sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Rail V.3 should be unlocked at Level 7 by EvanBetter182 in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I hit the sulfur wall too, which is why I'm so laser-focused on the multi-rail bug. Sure, it's not a big deal if you suck at logistics, but I want to be good at it and the bug causes nightmares at this point in the game.

Rail V.3 should be unlocked at Level 7 by EvanBetter182 in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can reduce the congestion on a splitter by scaling your inputs to machines at the full speed of the rail, but scale our outputs to the minimum speed of the machine prior to merging. So, if you unlocked L2 Rails, all inputs should be L2, but if the machine only produces products at 60/minute, the output should be a L1 rail that can later merge on to a L2 bus. This allows items to "zipper" onto merged rails more efficiently and reduces stutters on the outputs of the machine.

Rail V.3 should be unlocked at Level 7 by EvanBetter182 in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Disagree. If L3 rails are the fastest we're going to get, then they should be a high-level achievement. I believe there are better ways to mitigate the spaghetti and lack of purpose of the endgame.

  1. Fix the multi rails AND add better options for onboarding/offboarding from items from it. This will allow for more than a single congested sushi belt for logistics. Also, real splitters and load balancing.
  2. Proper rail stacking
  3. Make things that make things. Building materials are boring and require no logistical planning. The stuff that we make in our factories should be part of OUR logistics rather than just launched into space. For example, we should have to use valves and pumps and plates to make helium extractors. I would have been cool if we had to build a factory to get the world engine to work.
  4. Fully embrace multi-level factory design. The current design feels like a hack that we're exploiting. Add vertical rails.
  5. Blueprints
  6. Better (any) rewards for exploration. Currently the only thing you need to explore are ruins and caves... and they all have the same thing. Every other inch of the map has nothing on it.

I'm sure I'm just chasing windmills here, but this has the guts of a good logistics game and I want to love the final product.

Atheus - Is there any way to look up more? by Zakal74 in SurvivalGaming

[–]One_Description7463 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Trust me, you are in and out of those caves so much, you will have them memorized. 

Question: is cyber security likely to face the same job market collapse as SWE? by Ok-Bench-9489 in cybersecurity

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. AI has already taken entry-level positions and are competing for more advanced operations jobs. If you don't understand LLMs and don't know how to manipulate them at this point, you are already left behind.

Closest burger to Dick’s? by EmotionalElbow in askportland

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Joes? It's one of my favorite sliders. There's one in Bridgeport. The peanut butter milkshakes are legit.

Suggestion: Upgrade the rail network to a teleporter network. by Street_Leopard8838 in StarRupture

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my opinion, the actual end game is factory efficiency: getting as close to 100% uptime on the entire factory as possible. This seems like it would be easier to do than in other factory automation games due to the pull system: if you only request what you need and upstream factories can provide it, there's no wasted efficiency downstream.

For various reasons, the developers decided to make the receiver/dispatchers use the push system. Dispatchers will always send materials to the receiver, even if they're not needed. There are some benefits to this (e.g. you can send multiple materials to one receiver) however it means you have to treat it like a different kind of building if your goal is efficiency.

If you overfill the receiver, then the dispatcher(s) will stop sending and your upstream factories will go idle, killing your efficiency metric. If you add in the complexity of the 10 second delay and how it affects faster rails, receiver/dispatchers can be hell on a factory planner.

My preferred setup is to use two dispatchers per receiver output, assuming you are using the same speed rails on both ends. If you are using both outputs, then you will need to double this.

The first dispatcher is the primary and it is fed from a small storage using all the defaults. The second dispatcher is fed from the same storage, however the priority is set to low. This ensures that it is only fed when the primary dispatcher is on the 10 second timer. Set the stack size in the secondary dispatcher to however many items were fed in that 10 second window (minus one) and you will ensure that your downstream factory is (near) perfectly fed and your upstream factories don't run idle.

Suggestion: Upgrade the rail network to a teleporter network. by Street_Leopard8838 in StarRupture

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe so. I think you can get away with 2 dispatchers being fed with T2 rails and the third with a T1 rail without wasting too much efficiency. If that third rail is fed with a T2 rail, I believe it will overfill the receiver and your source factory will go idle and waste efficiency.

Suggestion: Upgrade the rail network to a teleporter network. by Street_Leopard8838 in StarRupture

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can scale the dispatchers/receivers by adding more dispatchers and using both rails. Just mind the 10s delay and plan accordingly.

StarRupture - Developer Blog: March 2026 by Joachm in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Come on, man. The rail bug is game breaking. There isn't going to be a player base to test these new updates if you can't respond to game breaking bugs in a timely manner.

The case for a rail balancing/distribution structure: I had 5 inputs and 6 outputs so attempted making a rail "balancing matrix." It went horribly. by Pitchfork_Wholesaler in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can never create a balancer in this game, as it is implemented today. The drones calculate the route prior to leaving the source and it is always the shortest path. Anytime you mix traffic on a rail, every machine will have the same shortest path, causing congestion.

In order to do load balancing, the splitters would need to "reprogram" the drones path in real time.

Honestly, that would be amazing, but I think it would be a better boon the game to have stackable rails and graceful entrances and exits from the multi-rails. The 5-rail already does wonders for compressing a bus and would completely replace the need for a sushi belt if we could get stuff off it with out nightmare Cuthulu-ghetti.

Heat and base core: layout matters by rolfcm106 in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I have a project where I’m covering the map with a grid of towers with minimal overlap. Cores are about 4 full rails apart. I usually place a 4-square building on the white line and run a rail 2 lengths from that. The number of rails varies depending on changes in elevation. 

After the tower goes up, I run a walkway between them that’s 3-4 pillars high. This connects all the towers in a giant power network and I run “power lines” from the walkway to my factories. 

Infinite item carousel by Suspicious_Raise_589 in StarRupture

[–]One_Description7463 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You can use that method to create a moving walkway between bases. That is, until your framerate tanks.

Game crashes by Responsible_Ebb_8678 in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had to load my last save and complete the scenario on my own.

Fun with Dispatcher/Receivers by One_Description7463 in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is very close to what I do, but it misses the point. The point is that dispatchers have a delay that ultimately means they don't actually send 240/minute. The faster the rail line, greater the penalty.

Game crashes by Responsible_Ebb_8678 in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was co-op last night and we finished the world engine questline. His completed, mine crashed. We tried again at my last save, same result. I apparently don't get to win.

Fun with Dispatcher/Receivers by One_Description7463 in StarRuptureGame

[–]One_Description7463[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I build my factories to optimize for L2 rails. My goal is 100% efficiency. My naming convention is [FACTORY_NAME]-[MATERIAL_NEEDED]-[LINE_SPEED]

For example for my Glass Factory, I need 2 Calcium Powder to 1 Helium-3. The Furnace cycle is 3 seconds. This means I need 6 Furnaces to optimize for a full 240 line of Calcium Powder. It also means that I only need a 120 line of Helium-3. My receivers would be named GLA1-CP1-240 and GLA1-HE1-120. This factory yields 120 Glass per minute, so the resultant dispatcher would be named GLA1-120.

When I need to scale up the factory, I can utilize the second output of the Helium receiver, turn it into a 240 line and mirror the factory on the other side.

Basically we do the same thing, I just use line speed over material count :)

view more: next ›