What is everyone's preferred train size

[vedrit]

I use 1-4, since my network is pretty dense with relatively short distances between stops.

[RocketManChronicles]

the smaller trains always pass the larger ones on the 4-lane main line near the base. I just wish I could give the long trains lower preference at intersections to keep the faster ones moving as they carry the stuff to fight the biters!

You could look into running them on their own network. Even when the two networks cross, it gives a whole lot of breathing room to the smaller trains to have their own playground that's not bogged down by trundling behemoths

They kind of are, as I tend to make the spurs and leads of the ore trains diverge/merge with the outside lanes, and the fast trains with the inner lanes. There are few cross overs to allow passing, but with such large ore trains, there are not that many populating the lines so they do not hold up in most cases. It's just that when they do, I would love to have some control of priority.... probably my experiences with TTD, Railroad Tycoon, etc.

[EvanT]

1-3-1 Bi-directional trains. Outposts have terminus stations (outpost may be smaller), the base has through stations (throughput)
Supply wagons: I use circuit conditions to load and unload.
- At base everything that should not be on the train is unloaded into active providers and every item that should be on the train is restocked into the supply wagon.
- The wagons may be used for very-low-load stuff like stone or small ore patches near the larger ones I build the outpost for.
- The base sends a request signal to all Outposts. (ores that are below a defined threshold) So I avoid overloading the base by loading only requested ores.

Ore:
Ore - Supplies - Ore

Uran:
Supplies - Tank(Acid) - Supplies
The supply wagons are used for the ore as well.

Oil:
Tank(Oil) - Supplies - Tank(Oil)

Most ore patches can not be mined faster than the two ore wagons round trip time. So I see no reason for larger payload trains other than rail road overload. But limiting the trains to only travel if the cargo is needed at base prohibits such overloads effectively.

[Hannu]

1-6 or 2-8. I have thought that when I make next large production railworld I try 2-12 or even longer but now I chose to keep my current base vanilla and small (1.25 all sciences per second) because real life sets certain limitations to my gaming.
I like that trains look and behave like trains. They have to be long (there are easily 30 wagons in real freight train), slow and haul huge amount of stuff per one run. I would suggest that Factorio train should have top speed of 80 km/h (except small motor draisine without freight capability for fast player transport) but freight capacity should be 10 times more, but I know that I would be alone.

[LazyLoneLion]

Everyone should just try to use four 1-1 trains instead of one 1-4 (or 2-4, or 1-4-1, etc.).
It's sooo convenient!
Don't see any reasons to not use them now. Not a one reason.

You should try, really.

[Lav]

Personally I'm partial to 1-3-0, they just somehow "click" with me, even though I know they're not the most efficient.

Considering a switch to a mixed scheme of 1-2-0 and 2-4-0 though.

There's also frequently a 1-X-1 train (X can be any of 0, 1 or 2) that I use as personal transport, it's the only bidirectional train in my network.

[The Eriksonn]

In my current World all my trains are 1-3-1, i almost Always do that or 1-1-1

[Xtrafresh]

There's also frequently a 1-X-1 train (X can be any of 0, 1 or 2) that I use as personal transport, it's the only bidirectional train in my network.

Funny, the personal train is the only one that never has a need to be bidirectional

[vanatteveldt]

I like 1-4-1 with two forward pointing locs most (so the last loc pushes the train from the rear). 1-4-1 is nicer in station design than 2-4 since the last loc can be on a bend. Also, you can more easily upgrade 1-2 to 1-4-1 or use both simultaneously.

Lately I am experimenting with using 1-2-1 double header trains as well, I do like the more compact station designs.

(and I am tempted to start using 1L-4C-4L-4C for my ore trains viewtopic.php?f=194&t=51751)

[Hannu]

Everyone should just try to use four 1-1 trains instead of one 1-4 (or 2-4, or 1-4-1, etc.).
It's sooo convenient!
Don't see any reasons to not use them now. Not a one reason.

They are fast and easy at beginning, if you do not care about realism or role game things, but you will need plan B when your unload station have to sustain 8 blue belts. Even 4 will be more problematic than advantageous compared to longer trains.

[LazyLoneLion]

They are fast and easy at the beginning, if you do not care about realism or role game things, but you will need plan B when your unload station have to sustain 8 blue belts. Even 4 will be more problematic than advantageous compared to longer trains.

Can't see any disadvantages really.
1-1 trains will have same (that is maximum) number of inserters per car, will provide same belt throughput if unloaded separately, on different stations.

