Do you think trains will become obsolete?

[Falesz]

Hey all,
With the latest FFF bringing us news of a belt that can transport 60 items per second AND the fact that items can be put into stacks of 4, meaning maximum belt throughput will get to 240 items in total per second, do you think trains are going to become completely obsolete? I hope not. Trains are pretty much my favorite toys in the game and I would hate to see them outbelted. Trains already are kind of optional, I do have a friend with hundreds of hours in the game who has never used a single train in the game, he's perfectly fine using express belts over long distances.
The devs did state sometime earlier that they want trains to remain the transport tools for the highest volume of items, so I wonder how trains will remain the top heavyweight carriers? I would love to see simple, but powerful train upgrades like cargo wagon capacity research or roboport wagons where trains don't need loading stations to load or unload cargo, because they are the loading station.

[PunCrathod]

Originally posted by Csöpper:

Hey all,
With the latest FFF bringing us news of a belt that can transport 60 items per second AND the fact that items can be put into stacks of 4, meaning maximum belt throughput will get to 240 items in total per second, do you think trains are going to become completely obsolete? I hope not. Trains are pretty much my favorite toys in the game and I would hate to see them outbelted. Trains already are kind of optional, I do have a friend with hundreds of hours in the game who has never used a single train in the game, he's perfectly fine using express belts over long distances.
The devs did state sometime earlier that they want trains to remain the transport tools for the highest volume of items, so I wonder how trains will remain the top heavyweight carriers? I would love to see simple, but powerful train upgrades like cargo wagon capacity research or roboport wagons where trains don't need loading stations to load or unload cargo, because they are the loading station.

If throughput was the only thing that mattered then trains would have been obsolete from the start. You can always just run more belts in parallel. What trains do is high throughput cheaply and the ability to easily put many different items through the same piece of rail. Even if a belt had 10000000items/s throughput I would still use trains.

[malogoss]

Take iron plates as an example.

You can easily build a rail track that will let trains transport 250k+ iron plates per minute in one direction.

The new tier 4 belt, with items stacked at 4, will transport 14.4k plates per minute.

If you prefer 17 or 18 belts, side by side, moving plates over thousands of tiles to a single rail track, go for it. But the crafting cost alone, even with just 3-4 such belts, would be hundreds of times what the cost of the rails is.

[Vyndicu]

Originally posted by Csöpper:

Hey all,
With the latest FFF bringing us news of a belt that can transport 60 items per second AND the fact that items can be put into stacks of 4, meaning maximum belt throughput will get to 240 items in total per second, do you think trains are going to become completely obsolete? I hope not.

*snipped*

The same is also true of logistics drones.

It has been confirmed in the stacking item blog that there are unannounced machines that 'encourage' higher throughput by consuming and producing more items in the Space Age expansion.


I wonder if they have more unannounced improvements to trains and drones to keep them from becoming obsolete to max stacked blue convey belts. That is not even taking into account the now-announced green convey belt.

[The_Mell]

A train made up of a single locomotive and four wagons carries 16k plates.
At 240 items / second that means a single train can easily feed a new super fast stacked belt for over a minute.
One train per minute is not a lot for properly set up train track...

Not to mention that trains will be able to use bridges und railroads function both ways.
You could set up your factory on an island with a single bridge going into enemy territory and just bring everything in over it while sending out outpost material like buildings & ammo out.
If they would add a roboport wagon, then you could maybe play that world around a train based system without ever leaving your island...or even be on that planet...

[Drizzt]

bots and trains have always been optional

you start with belts and inserters and can launch a rocket without ever using trains or bots

personally i rarely use bots at all, but i very much enjoy using trains - only using bots in the late game with the personal roboport to allow quick deconstruction (especially of trees) - and occasionally construction

but i pretty much never use the logistic robots, and rarely use roboports

so many of the tools in the game are optional - you can choose to create the most optimized, efficient and largest volume system - or you can choose to use the tools that you find most enjoyable (if those tools happen to differ from those that will be the most optimized)

plus with the addition of the new rail pieces in vanilla, and the elevated rails with the expansion, there will be even more enjoyment to be had with trains

so if players choose not to use them then that is their choice - but not a choice that will be necessary

i can't speak to the Expansion - since maybe in the later stages of that there will be less use for trains

but in the vanilla game, even if these inserter upgrades are part of the 2.0 update, trains will still be used by the people who like using trains

in fact the train system is one of the standout features of the game to many

so the idea that anything could make them obsolete is somewhat absurd lol :-)

once fun becomes obsolete we will all have a serious problem ;-)

[schnappkatze]

Trains have advantages that belts will never have, not matter how much they upgrade the throughput. For example versatility. With a train network, when you want to build a new mining/smelting/production station you can just hook it up to the network, name the station according to your train schedules and everything is taken care of. With belts you need to build them the whole way, to the exact location where you need them and they may not overlap with other belts/things.

