All Master Class Blueprints are available on FactorioBin Overview and direct links to all Blueprints: nilaus.atlassian.net/l/cp/HBEUm524 (Pastebin links no longer work)
I really like how you took the advice of the stream and broke these circuit builds up over 3 videos. The deep dives on how each part works and why you made the decisions you made helps me apply those lessons to other setups throughout my factorio playthroughs. Thanks for the great content.
I think for most late game blueprints it is more important to have internal production and belt efficiency than to compress outgoing belts, because if you train stuff away you won't have long belts, and the train won't care if you fill each wagon with 2 fully compressed belts or 3 70% full belts. On the other hand if a machine is working only 10% of the time because it is that last one to compress the belt, then that is 90% wasted, both the productivity modules in it as well as the beacons for it. Things like red circuits go to many different things and each consume an uneven amount of red belts. You gain nothing by knowing you have exactly a whole number of red belts to draw from. Again if you train the circuits the belts at the unloading stations will be compressed automatically. Trains are the ultimate belt balancer.
Try making the green circuits in the build as well - The assembler ratios work out nicely as 1:2:8 green circuits : copper wire : red circuit (when using productivity with speed beacons) and you have the copper there anyway so only need to bring iron in.
TL-DR: this is one of the few materials wher emodules are worth it: it takes 2.2 hours to start generating a profit over a no module build. a lot of cheaper items, like plastic, electronic circuits and especially smelting take very long to pay themselves back Full comment: assuming copper, iron, coal and stone all cost 1 material unit (MU) and crude oil costs 0.2, then we can calculate the costs of all items in the game, like: level 3 assembing machine: 400.1 MU level 3 Module: 4098.6 MU Beacon: 347.1 MU i will only be calculating with these, as other items in the build are negligible this build costs in total: 39 * 400.1 + 312 * 4098.6 + 78 * 347.1 = 1 321 448.0 MU this produces a total of 1 blue belt of circuits the running costs of this are 1.5 belt olf both plastic and electric circuits, and 3 of copper wire (being 1.08 copper plate belts) translating these values into MU: plastic cost: 2.55 ; electric circuit cost: 2.5 ; belt speed: 45 ; 2.55 * 45 * 1.5 + 2.5 * 45 * 1.5 + 1 * 45 * 1.08 = 389.2 MU / second a build making the same amount of advanced circuits, without using modules or beacons needs 216 assembling machines. these machines have a cost of 216 * 400.1 = 86 411 MU here the running cost is 2 belts of plastic, EC and copper plates, translated into MU we get the following: 2.55 * 45 * 2 + 2.5 * 45 * 2 + 1 * 45 * 2 = 544.6 MU / second how long does it take to pay back the extra investment: difference in ont time cost: 1 321 448 - 86 411 = 1 235 037 MU (in favor of build 2) diference in running cost: 544.6 - 389.2 = 155.4 MU / second (in favor of build 1) time for net gain: 1235 037 / 155.4 = 7945.4 seconds = 2.2 hours
A very easy way to judge which recipe to boost first is to look at the total "raw" cost declared on each recipe, and divide it by the crafting time. Higher number means it should be prioritized. Red circuits are good. Blue circuits are better. Rocket silo even better. Green circuits are also better than red even though they are lower tech, because the crafting time is so much shorter.
I rally like the tip with limiting the hand capacity to 8ths to keep the belts fully saturated. I used to use it in the past but I completely forgot about it... Also thanks for the tip with inputting/outputting the machines with underground belts, another cool idea!
Speed gives speed but increases energy cost Productivity gives extra free output but reduces speed And eficiency (the worst) gives eficiency (less energy cost) but reduces something... I don't remember They always give a net positive increase, so if you put productivity modules in a asembly machine and speed modules in beacons around it, it will give a positive in both productivity AND speed, but an insane energy cost Higher levels of modules just increase the goods and increase the bads
@@XplosivDS Efficiency modules don't have a negative, but cannot lower below 20% energy usage. This also reduces the pollution, making them very useful in miners.
@@Nilaus Hey! I uploaded a blueprint for just this purpose in the community Discord not too long ago. I think it can definitely be improved (it's pretty cluttered) but I think it could serve as a good starting point if you don't already have a design ready yourself. Thanks for all the videos! It's really helped me enjoy playing the game
@@Nilaus Just yesterday I've copied your "4-2-1" module production design you used in "Step-by-Step Transition to Megabase" video. I find it very convenient to use and expand. Can you give a suggestion though, whether it is better to use on-site storage for modules where each such block stores let's say 50-50-100 modules or is it worth designing some sort of global logistic storage logic with circuitry to store them somewhere centralized? Cause I'm not sure yet and my main concern is that in first variant too much unneeded Lvl1and Lvl2 modules get trapped in storage without ability to easily put them back into Lvl3 production.
