Friday Facts #137 - The release scarecrow

[MrGrim]

Unless something has changed (quite possible), a previous FF mentioned that all inserters would becoming smart inserters - so I personally would expect the "rapid" inserters (terrible name) to have smart-ness.

I was marveling at the short memory myself. There's no need to worry about smart inserters because smart inserters are going away, and everything can be attached to network:

http://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-125

[Linosaurus]

I hope that the wait-for-full-stack functionality only applies when lifting from belts, it would be very awkward if that applied when taking things out of an assembler.

Can I set a max stack size on an individual inserter? Ie copper wire belt -> green circuit assembler might work better with a stack size of 3 than 11 because of slightly longer response time.

As others have mentioned, they need item filter functionality. And a name that is less confusing, 'Bulk' is my fav so far (as suggested by OvermindDL1)

Removing stack size bonus on other inserters? That is evil.... but a great idea. It feels like it will create more interesting choices, somehow.

edit:

I was marveling at the short memory myself. There's no need to worry about smart inserters because smart inserters are going away, and everything can be attached to network:

Yes, but circuit networks will not help me create a station that can only ever unload iron ore, even if I park the wrong train there.

[blizgerg]

I have been really wanting an inserter that did NOT get the stack size bonus. There are situations where you do and do not want it.

An abstracted example of not wanting it, if you are moving items from a source chest to a destination chest. The destination chest has only two stacks of different item types that are not full that can take 3 extra items each to fill up. Using one inserter with stack bonus 4 means that the inserter is only going to finish one of those stacks and wait to finish inserting that 4th item before finishing the other stack.

[Kazaanh]

Sometimes I wonder if this game is really about building huge factories and expanding/optimizing/planning their efficiency anymore.
I think if loader made it into the game 95% of the base would be made only of solar panels and 4% or roboports, no hate or sth but Factorio future is kinda grim. At least from my pov.

Also does the flamethrower turret is the first step to remove turret creep and neverending turret walls? Since its going to require a direct pipe connection I assume it must be very powerful. How are you gonna fix it? Any planned biter overhauls/updates?

[DaveMcW]

Changing "rapid" to something much more different would help with the simplification/confusion issue. After all this isn't really a rapid inserter, it's a new weird thing. Drawing attention to the difference would really help the confusion factor much like companion cube.

for example:

• shovel inserter
  the shoveler
  stacker machine
  multi insterter
  crazy ridiculous inserter bot
  Dave

I know you devs could come up with something much more awesome. Maybe not as awesome as Dave though. Anyway Love everything you guys are doing! Really looking forward to .13!

transport belt -> fast transport belt -> express transport belt
inserter -> fast inserter -> express inserter

Although I do like Dave.

[Koub]

Stack inserter, multi-inserter, even heavy inserter is OK .

[Ashery]

Why is this an either/or situation when it comes to the inserters?

You can nerf the max inserter bonus to highlight the difference between the new inserter and the current fast inserter, while still allowing for compact assembler layouts like the current electronics assembly cluster.

You could even intertwine the inserter container tech with the new inserter's tech branch. Ie, something like this:

Code: Select all

New Inserter Base Tech (4)
New Inserter Upgrade +2 (6)
    Container Stack Size +1 (2)
New Inserter Upgrade +2 (8)
...etc

This would force the early game away from the highly compact designs while still allowing them to be used during the mid to late game. This is particularly true if the techs are appropriately expensive, perhaps with the Inserter Stack Size +1 costing something like 50 R/G/B. It's not prohibitively expensive, but you're definitely out of the early game once you've got blue science up and running. This kind of setup would also mean the new inserter always outclasses the older ones within its defined role.

I'll second "Bulk Inserter" for the new inserter's name.

[bNarFProfCrazy]

As others have mentioned:
Rapid inserter is probably a confusing name -> bulk, batch or multi inserter would probably be a better name.

