Wine O'Clock in 8 time / $61k

[Vividica]

I've been trying to figure out how to reduce the time for Wine O'Clock from 9 to 8 or reduce the cost from $74k to $61k. Any hints?

[Soul]

Not sure how they managed 8 cycles but I was able to get down to $64k by using only counters

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2831194501

If I fiddled with it enough I could probably take out one of the counters to get it lower maybe. I use the bottom 2 counters as a memory since the order is only 1 pulse, then it sets the opposite counter so that it uses the 0/on feature of the counter to enable the correct output.

I set the counter I don't want and the other defaults to 0 when the order comes in, which I use to hold the "enable" multimixer on the output that I choose.

[jjoacoTacularr]

?

[1.2M | Missingno.]

I've found two different 8 cycle solutions.

Consider that 8 is the absolute minimum just to dispense the tray (1), stack a product (1), and move it (6) spaces to the output. So 8 is a perfect solution that never leaves the tray waiting, the product must be right behind it and ready to stack immediately. But since our product does have to wait in order to fill, we must save stacking for last so the tray doesn't wait with it.

In order to do that, we need to dispense the glass at t=1, fill twice at t=2 and t=3, and move it off the sorter at t=4. You actually have one cycle of wiggle room if you put the sorter all the way down at y=5, but I'll tell you don't need to, you can do a step every cycle and have your sorter at y=4 to keep it from getting ahead of the tray.

So the next step is to figure out how to do these actions every cycle, with no latency.

If you need another hint: One of my solutions uses only one counter, the other uses none at all. Think about what else you can use to do actions at a specific time without a counter.

[UnluckyNinja]

8 cycles is easy, if the tray moves straight down and got stacked once, then ejected immediately, and never halts on the conveyor, it's 8 cycles.
And you have only one dispenser, so it's not possible to dispense twice while moving.
(also remember you don't have to meet both criteria at the same time)

So If bottle is stacked on the tray, the tray will halt with the bottle when dispensing.
Then you have to figure out how to prepare a full bottle before it gets stacked.

Which is to create a separate line for the bottle only.

If you stuck, remember you can buy multiple scanner to scan the tray

[Soul]

Originally posted by Mega Missingno.:

I've found two different 8 cycle solutions.

Consider that 8 is the absolute minimum just to dispense the tray (1), stack a product (1), and move it (6) spaces to the output. So 8 is a perfect solution that never leaves the tray waiting, the product must be right behind it and ready to stack immediately. But since our product does have to wait in order to fill, we must save stacking for last so the tray doesn't wait with it.

So the next step is to figure out how to do these actions every cycle, with no latency.

Thank you! This tip actually helped me shave off a cycle simply by moving where my glass gets inserted on the belt. For some reason I had thought it had to stay at the top even though it didn't start there. By rearranging the machines I was able to insert closer and remove the gap I had between the tray and the glass.

[UnluckyNinja]

Originally posted by Soul:

Not sure how they managed 8 cycles but I was able to get down to $64k by using only counters

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2831194501

If I fiddled with it enough I could probably take out one of the counters to get it lower maybe. I use the bottom 2 counters as a memory since the order is only 1 pulse, then it sets the opposite counter so that it uses the 0/on feature of the counter to enable the correct output.

I set the counter I don't want and the other defaults to 0 when the order comes in, which I use to hold the "enable" multimixer on the output that I choose.

You don't have to deactivate the lower two counters. The sorter will not sense anymore after it received a THRU signal, you can save one mixer for that

[Soul]

Originally posted by UnluckyNinja:

You don't have to deactivate the lower two counters. The sorter will not sense anymore after it received a THRU signal, you can save one mixer for that

Awesome catch! Brought me down to 8T $63k, pretty happy with that!

[John]

Originally posted by Soul:

Originally posted by UnluckyNinja:

You don't have to deactivate the lower two counters. The sorter will not sense anymore after it received a THRU signal, you can save one mixer for that

Awesome catch! Brought me down to 8T $63k, pretty happy with that! :Hand_Shake:

You can also use the counter for sorter to inactivate the other counters, saving more multiplexer and get 61k

[Sawtaytoes]

I got it down to 61, but someone else got it down to 59. From my estimation, doing 59 means removing one timer and adding another multimixer. No clue how you're supposed to manage it. Anyone have an idea? I feel like I'm missing something crucial to understanding the game.

[Goblin]

Originally posted by Sawtaytoes:

I got it down to 61, but someone else got it down to 59. From my estimation, doing 59 means removing one timer and adding another multimixer. No clue how you're supposed to manage it. Anyone have an idea? I feel like I'm missing something crucial to understanding the game.

A full list of components to get 59 (big spoiler of course): Two normal multimixers, four timers, one stacker, 5 conveyor belts. Nothing else.

Some vague worded hints to help a little: Priority is important and true until false
An important feature of a component is that Counters never output on the first tick.

Also, for when you have solved it: I know someone who got $57k and I don't know how either. Now we can suffer together :')

[Sawtaytoes]

Thanks! That helped me figure it out. I shouldn't realized, but it's one of those things that seems like a bug and not a feature :p.

On the other hand, I can't even do the chicken one after everything else being relatively easy up to this point... :(