Side Splitting Unloaders are Old News? | Factorio Spage Age

[@TheChrikos]

Wild guess, the red splitter shuffels 60 items a second or 1 per tic, so every 2 tics orr is exactly where other ore would be loaded so it blocks the loading. Since the belt speed is exacly half the tick rate.

[@TheJarGames]

Interesting thoughts, seems logical

[@rogo7330]

There is no shuffling speed difference between them. Item just gets teleported once it reaches a specific point on the shuffler input belt.

[@TheChrikos]

@@rogo7330 Thats where you are wrong, a splitter can "shuffle" 2 belts of its own colour so it shuffels at double the speed of the belt. So it has a maximum shuffle speed and for red's it is exactly 60/s just like the tick rate

[@SomeTomfoolery]

I watched this at 1.5x speed and forgot that it was sped up

[@TheJarGames]

lmao I feel that. I watch everything at 1.5 - 2x speed. I can't believe I talk so slow normally still though 😅😅

[@kolumdium]

When you consider that Spliters use extra FPS/UPS compared to raw belts, I would say it's not worth it if you have a big base. Would be intresting to see with different Quality Inserters as well as Stack Inserters.

[@TheJarGames]

good point! I'm going to do another exploration of this and see what the best solution is for endgame unloading stations is with stack inserters.

[@decrobyron]

This.

[@rogo7330]

That's strange. "The splitters bug" was about that inserters were putting items in exact point where splitter starts teleportation of the item. On the next tick item gets teleported, and there is the place for an inserter to put a new item, because previous was already teleported and did not occupied 32 positions out of 256 that each side of the belt have. After the change inserters now put items before the point where they would've teleported straight away, thus essentially unloading to a single belt. But since Vulcanus (green/turbo) belts have a speed of 32 positions per tick, there is no difference for them between pre-change and post-change, since on the next tick there is already a place for an item to be dropped, and throughput difference is none between two setups.

[@TheJarGames]

interesting, thanks for the info.

[@itzememario]

I think for the yellow belt the improvement comes mostly from how it better feeds into the belt and also sorta skip a tile with the splitter, thus having less lag in the system. and then for the latter 2 you reach into that quantum mumbo yumbo you are on about.

[@TheJarGames]

@@itzememario lmao 100%

[@james_90]

With the crazy scaling changes in space age and wagons not having increased capacity with quality I'm a convert and now training around molten fluids instead. Still an interesting experiment though.

[@TheJarGames]

Interesting! Never though of doing that, great idea

[@truefreak]

Would be nice to see how this compares to just using 6 inserters (or for your test, 3) instead of 4 per train?

[@TheJarGames]

Interesting! Good question. I will have to make another short to test it out!

[@KryptLynx]

I didn't played Space Age yet, but I experimented in Space Exploration mod back then. Try to join two splitters in the *same* direction, and merge sides into single line. It is more compact than your solution at 0:27 too (just join 4 splitters this way). It does not pull equally from the chests, though.

[@ivanalaskevich4736]

Hmmmmmmmm... I definitely remember seeing another test that disproved the usefulness of this feature, and the difference was significant. But I don't remember what video it was. In my tests, the results were ambiguous, but the increased efficiency was not justified by the "complexity" (or rather inconvenience) of unloading to splitters... But when re-testing now, the difference became very noticeable. I can assume that the developers noticed the negative reviews about "fixing what worked before" and returned the functionality.

[@TheJarGames]

Interesting! Well this is what I love about Factorio, continuously developing our understand to make the most efficient factory! LFG!

[@skyjoe55]

I think the 4 item difference for red belts was purely that the splitters are teleporting items over a tile So the splitter lines get to the output one belt faster but there is no actual throughput increase

[@TheJarGames]

yeah definitely. it's negligible for reds... but that's also nice to see you can have the design for yellows, and then not worry about it being less-than-efficient while using reds.

[@danieltelford9977]

You should try it with the new stack inserters if my mathestimate is correct it should negate the benefit

[@TheJarGames]

will do!

[@jojoats]

For such a video, probably good to put the version / revision number in

[@TheJarGames]

Good call

[@Gorre022]

Very cool… I wonder about stack inserters though. This is great for fully saturating a belt with 1-stacks… what about 5-stacks? 🤓

[@TheJarGames]

Great question! That would be a great topic for a future video!

