Steam installieren
Anmelden
|
Sprache
简体中文 (Vereinfachtes Chinesisch)
繁體中文 (Traditionelles Chinesisch)
日本語 (Japanisch)
한국어 (Koreanisch)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarisch)
Čeština (Tschechisch)
Dansk (Dänisch)
English (Englisch)
Español – España (Spanisch – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (Lateinamerikanisches Spanisch)
Ελληνικά (Griechisch)
Français (Französisch)
Italiano (Italienisch)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Ungarisch)
Nederlands (Niederländisch)
Norsk (Norwegisch)
Polski (Polnisch)
Português – Portugal (Portugiesisch – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (Portugiesisch – Brasilien)
Română (Rumänisch)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Finnisch)
Svenska (Schwedisch)
Türkçe (Türkisch)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamesisch)
Українська (Ukrainisch)
Ein Übersetzungsproblem melden
Diskussionsregeln
Diesen Beitrag melden
Belts are quick. Belts are easy. You drag a belt across the map and it's ugly, but it works. Half of the work can be bulk assembled with blueprints, and the other half is connecting the blueprints together. The most painful part is upgrading new belt tiers, which means running along a line and spamming the upgrade all the way. Half of that work can be cheated by splitting output out of the mine, so only the one line going into the splitter needs the upgrade. Twin belts cut down the upgrade pattern from using mk3 arteries, then upgrading to mk5 arteries. But even then, the belt upgrade is likely the smallest step in your factory upgrade, every other step in the factory is far more involved than jogging one lap in the wilderness. Love it or hate it, belts will get the job done.
Anyone who says "Trains are better than belts" - are very blind.
All you need to ask is this simple question:
"What feeds the freight platform?"
"What empties the freight platform?"
Belts.
The factory starts...and ends with belts.
You can't say Trains are faster than belts - when your train yields to belts.
Belts are always going to win because they are "Consistently" running at the same speed.
Trains have a minor weakness - everything stops for 17 seconds or so when they are loading/unloading. Not to mention the travel time.
Makes for fun algorithmic challenges.
Which is why you need to use buffers to mitigate.
This means you have to plan for the "Gap" - where Belts - if you do things right - there is no gap.
However - in spite of belts being king - the game engine can't handle the load if you have nothing but belts all over the place - this is a understood and well known fact.
Trains are cool - Trains are great long range hauling of cargo - but they are not a requirement nor a mandate.
No one said you had to use them - like any other logistics option - there is no "superior" because there's always someone out there who has a great system - from trucks to drones to trains.
But at the end of the day they all yield to the almighty belt.
So anyone who says "Trains are faster than belts" - is blind as a bat.
Yeah, I'm also not a big fan of trains for fast efficient playthroughs, though I usually do one bidirectional line before I get t5 belts to hook up rubber/plastic > base > aluminum > base > rubber/plastic. Mostly because I don't want to waste time with t3 belts.
When I get drones though, especially if my factory is far from my rocket fuel factory, I will use drones to start supplementing ingredients to my main hub, though honestly once I push through phase 4, I basically have everything I need for phase 5 set up minus the new tech which is fairly trivial, and time. So once drones come online, I'm usually pretty much done with my main hub and just use them to free up my mk5 sushi belts so my throughput doesn't dip. I don't really play past the "end" of the base game, as I can't really get into it without ADA chirping in my ear about what I need to do next.
Trains ARE great for megafactories though that use all the resources on the map, but I have literally zero interest in playing like that. I'm more of a start over and see if I can do it faster kind of guy.
I see so many mixed viewpoints on drones - I'm eager to check them out for giggles. Specially since they take other fuel sources these days.
Honestly I think they are pretty well balanced, and they go a lost faster and farther with better fuel. They are a really nice use case when you build your fuel plant very far from your main base (for me blue crater rocket fuel and northern rocky desert main hub). Now what I did for packaged rocket fuel is just hypertube cannoning over with a bunch of stacks of aluminum ingots to make cannisters, which fill up really fast, and then hypertubing back with all the rocket fuel I need. I've only had to do that once because like how much packaged rocket fuel do you need. I have more than enough to last to endgame.
But what I'm going to do (haven't had time yet) is get a drone doing that, and then a drone will take all the packaged rocket fuel back to a central hub, distribute it, and a fleet of maybe 4-5 will grab a few things that are trickling in because my belts are too full and distribute them straight to the priority manifold that builds my complex parts. It's very fast to set up and a pretty small footprint when compared to a train station (at least if you don't overly care about aesthetics).
I'm honestly not sure how ill use them - Trains are a little easier as they are bulk transport and a question of time management - drones will prove to be a bit of an interesting experiment.
