Factorio Forums

Hello to all!

My suggestion is to change default locomotive and cargo-wagon lengths.
This would be useful to avoid so strange situations where every wagon in train has “random” inserters nearby, as on Wiki page (where bug trying to present as a feature):
https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... _positions

In detail, I suggest to change this options in file \Factorio\data\base\prototypes\entity\entities.lua

For wagon

• Change “connection_distance” from default value 3.3 to 3

For locomotive

• Change “connection_distance” from default value 3.3 to 3

• Change “joint_distance” from default value 4.6 to 4.5

This would be after changes:


Every wagon would have strictly 6 inserters from every side.
And it’s beautiful that “base points of wagon” hit clearly in grid nodes .

There is no overlaps of collision box of wagons and locomotives. There is only small overlap of graphics. And because of the fact that developers have all powerful tools to change the game, I think that overlap of graphics is not a problem.

P.S.: if “connection_distance” for wagon would have value 4, there would be 7 inserters one every side of wagon. Let developers select right number.
P.P.S.: for me is so strange, why this situation was begin. If my suggestion is not valid, tell me please why .
P.P.S.: it's not a solution of "last inserter of last wagon" problem.

Thanks for attention. Devs, you are the best Devs among those whom I know.
Edit: sorry for my breaking English. I did my best

I think we better should ask for a special loading/unloading platform that is direction independent and have a total lenght of a wagon plus a gap. It could work as a long chest and can be filled directly from a belt as well as fully fill the belt.

I agree that trains should be aligned to the grid. It's very awkward dealing with stations when every new cargo car takes an inconsistent amount of space.

Seems like a good suggestion to me. Makes the train loading/unloading more consistent and intuitive. Although it will be a nightmare to rework all my stations .

No matter how long wagons are horizontally, they would be different size vertically. Even more they would be sqrt(2) times shorter - not an integer anyway.

This suggestion would make wagons of different length than than the current (or any other "standard" length) unuseable. Also different locomotive-lengths. Other train-stops.

And who says, that it is written there, that wagons needs to be filled/emptied by inserters?

Summary: The problem is not the wagon length, the problem is, how a train is loaded/unloaded.

What could be useful is a drop pit underneath the wagon (https://youtu.be/RTIHKJ3nXLk?t=30s) It Wouldn't really work with things like circuits but definitely with coal and ores (maybe plates?)
There doesn't have to be a new type of wagon but there would need to be a track with a 'hole' underneath. This would definitely go onto a belt.
The wagon would unload when it is stationary over an 'unloader track'.

Also a similar style loader would be cool with a belt leading up a ramp to the top of the wagon (possibly a hatch added) (https://youtu.be/4vs5WBwokI4?t=25s) or (https://youtu.be/45Y6Ou--_8s?t=30s) which is a bit more factorioy!
Maybe an overhead one (https://youtu.be/WgYxGFZ2djc?t=20s)


Or if all that is too sensible: https://youtu.be/DbJl_Astx_w

I agree that the wagons should be a standard length, but your sugested fix does not solve the problem.
Another issue arises that wagons and locomotives have a different length when orientated vertically than they do when oriented horizontally.
I have tried playing with the values via modding, but nothing I could do would allow me to make something that actually made sense.


A better sugestion would be to make wagons not only a standard size in tiles, but also to have the same size vertical as horizontal.


Even though I disagree with the actual sugestion, due to not taking the full issue into consideration, I do fully support the idea.

ssilk wrote:This suggestion would make wagons of different length than than the current (or any other "standard" length) unuseable. Also different locomotive-lengths. Other train-stops.

Of course. It occurs everytime when come radical changes. For example, when belts begin NOT put items far than itself.

ssilk wrote: And who says, that it is written there, that wagons needs to be filled/emptied by inserters?
Summary: The problem is not the wagon length, the problem is, how a train is loaded/unloaded.

It's a problem of how train loaded/unloaded AND a problem of wagon length because of players have a possibility to load/unload trains using inserters, AND this possibility is showed in Wiki.

bobingabout wrote:Another issue arises that wagons and locomotives have a different length when orientated vertically than they do when oriented horizontally.

Because of difference in horizontal and vertical is fundamental property of in-game isometry, it's the task of higher level

Summary: The problem is not the wagon length, the problem is, how a train is loaded/unloaded.

And that is a problem precisely because trains can not be loaded/unloaded according to a fixed metric.