[@0thPAg]

Why are people using splitters for even loading of the chests instead of running a belt past them and putting in 2 combinators ? It works pretty fast, I wonder if there is any delay at all.

[@dripthanos5595]

that causes uneven loading, so if a train is set to come when theres a certain number of resources in those chests, it might cause throughput issues as only a few of the inserters can be pulling items from chest to wagon for the entirety of the loading process.

[@rogo7330]

There is no difference in speed, plus with combinator setup you get guaranteed balancing of items between chests if you get them unbalanced somehow. A lot of people just playing this game very casually. I myself never even launched a rocket in 1.1, because I looked at the recipe, saw huge numbers, thought to myself "Ok, I will need that much for that much and that many hours to sit on the ass waiting for research to complete at 60spm" and started fiddling with whatever I already unlocked instead of building yet another city-block base, which is the only right choice if you don't care to dump 100 hours more into the game and come up with something more compact and resource efficient but more complex to build.

[@dripthanos5595]

@@rogo7330 ohh they mean limiting insertion into the chests with the circuit network. Thats sort of unnecessary when a balancer gets the job done well enough.

[@Jowbaka]

​@@dripthanos5595Circuit chest balancing vs splitters: + Takes less space (only one arithmetic combinator). +Will never become more more unbalanced than some constant (nr_chests*diff_from_avg). Max inbalance can be measured by running one belt running past all the chests, and taking difference between first and last chest. -will be slightly unbalanced so should add the max inbalance to the full train calculation. -Must watch tutorial to understand the principle, but once you have the blueprint it's easy. *More difficult than simple balancers but easier than complex balancers.

[@alexanderjanke1538]

​@@Jowbaka-takes up calculating power so not that great for mega bases

[@TheSinzy]

UndegraundBeltPiexe pointing down plus a piece of belt pointint to it. Just 2 tiles

[@zlac]

But you can side load (without splitters) using only 2 lanes, then you can use 3 belts in 6 lanes instead of 2 belts in 6 lanes (or 6 instead of 4 per side of the train), that's 50% more inserters and 50% more belts... you can merge this into less belts if "it's not fast enough to saturate a belt", but it should be fadter, no?

[@TheJarGames]

check out the latest video on the king of unloading! kzbin.info/www/bejne/rJmVqGiBl7prjK8

[@jeffreyspinner9720]

This imo should be some form of ANOVA design of experiment, separating the potential variability between belt speed and spitter speeds. You have the belts leading into their respective belts (yellow, red, blue) as the reference speeds as you have already set up, but then you split a section of yellow belts with at least yellow AND red splitters; then the red belt, but side by side with a red and blue splitter feeding a red belt; and for this example have the blue belts fed into each other and have a blue splitter set up and a separate green splitter set up as a comparison too. This would test if the devs set up the balancing right or the belts can be loaded with faster speed with higher level splitters over the same belts being the mechanism to beat. What you are trying to separate is the variability between the quality of the belts and the quality of the splitters, i.e., can the splitters of higher tech actually feed more on the same belt or not? //...and now for a metacomment separated by a comment How dare you look at your presuppositions? Most ppl don't even know they presuppose anything. This human frailty is what some ppl and orgs prey upon when they use NeuroLinguistic Programming (NLP*) to sell you stuff, or do WAY more nefarious things outside your awareness if you're not an active listener and viewer (!) "Just consume product." "Lay back and think of England." - Idk why I thought of that line... Oh, maybe because as an experiment I wanted to see if I could overcome a date's objection to taking her clothes off even though I knew she wanted to, something was stopping her. Spoilers NLP worked and outside of her awareness because she asked me, "How did you take my clothes off?" She only noticed because she felt cold, she told me. I did ask her if she wanted to continue without using hypnotic communication, and it worked out well for both of us 😉 If I ever do that again (I was young, man!) I'll remember to get the room to normal cat temp comfort, not normal man temp... 😎 Cats run at 102 degrees F I think, if I remember my ytube cat videos... _________________________________ * Not NLP:= Natural Language Processing...

[@estapeluo]

I think the bug was related to how compressed the belt is while unloading. not what are you showing (which you didn't show anything)