Though 8 blue belts are 8 blue belts, sure

[Hannu]

Can't see any disadvantages really.
1-1 trains will have same (that is maximum) number of inserters per car, will provide same belt throughput if unloaded separately, on different stations.

One disadvantage is increased load for train system. You have to allocate path for 8 trains instead for example two 2-8 trains (two because speed is roughly half). At least you have to plan rail network very carefully and probably have more parallel tracks, large waiting railyards etc. You also lose most of benefits of small fast trains if you need 8 unloading stations.

[RocketManChronicles]

Can't see any disadvantages really.
1-1 trains will have same (that is maximum) number of inserters per car, will provide same belt throughput if unloaded separately, on different stations.

One disadvantage is increased load for train system. You have to allocate path for 8 trains instead for example two 2-8 trains (two because speed is roughly half). At least you have to plan rail network very carefully and probably have more parallel tracks, large waiting railyards etc. You also lose most of benefits of small fast trains if you need 8 unloading stations.

This all very true. The advantage of large trains is that you have fewer of them on the rails between stations, which leads to fewer parallel tracks, fewer encounters of intersecting trains, and better fuel efficiency per unit of good transported. There is something to following real-world operations, again this is a game, but the concepts and lessons learned still apply.

[LazyLoneLion]

One disadvantage is increased load for train system. You have to allocate path for 8 trains instead for example two 2-8 trains (two because speed is roughly half). At least you have to plan rail network very carefully and probably have more parallel tracks, large waiting railyards etc. You also lose most of benefits of small fast trains if you need 8 unloading stations.

Not really. That's often cut to only more rail signals -- you can put them much more often and have smaller rail blocks (thus fewer _blocked_ blocks).
That's both for waiting railyards, parallel tracks, etc.

As for 8 unloading stations -- they are 8 times less as well. The number of chests/inserters is the same (except for fuel). You need more station poles (basically what is called "stations") and rail signals, but every car will be unloaded with the same speed as with 2-8 train stations (but with less waiting between trains).

And it's kind of hard to load such a big trains anyway. There is just not enough resources usually.

But sure it's up to you.
Me, personally, I like to have lot's of trains and kind of small games (no megafactories yet).

[Hannu]

And it's kind of hard to load such a big trains anyway. There is just not enough resources usually.

I use one train for 2 or 3 outposts. Like this:

smeltery in until empty
outpost1 out until full or circuit ore < 20
smeltery in until empty
outpost2 out until full or circuit ore < 20
smeltery in until empty
outpost3 out until full or circuit ore < 20

Then outposts have time to produce 16000 ore for 8 wagon train. If I have a large smeltery (for example 8 blue lines) I have 2 such groups of ore trains to ensure continuous supply.

But sure it's up to you.
Me, personally, I like to have lot's of trains and kind of small games (no megafactories yet).

I understand. I do not try to say that your way to play is not as correct or as good as mine or anyone else's. Just that it is not problem free for all purposes. It is strength of Factorio that we have so many different ways to achieve entertaining gaming experience instead of one perfect or clearly best solution.

[mietok]

I got 2+6+2 trains but I'll think that they are still too small. In our megabase we got something like 140 of those and thats a lot of traffic Oil trains do not matter that much. 1+2+1 are enough.

[ssilk]

Either 1-4-1 bidirectional or 1-4-1 unidirectional (with a train at the begin and end in the same direction).

This looks so:

<LCCCCL> for the bidrectional and
L>CCCCL> for the unidirectional

The advantage is this: First I can use a bidirectional train with terminus stations and when there is higher throughput needed I can exchange the whole train and rail-part (especially the train stations) to unidirectional and roro, which in general increases the throughput by 50-200%. This is a good tactic, cause terminus is in general much easier to build. (of course a good planning is needed to enable this change later, you need some bit of extra space, not always useful/possible)

Two unidirectional trains and four wagons is also a very good compromise speed vs. train length...

[Projekt_13]

I use Inverted, one Directional 1-1-1. Cargo-Train-Cargo. Left-Handed.

The Contra:
-Unusual
-Non-Ideal Un/Load-times
-One Directional

The Pros:
+easly useable for multifunction-trains
+small and, in extend, fast
+Confuses everyone else

[Jap2.0]

I've used a lot of different kinds of trains, 1-4-1, 1-2, 1-4, 2-9, 1-2-1. I find they are all good with different resources and station setups.

[Ohz]

2-8-2-8-2

What is the difference between 2_8_2_8_2 and 6_16 ?