Friday Facts #137 - The release scarecrow

[KatherineOfSky]

You know, where actually do you need the stack bonus anyway?

For me, it's not about need -- it's about creativity, and having the options to design a factory using innovative and interesting ways of transporting A to B. Having seen several people play on Youtube, as well as experimenting on my own, there are LOTS of designs that will now be very limited.

For fun, I was going to design a factory that used no conveyor belts, only inserters + chests in long "conveyor" lines. Clearly a stack bonus is needed. However, in an early-game factory, you want to be producing with every item that comes down the line.... and not wait for 11 to be available at once, alas.

I wonder if a happy medium could be achieved -- the Rapid Inserter gets an 11 size stack bonus, but other inserters could have a 3 size bonus, or 4 (as previously)?

[Zeblote]

I was going to design a factory that used no conveyor belts, only inserters + chests in long "conveyor" lines. Clearly a stack bonus is needed.

Why is a stack bonus *needed* so you can make a contraption that was never intended? Belts are supposed to move items not boxes.

[groessenwahn]

I think the disadvantages outweigh the advantage here. Often I need a long handed inserter to reach over a belt to get items form one assembler into another. With the proposed changes, that long handed inserter would be a severe bottleneck. It severely limits the possibilities of production layouts.
Consider this:
Assembler 1 is supplied from the left side. On the right side of Assembler 1 is a belt to supply Assembler 2 (which needs lots of different ingredients). On the right side of that belt is a normal or fast inserter to put items from the belt into Assembler 2 and an long inserter to get items from Assembler 1 into Assembler 2. On the right side of Assembler 2 are additional belts/inserters to supply an additional ingredient and take the product out.
This gives a compact, extendable and efficient layout, e.g for green/blue science.
With the proposed nerf (no more stack bonus for long inserters) it would get very slow with both assemblers spending a lot of time with idling while waiting for the long handed inserter
to move each item one by one.

This is the order how I'd like it to be changed, from best to worst:
1. Use current bonus for loading from/to belts also (with new heavy inserter)
2. Just leave it as it is now.
3. The currently proposed general inserter nerf.

[mooklepticon]

Rapid inserters: I'm a fan. This makes belts competitive with bots, again. Although, the "wait until full" thing can be a liability in some situations. It'll be rare, as I tend to completely compress my inputs, but it can create some spiky production in low-power situations.

Fast inserter stack size loss: Not a fan. I like the idea of Rapids having MORE stack size bonus. Perhaps the Fasts could get 2 or 3 stack? Still nothing comparable.

[kann_]

Will the rapid inserter be a "smart inserter"?

I am not very concerned about the stack decrease except for a debuff of smart inserters.

And does the rapid inserter wait to input into assembly machines?
This could cause issues. *edited this question*

[mooklepticon]

Will the rapid inserter be a "smart inserter"?

I am not very concerned about the stack decrease except for a debuff of smart inserters.

And how are the priorities if two rapid inserters want to input in the same assembly machine?
I think it would be helpful if it would be on a first-come-first-server basis otherwise it could get difficult to get a fast assembler running full time.

Oooh, what if I put a fast right next to a rapid, with the fast upstream? That would give me guaranteed throughput of the fast and the increased throughput of the rapid, in high demand situations. Ooooohhh fun times.

[bolok]

I think a lot of people won't like stack nerf, but how about new inserter(crane) that transfer items between containers only?
Additionaly to substitute for long inserter have two switches far/close separately for pick and put.

[devilwarriors]

Burner inserter: "Welcome, brothers, to forgotten graveyard a player almost never uses"

They always been in that graveyard for me.. nobody got time to feed inserter coal

[alaeth]

Burner inserter: "Welcome, brothers, to forgotten graveyard a player almost never uses"

They always been in that graveyard for me.. nobody got time to feed inserter coal

Burners feed themselves coal (if available)... great for boilers or remote gun turrets.

[bNarFProfCrazy]

Please don't nerf the existing inserters.
Because you will end up using only the rapid inserters in the end, making the fast inserters a mere intermediate product.
However you could make the rapid inserters really expensive.

I have a suggestion for your wait infinitely on resource lack issue.
Turn if there are no more items to pickup in that moment.

