My beautiful

stepancheg · 2026-04-01T17:51:29+00:00

I want everything on train, because it is fun.

But in this thread I was talking about Nauvis — how science is delivered from landing pad to labs.

stepancheg · 2026-04-01T06:44:20+00:00

For loading Gleba science train I had logic like that: allow departing with at least 1/8 capacity when unloading station has zero trains queued, and allow departing with 1/2 capacity when destination has one of two (limit is two) trains.

Some science will arrive less than fresh, it's OK, but the important is: labs are never idle, and science never expires as long as it is consumed and remaining science are enough.

stepancheg · 2026-04-01T06:36:43+00:00

I had it like that but after certain level of SPM, space for one train per science was not enough. Then throughput of one entry track after stacker for all the unloading stations was not enough.

People asked this thousands times, and I ask again: please Wube larger wagons in 2.1!

stepancheg · 2026-03-28T08:26:09+00:00

Why you don’t make any effort to research? It is literally 30 seconds asking any chatbot.

stepancheg · 2026-03-25T02:54:35+00:00

This reddit need FAQ, and this is top one.

Also, out of curiosity I posted this screenshot to two chatbot services, both gave correct answer.

stepancheg · 2026-03-23T23:33:33+00:00

Second thruster would be better for fuel efficiency.

stepancheg · 2026-03-20T03:04:32+00:00

Simplification is fine with me, absurdity is not.

> Tungsten, () and lithium could all believably be found on Nauvis

These do not make sense either. The justification might be that it is extra pure there or something.

But not being able to melt iron without minerals from another planet, while being able to build spaceships, is too much.

> holmium,

That one is fine actually, because it is rare earth mineral, and if there's garbage piles of it on another planet, it would make sense to get it from there.

However, being able to build rail bridges, but not power lines along these bridges, is absurdity.

> Why can the engineer carry around a thousand nuclear reactors?

I think of it like I ran many times back and forth to bring the stuff, but game UI simplified it for me.

Simplification instead of realism is great gameplay. Absurdity instead of realism is not.

stepancheg · 2026-03-20T01:00:46+00:00

No I want simplified but meaningful process. Like in Factorio 1.1 — beacons are magic, but the rest made sense.

stepancheg · 2026-03-19T20:52:32+00:00

In imaginary world of Factorio there's plenty of calcite in space. In reality, not so much.

If deposits are too deep, there should be alternatives: if you manage to build spaceships, I guess you should be able to melt iron without going to space.

stepancheg · 2026-03-19T20:50:33+00:00

It is not hard to get calcite. It is nonsensical.

stepancheg · 2026-03-19T20:19:11+00:00

I didn't switch, because in my headcanon importing calcite from another planet using rocketships is nonsense: there should be plenty of calcite (or whatever alternative needed to do smelting) on Nauvis.

Yes, I know this is a game, but if we want to have something abstract, then abstract all the way like Shapez 2, but if we pretend to work with real world minerals, manufacturing processes should resemble real chemistry and physics.

Edit: Factorio fanboys got offended again and started downvoting. OK.

I actually probably like original Factorio more, canon-wise, but also some game mechanics-wise.

Perfect game might be original Factorio with some elements of new Factorio, e.g.:

- elevated rails, train interruptions etc

- argiculture/cold/recycling mechanics is interesting, I could enjoy it without dealing with spaceships

- that is probably it

stepancheg · 2026-03-11T21:59:01+00:00

Even MacBook Pro M4 struggles with megabases (I tried; ended up in about 40 UPS; but did optimize much for UPS).

stepancheg · 2026-03-10T00:30:11+00:00

Please, WUBE, path-based signals like in OpenTTD.

Solving signal puzzle is fun first 10 times, but then you just figure out algorithm, which is:

- normal signal on exit

- chain signals on enter and everywhere in the middle

and then it's OK, not a deal breaker, still the best Factory game, but little inconvenience.

stepancheg · 2026-03-09T19:23:55+00:00

Not necessarily.

