tracks could easier allow for fast/express lanes that flowed to different points in the factory without the need for a bulky main bus. A proper compression method would help as well.

Don't force people to stop doing what they like, or what works for them. Instead find ways to encourage people to try new things.

User avatar
Durabys
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 3:30 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by Durabys »

justincuster wrote:I think you could potentially make a lot of players mad if you removed bots or nerfed them too much. Perhaps you could add a starting condition which permanently disables logistic bot research/production in a particular save.
I proposed this exact same thing HERE:
Tomik wrote:
A simple solution that does no harm to anyone:

Remember how people played Marathon and Resource Overhaul mod? And then you made Hard Recipe and Railworld settings?

Just look at all the Config+/Advanced Settings/ReStack/Noxys Extra Settings Info mods on the mod portal that people frequently use and which allow one to RIDICULOUSLY modify the base game.

In vanilla non-modded Dwarf Fortress and Rimworld the player has EXTREME amounts of freedom to modify pre-game settings and options for a new game. Each game being completely different from another.

Add an option to the New Game settings screen that allows you to remove/add buildings/mechanics for your new game.

Done and nor harm inflicted on the community!

GenBOOM
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by GenBOOM »

Cordylus wrote:I will remind my idea about ropeway conveyors:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7977
Image

This system could replace the logistic robots. The ropeway wagons loaded with the cargo (stored inside like in the chests) would be just moving along the line, and they will be able to unload by the long inserters. Basically the conveyor belt with the chests that interact with the ground in the minimal way.

Image

Just the logistic bots are moving along the predefined line. It would be also perfectly fit the Factorio style.
that would be pretty neat

reminds me of this game:
http://positech.co.uk/cliffsblog/category/programming/
Image
Last edited by GenBOOM on Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 6539
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by Koub »

Cordylus wrote:I will remind my idea about ropeway conveyors:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7977
Now that's an ooold screenshot, before a set of belt optimizations that broke all the bases :')
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

bobucles
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1657
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:37 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #224 - Bots versus belts

Post by bobucles »

I think that the new artillery cannon can fill the role of "airborne logistics" in a much more satisfying manner than bots. :lol:

One of the big reasons to use bots is because they can manage a MUCH higher throughput than belts. This is very important for managing trains and the insane resource demands of beacon bases. Players also lean towards bots because at high mining research levels there is no way to manage an ore outpost with belts. Once again bots save the day in a situation where belts can't keep up.

I'm not sure there's a nice way to make a high throughput belt network that isn't basically a different kind of train network. Mods make an attempt to increase belt speeds through tricks such as stuffing lots of items into a single crate or using loaders to streamline the process. However these tricks favor bots as well since they too can take advantage of faster item transfers.

I'm not sure that belts can ever compete with bots without some kind of drastic balance changes. Faster belts are good, but faster bots are currently even better. Bot speed is unlimited research while belt speed caps out very early in the game. If you want to load or unload a chest, no number of inserters can compete with the sheer inventory dumping that a conga line of bots can do. In fact the only reason we still use archaic inserters and chests is because bots can't simply drop items into the assemblers.
Last edited by bobucles on Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Locked

Return to “News”