Pseudocode

Code: Select all

while (current < max && hasItemToPickup()) {
    current += pickupItems();
}
if (current > 0) {
   turn();
}

instead of (current implementation)

Code: Select all

while (current < max) {
    if (hasItemToPickup()) {
       current += pickupItems();
    } else {
       wait();
    }
}
turn();

This will make your rapid inserters behave like fast inserters on low item availability and "rapid" on high item availability.

[radeor]

You should consider putting the visualization for train cars spaces on the tracks around signals as well, to help with laying out signals at the right spacing.

[KatherineOfSky]

Why is a stack bonus *needed* so you can make a contraption that was never intended?

I think you missed the first two sentences of my post:

For me, it's not about need -- it's about creativity, and having the options to design a factory using innovative and interesting ways of transporting A to B. Having seen several people play on Youtube, as well as experimenting on my own, there are LOTS of designs that will now be very limited.

Besides silly contraptions, there are MANY legitimate and interesting solutions to real problems in Factorio that need stack size bonus.

Nerfing the stack size on long-handed and fast inserters are going to limit those solutions.

[Neotix]

You should consider putting the visualization for train cars spaces on the tracks around signals as well, to help with laying out signals at the right spacing.

Hahaha I just wanted to suggest that

[UndyingUndyne]

My biggest concern about the stack size nerf on all inserters is that now it may not be ideal to use smart inserters on train unloading stations anymore. What am I supposed to do now if I have an outpost that is on a spot with multiple types of ore in it? Am I going to have to devise a way to ensure my trains don't have mixed contents loaded into them?

You should consider putting the visualization for train cars spaces on the tracks around signals as well, to help with laying out signals at the right spacing.

+1 to that as well. I'd love to be able to visualize how much space I'm giving between my signals.

[Honza_]

Could you explain the inserter stack size nerf?

If that means fast/vey fast/smart/long inserters would pick always just one unit, it is drastic change imo. It would slow all transitions between chests and trains to chests significantly.

If that's so, just throw that idea away, please.

[devilwarriors]

Burner inserter: "Welcome, brothers, to forgotten graveyard a player almost never uses"

They always been in that graveyard for me.. nobody got time to feed inserter coal

Burners feed themselves coal (if available)... great for boilers or remote gun turrets.

I know, which is why I use them for boilers, but bringing coal to a remote turrets is a pain when electricity is so easy to bring to them.

[TeT]

Why is a stack bonus *needed* so you can make a contraption that was never intended?

I think you missed the first two sentences of my post:

For me, it's not about need -- it's about creativity, and having the options to design a factory using innovative and interesting ways of transporting A to B. Having seen several people play on Youtube, as well as experimenting on my own, there are LOTS of designs that will now be very limited.

Besides silly contraptions, there are MANY legitimate and interesting solutions to real problems in Factorio that need stack size bonus.

Nerfing the stack size on long-handed and fast inserters are going to limit those solutions.

It's of course no surprise for me to see some kind of resentment at any changes made to Factorio. People hate change in general.

But what I don't understand is why you seem to think this will be limiting creativity. I thoroughly disagree. Many of current "tricks" used in factorio appeared after 0.12. Any change tend to suppress certain strategy but also creates brand new ones.

Don't limit this change on inserter to only what you are used to do in factorio, but also consider what new stuff you will be able to do creatively.

There is legitimate needs for fast inserters/loader type devices, just like there was "legitimate" uses for 0.13 inserters. "Legitimate" also is a term I don't think is really fitting here.

Legitimate according to who ? Legitimate because of what ?

[Kewlhotrod]

well, removing inserter stack to only the rapid inserters is certainly bawsy.

also this needs attention

You should consider putting the visualization for train cars spaces on the tracks around signals as well, to help with laying out signals at the right spacing.

[19wolf]

I would love if the station direction was unrelated to the side of the track the "station" is on. My factories have all kinds of symmetry and trains really mess things up...

[Zeblote]

You should consider putting the visualization for train cars spaces on the tracks around signals as well, to help with laying out signals at the right spacing.

Yes! Moving a train to the new intersection to see whether it fits or not is annoying.