Do we need faster belts?

[JackGruff]

One thing I have begun doing recently is to separate my production at an ore level. For example, circuit board production gets its own copper ore. I have done this because I find that even express belts struggle to move things fast enough. Also, all those insert transfer bonuses go to waste. So now I focus on putting as many entities next to each as possible.

However, one of the nice things about Factorio is options. We are free to arrange our factories and setups however we want. So I'm thinking we should have an option for even faster belts. At first I thought of a fourth type, but I think we could actual do with some belt upgrades in research. We could also have upgrades for inserter speeds so that they can keep up.

[ssilk]

The belts can be used for many stuff, but what counts in the end is throughput, not speed.
And with the basic belts we have about 700 items per minute, but with express belt, the throughput is not three times faster and with adding more speed, this gap rises.

(See https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... ts/Physics)

Or in other words: faster belts than yet would look wired (because of that speed) and have not the awaited advantage.
They must be extremely expensive (500 iron per section) and you can bring your character in trouble, because he can't run against it.

Another thing would be a new transport system. I think for something like in Portal II: tubes, which transport all the produced items and which have also automated switches and so on.

Which brings me to the point, that the factory in portal II was really cool.

[Hazard]

Just a question, but exactly how much material would a line of fast inserters move compared to the belts if we stick chests between them and max out the inserter stack size bonus? We presume of course that the the stacks being moved around are at the max for the inserters to handle at minimum.

[malokin]

YES WE DO!!!! (At least bump up the speed of lvl3 belts)

The fastest belt in the game should be slightly faster than walking speed. You MUST do this in the multiplayer release for trapping newbish players. (I'm also assuming enemy players WONT be able to dismantle enemy belts quickly)

[Nova]

@malokin: Just go away. Doing something like this will only annoy new players. Something like this may be "fun" for you, but it's like mobbing a pupil. "9 of 10 people like mobbing."


Do we need faster belts? Don't know. Some people say, solving problems is the main part of Factorio. "I want to split all my resources evenly on both sides of the belt, how do I do that?" - Some people want a special object for this. Another way would be to build something with a splitter and a few additional belts. Some people say, this "workaround" is an importand factor of Factorio and should not be simplified. Managing the space and belts to perform this task is the main part of Factorio, they say. What's better? Playing around with belts which are "not fast enough" could be one of this tasks.

All in all belts are very important for Factorio. But should we use them for the final stage of a base in Factorio? Belts are not really something I want to put in context with "high tech" and "speed". More like "slow, but steady". The problem: I have no idea which system could replace high speed belts. ^^

[Dysoch]

My opinion is ues, simple because faster belts mean the fast production start.
DyTech adds 2 faster belts. Soyou can try it

[malokin]

@Nova: No thanx brah, but I appreciate the input
edit: I don't know what "mobbing the pupil" is, so maybe I'm way off base here

Newbs can't get stuck, they'll just have to dismantle the belts if they stick themselves somewhere. If you can't see why having a belt that can trap players or force them or their vehicles into your laser grids is a good idea, i can't convince you. But when multiplayer rolls around, I bet you'll start to come around to the idea.

You need to use your imagination more, i agree that belts dont need to be faster for production's sake, it is not a speed/efficiency thing. It is the fact that having an end teir belt SLIGHTLY faster than foot travel gives players the freedom to make traps/unwalkable areas for other players in multiplayer AND it increases the value of speed increasing items. Imagine a MOAT of these belts, this would mean only vehicles or characters with exosuits could enter my base.

No need for the hostility nova, i didnt mean it as a troll for new players, i meant it as a legitimate idea, and I even acknowledge that newbs might get stuck in these end teir belts if they make a "whirlpool" of belts. Isnt that fun though? Being stuck in your own belts until you dismantle one? Meh, we have different tastes. My opinion is, A game should fucking hurt you on the last level, its okay for the highest teir to be dangerous for the newbs. factorio is far too gentle in its endgame.

[Gammro]

I agree with NOVA. There are already constructions with the current fastest belt which makes it hard to get into the base for aliens. This follows nova's idea of "finding workarounds to make it work", as it exploits the fact that the outer corner moves faster.
And to me, getting stuck behind a belt just sounds annoying, not like increasing endgame difficulty. I'd rather have the devs spend time on things like MP and blueprints.

