You know I agree with you on item exact, and also slot exact...Yoyobuae wrote:My count exact, tick exact, slot exact contraptions heavily disagree with you.
Did you know that south facing inserters takes one tick longer than north facing inserters when inserting from box to belt? Well, I noticed because it spoiled the perfect lane alignment when creating a compressed belt by using inserters.
... But tick exact stuff sucks in this game (and any other game for that matter). Ever since XNight's Smart Furnace I despise such contraptions that have to be so damn deterministic that they choke on themselves if only a single tick misalignment occurs.
Yeah, I know that Inserters facing in different directions are acting at different speeds, but it has been barely measurable before people started to make crazy combinator contraptions that required tick perfect behaviour. Before that most contraptions still worked nicely and without any problems, including a Smart Furnace and various other things.
Now that a lot of circuit network designs depend on tick perfect behaviour to measure item amounts everyone seems to freak out because of that... but I don't really think it should go into that direction because in my opinion the circuit network was never truly designed to handle tick perfect contraptions in the first place... and neither do I think that a tick perfect solution is necessary to make item perfect contraptions - which is all that is really necessary to optimize factories and item flow.
You know what I compare that to? Classic NES speed running.
Why? Because those speed runners always complain about the game when it doesn't behave frame perfect like they expected it to... and they make their own life miserable because of their sense of perfection.
The funniest/best part about that is that it was never required by those games to play frame perfect to win. It was just required to react within a certain margin, within a certain tolerance limit.
So coming back to Factorio I think that people should forget about tick perfect control because it is way out of day-to-day usage scenarios that are imposed on players. As long as a perfect item count can be guaranteed then tick perfect contraptions aren't really necessary except if you want to make your own life more miserable. Perfect Item count is much easier to implement when done at the right spots like for example via Circuit Network adjustable Inserter Stack Size. Stuff like that's all that's really needed to gain back the control over the item flow we lost thanks to the Inserter Stacksize updates of 0.13.
I think a lot of people who are too deep into the Circuit Network stuff lost their perspective on the game as a factory game and that this factory game itself requires some tolerance and margin within things work... and that tolerance limit is basically reached with Item perfect setups, not tick perfect setups because you may need several ticks as a margin in which the entire circuit network is running because the circuit network needs to react faster to stay within the tolerance limit.
I like how both you and ssilk had that small discussion about quantum stuff in the "The sad State of circuit logic"-thread. It basically describes what I think... due to the way certain things within the game engine work you will always have this very small fraction of chaos even if this chaos is somewhat deterministic and even if it is only one single tick. So one absolutely needs a tolerance to cope with that chaos. What you expect is that the game itself should be reduced to 0 chaos so that the circuit network can be tick perfect, which is unrealistic to say at least without increasing the UPS to update faster than the CN updates so that you are able to catch states between states, increasing the resolution, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I'm for more control over the item flow, I just don't think that a tick perfect approach is the right approach... I don't even think that it is completely possible to make tick perfect contraptions reliable due to how the data is structured into chunks and how certain things work in a "cascade" fashion and whatnot. It's just not worth the trouble. Staying with item perfect on the other hand is a very likely thing.
What the hell is that thing... and where would I need that? And why wouldn't splitting 1:1 with an express splitter be sufficient?ssilk wrote:One example I described here:
Only this combination is able to transport both lanes of the basic belt. If you replace basic belt with express belt, only one lane is needed.
Well, I admit it's a rare case. But I'm sure, there are more.
And that's why I came up with the belt-motor+modules that has an area-of-effect. No need to run around like a dumbass replacing belts anymore. Just plop the belt motor and the effect starts immediately... but the best is no one is forcing you to do it.ssilk wrote:Well, when I remember back, I did it the same.
But now I'm really not for any kind of "automatic replacement". This gives the player a feeling of "this must be done to play the game 'right'". But it is sooooo expensive to use express belts. Or eplace basic belts with fast or - much uglier - express belts. IMHO in most cases not really needed. The problem is, that the game "looks like", that this is needed. But the truth is, that you make a faster progress, if you try to not use them and place parallel belts instead (where possible of course).
Express Underground Belts braided with Fast Underground Belts and so on. That abomination:ssilk wrote:What is belt braiding?