I cannot really imagine to use long belts except for the ore deposits right next to the starter base.

Apart from that: I wouldn't be surprised if trains would get an upgrade, too. While they are still superior, it would be weird if belts get a massive boost and trains stay the same. Maybe "big wagons" as an upgrade, probably faster fuel, maybe something a bit more innovative that makes us play different, like the containers in the Freight Forwarding mod.

[malogoss]

Originally posted by Sushi Dragon:

Originally posted by schnappkatze:

With belts you need to build them the whole way, to the exact location where you need them and they may not overlap with other belts/things.

This is exactly the same with trains though... and trains are a higher logistical cost. Belts can go underground.

Please define "logistical cost".

Also, if it looks like this
base <----- iron ore mining
Then yes, you'd need a full rail track or at least a full belt to transport ore.

As you keep expending in that general direction, it might now look like
base <--- iron ore <----- copper ore <----- stone <----- coal

Build a new track segment from iron ore to coal and you're good.
Build belts instead, you have to double them to reach copper, triple them to reach stone, etc.

The belt solution can always be applied. For every outpost added, rails and trains become better, belts get worse. Plus, you also have a fast way to move between base and coal if you build rails. Use belts only and it's the most boring walk ever. Or an annoying car ride at best, which is slow compared to trains.

It's all a matter of scaling efficiently. Try to build a mega base without trains. It is possible, but it is a challenge only maniacs would consider. Pretty much on the same level as only using burner inserters, or using only tier 1 assembling machines.

[knighttemplar1960]

No they won't become obsolete even if trains don't get a buff.

1. Elevated rails will allow you to cross long cliffs and long stretches of water. The new hyper belts only get an additional 2 under ground tiles.
   
2. Hyper belt tech is locked on one of the later planets so it will be a late game item. If you use trains you'll have a fully developed rail system on all the previous planets before you unlock the hyper belts.
   
3. Logistic bots with all pre-space upgrades can all ready move ~250 items/sec over the distance of 2 roboports (100 tiles). Even if the robots get no buff they will still be marginally faster (and use less space) to move the same amount of material and infinity researches will still step them up further. If Logistic bots gets the same buff so they can carry 4 stacks of 4 they will be able to move 1,000 items/sec.
   
4. Nuclear fueled trains (1 loco 4 wagons) can achieve a speed of about 330 km/hr (~92 tiles/sec) on long stretches of track. Elevated rails means there will be far fewer intersections to cross to slow trains down. If we are talking about iron plates that's moving 16,000 iron plates over a distance of 92 tiles every second. Even if you only average 40 tiles/sec that's still 400 items/sec (200 items/sec per tile if you take into consideration rails being 2 tiles wide) assuming that trains get no buff. If they do buff trains and let each slot hold 4 stacks of 100 per slot trains go up to 800 plates/sec.
   
5. Hyper belts will be hideously expensive. A blue belt costs 31.5 iron plates and 20 lubricant. If the devs follow their cost progression a hyper belt will cost a blue belt plus another 20 gears and what ever else they decide to add as a cost (maybe an engine unit). So at least 71.5 iron plates, 20 lubricant and what ever extra they add for 1 tile of hyper belt. Rails are 2 tiles long (and 2 tiles wide) and each production cycle produces 2 rails. The input for a rail assembly machine is 1 iron stick, 1 steel, and 1 stone and it gets you 4 tiles of distance.

So, no. Trains won't be obsolete at all even if the devs do nothing other than the elevated rails. It just means that people that don't like/can't figure out trains will be better able to substitute belts if they don't mind the astronomical costs of hyper belts.

Edit: It appears that one of those type people that can't figure out trains and/or math is handing out clown awards. Thanks for the points whoever you are!

