Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
If you work twice (2x) as fast, you'll do the work in half (1/2x) the time. So if you work 0.75x as fast, you'll do the work in (1/0.75)x the time. Ergo, circuit production speed is 0.5 [s/item] / 0.75 [1/assembler] ≈ 0.667 [assembler s/item].
Now, if it was 1 [s/item], we'd need 15 assemblers to fill a belt. If it was 2 [s/item], we'd need twice as many assemblers. If it was 0.5 [s/item], we'd need half as many assemblers. Notice the pattern? We need to multiply, not divide!
So 15 [items/s] x 0.667 [assembler s/item] = 10 [assemblers].
(Also notice the units (in brackets). If you divided, instead of items/s and s/item cancelling so you could get assemblers, you'd get 22.5 items-squared per second-squared per assembler :) If you'd like to know more, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensional_analysis )
If you're playing modded, you can make it easier for yourself with https://mods.factorio.com/mod/MaxRateCalculator
In that case, one 0.75 speed assembler making items that need 1 [s/item] can make 0.75 items per second. If it was crafting items that need 2 [s/item], it would craft 0.75/2 = 0.375 items per second.
So crafting speed for circuits is 0.75 [1/assembler] / 0.5 [s/item] = 1.5 [item/s/assembler].
Now it's easy: if an assembler can make 1.5 items per second, how many assemblers do we need to craft 15 items per second? 15 [items/s] / 1.5 [items/s/assembler] = 10 [assembler].
I prefer this approach. Personally, using "items per second" is much more intuitive than using "seconds per item" :) Especially when we get to "items per second per assembler" vs "assembler-seconds per item" :)
I'm glad I was wrong too, and was starting to suspect as much. Based on my numbers, I started to realize I wouldn't be able to supply the materials needed to feed that many assemblers, at least not in way that fits in nicely with my desired design, lol.
Thanks :-)