Love your builds! When I saw the fact that there is an over production by about 4 copper wires, I was hoping to be able to reduce the input to 1 copper belt, but sadly, the best one can do is about 15.3 copper per second for each part of the build so still requires 2 coppers in for set of 3. ^^;
Move the first underground exit of the plastic/green belt 1 down, you can move the entrance down 2, in the gap you can fit 2 stack inserters to feed another copper wire builder, that also unloads onto a belt that also connects with an underground, and will give you more copper, also insert a full copper belt not a half copper belt. Maybe add a second copper wire belt with undergroundies next to it. I am gonna screw around with this a bit :P
Final copper consumption estimate is a bit off. The calculator is giving you how much copper the coil-maker can consume, which isn't taking into account how much coil is actually being consumed. I think 3 columns will still consume more than a full copper belt, but not by much.
@@Nilaus Yep, and I think you still made all the right design decisions to arrive at a fantastic blueprint! It's just an easy mistake to forget that max rate calculator doesn't adjust raw inputs based on downstream consumption of intermediate ingredients. I'm pretty sure you know that already, but that thought process didn't make it into the video
I don't think overclocking a single wire assembler is worth it tbh. I tested this setup against my own, which is very similar but with 1 more assembler for wire and 6 fewer beacons per line, and it uses 6 to 8 MWt less power, while still outputting a full 100% gapless belt of reds.
Yeah, I used this strategy as well to get a gapless blue belt of red circuits for 60 beacons and 42 assemblers. Or 3 more assemblers and 18 fewer beacons. Which means 24 fewer modules and roughly 5 MW less power per blue belt of red circuits.
curious to ask, I knoe its been a year but did u also have 3 rows merge into one blue belt for a compressed belt? I can't seem to get it compressed with 2 belts, and 3 seems slightly odd to me
This solution works fine, but I was thinking what if you put some more cable production in the middle of the red circuits production? It has enough space for a copper plate belt. You can also try to alternate the blue belt and red belt in the same lane... just things to try...
This is another example of how belts are bad for productivity. You removed beacons just because you had belt constraint. A 12b coil machine can support 12 8b red chip machines. If you had 12b red chip machines, you would have like 1 coil to 6 reds, output by bots and you get a smaller setup than what you currently showcased that produces way more items than what you showcased.
Once you go into building megabase, main problem becomes that computer cannot keep up with everything that's happening. So you want to have as little entites as possible. And having everything perfect looks cool. Yeah, that's probably main reason.
Honestly, they are good blueprints, but using infinity belts to supply- ruins it. This is a perfect example of realistically janky. Filling one side of the each belt 6 times?! what do you suppose that looks like on the feed side?! Easy to put up a nice array until you need to set up the feed side of it, which is half the battle. You need to stop using infinty belts to make it easier to show us the array. Setting up the supply is the messy part thats why you skip it. We spend more time trying to feed the array and figuring out what goes where and especially HOW MUCH we need to feed. These are more important then production numbers. Most of us are looking for help, so showing us your perfectly organized best case scenario base where everything is exactly where it needs to be doesnt apply to someone on youtube looking for help on an array. Which is why inifinity belts only makes it easier for you. If we had a city block mega base with rez to spare and everyything where it needs to be we wouldnt be here. Our bases are a mess and we need help situating things from start to finish on a certain item so thats its efficeint and clean. Or we just come back looking for the step before, and the step before that. For example, we need a red circuit array, oh wait, now we need a good green and plastic one that propery feeds it. Its not useful to show us a red circuit array unless you show us the steps before to properly feed it or we're back to square one. Start off by saying, to properly feed this array you're going to need a full belt of x, and half belt of y and a full belt of z, also you will also need this much space and this much rez etc etc, earn your money on here man.
All Master Class Blueprints are available on FactorioBin
Overview and direct links to all Blueprints: nilaus.atlassian.net/l/cp/HBEUm524
(Pastebin links no longer work)
I really like how you took the advice of the stream and broke these circuit builds up over 3 videos. The deep dives on how each part works and why you made the decisions you made helps me apply those lessons to other setups throughout my factorio playthroughs. Thanks for the great content.
These masterclass designs are absolutely unbeatable. Can't wait for blue circuits!
I think for most late game blueprints it is more important to have internal production and belt efficiency than to compress outgoing belts, because if you train stuff away you won't have long belts, and the train won't care if you fill each wagon with 2 fully compressed belts or 3 70% full belts. On the other hand if a machine is working only 10% of the time because it is that last one to compress the belt, then that is 90% wasted, both the productivity modules in it as well as the beacons for it.
