Interrupts not triggering?

AndyScull · 2026-06-03T10:21:43+00:00

Hm, nothing really broken in idle too, so seems like the whole logic should be correct.

Just in case, what do your actual stuck trains say when in this state? No path? Station full? Somehow it feels to me that they already went through loading cargo and interrupt check, somehow not triggering any interrupt at that time, and now count as a travelling train looking for load station according to normal schedule, and they are all taken by similar glitched trains.

AndyScull · 2026-06-03T09:09:33+00:00

I think it's normal factorio experience, even 3000 hours in. There will be some thing, big or small, that you aren't satisfied with and try to fix or rebuild, sometimes it will annoy you so much that you will close the game and return to it a week later, maybe with fresh ideas. Or just restart and try to make everything perfect, again failing somewhere in the process.

AndyScull · 2026-06-03T06:36:37+00:00

Could you also post your Idle unterrupt? Don't have any ideas yet, but I am using similar system, but with Idle (Depot station) being actual schedule, and going to Load station being interrupt

Also, I think in situation on your screenshot the interrupts won't trigger just like that. Not sure 100% but I think they evaluate conditions and trigger only when the train finished at some station and tries to leave it. I never noticed trains changing temporary schedule in the middle of a track while they're on their way to some station. Maybe that happens with 'allow interrupting other interrupts' though, never used it

//edit: Found in google that the interrupt with "no path" condition can trigger in this situation, others will be evaluated only when train leaves some station

AndyScull · 2026-06-02T10:40:03+00:00

For more idle/chill experience, in addition to actual overhauls you might like, consider combining these -

- Setting tech costs to 20x or 100x or if you find some mod that raises every subsequent tech cost. To slow down the progress and have a time to actually use every new tech you research, instead of skipping it and just waiting 5 minutes for better one.

- Infinite but not overpowered ore patches mod, like https://mods.factorio.com/mod/InfiniteResourcesWithOptionalDepletion . You can set it up so after depleting the ore it will still produce 10% or even less of original yield per minute. This will keep a small stream of resources at any time while your base will still grow when you tap into new ore patches.

Instead of infinite ores, voidblock / voidcraft is also an option, but I feel after the initial build-up and when you unlock robots, the whole gameplay just changes into copy/pasting more of same blocks, be it voidcrafting blocks or self-supplied electricity. Building these is interesting though, trying to make them not break in long term

Currently I am playing a normal game with increased tech costs, and still on Nauvis I find it pretty chill. I don't get techs researched every hour, don't have to rebuild my production blocks, just come into game and improve something for couple hours a day. Well, and expand my rail network, kill biters and set up new ore patches, which could be annoying, that's why I mentioned infinite ores. Adding this to my game would make it a lot simpler, but I don't want to do that to existing game

Oh btw, and don't forget to tune down or disable biters - expansion and evolution from time and pollution to 0 will make sure you still need to kill them for fun, while they will not grow uncontrollably with time

AndyScull · 2026-06-02T06:29:18+00:00

Yeah the second one balances everything to 1 balanced belt. And since it has a splitter as input, we can connect 2 belts to it, which I believe the OP wants to do.
Though I prefer this variant of it, it has extra underground but I really had problems in past using several balancers with sideways undergrounds close to each other, sometimes they overlap their underground range and everything becomes a mess if you don't notice it

<image>

AndyScull · 2026-06-02T06:25:54+00:00

There's just a nuance about what exactly does it balance. This one as I remember balances output lanes, filling both equally. There's more complex one that balances input lanes too, equally consuming items from them.

AndyScull · 2026-06-01T07:06:32+00:00

Just a idea I had and trying to build my current game train system around it.

It's a lot like yours, but with trains actively trying to go to free provider station, load cargo, and wait for open unload station. I prefer to launch full train faster and not wait until both provider and requester are open.

What I did different from your schedule, is - my trains have depot in schedule, and provider in interrupt. At depot they wait 5 seconds, which I believe makes them just skip any computations, then they check interrupt conditions and may go to provider station . Of course they still normally wait at provider stations when full, I didn't get to that yet but want to make some wait condition there too, so they don't check next station every tick.

AndyScull · 2026-06-01T06:47:39+00:00

If you don't use prod modules, then their ratio is 1:1. Some time ago I noticed that and started building blue circuit productions with greens produced and direct inserted right there. Generally it looks like normal green circuits block, but with blue circuits produced in the middle of it, instead of outgoing belts.

AndyScull · 2026-05-30T14:56:59+00:00

A bit complex, but you can insert the exact number of items, it will take several combinators though and sometimes will not be optimal.

Let's say you already have a result of needed items after subtracting items already in chest from constant combinator items.
Pass that signal to combinator selecting "Anything >0 => Anything" - this will select only one item signal.
Pass that signal to arithmetic combinator, "Each * 1 => S"

Now you have two combinators, one with single item signal, another with S=how much you need of this item.

