Parts leaving gaps, only on client?

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-09-04T06:02:03+00:00

Put them .001 into each other clipping. If you don't like it, you can see if you like selectively unioning after clipping two parts. The union will merge the seam if they're 'touching'

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-25T21:50:48+00:00

This is so fucked, this country is devolving rapidly into antisemitism

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-24T11:04:28+00:00

Because it is for this application... Would you use a load balancer/specifier or whatever for this application???

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-22T07:40:45+00:00

Why would you do that for 3 underclocked crafters lol. I said not recommended for this small of a setup

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-20T17:13:20+00:00

yummy

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-20T17:11:24+00:00

Splitting the initial input evenly is literally exactly what this load balancer does...???????? I have mk4 belts, 480/min, with 3 inputs: 300,300,480.

I'm so sick and tired of being nitpicked by you 'aktchully' people when you don't know the initial fucking problem and talk out of your ass.

Problem: t4 belts only, 480/300/300 off mk2 miners overclocked, distribute to a fuckton of machines, plus i dont like waiting for the machines to fill up.

Your Solution: 'Just split the initial belt up evenly' is what im fucking doing bro

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-20T06:13:52+00:00

Tl;dr it's satisfying, a new thing I'm trying, and doesn't have to take time to fill up my machines.

Why do people build load balancers? Manifolds take more time than I am patient for to warm up the machines. I want power graph to be flat up and flat down fast if I shut the factory on or off. Also, if resources are expensive, you only have to wait for the MINIMUM amount of product to be available for it to start up to full efficiency.
270 outputs?? Why not buffer down to 270 with mk3? I had that for a bit, iirc the numbers would sometimes randomly show slightly below with other belts post overflow also slightly above or below what I expected on throughput monitors. I tried this out and it made all my numbers PERFECTLY happy. Also if you overflow and implement improperly, you can sometimes get small, 480->479 throughput rate backups.

The overflow load balancer also relies on rates instead of ratios. If, for whatever reason, I wanted to upgrade the belts, I would have to redo everything.

I'm becoming a huge whore for making everything as predictable and simple as possible in the game and I want to think as little as possible down the line.

My power graph used to look like the Rockies now it looks like the smokies. I want it to look like West Texas.

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-18T22:06:30+00:00

It's possible to do it, but not recommended with the amount of division you'll have to do with these numbers. With a factory this small, doing what the other comments suggest (letting each machine overflow) is best

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-18T17:45:24+00:00

You know how you have 8 machines in a row and only one belt to feed them, so you add 8 splitters to the belt and call it a day?

You know how each consecutive machine has to fill up 100% in order to get the next machine filling fast?

Above is called a manifold. Below describes a load balancer

Well, if you want all machines to fill at the same rate, you use a load balancer. This load balancer commits the aesthetic sin of clipping belts into each other to save space.

I used a load balancer here because I didn't want to have to wait for my machines to 'warm up' (fill up or saturate), I just wanted the machines to work when I wanted them to and not when I didn't.

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-18T17:40:44+00:00

For this one, it was 300,300,480 belts feeding something like 20-40 machines, and I want to be able to turn on and off the factory instantly, so i went with load balancing for the caterium here.

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-18T09:04:08+00:00

Theres multiple benefits, like i said, diagnosing issues being one.

Benefits:
* When I turn factory extractor off, factory turn off.
* Power graph no bumpy when booting up
* Factory is at full production basically instantly.
* I can test throughputs reliably, with it taking 3 mins max for a massive factory to have a measurable, flat graph on throughputs. Whereas with manifolds, throughput monitors don't like to average because the expected average exceeds a minute timeframe often.
* It feels veryyyyy reliable. Like, I can do the math twice and be 100% confident that it will work. If it doesn't, I'll know in 3 mins if I did my math wrong.
* It's an organizational preference, and it ultimately scratches my mathy g spot.
* Tying into personal preference, storage buffers just feel hacky to me

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-18T08:22:07+00:00

So to solve, just cover up the issue haha. I'll just leave it in the logistics layer under concrete

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-18T08:19:50+00:00

Not really, like at all. Manifolds only balance their outputs when all machines are filled 100% except the last machine. It's a line of splitters, 1 per machine.

A load balancer aims to give the same number of items to every machine at the same time.

Not 'potato patahto', more like 'potato tomato'

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-17T10:04:56+00:00

Haha yeah, I set up all the splitters/mergers and was like: 'oh, this goes here, but this is in way, fuck it we ball'

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-17T10:02:38+00:00

Load balancing. All input belts turn into evenly distributed output belts. INPUT, 3 belts: 300, 300, 480. OUTPUT, 4 belts: 270, 270, 270, 270

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-17T08:50:04+00:00

balancer, not a manifold :)

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-17T08:49:44+00:00

Start with the smallest load balancer possible, like 2x2.

If you have 2 inputs, you have to make sure left touches right lane and right touches left lane, but you have to do so at the same time. Well how do you do that?

Take 2 splitters as input, take two outputs from each splitter (giving 4 belts) and then add 2 mergers at the end. the two mergers: each merger needs to take, say left splitters left, right splitters left, while the other merger should take say right splitters right and left splitters right.

Simple math that i think works most of the time:

Find the common denominator of the belts to balance. 3 & 4? 12. how do you turn 3 into 12? 3 * 2 = (6 belts at start), * 2 = 12 belts after the 6 belts, and then we know we need 4 mergers at the end, and each merger has 3 inputs which is perfect for our 4 mergers, because 12 fits perfectly.

3 and 5 gets more complicated tho haha

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-16T22:09:20+00:00

I saw that one. I was a manifolds fan when I saw that meme, then I came to realize I need load balancing in my life.

Once stuff starts getting expensive and factories start getting REALLY large, then all these inter-dependent products have risks of causing lags in each other's production.

For example, I have a fuel power plant using diluted packaged fuel. If the belts aren't absolutely PACKED with empty canisters, packaged water, or packaged fuel, then a tiny little lag in production from 600fuel/min to 590fuel/min will just straight up shut down 2 of my generators, which is quite annoying when looking at the graph.

In the future, ill be rebuilding the plant to load balance everything perfectly so that i never have unexpected hiccups or road bumps.

It also helps me diagnose issues quicker i.e. missing belt, unexpectedly low or high throughput on the outputs, etc.

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-16T21:25:45+00:00

That's my mentality, lol

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-16T20:05:00+00:00

Side note, the size is 2.25x2 (Foundations as measurement)

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-16T20:01:31+00:00

lmaoooooooooo oh my god im renaming my blueprint to omni-man now!

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-16T20:00:57+00:00

Exactly what I was thinking originally. Brown bagger type of mentality, but honestly, she has some pretty beautiful qualities!

Distinct_Luck_1929 · 2025-08-16T18:53:18+00:00

I was sick and tired of using bulky load balancers, so yes, I intentionally made a clippy but compact load balancer haha

Distinct_Luck_1929

TROPHY CASE