Factorio Forums

Yeah, and those numbers are taken from here: https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... ts/Physics

According to the article, yellow belt with "fixed" corners still not as good as straight belt.

674-683 vs 719 respectively.
I wonder if splitting and rejoining after making the turn gives better or worse results.

Did some tests.

Yellow belt with fast turns vs yellow split & rejoin.

Competitiors:


First run:
183:186
214:222

Split & rejoin wins.

Test track
http://imgur.com/1LpGKqd
All inserters receive power at once and start packing coal as fast as it arrives.
I cut power before end of the queue reaches last turn.

Obviously, the queue has to be mile long to calculate the exact difference. I don't have resources for it in the current game.

Maybe someone will do it properly.
It would be nice to include straight belt in the comparison too.

By the way, just noticed that common belt rebalanced causes BIG loss of compression. I didn't make tests, but by the looks of it ~30+% of the throughput is lost at the rebalancer.

User_Name wrote:Did some tests.

Yellow belt with fast turns vs yellow split & rejoin.

Competitiors:


First run:
183:186
214:222

Split & rejoin wins.

Test track
http://imgur.com/1LpGKqd
All inserters receive power at once and start packing coal as fast as it arrives.
I cut power before end of the queue reaches last turn.

Obviously, the queue has to be mile long to calculate the exact difference. I don't have resources for it in the current game.

Maybe someone will do it properly.
It would be nice to include straight belt in the comparison too.

your test is invalid as the long of the beats is not the same

fist one 16 the oner one has 24

Lee_newsum wrote:
your test is invalid as the long of the beats is not the same

fist one 16 the oner one has 24

I measure relative throughput, thus the length does not matter.

See here for the follow-up

I think that there's nothing particularly wrong with the fact that corners slow down throughput. The fact that "going straight" is faster encourages more streamlined designs and is also somewhat more realistic.

The fact that you can work around this with splitters could be considered a problem instead. It indicates that splitters are too fast. It would not be unreasonable for a splitter on a 100% full belt to cause a minor loss of throughput, something like 20%.

I think that fixing this with corners of a higher speed is ugly. Maybe there should also be an intentional throughput loss when changing belt types?

fluffy_5432 wrote:The fact that you can work around this with splitters could be considered a problem instead. It indicates that splitters are too fast. It would not be unreasonable for a splitter on a 100% full belt to cause a minor loss of throughput, something like 20%.

20% isn't exactly minor, but I do agree that it's silly that splitters are faster than the belt they're based on.

n9103 wrote:

fluffy_5432 wrote:The fact that you can work around this with splitters could be considered a problem instead. It indicates that splitters are too fast. It would not be unreasonable for a splitter on a 100% full belt to cause a minor loss of throughput, something like 20%.

20% isn't exactly minor, but I do agree that it's silly that splitters are faster than the belt they're based on.

It has nothing to do with the speed of splitter.
Split & Rejoin trick works because you split your belt in two before making turn, thus compression drops by the factor of two.
Corners reduce compression only if it's close to maximum, it is totally safe to make turn with belt which has 50% compression.
After making turn you join two belts with 50% compression into one with 100% compression again.

User_Name wrote:According to this calculator, corners steal 35% of your throughput.

I was thinking 10% per lane, but even if it's closer to 20% per lane it doesn't influence my position. The corner slowdown seems like something that should remain part of the game.

I also think that it's not a problem, just an extra challenge.

I generally don't try to avoid turns, so for me, "100% belt speed" is the speed that of a belt with a turn in it. From that perspective, there is no punishment from turns, only a bonus from avoiding turns (which is no different from getting a bonus for upgrading to faster belts).

Likewise Ido not believe this to be a problem.

Problem would've been if it severely nerfed belt throughput.

Not to mention use of faster belts for corners effectively solves the issue leaving only blue belts. These would need belt buffering for corners or be used only in straight lines. Both strategies are quite possible to achieve (i've made factories where iron/copper was delivered everywhere through only two straight as an arrow belts across the entire factory.