I agree: The different length of trains vertically vs. horizontally is a complete design failure. But I really don't know, how to fix that.

But if that is fixed I don't see a problem, if we have a device that can (un-)load a wagon of any size. And knows to do that only for special types of wagons.

Obvious solution is to simply ignore the issue of it seeming to shift size when changing from horizontal to vertical. A mild, or even obvious distortion is a minor cost compared to the benefit of easy setup.

Obvious change, yes, but I would like to see that before. I fear it will hurt the eye.

Mion wrote:

bobingabout wrote:Another issue arises that wagons and locomotives have a different length when orientated vertically than they do when oriented horizontally.

Because of difference in horizontal and vertical is fundamental property of in-game isometry, it's the task of higher level

Yeah, well, the vertical is the same as the horizontal for other aspects. for example, 100 tiles vertical is the same as 100 tiles horizontal, and therefore will use 100 pipes, or 100 belts, yet a different number of train wagons to cover the same distance.

therefore, the wagon actually shrinks when it changes orientation to vertical. this shouldn't be the case, and needs fixing. which would need new graphics, as well as recoding.
And if you're going to do that, you might as well attempt to make them occupy a standard length in whole tiles.

You definitely will notice the length change of the wagons if you'll try to adapt them to the world grid. It would be about factor 1.4 — this is a huge distortion.
Something like this, but without angle distortion.

Just to clarify.

My idea is not in changing/removing isometric distortion, although it will be good.

At now, this isometric distortion is given. And if horizontal stations better for inserter load/unload than vertical (again, at now), let these station would be optimized!
Let will equal number of inserters on every side of wagon, not magic numbers 7-7-8-7-7-8-7-7-7-8... (see https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... _positions), because of strange fractional parameters in entity's settings.

The isometric distortion though shouldn't be as much of an issue as it is, because we're not truely using isometric.

besides, how can the chemical plant for example be 2x2 in all orientations, and work, but the train shrinks?

I think the issue with the graphics is they're trying to keep real world proportions from the upper forward edge, but at the same time using a 2D top down grid.

if you're having a griid of X = Y (IE, squares), then when you rotate an object 90 degrees, previous X = current Y, no exceptions. the train does not conform to these rules.
If you fix it, the train might look taller due to the height of the vehicle though.

Even with a 1:1.4 ratio, you will probably only notice it if you watch very carefully when the train turns.

Also, the chemical plant probably has different apperent dimentions when rotated, which, again, aren't noticeable since you don't see it rotating, and don't actually have any way to compare them normally.

bobingabout wrote:The isometric distortion though shouldn't be as much of an issue as it is, because we're not truely using isometric.

How can you be so sure? The devs made this, because it was ugly looking. Of course. Why else did they think to make it so (I mean, it has cost much time to fix this).

Besides, how can the chemical plant for example be 2x2 in all orientations, and work, but the train shrinks?
I think the issue with the graphics is they're trying to keep real world proportions from the upper forward edge, but at the same time using a 2D top down grid.

I'm sure the answer is: because of the aspect ratio. You look in a 45 degrees angle onto the surface. For small objects (2x2) it looks ok, not to change the ratio, but for long you will clearly see it.

Ranakastrasz wrote:Even with a 1:1.4 ratio, you will probably only notice it if you watch very carefully when the train turns.

Sorry, I know the devs: The would never do such afford, if it wasn't needed.

First off let's set the first thing straight: Factorio works with an oblique projection, not an isometric. An isometric perspective is a special kind of oblique because all 3 axes are rotated 120 degrees relative to the other 2 on the 2d projecton plane:

Factorio uses an oblique projection with the angles seen in the image above. The z axis(and yz angle) does not matter for the discussion.

Mathematically, the length of lines x and y onto the projection can be described as following: proj(x,y)=(a*x, b*y). We can safely say the x axis is scaled by 1, I think we can all agree. Now what this means is that we can extrapolate the value of y from the simple property that game tiles are equally sided square. This means that b is also 1, so a=b.

This means that if a line in 3d space on the x axis is as long as a line on the y axis, the oblique projection(to your 2d screen) should also show them being the same length! So it's illogical for trains to be shorter when vertical than when standing horizontal. However, the train should appear longer when positioned vertical, because of the overhang as a result of the height of the train(the z axis). An example of this:


So what should happen is that the real length of the train should match up in all orientations, while the apparent length should be bigger when positioned anything else but horizontal(ie. at an angle)