Friday Facts #128 - Back down to earth

[kovarex]

So here it is: https://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-128

[keyboardhack]

As a 2x1 item i don't think the loader is overpowered as it usually won't be used over a 1x1 inserter.
It will also make belts more viable when compared to robots.
Because it's expensive it won't be used in early game and it's really needed in late game when you are working with belts.

[HanziQ]

How is the number in the title always wrong?

[Xeteth]

I get what the aim is here with the 'Loader'; it allows a high throughput of items in/out of chests/wagons which may seem like a great idea. But honestly half the magic of Factorio is working with complex builds and designing things to be the 'most efficient' or balanced etc. As such I really think this detracts from the game... Factorio has never been a game to hold the players hand and I think it would lose some of the magic if it did so.

[MalContentFL]

I'd love to see the loader in Factorio. I think if it only unloaded and loaded chests it would be balanced, as letting it extract from trains would make almost every train station obsolete. Also, making it endgame wouldn't ruin the creativity of early and middle game designs. I imagine it would cost quite a few processing units and would take a lot of research.

[vanatteveldt]

As a 2x1 item i don't think the loader isn't overpowered as it usually won't be used over a 1x1 inserter.
It will also make belts more viable when compared to robots.
Because it's expensive it won't be used in early game and it's really needed in late game when you are working with belts.
Loader DO WANT!!!!

I disagree. I think the loader is a too-specific and overpowered replacement for something that already exists, namely inserters. I think inserters almost always move from container-to-container (including assemblers, wagons, etc), or from belt to container or vice versa. In the latter case, they get a big stack bonus. If inserters need to be boosted, why not create a new class of "express inserters", or use the stack size bonus for belt insertions as well?

As Kovarex indicates in the post, it is a drop-in replacement for something that we can already achieve with interesting setups, so I think it takes away gameplay rather than adding it.

What I would instead add are hoppers and feeders. A feeder is a belt that carries goods up into a hopper, and a hopper is a container that has a belt coming out of it (or that can be placed on a belt somehow). This should possibly be restricted to raw materials, ie coal and ores
. Trains should also have hopper cars that can be loaded with a feeder, and that are unloaded automatically if they stop over a hopper car unloader pit, which has a belt coming out of it.

[ratchetfreak]

Maybe don't fully compress the blue belt.

Instead add tiers: only provide enough for a yellow belt for the first tier. Red belt for the second one and blue for the final one. Each with increasing costs.

It should also be limited (besides the extra space) so it won't replace the inserter completely. Like it won't work with all entities.

[DaveMcW]

The belt balancing mini-game is overrated. It has almost no benefit compared to letting over-supplied belts fill up, and under-supplied factories shut down naturally.

If you really want to play the belt balancing game, you quickly realize that it is a boring circuit optimization problem that has nothing to do with building factories. The best solution is to copy a design from someone who cares about it more than you.

[TuckJohn]

I vote no on the loader- as someone mentioned above me, it replaced the need for (some) complex setups and it can take away part of the gameplay.

[sillyfly]

I think the loader can be a great addition if done correctly, or very frustrating if done incorrectly. The main issue is probably it being "overpowered", so it takes over everything.

I think if it can take out of any chest and put into any chest it may (not sure) be overpowered. If it can interact with assembling machines as well it will definitely be overpowered.

I don't think it being able to interact with wagons will be overpowered - on the contrary, I think making it only able to interact with wagons (Ok, and maybe steel chests) will make a lot of sense - I don't really enjoy putting loads of chests next to every wagon, and I really think it's a problem. There's no thought to it - just slap a very long line of chests with inserters. Why not have one entity that can unload the train fast, instead of all these chests and inserters?


So my opinion is a loader is probably a good idea if it:
1. Takes a high-level research to unlock (at least blue science, possibly gated by Inserter stack size bonus 3 or 4).
2. Can't take things out of / put things into assembling machines / furnaces etc.
3. Is expensive to build and requires electricity.
4. (And I know this will probably be a point of contention, but I really think this one makes a lot of sense!) It can put things into / take things out of cargo wagons.

[sillyfly]

The belt balancing mini-game is overrated. It has almost no benefit compared to letting over-supplied belts fill up, and under-supplied factories shut down naturally.

If you really want to play the belt balancing game, you quickly realize that it is a boring circuit optimization problem that has nothing to do with building factories. The best solution is to copy a design from someone who cares about it more than you.

I completely agree with this.