Things like red circuits go to many different things and each consume an uneven amount of red belts. You gain nothing by knowing you have exactly a whole number of red belts to draw from. Again if you train the circuits the belts at the unloading stations will be compressed automatically. Trains are the ultimate belt balancer.
Try making the green circuits in the build as well - The assembler ratios work out nicely as 1:2:8 green circuits : copper wire : red circuit (when using productivity with speed beacons) and you have the copper there anyway so only need to bring iron in.
Loving my play trough atm thanks to you! Love the cityblock design :D
thank you nilaus patreons for funding this wonderfull man ,am poor myself ,so i gotta leech of you all smile :^)
TL-DR:
this is one of the few materials wher emodules are worth it: it takes 2.2 hours to start generating a profit over a no module build.
a lot of cheaper items, like plastic, electronic circuits and especially smelting take very long to pay themselves back
Full comment:
assuming copper, iron, coal and stone all cost 1 material unit (MU) and crude oil costs 0.2, then we can calculate the costs of all items in the game, like:
level 3 assembing machine: 400.1 MU
level 3 Module: 4098.6 MU
Beacon: 347.1 MU
i will only be calculating with these, as other items in the build are negligible
this build costs in total: 39 * 400.1 + 312 * 4098.6 + 78 * 347.1 = 1 321 448.0 MU
this produces a total of 1 blue belt of circuits
the running costs of this are 1.5 belt olf both plastic and electric circuits, and 3 of copper wire (being 1.08 copper plate belts) translating these values into MU:
plastic cost: 2.55 ; electric circuit cost: 2.5 ; belt speed: 45 ;
2.55 * 45 * 1.5 + 2.5 * 45 * 1.5 + 1 * 45 * 1.08 = 389.2 MU / second
a build making the same amount of advanced circuits, without using modules or beacons needs 216 assembling machines.
these machines have a cost of 216 * 400.1 = 86 411 MU
here the running cost is 2 belts of plastic, EC and copper plates, translated into MU we get the following:
2.55 * 45 * 2 + 2.5 * 45 * 2 + 1 * 45 * 2 = 544.6 MU / second
how long does it take to pay back the extra investment:
difference in ont time cost: 1 321 448 - 86 411 = 1 235 037 MU (in favor of build 2)
diference in running cost: 544.6 - 389.2 = 155.4 MU / second (in favor of build 1)
time for net gain: 1235 037 / 155.4 = 7945.4 seconds = 2.2 hours
r/theydidthemath
Tour de force!
lol, you math too much. Moduled builds look cool, that's all that really matters.
A very easy way to judge which recipe to boost first is to look at the total "raw" cost declared on each recipe, and divide it by the crafting time. Higher number means it should be prioritized. Red circuits are good. Blue circuits are better. Rocket silo even better. Green circuits are also better than red even though they are lower tech, because the crafting time is so much shorter.
Difference is in game performance. So you can build bigger factory with beacons.
I rally like the tip with limiting the hand capacity to 8ths to keep the belts fully saturated. I used to use it in the past but I completely forgot about it... Also thanks for the tip with inputting/outputting the machines with underground belts, another cool idea!
Hello Nilaus, can we have a tutorial about level 3 modules? tyty
Speed gives speed but increases energy cost
Productivity gives extra free output but reduces speed
And eficiency (the worst) gives eficiency (less energy cost) but reduces something... I don't remember
They always give a net positive increase, so if you put productivity modules in a asembly machine and speed modules in beacons around it, it will give a positive in both productivity AND speed, but an insane energy cost
Higher levels of modules just increase the goods and increase the bads
I should make one of those...
@@XplosivDS Efficiency modules don't have a negative, but cannot lower below 20% energy usage. This also reduces the pollution, making them very useful in miners.
@@Nilaus Hey! I uploaded a blueprint for just this purpose in the community Discord not too long ago. I think it can definitely be improved (it's pretty cluttered) but I think it could serve as a good starting point if you don't already have a design ready yourself.
Thanks for all the videos! It's really helped me enjoy playing the game
@@Nilaus Just yesterday I've copied your "4-2-1" module production design you used in "Step-by-Step Transition to Megabase" video. I find it very convenient to use and expand.
Can you give a suggestion though, whether it is better to use on-site storage for modules where each such block stores let's say 50-50-100 modules or is it worth designing some sort of global logistic storage logic with circuitry to store them somewhere centralized? Cause I'm not sure yet and my main concern is that in first variant too much unneeded Lvl1and Lvl2 modules get trapped in storage without ability to easily put them back into Lvl3 production.
Love your builds!