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by knighttemplar1960:

Edit: It appears that one of those type people that can't figure out trains and/or math is handing out clown awards. Thanks for the points whoever you are!

possibly their defining characteristic is their apparent inability to use words to argue against the merits of a position

but it make sense - if they can't work out how to use simple words, or understand basic logic, then it's not surprising that trains entirely baffle them ;-)

anyway - as mentioned by a poster in the announcement thread, i am looking forward to using these new belt upgrades to feed my (potentially elevated and upgraded) train network :-)

[Falesz]

I see, you are all bringing valid points. I'll admit I must have posted this discussion in a moment when I barely thought these things through, I just thought "belt go fast, train go fast, no more difference" and got worried that maybe this would mean trains become less viable. I must also have been biased by the fact that basic and fast transport belts are generally more accessible than trains, and I only ever upgrade to express belts when I can already mass-produce them, so I never really considered their initial cost and what sort of cost that projects for the green belts. Thanks for all the answers!

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by Csöpper:

I see, you are all bringing valid points. I'll admit I must have posted this discussion in a moment when I barely thought these things through, I just thought "belt go fast, train go fast, no more difference" and got worried that maybe this would mean trains become less viable. I must also have been biased by the fact that basic and fast transport belts are generally more accessible than trains, and I only ever upgrade to express belts when I can already mass-produce them, so I never really considered their initial cost and what sort of cost that projects for the green belts. Thanks for all the answers!

i would suggest that PunCrathod's point is a huge one - since belts have two sides, each belt can carry only 2 kinds of item, unless one goes for a sushi belt (which is its own kind of logistical challenge) - whereas a single set of dual rails (properly signalled) allows for many trains to bulk transport many kinds of items - as well as allowing for easy expansion (new junction, rail extension etc) - whereas belt systems can quickly become hard to manage over a certain width, as well as problematic to expand, plus the limited item types if using single item type lanes etc

i definitely think there are lots of interesting challenges to be made by only using belts - and the base game challenge can certainly be achieved without trains - especially if the required resources are conveniently located

but trains are both useful and a lot of fun - so even just the current vanilla version will always have many uses - and with the new stuff that's coming, i expect the train junkies like me will be getting a satisfactory (not a reference to the game) fix :-)

as is usual with Factorio: more features = more options = more fun :-)

also - while belts currently have the advantage of being able to tunnel past cliffs, rivers or factory sections etc - we will be getting elevated rails with the Expansion - and one has to wonder if we are going to see an announcement about rail tunnels at some point.....

this year cannot move along fast enough lol :-)

[brian_va]

Originally posted by Drizzt:

anyway - as mentioned by a poster in the announcement thread, i am looking forward to using these new belt upgrades to feed my (potentially elevated and upgraded) train network :-)

running 4 times as many green circuits into the blue circuit factory will hopefully change the slight trickle of output into a gentle stream

and i'll agree on the train tunnel, cliffs optional of course.

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by brian_va:

......cliffs optional of course.

i know cliffs are a contentious topic for some - but for me they are very useful

because i am an obsessive turtler

i cannot get my factory going properly until i am fully defended against the biters

and so for that i need a full perimeter wall with belt fed turrets

and so for me cliffs are very useful as indestructible walls - and long ones can help me get things moving a little quicker since i don't need as much stone or as many turrets

plus i like using underground belts to tunnel under them - gives the landscape a sense of depth

but i can see how they could annoy people - and they certainly make some areas a pain to traverse

but i just see them as another challenge - and one that can be customised or disabled entirely

but i play on mostly default settings and haven't been troubled by them - and as mentioned they work to my benefit as walls

plus i also like routing my trains through narrow gaps where cliffs meet

anyway - yes - interested to see if train tunnels are gonna be a thing - but maybe they will be saved for Factorio 2 - with full terrain elevation and higher BHP needed to traverse steep grades etc :-)

[malogoss]

I personally don't wish they'll be a thing. But even if I did, I would not have much hope on train tunnels happening.

The FFF about elevated rails stated that they evaluated their options, they could have decided to go for tunnels but in the end they chose elevated rails for many reasons. Tunnels would create new problems and since elevated rails can accomplish almost anything tunnels would (if not everything), I don't see why they'd invest time in them now that they chose elevated rails.

[brian_va]

i'll agree they almost certainly wont do an underground train tunnel; i'd still like to have them though.