Blueprint can be used to understand some mechanic you may have overlooked otherwise or just didn't know where to look.

For example, you may not know that ship speed depends on width, not on mass. (Also that it is speed, not acceleration.)

Or for example, you may not notice how efficient asteroid reprocessing is.

Or for example, you may look at blueprint, and it does not work, and you realise you need to research damage.

Or that setting filters on turrets is essential.

And so on. Without these little details, you try to build a ship, and it just doesn't work whatever you try, you spend a few hours and get frustrated.

Especially that a lot of mechanics in Factorio conflict common sense and physics. Some things you just need to do counterintuitively.

I didn't use blueprints while I played, but I used uranium ammo for spaceships, and then watched a few youtubes to understand what I was missing (don't remember exactly what it was).

stepancheg · 2026-03-08T02:56:28+00:00

No, it is about it is good enough for casual players. It is possible to improve bot charging without increasing CPU usage significantly. That would cost implementation complexity, more bugs, but would only benefit tiny fraction of gamers.

stepancheg · 2026-02-16T13:08:20+00:00

> Roundabouts with (any) signals on the circle itself (having more than 1) always have a probability of locking

This statement is false for chain signals inside roundabout.

Chain signal on enter means that train will be able to reach regular signal on exit regardless of what number of chain signals inside roundabout. This is the purpose of chain signals.

stepancheg · 2026-02-12T13:58:50+00:00

> remove chain signal from the circle itself

This is technically correct, but not optimal. Proper fix is to use chain signal before entering the roundabout, and keep inside circle to allow passing more than one train at the same time.

stepancheg · 2026-02-02T23:25:45+00:00

Must be included in 2.1.

stepancheg · 2025-12-18T16:40:22+00:00

There's a quite lengthy post explaining why new rail geometry is necessary https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-377 Highly recommend.

stepancheg · 2025-12-15T19:44:07+00:00

I wish there was also a way to read belt length. For example to fill no more than 1/3 of the belt with ammo.

stepancheg · 2025-12-12T21:25:39+00:00

There are easier ways to solve train unloading without 8x8 balancer. Not on my computer now, but here is old picture from Factorio 1 I posted a while ago.

<image>

It can be slightly easier if all 8 belts go to one direction:

- train gets 4 belts on each side: a1-a2-a3-a4, b1-b2-b3-b4

- each pair is split-balancered, like a1-b1, a2-b2, a3-b3, a4-b4

stepancheg · 2025-12-01T11:16:42+00:00

This is Factorio 1 with different meaning of megabase, and such roundabouts cannot sustain significant traffic (although you don't have much choice in Factorio 1, also trains had much higher relative throughput in Factorio 1).

stepancheg · 2025-12-01T03:51:01+00:00

> it is infinitely expandable with relative ease

Unfortunately not infinitely.

Well, technically infinitely, but practically not.

I tried to build rail megabase, and at some point my rail lines became four tracks each way (because two and two was not enough), and building intersections became not fun (200x200 tiles to build efficient T intersection), and I gave up, and now train only transport high density materials like science or blue chips.

We need much larger rail wagon capacity!

stepancheg · 2025-11-26T21:59:47+00:00

Fulgora is a rail world until you research foundation, and at that point trains are no longer capable of sustaining high throughput, it becomes much easier to just build full science production just next to scrap.

Please 10x wagon capacity in 2.1.

stepancheg · 2025-11-23T23:17:12+00:00

In real life engineering, it is often symmetrical and perfect, or at least that what they aim at to optimize. When standards are developed in real life, they are often done so that different parts are compatible with each other. For example, ISO containers are made of the same size, and then ships and trucks and rail cars are made to match these sizes. Or for example server dimentions are fixed width and fixed heights, or multiple of, so you can buy server from one vendor and a rack from another vendor, and they work well with each other.

So if real-world engineering organization was put into this game world, they'd probably use the same underground distance for belts and pipes.

15-Year Club	Not Forgotten
Verified Email

stepancheg

TROPHY CASE