When I saw the fact that there is an over production by about 4 copper wires, I was hoping to be able to reduce the input to 1 copper belt, but sadly, the best one can do is about 15.3 copper per second for each part of the build so still requires 2 coppers in for set of 3. ^^;
Move the first underground exit of the plastic/green belt 1 down, you can move the entrance down 2, in the gap you can fit 2 stack inserters to feed another copper wire builder, that also unloads onto a belt that also connects with an underground, and will give you more copper, also insert a full copper belt not a half copper belt.
Maybe add a second copper wire belt with undergroundies next to it.
I am gonna screw around with this a bit :P
Final copper consumption estimate is a bit off. The calculator is giving you how much copper the coil-maker can consume, which isn't taking into account how much coil is actually being consumed. I think 3 columns will still consume more than a full copper belt, but not by much.
48 Copper for 45.6 Red. So you can subtract the copper needed for 0.6 Red i.e. practically nothing
@@Nilaus Yep, and I think you still made all the right design decisions to arrive at a fantastic blueprint! It's just an easy mistake to forget that max rate calculator doesn't adjust raw inputs based on downstream consumption of intermediate ingredients.
I'm pretty sure you know that already, but that thought process didn't make it into the video
@@jdkemsley7628 that's a great observation
Thanks for shouting out the people that stayed awake during this lol
early afternoon. Still awake ;) - I love the copper wire build
I don't think overclocking a single wire assembler is worth it tbh. I tested this setup against my own, which is very similar but with 1 more assembler for wire and 6 fewer beacons per line, and it uses 6 to 8 MWt less power, while still outputting a full 100% gapless belt of reds.
Yeah, I used this strategy as well to get a gapless blue belt of red circuits for 60 beacons and 42 assemblers. Or 3 more assemblers and 18 fewer beacons. Which means 24 fewer modules and roughly 5 MW less power per blue belt of red circuits.
curious to ask, I knoe its been a year but did u also have 3 rows merge into one blue belt for a compressed belt? I can't seem to get it compressed with 2 belts, and 3 seems slightly odd to me
Good job Nilaus, this was really helpful. What mods are you using in this video?
This solution works fine, but I was thinking what if you put some more cable production in the middle of the red circuits production? It has enough space for a copper plate belt. You can also try to alternate the blue belt and red belt in the same lane... just things to try...
Rough math but I think it should take about 4 of these to supply and automate a ~10k megabase.
What do you think about full logistic drones build with provide/request chests?
Thanks a lot dude!
Nice and crisp!
how about putting 1 lvl 3 speed module in each of the last 2 mid beacons instead of 2 in each ?! can someone do the math for that ?
can you cover batteries? please ♥
What is that magic purple belt? and where do I get one?
It's a mod, used to more easily demonstrate the build. Nilaus explains it at the beginning, about a minute and a half in.
It consumes more than a full belt of red belt
I’m not even at the point of red circuits I’m just watching it
nilowsh
Hello, i'm surprisingly early
This is another example of how belts are bad for productivity. You removed beacons just because you had belt constraint. A 12b coil machine can support 12 8b red chip machines. If you had 12b red chip machines, you would have like 1 coil to 6 reds, output by bots and you get a smaller setup than what you currently showcased that produces way more items than what you showcased.
i really don't understand why it is so bad to over produce. i can't understand your obsession on making it so perfect.
Once you go into building megabase, main problem becomes that computer cannot keep up with everything that's happening. So you want to have as little entites as possible.
And having everything perfect looks cool. Yeah, that's probably main reason.
Honestly, they are good blueprints, but using infinity belts to supply- ruins it. This is a perfect example of realistically janky. Filling one side of the each belt 6 times?! what do you suppose that looks like on the feed side?! Easy to put up a nice array until you need to set up the feed side of it, which is half the battle. You need to stop using infinty belts to make it easier to show us the array. Setting up the supply is the messy part thats why you skip it. We spend more time trying to feed the array and figuring out what goes where and especially HOW MUCH we need to feed. These are more important then production numbers. Most of us are looking for help, so showing us your perfectly organized best case scenario base where everything is exactly where it needs to be doesnt apply to someone on youtube looking for help on an array. Which is why inifinity belts only makes it easier for you. If we had a city block mega base with rez to spare and everyything where it needs to be we wouldnt be here. Our bases are a mess and we need help situating things from start to finish on a certain item so thats its efficeint and clean. Or we just come back looking for the step before, and the step before that. For example, we need a red circuit array, oh wait, now we need a good green and plastic one that propery feeds it. Its not useful to show us a red circuit array unless you show us the steps before to properly feed it or we're back to square one. Start off by saying, to properly feed this array you're going to need a full belt of x, and half belt of y and a full belt of z, also you will also need this much space and this much rez etc etc, earn your money on here man.
1
congrats on your medal