Part of me wants to mess with roaming inventory but with dimensional depots tends to rule that out.
I'll find an excuse (a good one - not just to mess around) to implement so I can at least said " i did it ".
Advantage (to me)
Train tracks works on hoverpack ;) (which is nice)
Train track carry power (also nice)
Train and do long distance better (at least for me)
Downside:
Train stations are LARGE :(
I am working on factory train system instead of belts. Each of the station are huge, but at the same time, I can bring in whatever from anywhere (I set up each resource to have their own train and massive tracks)
Consideration:
Get some Mercer Sphere so you can get some depot. You will be laying A LOT of tracks and it is easier when it is auto transport to your scientific portable pocket ;)
Having a mental issue does not make it any easier ^^
Well my plan was to place a station at every node, and then ship that over to a massive factory..
However, when i think about that, i dont think its a good idea at all, especially when you got fps to consider...
Instead it might be better to have a "smelter" factory layout near each node and then maybe a small construction factory layout near them and then ship that further to a "main" base?
That has essentially been my go-to logistical structure. I put down factories amidst good nodes capable of making _most_ of a thing. Then use a simple logistical network (Belts, Pipes, Trucks, Trains, Drones) to bring in the few missing pieces -- Quartz, Bauxite, Caterium, etc.
Megafactories are cool and all, but then you've painted yourself into a corner to long-range logistics literally everything.
People mainly saw trains as a way to fetch ressources/carry ressources in long distance. This is true, and mainly when you do simple loops. But it's in network that trains makes more sense.
Yes, it takes some time to design and make efficient rails, I'm not contesting that. But if you do that, you would never need to connect point A from point B with anything else ever for the rest of your save. Better, you would be able to add point C, D, E, F... with less effort than adding a belt between them.
That's called scalability, the ability to adapt. And it's on ANY range. I'm mainly set up in the arid desert on pretty much all corner. I've only one early belt that goes a bit of distance cross the desert, all the rest is trains, and I've 3 medium factories connected like that. And if needed, I could harvested all the ressources nodes I left to sent them somewhere in the network, being somewhere else on the desert, or at the other corner of the map, and all the work I would have done is making a gare, connect the rail, and setup a train.
"Trains are bounded by belts because gares are", this is both true and false.
It's true that a gare has only two inputs/outputs, so belts have an impact for sure.
It's false since you could simply put more freight station/more gares (I usually switch to have one more gare if I pass a total length of 5 segments for a train). Trains are bounded by belts, but the rail isn't.
Also if you have X belts of one item, then you will have to deal with X belts of one item to move from points A to B (trains or not), so I really don't get the argument.
So now to discuss further on how you implement them, I talk on how big you could make them, but it could be overwhelming for sure.
It wasn't a critic when I said that simple loops isn't using all potential of trains, we all start somewhere. Do them to get a first grip on how they work to fetch ressources and bring them to your factories/build somewhere else.
At some point, try to complicate them a bit by having a single choke point where you fuse two loops, you'll discover signals that way. You'll need to understand the difference between stops and path signal, but after that, you'll be able to build real network.
For network construction I highly suggest building two rails for each direction, it would simplify all the network construction and pathing for Trains, but you'll now have to learn how to do 3/4 way intersections . It would go smoother since you'll just apply what you learn on signals to build them (or you'll go on youtube, it's fine too lol). And if you reach that step, you'll see that at worst you'll need to add stations (so plan ahead/let space to upgrade), at most you'll just need to modify inputs/outputs on your gares to assure everything goes smoothly in the network, with way less work than putting belts everywhere on the map.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/526870/discussions/0/4691153988132270100/
(1) Trains are better than belts for mid-to-long distance because
(a) trains are much easier, cheaper and quicker to build than belts.
You lay one track once and you can send huge volumes through it. Having once built a 16-lane belt from the south to the north of the map, over the plateau, I can tell you it's extremely time comsuming. It took me something close to 50-70 hours and even then I abandoned it because it drove me crazy. Of course you dont need something that big but you could put rail network across the entire map in the same time.
(b) Trains are more flexible than belts.
You can send anything from anywhere to anywhere and manage it all in a management interface.
(2) Trains are better for second-stage exploring than anything else, including hypertubes.
Trains are faster than hypertubes, you can jump off where you want, you can build a train and drive off when you want, you can carry huge amounts of resources back if needed.
(3) Trains are better for game performance than belts. Less contant moving parts to model. Late game this starts to matter.
(4) The map is designed for trains so its a joy to build them once you solve the landscape puzzles and work out where.