What I would instead add are hoppers and feeders. A feeder is a belt that carries goods up into a hopper, and a hopper is a container that has a belt coming out of it (or that can be placed on a belt somehow). This should possibly be restricted to raw materials, ie coal and ores
. Trains should also have hopper cars that can be loaded with a feeder, and that are unloaded automatically if they stop over a hopper car unloader pit, which has a belt coming out of it.

Also very good point. Maybe make them only able to process raw materials, and only load/unload wagons, and maybe "ore heap".

[GeoStyx]

I like what sillyfly said. I think it'd need to be high level research, and be really expensive to make. Also require electricity to run, and have it only work with chests and train cars. I do think this would take the pressure off of using so many bots lategame to reduce lag.

[Martc]

I like hopper/feeder idea. It will works like loader but it would have own storage, which needs to be filled/emptied with inserter. This way you can use inserter stack bonus for belts and you still needs some designing to saturate belt.

[selkathguy]

I agree that a lategame belt solution is required. I think this "Loader" as it stands now is significantly overpowered being able to completely saturate a belt.

Suggestion: Perhaps it can load both sides, but only as fast as a slow belt could, so you have convenience at the price of throughput.

Efficient and optimized systems should be a challenge to build, but not tedious. As it stands now the Loader removes all challenge for maximum performance, which the entire point of the game is an optimization puzzle. As a sidenote it robs players of the satisfaction of "i built this" and makes higher throughput factories less impressive, imo.

EDIT: Hoppers and Feeders seem interesting. As long as you can combine entities with others in new and interesting ways, more entities is fine. They just should not serve a single purpose.

[silver_26]

I would say no.
first becase you are pushing the 0.13 further away every time
and more and more things com between it so, with the loader
it will take even longer for 13 to be released... ( and im waiting over 6 months for it )

2nd I think it will be over powered .
and how are you going to make this "loader" if you would have a belt with chests on both sides for storage ?
or storage unload...
like chest - loader - chest - loader ect. ? that would be overpowered

and I agree with selkathguy

Efficient and optimized systems should be a challenge to build, but not tedious. As it stands now the Loader removes all challenge for maximum performance, which the entire point of the game is an optimization puzzle. As a sidenote it robs players of the satisfaction of "i built this" and makes higher throughput factories less impressive, imo

I prefer to have bigger chests like warehouses with ... 30 / 40 or 50 items slots

leave the idea as it is and continue with bugfixes , dedicated multiplayer servers, and 0.13
or / and maby optimization for mega bases... caz im down to 22 Ups / 25 FPS

I think that is more a priority then the loader

[kovarex]

or / and maby optimization for mega bases... caz im down to 22 Ups / 25 FPS

I think that is more a priority then the loader

Can you provide the save? I will definitely do some optimisations in the spare time.

[DanGio]

Loader seems fine to me if well balanced, like said before : expensive item, late & expensive research...

maybe huge power consumption, or even, could consume lubricant in order to work ?

[Mercury044]

I think the loader can be a great addition if done correctly, or very frustrating if done incorrectly. The main issue is probably it being "overpowered", so it takes over everything.

I think if it can take out of any chest and put into any chest it may (not sure) be overpowered. If it can interact with assembling machines as well it will definitely be overpowered.

I don't think it being able to interact with wagons will be overpowered - on the contrary, I think making it only able to interact with wagons (Ok, and maybe steel chests) will make a lot of sense - I don't really enjoy putting loads of chests next to every wagon, and I really think it's a problem. There's no thought to it - just slap a very long line of chests with inserters. Why not have one entity that can unload the train fast, instead of all these chests and inserters?


So my opinion is a loader is probably a good idea if it:
1. Takes a high-level research to unlock (at least blue science, possibly gated by Inserter stack size bonus 3 or 4).
2. Can't take things out of / put things into assembling machines / furnaces etc.
3. Is expensive to build and requires electricity.
4. (And I know this will probably be a point of contention, but I really think this one makes a lot of sense!) It can put things into / take things out of cargo wagons.

I like the idea of a loader for chests (like loading Iron Plates into a Pasive Provider) but i like that trains take thought to unload.

Also like the idea of it taking stack size to unlock.

what about something that only loads chests quickly not unloads?

[madpav3l]

NO Loader, I think it is too OP or make it very limited, for example can be used only for raw ore (iron, copper, coal) so basically just for unloading/loading trains and even in this case I would limit the speed maybe just to saturate yelow belt.
As others said, make it expensive and late game research.

EDIT
I really like the Lubricant idea people come up with later in the thread.

[provet]

I've wanted something similar for some time now, I vote yes to loaders!
If nerfs were to be made. Make them only for input to inventories, not output.