[kovarex] [16.0] Inserting on underground belt behaves different

[AideenFb]

From the perspective of someone who has actually designed and built manufacturing conveyor equipment for all sorts of products from canned goods to oil drain pans to circuit boards and microchips.

Frankly the idea that a splitter can compress the throughput on a conveyor belt is ludicrous. From my experience being involved in the design of over 75 conveyor based production lines, there are only a couple of methods used condense the output of any machine or series of machines onto a single transport belt. 1) individual machines deliver their product onto secondary belt or ramp which side loads onto the main belt, or 2) the output belt is wider than the transport belt to allow product to be placed on the belt with more freedom, and then a diverter will compress the output into a single continuous stream. In either case where product flow is a result of belt mechanics micro gaps in the product flow are unavoidable unless the flow is backed up. Keep in mind these methods are not based on using robotics to insert the product onto the transport belt. Using robotics changes things considerably.

When robotic inserters are used they absolutely must be precisely calibrated to deliver product to a specific point on the belt, and because of this precision placement other methods of condensing product flow become unnecessary.

How this might apply to Factorio? Yes, inserters should be capable of producing a fully compressed belt without the need for fiddling. Frankly, it's actually somewhat counter intuitive that we start with robotic loading devices rather than loading ramps or a similar device. Side loading also should be capable of improving belt compression but not necessarily to the point of full saturation. The current mechanics where side loading only works if the gap is larger than the item being placed on the belt is extremely frustrating to be blunt. I don't actually think that underground belts should be able to assist with belt compression, so I don't miss that being fixed. What I would love to see more than most anything with regards to belt compression however would be a diverter, aka a part that would squeeze the product on a full belt onto only one side of the belt. Since this is the method most often used to produce a fully compressed conveyor belt in real factories it's a glaring oversight to not have such a device in Factorio.

[JareX]

From the perspective .....

I totally agree. Having a "diverter" would be awesome. And yes, inserters should compress the belts on their own.

[menschmaschine]

It is kinda the same with all these management-"games", be that Factorio, OpenTTD or Simcity.
We get accustomed to a way we create, built and resolve problems.
We also love our builds, even more so, when they span many updates and/or are substantially big.

Especially if a specific behaviour is -not- the result of an overlooked bug and gets changed/fixed, there will be people who won't like it.
One saying that comes to my mind is "Tradition is not worshipping the ashes, but passing on the torch" and of course "Without change there is no progress".

I do not go so far to say that some people are against progress, but, come on, guys, it still -is- a game.
And it -is- still v0.16, not v16.00, not even v1.00, as this threads title may imply *winks*
Easily we may succumb believing a game is pretty much finished/ready/bugfree, when they are featurepacked and sophisticated like Factorio already is.

*smiles* Keep calm and re-invent.

[golfmiketango]

From the perspective of someone who has actually designed and built manufacturing conveyor equipment for all sorts of products from canned goods to oil drain pans to circuit boards and microchips.

Frankly the idea that a splitter can compress the throughput on a conveyor belt is ludicrous. From my experience being involved in the design of over 75 conveyor based production lines, there are only a couple of methods used condense the output of any machine or series of machines onto a single transport belt. 1) individual machines deliver their product onto secondary belt or ramp which side loads onto the main belt, or 2) the output belt is wider than the transport belt to allow product to be placed on the belt with more freedom, and then a diverter will compress the output into a single continuous stream. In either case where product flow is a result of belt mechanics micro gaps in the product flow are unavoidable unless the flow is backed up. Keep in mind these methods are not based on using robotics to insert the product onto the transport belt. Using robotics changes things considerably.

When robotic inserters are used they absolutely must be precisely calibrated to deliver product to a specific point on the belt, and because of this precision placement other methods of condensing product flow become unnecessary.

This is quite interesting information but as I'm sure you've noticed, Factorio is as about as much a simulation of real-life industrial production as Super Mario is a simulation of real-life parkour and martial arts.

That stated, if gameplay would be improved by changing factorio in certain ways that made the "game-play metaphor" more closely model real life, then I'm all for it. However, one thing that can be hard for players to accept (especially, sometimes, more experienced players, who have had time to "invest" in building a lexicon of techniques) is that, sometimes, making the game more frustrating and difficult does not necessarily detract from the overall gameplay experience.

The whole thing about "real life" vs "how the game works" is a bit tricky and subjective as at some point you've gone so far into "crazy town" that you start to break your metaphor, and different people are bothered by different aspects of these "game physics".

I think what is fun should be the deciding factor... If you could, presumably the thing to maximize would be total area under all players' curves of lifetime enjoyment of factorio over time, perhaps with some sort of interest rate to discount the future since... who knows maybe enjoyment is less important in the future or something

Actually this is easy: sometimes players fail to understand that I am always right. I know from experience that my impressions of what is fun and what is stupid in factorio are 100% correct, not other peoples'. The hard part is convincing them (but I'm working on it...)

[Jovus]

I'm something of a newbie in Factorio. I've been around since v0.12, but I've never launched a rocket, because I tend to get the Factorio bug for a while, build a base right up 'til the point of robots or a little beyond, then fall off in interest until, say, v0.15 or so. Which is all to say I've been around enough to be familiar with the game, so I'm not a rank newbie, but I'm also fresher in perspective than many a veteran.

My opinion: make inserters capable of full compression. It's not obvious that inserter vs side load vs underground belt compression is even something to worry about, so it's not even clear that it is a puzzle in the first place, and being bitten by something you don't even realize can be a problem is not fun.

Throughput is obvious as a field of optimization

Ratios are obvious as a field of optimization

Balancing is obvious as a field of optimization

But compression is not.