I don't need rapid inserters at all, because the current setup provides enough throuput. 2 cargo waggons => 1 blue belt vs 2 cargo waggons => 4 blue belts.
Have you considered how much space it takes to smelt even one express belt?
In my current (no mods) setup smelting takes ~2 times the space for one train station if I use L-CC (1 blue belt)
and ~5 times the space if I use LL-CCCC (2 blue belts). This has to be doubled if you smelt it to steel. (2/5 blue belts)

With the new rapid inserters this will take ~8 (L-CC) and ~20-22 (LL-CCCC) times the space, this is a quite enormous space requirement.
(For steel ~16 or ~40-44 times the space)
IIRC one station LL-CCCC takes ~12x70 square tiles. Now have a look at the space requirements for smelting that.

My train station/platform is designed for stackability, even if I could have faster inserters they wouldn't be used because the space required for processing the ore far outweight the space required for a new train station. Unloading a train takes ~15 seconds with 2*5 fast inserters per side, this gives me 5*15 - 15 seconds = 60 seconds (5 is stack bonus c->c vs c->b) for a new train to arrive at the station before the storage is emptied.

Using rapid inserts increases the number of trains that have to be send, but reduces the need for rail infrastructure.
(IMO its quite fun to build larger train stations/Platforms for loading unloading, because it gives you something to do while you are expanding)
One of my outposts produces 8 express lines full of ore. To load unload it I need 8 trains and 4 train stations each to load and unload it.
With the rapid inserters I need 8 trains and only one train station each . => In almost all cases having one station will be sufficient. => Less fun.

If you just have to send more trains, then you have to spend far less time with building your rail network which results in lower importance.
From my understanding rapid inserters are added to increase the usage/importance of trains, but following my argumentation the rapid inserter does not help here.
Rapid inserters only help in situations where you utilize few train stations, spread far apart.

For those of you argue pro stack size removal on fast inserters:
Yes, players will/have to adapt to the new requirements.
In the evolution the species had to adapt as well, however that does not having anything in common with fun, but survival.

The train visualizations are great. However some mods may add wagons that are smaller than the default cargo wagon, how would they affect the displayed layout or will they be forced to use the default size?

[provet]

Why don't you guys (devs) have nightly builds for us? Or is the hype a to positive thing for you to let go off?

[aRatNamedSammy]

so awaiting the next release
this new inserter will be handfull in my kind of setup
placement for rails, no more guessing when building.. and with new inserters, wagon wont stay long at same station.. i already think about a rail setup using the new inserter.. great
-- express inserter.. i like that name better --

[Rythe]

I quite like this change.

The only real nerf appears to be some potential throughput for long inserters. I'd also missed that bit about all inserters becoming smart via logic network. Makes sense to me as a set. I'd prefer the name 'Batch' Inserter for the new one, though.

What's really astounding is the doom and gloom over a long inserter nerf, as if reducing its stack transfer would break everything somehow (if some people were to be believed). I bet most to all of the logic network bits come into play more often than the stack transfer on a long inserter.

Given the problem being considered here with the rapid inserter, I think this is the right direction to go, even if it probably means I won't be seeing rail buildings for bulk transfer of train cargo.

Ah well...

Speaking of, I am curious about when the rapid inserter comes into play tech-wise, because without the stack bonus on standard inserters, it could really slow down train usefulness in the mid game. It might be worth leaving in a reduced standard stack bonus for the early-mid game (tops out at 3 items ish total) and to help along the long inserters in the end game.

[Fatmice]

I think the inserter stack bonus change is short sighted. There are many builds out there that depends on this stack bonus to function at top efficiency and this single change will no doubt destroy such builds. What should have been done, in my opinion, is instead of changing inserter stack bonus as a technology applicable only to the rapid inserter type, the technology should be changed to an inserter upgrade. This technology is researched once and will give access to inserter upgrade slots and an inserter stack bonus module that can be built. Each inserter stack bonus module increases the number of items picked up by an inserter by one and energy consumption by 20%. The stack bonus and energy consumption increase are additive. All inserters will have a number of slots, depending on their type, for inserter stack bonus upgrades that can be inserted by the player. In this fashion, the player has direct control over which inserter should operate with stack bonus. What separates the rapid inserter from the other inserters is the queue behavior and item compression, i.e. they wait until their buffer is full before executing a move and items placed on belts are fully compressed. The other inserters will behave as they do now in 0.12.x where they move up to the stack bonus but does not wait for a full queue nor will they place items on the belt in such a way that compression is easily achieved.