[ssilk]

Just a question, but exactly how much material would a line of fast inserters move compared to the belts if we stick chests between them and max out the inserter stack size bonus? We presume of course that the the stacks being moved around are at the max for the inserters to handle at minimum.

Good point!

That's up to 5 items per pick and fast/smart inserters move 2.4 times per second, which is 0.41667 sec per move.

So:
5 * 2.4 = 12 items/sec. Or 720 items/min, which is exactly a basic belt.

The movement is faster:

2 tiles / 0.41667 sec = 4.8 tiles/sec.

That's about one tile per second faster than fast belts.

Disadvantage: this needs power. But for short distances this is very valid construction.

[StanFear]

I actually found transport belt cheated !
they allow to move stuff from one place to another energy-less !
I think the express belt should be removed, and for the other belts, they should have to be powered by belt station, which needs power to work and only support a number of items on a section (and could break if too much items are put on it ?)
that way, transports systems such as trains would become much more interesting !

[Wredi]

I actually found transport belt cheated !
they allow to move stuff from one place to another energy-less !
I think the express belt should be removed, and for the other belts, they should have to be powered by belt station, which needs power to work and only support a number of items on a section (and could break if too much items are put on it ?)
that way, transports systems such as trains would become much more interesting !

i agree entirely, although i dont have much game experience yet, it diesnt quite display for me, why trains and cars are necessary for production purposes, belts are way easier to handle, and the dont cost anything once they are build. they should consume electirity as well, that would be the major bit of the overall consumption, as it should be.

Regards, Wredi

[Hazard]

The belts don't cost electrical energy to facilitate gameplay, even though logically it should cost energy to run them.

Basically, it's an acceptable break from reality.

[Wredi]

The belts don't cost electrical energy to facilitate gameplay, even though logically it should cost energy to run them.

Basically, it's an acceptable break from reality.

i must concur. if we follow this logic, there wouldnt be any justification for improvements. i accept that it may be necessary in the current development state. But in long term i would like to see the belts cost electricity as well. its just silly that the main transportation "vehicle" is so irrational implemented.

Regards,
Wredi

[Hazard]

i must concur. if we follow this logic, there wouldnt be any justification for improvements. i accept that it may be necessary in the current development state. But in long term i would like to see the belts cost electricity as well. its just silly that the main transportation "vehicle" is so irrational implemented.

Regards,
Wredi

The problem is implementation; powering belts (especially over large distances) would cost large amounts of resources, and not just in electricity. The problem is how do you distribute the energy needed? By requireing that all belt sections lie within the reach of a power pole? By creating a 'belt motivator' structure that needs to be powered and either has a reach or a number of sections of belt it can power?

That all adds up into the raw materials that need to be inserted into the system, which can make starting up the factory a lot harder as more resources are needed while at the same time you can't provide those resources through automated systems.

[Wredi]

The problem is implementation; powering belts (especially over large distances) would cost large amounts of resources, and not just in electricity. The problem is how do you distribute the energy needed? By requireing that all belt sections lie within the reach of a power pole? By creating a 'belt motivator' structure that needs to be powered and either has a reach or a number of sections of belt it can power?

That all adds up into the raw materials that need to be inserted into the system, which can make starting up the factory a lot harder as more resources are needed while at the same time you can't provide those resources through automated systems.

Thats true, but as i said, the goal should be to prevent such leaks in the production process as the magic belts. you are right, at the moment thats not quite possible, the start would be dragged much.
But it should be the goal in my opinion to provide a game mechanic that will balance that fact. you could at least calculate the amount of energy per tile of belt and substract that of your electricity production, that would be enough in my opinion for the moment.

Regards,
Wredi

[ssilk]

I actually found transport belt cheated !
they allow to move stuff from one place to another energy-less !
I think the express belt should be removed, and for the other belts, they should have to be powered by belt station, which needs power to work and only support a number of items on a section (and could break if too much items are put on it ?)
that way, transports systems such as trains would become much more interesting !

hff.. every quarter year the same discussion...

