Factorio Forums

I know this is REALLY ambitious, but I have 43 mining stations, with variable amounts of mining drills (resulting in unequal output). The 43 mining stations should feed 22.55555555555 (23) express lines of furnaces equally. I don't care about space or resource efficiency, as both are infinite in my world. I do need maximum throughput, so combining them all into one belt and then splitting it off again won't work. I've tried a few thoughts I've had, but I'm struggling to equalize 8->8, much less 43->23. Can anybody help me?

BTW, I am using 0.12, so double corners aren't necessary.

For all of you curious people out there (like myself), I'm attempting to make a factory that produces every item at 1 item/minute. Inspired by One minute rocket defense, which is no longer possible with 0.12.

this imgUR account has several balancer designs. (though not 43 to 23).

Though a 44 to 24 (4 11 to 6 in parallel) would be easier and then feed the extra output back into the input.

This may be slightly off-topic, but I'd really love to see a map of a base with 43 mining stations being handled only on belts with no trains.

My first thought is... 43 mining stations? Hmm. Must be using endless resources??
And then... trains? Trains would make it all.... much easier.

And I feel like 1 item/minute is pretty easy.. you mean 1 item a second?

You may not care about space or resource efficiency, but CPU efficiency will definitely be a thing. Don't run a dozen belts 20 miles down the map. That way lies lag. Pack stuff onto trains and haul them to a more central station. If the resources are infinite, feel free to smelt them on site.

There is also a resource crate mod. It will allow you to pack absurd resources into handy boxes and haul them all with a single belt.

ratchetfreak wrote:this imgUR account has several balancer designs. (though not 43 to 23).

Though a 44 to 24 (4 11 to 6 in parallel) would be easier and then feed the extra output back into the input.

Thanks, they look great! The problem arises (with your 4x11->6 solution) is that while each of the four are equal, the entire system probably isn't.

Havoc_mayhem wrote:This may be slightly off-topic, but I'd really love to see a map of a base with 43 mining stations being handled only on belts with no trains.

I'm going to try. It's going to be a laggy mess, I'll probably end up switching to trains.

OBAMA MCLAMA wrote:My first thought is... 43 mining stations? Hmm. Must be using endless resources??

Not quite endless, but near that. I set all settings to the maximum (except biters).

OBAMA MCLAMA wrote:And I feel like 1 item/minute is pretty easy.. you mean 1 item a second?

No, I mean per minute. Most of the items will only need one Assembling machine I, but the ones that don't (Advanced circuit, accumulator, battery [normal and module], coal, concrete, copper ore, plate, and cable, combat robots, modules, energy shields, engines, explosives, you get the point) require a lot of assembly machines. Even though there isn't a rocket defense anymore, the factory will still be the scale of the One minute rocket defense.

bobucles wrote:You may not care about space or resource efficiency, but CPU efficiency will definitely be a thing. Don't run a dozen belts 20 miles down the map. That way lies lag. Pack stuff onto trains and haul them to a more central station. If the resources are infinite, feel free to smelt them on site.

I know, but I'm going to try.

bobucles wrote:There is also a resource crate mod. It will allow you to pack absurd resources into handy boxes and haul them all with a single belt.

I'd rather not use any mods, but good to know.

ricky3350 wrote:

ratchetfreak wrote:this imgUR account has several balancer designs. (though not 43 to 23).

Though a 44 to 24 (4 11 to 6 in parallel) would be easier and then feed the extra output back into the input.

Thanks, they look great! The problem arises (with your 4x11->6 solution) is that while each of the four are equal, the entire system probably isn't.

that's why you then group one of each 11->6 outputs into a 4->4 balancer.

ratchetfreak wrote:Though a 44 to 24 (4 11 to 6 in parallel) would be easier and then feed the extra output back into the input.

Was the 11->6 on that imgur, or are you suggesting it separately?

ratchetfreak wrote:

ricky3350 wrote:

ratchetfreak wrote:this imgUR account has several balancer designs. (though not 43 to 23).

Though a 44 to 24 (4 11 to 6 in parallel) would be easier and then feed the extra output back into the input.

Thanks, they look great! The problem arises (with your 4x11->6 solution) is that while each of the four are equal, the entire system probably isn't.

that's why you then group one of each 11->6 outputs into a 4->4 balancer.

That should work. Sorry, didn't think about that at the time.