Factorio Forum  /  Using trains for 100% speedrun
(edited: )

This might be applicable to the other runs, not sure, but definitely I think for the 100%.

The core of the idea is this: One track with trains as belt is sorta the same as 40 different theoretical sides of a belt, amiright? Imagine the simplicity. Screw belt weaving.. Plus you've got random access belt sides! No side switching required.

So you use miner -> wagon direct insert and long trains instead of belts and zero chests. Via DI You fill each wagon with enough copper/iron/coal/stone by rotating them around patches for an appropriate amount of time. To keep things simple, the rotation never cross so there is never an intersection to deal with (see the clockwork design I discuss on this thread - https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=96099&p=553933#p553933)

Basically rotate enough for 15 each science in raw resources in each* wagon. So each wagon has all the resources required, doesn't need anything from another wagon (except fluids). Perhaps a bit less science as you may need extra coal for furnaces if you're not using electric ones. I dunno the exact numbers, but it's somewhere around 10-15. Depends on module usages as well.

Once the trains have got their raw resources after clockworking around the patches, they then come back to the processing factory where it removes the raw from the wagons and replace them with intermediates. No chests, no belts, just pull resource from wagon and replace back into the wagon.

And then the train moves onto the next processing steps: plates, gc, gears, belts, inserters, red science, green science, steel, pipes, rc, engines, sulfur, blue science, sticks, rails, modules, bricks, furnaces, violet science, bc, red engines, batteries, frames, lds, yellow science. rcu. jetfuel is all fluid so mabye not train fed. white science you'll want to pull and deliver to the labs like any other science. Again, no funky belts required as you have 40 different spots to put stuff.

Red inserters not required, you can probably use some very very basic assembler patterns. Just up and down.

You could lay out the factory horizontally for the steps and expand vertically downwards as you add more patches for production and trains.

With 100% megapatches though, you wouldn't need as many patches and you could use longer trains.

The advantage to this approach I think would be the very minimal amount of actions and infrastructure to lay it out and the very easy expandability. Obv you want to be processing as many wagons in parallel as possible. You're going to end up with a lot of trains running by the end here.

Filter inserters are pretty handy. You can fit about 6 steel furnaces per wagon, but electric furnaces can utilize modules. 4 assemblers per wagon, some use of inter assembler DI might be advisable.

Fluids would be done separately of course. Doesn't make sense to train that around.

(edited: )

Here's the basic idea for the factory.



You will need to figure out the ideal length of trains and timing for stops at each processing step, based on the ratios. Your patch mining route needs to make sure it's spending the right time at each patch so it doesn't put too little or too much of a particular raw resource in a wagon.

Having roughly the same timing per phase may be the best way to go to manage a consistent throughput, and you can double up the phases and tweak with modules/beacons. Some thought towards optimizing will want to be done here.

The rail lines below are complete copy/paste which bots will be very ideal for. A train arriving with wagons filled with raw resources will pick one of the paths and go down it, whichever is available. In this way you can do unlimited amounts in parallel.

Once you get to this point you'll just be pasting in the lines. You'll probably want to grid the map a bit with roboports so they can lay down track for you as well.

DI design on the patches can be a little tricky, but very large megapatches will give you some breathing room to waste a little space. OF course, you can just chest it if that's what you prefer.

(edited: )

I did a poc .. the only cumbersone aspect of this is the length. This approach will not win awards for SPM density per sqm. I think the UPS efficiency will be fairly good as there are no bots or belts.

You'll want to be careful not to make mistakes and probably have a car handy. Fortunately the stops are very commodity so everything is much the same and requires a very narrow set of memorized keystrokes.

It's very high output tho. Around 30 SPM per line using 1 length trains. Longer length trains would be higher SPM, but more cumbersome to build because of the length.

It is very very circuit logic heavy, so blueprints are probably a must.