I do not know how much more complicated this suggestion will make the inserter class, but to me it seems natural that inserters should have always behave like this. I hope that revision to inserter stack bonus can still be made prior to or during 0.13.x. Furthermore, it feels to me like this inserter change is "pushed" and not deliberated well due to the upcoming 0.13 deadline.

[xBlizzDevious]

I really don't like the idea of the stack size bonus being removed for "old" inserters.

I don't see mention of rapid inserters working from chest > chest (and machines, too) - would they be able to transfer any number of items up to their max from one inventory directly to another or is the bonus only when placing things onto belts? Or will they only work between chests if they can pick up the full amount - another major issue, in my eyes.

[Darkhogg]

The main issue with this change will be, as others have already said, long handed inserters. Long handed inserters are in desperate need of some love, but with the stack bonus nerf they lose the few freinds they have. I'm really ok with the stack bonus nerf (although a 2-3 item stack would be nice, it's really enough for most uses) as long as the long handed inserters receive some love. With this I mean:

• Long Handed Inserter should be exactly as fast as a regular Inserter. (Slower version than current one)
• Fast Long Handed Inserter, a new inserter, as fast as Fast inserters. (Faster than current)
• Bulk Long Handed Inserter, a new inserter, with the same properties as Bulk (rapid) Inserters, although meybe with less stack size.

I don't add a Smart Long Handed Inserter to the list because devs already said all inserter will be smart, so I assume there's no need for them.

This change, I think, would even out the field for inserters. It makes their production a bit more complex and interesting and prevents Long Handed Inserters from becoming completely useless in the long term.

[Lee_newsum]

ok Red Inserter

Red Inserter.png (1.98 MiB) Viewed 7609 times

12 items.png (1.07 MiB) Viewed 7609 times

[nobodx]

I'm wondering, what happens when you place multiple rapid inserters in a row.
Will they drop and pick up each item one by one, or will the pick up the entire stack? And what is, when the source (say a chest ) has less than a full (inserter size) stack ?

Edit:
And why don't the rapid inserters assume, that the belt is a full express belt ? Once they've picked up a single item, a timer starts, and (I don't know the exact number of items per second on a express belt) after 1sec they move everything they have in their hands.

[Ojelle]

As others have mentioned:


Using rapid inserts increases the number of trains that have to be send, but reduces the need for rail infrastructure.
(IMO its quite fun to build larger train stations/Platforms for loading unloading, because it gives you something to do while you are expanding)
One of my outposts produces 8 express lines full of ore. To load unload it I need 8 trains and 4 train stations each to load and unload it.
With the rapid inserters I need 8 trains and only one train station each . => In almost all cases having one station will be sufficient. => Less fun.

On my map I unload 18 compressed express belts with 3 train stations ^^

And to bad the loader isnt there, I would have loved the storage it offered.
And the stack bonus removal isnt something you cant overcome. Nearly nowhere it really is that neccesairy with the new inserter. And my factory is nearly full belt driven.

[Tev]

I don't know how many people posted it before but it needs repeating:
TRAIN FULLY LOADED IN 5 SECONDS! YAY!

Everything else is a cost I'm willing to pay

[brunzenstein]

I don't get why the developers are stubbornly focusing on search for a problem nobody seems really to have (about 50% are even strictly opposing the announced, de-facto drawbacks, given the state of that very blog) but letting at the same time folks down waiting for mending of stubborn bugs and GUI problems persistent since many, many releases.
Not speaking of such long needed mendings like the h/v wagon length problem, rail laying quirks or the inability of the GUI to show even the content of network items. But speaking of showing current combinators /chests / assembler state when moving with the mouse over...
PLEASE give 99% of the users what they really want, need and ask for a long time:
Basic and simple things the average user really wants, needs and would applaud for - not truffled parrot heels on blue trout caviar

[Animar]

Sorry but I have to vent for a bit
I have to say I'm really disappointed with this. The Loader was THE chance for a real competition against bots but no, all we get is a faster inserter witch many other mods already did. There where so many good ideas to balance them. And even worse for no good reason Nerf all the other interests why. because they can.

I know you do your best but this ... I don't know.