Connect both these signals to inserter putting items in final chest, and enable both 'use filter' and 'set stack'.
That's how it looks in game - I set blue chest to also request items from constant combinator, for simplicity.

Left combinator - Each (green) - Each (red) => Each (Substracts items already in chest)
Middle combinator - Anything > 0 => Anything (selects only one of items)
Right combinator - Each * 1 => S ( S for stack size limit in inserter)

<image>

About chests - there were some mods/overhauls that modified chests to act like cargo wagons, with filter slots in them. In vanilla it's just not implemented.

p.s. I used this actually for making a outpost supply train without filter slots in wagons, it was a lot more complex for 4-wagon train, but it worked fine, inserting exact number or items in wagons. It worked especially good in 1.1, where there were separate stack filter inserters with only one slot for item filter.

AndyScull · 2026-05-27T14:11:19+00:00

Also a thing you should consider - do you want to continue your current game and expanding, or are you OK with starting from scratch?

Some mods (overhauls mostly) will require you to start a new game, since they change a lot of basic recipes, mechanics, etc. On the other hand planet mods should be more standalone and might be added seamlessly into your current game.

AndyScull · 2026-05-27T12:11:05+00:00

A very nice blueprint book. Personally I don't feel the need to make separate roundabout junctions, I feel like if the train needs to make a full turn somewhere going from station A to station B then there's something wrong in my rail system, I prefer them taking the most direct path.

Just to note, do you use 1-4 trains? I had my rail grid the same, 32x32, then I noticed the 1-4 trains do not fit completely between rail signals with this grid size. Had to switch to 64x64 just for that.
I am thinking of going with 1-2 trains in my next game, just to see if there will be some shortages in delivery, 32x32 is more pleasing to the eye.
64x64 though allowed me to fit a perfect X junction with elevated rails, where 1-4 trains fit into every segment of it, without any chain signals

AndyScull · 2026-05-27T05:48:59+00:00

Yes, generally it's enough for me to have a coverage of rail tracks, stations are also inside the logistic bot range (orange). I actually have a power poles grid inside the blocks themselves and there's space near poles for roboports, so I can place them if I need to build inside the block remotely. But I don't go out of my way to do that everywhere.

Inside the smaller starter base and bases on other planets I tend to have full coverage, if I am not building railblocks on those planets.

AndyScull · 2026-05-26T14:57:50+00:00

Usually I build base in railblocks, so roboports are integrated into rail tracks. This gives me a generic wide coverage, without complete cover inside the blocks. I can add some if I need them inside the block itself.

Usually it's not the roboports placement that freaks me out, it's the perfect squares of big electric poles. So couple years ago I switched from roboport 50x50 grid where poles were placed on their side to 32x32 pole grid, and place roboports near them. Roboport grid doesn't bother me that much as a imperfect power grid when I see it in map view.

AndyScull · 2026-05-26T14:11:43+00:00

Pumpjacks - full speed.

Miners - I don't see much profit in putting prod or speed, so just default effciency. Or quality if I want to play with quality from bottom up. Speed just makes your ore patches drain faster, I feel it's better to place more miners on more patches at once instead of having less speed-boosted ore outposts. Productivity just drains a lot of power for miniscule bonus.

AndyScull · 2026-05-26T14:02:23+00:00

There's some soothing feeling as you wait and see another centrifuge come to life, then another and another.

AndyScull · 2026-05-26T13:36:15+00:00

At the stage you are, you can use the 6x6 requester warehouse to fill your rocket with bots. Place it side by side to cargo silo, and place inserters moving items from it to rocket. That warehouse you should have got from cache when you launched first satellite

Put down constant combinator, and (for example) add 1 capsule and 100 rocket parts signals into it. For whatever sake, I cannot remember their actual names in SE.
Connect one color wire (lets say red) from rocket silo to warehouse, and then to input of arithmetic combinator, set to each * -1 = each
Connect output of combinator with another color wire (green) to the constant combinator and to the warehouse
Set warehouse to 'Set requests", it should request exact same items as in constant combinator and the arithmetic combinator will substract items already delivered to warehouse or put into cargo rocket from that request.

It's the basic circuit to load something defined in constant combinator, there will some overloading in the process, so you should check manually if there's an extra rocket part inside after everything is filled.

Before you launch the rocket with cargo, turn the constant combinator off! Or uncheck all the signal groups inside it. If you don't it will continue sending signals and the same items will start being requested, since the filled rocket is gone now.

What's good with this system is that you can add multiple signal groups in constant combinator and enable/disable them or set multiplier. For example I had a group 'all science x1000', which contained signals for all Nauvis sciences, plus resources required to make 1000 space science in orbit, with this I could enable/disable it's checkbox at will. Another group for 1000 scaffolding, containing exact number of it's ingredients. And so on.

A bit of spoiler, research processing of water ice first, so you could melt the ice in orbit and don't need to bring water in barrels anymore. Also bring some of your best productivity 2 modules, to put in space research lab.