The most players don't see it in the beginning, but if you want to go for real high throuhgput, lets say you want to process 2000-3000 iron ore per minute (and copper and stone etc), you need trains, you need logistic bots and you need belts. Otherwise completely impossible.

And belts doesn't cost power, because when power goes off the belts won't feed the burners any more. No burners, no steam, no power, no coal, because the belts strike. It's the same reason, because pumps don't need power, because no water no steam. And the much bigger reason is, that it wont bring anything new into gameplay. You need to lay the belts an in parallel you need to lay power. Same task twice. This is a game an not realism. Some things are very realistic, because it makes fun, other not, because no fun.

I see belts, that costs energy only, if they do very special things, like a belt which has sensors on it, which counts the number of items or belts, which can have adjustable speed, but currently, if belts would cost energy, they won't be so much fun anymore.

[Ardagan]

Voted NO.

Basically, you can add faster belts as a part of free-play or fun-play. Just to make a factory on pure belts. or something like that.
Otherwise, you want a proper balance between trains, bots and belts.

I don't use trains yet, though. I'm lazy and hate limited resources.

However right now I'm thinking of testing the maximum throughput I can get and want to try trains for that reason. Just need to find an unlimited resource consumption requester...

[FreeER]

I'm going to say/quote two things that may seem contradictory, then I'll explain.

The fastest belt in the game should be slightly faster than walking speed. You MUST do this in the multiplayer release for trapping newbish players.

The belts can be used for many stuff, but what counts in the end is throughput, not speed.[...]
Another thing would be a new transport system. I think for something like in Portal II: tubes, which transport all the produced items and which have also automated switches and so on

Ok, now for the explanation. I do not think that faster belts will help production very much, but they would help in creative defense which will be needed in MP if players are on different 'teams'/forces. It would not be just for 'newbish' players because you'd learn very very quickly that you can't walk through them, you'd have to destroy/dismantle them, or upgrade your tech (cars, mobility enhancement etc.). For those who think it would be an issue in your own base, walk sideways, or design better (there should be room to walk), and there will eventually be a way to 'fly' over them so it won't be much of an issue at that point. Still, not really needed until non-coop MP is implemented.

As for the second quote, every technology has a point of diminishing return where upgrading brings relatively little overall improvement. From what I've seen (aka other players have tested) express belts are right at that point. To improve your processing you would need to build separate processing facilities (rather than expanding the original) or you'd need a new form of transport (trains, tubes, etc.)

as for belts requiring energy, I like the idea. There are two ways that I see it being implemented, either any belt being withing range of power would power all connected belts, or you'd need an 'belt-engines' at one end (there would be several levels of engines, the first would be coal powered, the rest electric and increase the number of belts that they can move at optimal speed) that just move the belt that's wrapped around all the 'belt-frames'. In either case (and currently) the 'transport belts' that you craft are nothing more than modular 'belts' and 'frames' that can be connected to others easily. Basically think of daisy chaining the power cords together.

[TGS]

Personally I just imagine the belts as self-contained and self-powered units. Then there is no break from realism. I mean, if you can get to another planet. I'm sure you can come up with neat tech. Now sure that could raise other 'reality breaking' issues such as the comparison of that high tech vs using coal/steam. But the objective is to fix the break from reality, not question the entire system.

As it was said, making belts require power would be annoying and probably not give you much 'reward' gameplay wise.

As far as the belt speed issue goes. I don't believe it is needed. Perhaps if/when underground resources are possible that might change. Or perhaps when the 'end-game' tech is expanded enough and there is a considerable need for higher yields of resource production then perhaps it can be investigated. But honestly I would recommend pushing away from using belts as your end all be all to everything. The player should be encouraged to use other options. Not forced to... but encouraged. It's balanced quite well in that regard now. Adding a new better super belt would probably throw off that balance. Imo.

[BurnHard]

The problem is implementation; powering belts (especially over large distances) would cost large amounts of resources, and not just in electricity. The problem is how do you distribute the energy needed?

The belt itself would transfer power to adjacent belt segments. You would have to power just one segment of the belt, the rest of the connected belt is powered