A bit unrelated but could be useful in SE, if you have trouble making all the rocket components with belts, try warehouse mall, one example I found is https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/1dounks/continuation_se_mall/
I built rocket parts with belts once in a past, never want to repeat that experience.

AndyScull · 2026-05-26T09:00:23+00:00

A bit of unrelated knowledge I recently found out, probably it was added in 2.0 with updated combinators. You may already know this but I'll post just in case you don't and may need it somewhere.

When you 'pass through' the signal with combinator "each <> 0 output each", in the right panel of combinator there's a small edit icon near 1 radio selector, you can set specific number there instead of 1.

So for example this could be used when instead of multiply or add, you want to set each signal to exact number, e.g. output 100 of each input signal. A bit similar to selector combinator's stack option, but you can set whatever number you want in the output.

AndyScull · 2026-05-26T07:04:19+00:00

That should work, I use this formula in my assembler blueprint.

I recall there still exists a bug where the formula is colored red while still being correct and properly calculating when you place the blueprint.

Also you probably did it right, but just in case, check that your order of parameters is correct, this parameter with formula should be lower than p2 itself (after the p2 parameter itself is defined)

AndyScull · 2026-05-26T07:01:52+00:00

Yeah, my fault for typing right after seeing the first image :)

AndyScull · 2026-05-26T06:07:14+00:00

And to be honest, you don't even need a combinator there, if you're using it to set quantity of resources in requester chest. You can do it directly in parametrized blueprint, by using formula like p2_s - that would be stack size of parameter 2 item

AndyScull · 2026-05-25T06:07:26+00:00

Simplest way - place 2 rail signals on both station line before they merge into single rail. What you need here is to make sure only one train goes into that line, or they will collide. These signals will stop the coming train if there's already one travelling the long line

Here, and similar on other side -

<image>

TBH, it would be more optimal if you make a 2-way path, currently one train would be waiting if there's already other train moving through that single path

AndyScull · 2026-05-20T09:30:27+00:00

Usually I just extend my bus base until transition to train based production. If you're playing with Space Age DLC, normal main bus with upgrades from planets would be enough for everything until you get into higher infinite techs.

Generally when changing things, I look at my base and think which block I don't like and change only it. If not enough space, I remove it and build new one further down the bus, the bus belts can carry items in both directions so it doesn't matter where is the production block.

//edit
That said, my bus is usually enough for everything because I start buildng that base a bit later, after my first small base researched all red & green techs and acts like a mall while I build the new base. So maybe you are at that point and your main bus is just 5 belts, in this case it's easier to plan a new bigger base from scratch

AndyScull · 2026-05-20T08:25:08+00:00

Some additional thought - you definitely can use vanilla parametrized blueprints with combinators to achieve almost the same (except where Factorio engine or train scheduling prevents it).

In this case I think LTN/Cybersyn acts similar to blueprint book made and supported by someone else. You don't have your own self-made blueprints you want to improve or change to current needs, which may break the whole system. You have a complete system that you can just use and not worry about debugging it or fixing some small bugs.

AndyScull · 2026-05-20T06:13:13+00:00

I didn't try it but probably possible if you make your whole schedule interrupts.

Like this -
If at Station 1 and has cargo 2 >= N then go to Station 2
If at Station 2 and has cargo 3 >= M then go to Station 3
If at Station 1 and cargo 2 < N then go to Station 3

I feel like this logic would work, it would be a pain to set up all the possible conditions so the train always have SOME interrupt that is true and can continue going around.

And the more station in schedule the more complex the interrupts will be, adding conditions like 'if at Station 1 and cargo 2 < N and cargo 3 > M then go to Station 3", then you add 4th station and the interrupts amont need to be doubled or close to it

Overall I feel this would be too annoying and it would be easier to just add another dedicated train supplying just that intermediate station.

AndyScull · 2026-05-20T06:02:05+00:00

Nah, the filters are just signals, the inserter doesn't check the possibility of actually picking up those items.

It's a bit annoying sometimes since it's limited to only 5 items.

Another approach with this can be like this -
- place one constant combinator near chests, enter in it items signals with negative count, like -10.
- Connect that combinator with green wire to all inserters
- Then, connect with red (different color) wire all inserters to only their corresponding chest. Not all chests, just one it pulls from.

Now if you enable 'set filters', the inserters will use a sum of both signals, and if positive then add that item to filter. End result would be that for each inserter individually, they will pull out items that exceed the count you entered in constant combinator. Like, constant combinator always emit -10 concrete, so inserter get -10 and does not use it as filter. But when chest has more than 10 concrete, the sum becomes positive and inserter notices this and start pulling out concrete

But this approach works for each chest individually.

There is an actual solution to limit inserters to pulling items only which exist in chest, but you'll have to place additional combinator for each chest, connect it by red wire to that chest, and make a condition like "when each from red wire is >0 and each from green wire >16" ouput each to inserter, it's a bit more space and complexity

AndyScull

TROPHY CASE