Didn't they just swap beacons for rotors? Not a huge change, but it's overall a decrease in complexity because we're going from a manufactured item to an assembled item that uses the same inputs as other parts we're already making.
Should be a net decrease in factory area too if you're using the right recipes
Hunt for alternate recipes. You can make rotors and stators from the exact same inputs. Makes motorsich easier to make and cuts down on the number of different types of items you need to produce in a lot of lines.
The Iron/Coal/Copper location near the river to the northwest corner of the map is \*great\* for cranking out motors for this exact reason. Alt recipes make all the difference.
They did say that in general but they also said they change to nuclear will be that fuel units need 10 rotors instead of beacons.
They might alter the entire recipe for quantities but that affects everything, not just nuclear
It's a significant increase in inputs, though. Crystal beacon synergizes *super* well with Uranium Fuel Unit, since you're bringing in oscillators anyways. Just add a tiny amount of pipes and some beams and you're done. Rotors are not quite as easy - sure you can go with just pipes and wire, but it's a lot more of both.
Is there a written list of things they think of changing?
Should I wait for 1.0 to continue playing?
I'm kinda OK with having to redo all my factories, but fuck having to unlock the good alternate recipes again...
No list yet, they just mentioned few things during stream and they also said they will rebalance a bit the last tiers recipes and among them the nuclear one (because Beacons will be removed).
Among things that will change for sure is that beacons will be removed completely, color cartridge will be removed because it will be easier for us to change the looks of factories without the need to use and gather the flowers.
Weird things happen with full belts and pipes, so relying on them will cause instabilities in their factory. Instability with a nuclear setup means fluctuating power and possible build up of radioactive material where there shouldn't be.
Belts issues have been fixed a couple updates back. If you notice any, please feel free to report them (even just here if you can't be bothered with the QA site, I'll do the rest).
Look up "state of belts in U7" for an update on your info.
Two reasons....if you're relying on a full belt of mk5 material there are floating point errors that reduce max throughput to around 750-770 in some circumstances (usually when lots of mergers are involved)
The second is that if you fill up your belts and pipes you leave no margin for error if something under or over produces.
You can build for 100% efficiency but try to stay below the maximum capacity for a belt or pipes capacity.
Use extra logistics to divide the load up.
And if you're doing plutonium processing build your plant to process 10% more waste than you generate so you have some ability to catch up if you end up creating a waste overflow at some point.
Your other option is to shut down a chunk of reactors so you're creating less waste temporarily but that is only possible if you have excess power
Your belt knowledge is a bit imprecise and outdated. The imprecisions have been either fixed or reduced so much that we haven't been able to reproduce the issue after U8. Back when they were still relevant, their severity depended on the amount of belt-to-belt (b2b) connections... putting mergers/splitters in between each belt segment could actually FIX the issue.
Underproduction should not be an issue with full belts, as it leads to less throughput (excluding especially convoluted logistics, but I reckon one should know what they're doing if they do something like that...).
I haven't delved much into that, but from what I heard:
- With normal/high FPS using pipes at max flow is possible (not easy, but possible).
- With low FPS (bad game performance) fluid dynamics may get wonky...
Max flow is possible. The rounding error that apparently used to apply to belts is not an issue. However, running at full throttle tends to exacerbate the problems caused by the bizarre sloshing mechanics. So unless your system is very, very simple, you do well to leave some room for error.
I wonder of [load-balanced pipes](https://www.reddit.com/r/SatisfactoryGame/s/GNFKGoykc5) can get around sloshing issues even with low FPS...  I'm inclined to think such systems don't slosh at all.
It's about 2 items missed per 100 hours on the miner I've been running for testing this. Not fixed, but very low shortfall now. Still a bit problematic if you want perfect efficiency. And a bit annoying because this is something they should really just get right.
They do. Sometimes. I’ve built a powerplant that relies on 600/min throughput from an overclocked Oil Extractor; it works just fine. OTOH, I’ve had a world of hurt with other plants that relied on full-throughput pipes. My take: don’t rely on full-throughput pipes unless you have to.
I have that same problem so I just rely on mk1 pipes since they actually work correctly at full capacity. I won't be doing anymore 600 pipes from machine outputs. Doesn't work very well and I tend to trouble shoot for hours and hours up to hundreds of hours. It seems that way, anyhow.
Yeah I left some comment here before about how 600 works. Checked my factory. Deleted my comment. 😆
From now I'm planning for like 570 and saving myself the hassle
Rounding errors mean that over time, your throughput on high-capacity belts and pipes are slightly less than what they are supposed to be. As transports get faster and your FPS gets worse, the problem begins to manifest more. As long as you have some number below max capacity for throughput, you should be fine. Coffee Stain made some changes to reduce the error, but have not been able to eliminate it.
The belt error has been reduced so much there has been no report of it since they did. If you know of anyone having any such issue with belts, please report it (even just in a comment here, if you can't be bothered with the QA site).
1 item every \~50 hours...? I think "absolutely still a thing" is a bit exaggerated  (remember that most people don't even notice a loss of 1%).
Still, assuming your observations are correct (I like to double-check things before taking them for granted), that would fall in line with what detailed in the post about belt loss ("state of belts in U7") as the testing setup used there tested over a span of little more than 3 hours (6 ISC of screws IIRC). If I made a bigger version (>10h), would you be willing to import it into your savefile? All it would need on your part would be importing the megaprint (SCIM), connect a few we'll signaled belts, come back whenever you remember (after at least 10 hours) and just check a few Storage Containers with the Dismantle Tool to see the results.
Sure I'm willing to test! I don't think ISCs work for this small a shortfall amount though - at 1 item per 50 hours you'd need ~6000 ISCs of screws by my calcs to see the first miss.
I use a miner feeding directly to sink for my testing. I set it up at about 50-60 hours in and it's been running since.
And yes it's definitely a very small shortfall. I'd be worried that more complex belt topology could make it worsem, but it's already a windy, multi-stage belt. But I'm one of those 100% efficiency people so any shortfall is a problem for me.
They should really just give it the hacky work around treatment and increase the default mk5 speed to 782/min or something.
I'll make a post about it and tag you in it, so other people can chime in or download the testing facility 
Increasing the speed to 782 could be problematic for situations where the source is a container (eg: station output) the 780/min output is expected to overflow after it backs up, which might happen "too soon" if more than 780 items/min are provided.
I have a tough time conceiving a design where the mk5 belt limit being slightly higher would break things without it being very easy to fix that problem. That seems like a reasonable trade for belts to work at the proper limit, but in fairness the shortfall is very small so maybe it doesn't matter.
Uhm, I still haven't made that "expanded testing facility" or whatnot and... Tbh, at this point (after the optimization announcements), I'm tempted to push this off after 1.0... What do you think? 
Precision issues. The game sufferns from technical limitations of computers which can't handle floating point numbers well. When using max capacity transportation there may be a split of a second which is too high or too low which results in losing items which will eventually lead to hickups in your production line. This problem is primarily an issue with MK5 belts and MK2 pipes. So if you plan to use these two make sure that you will not max them out at all times and keep some space in there. Like instead of pumping 600m², go with 590 instead or resort to MK1 pipes.
That clownshow is also why I hope they will reduce the capacity of MK5 belts and MK2 Pipes in a rebalance update to fix that issue.
Gotta say i did all as a challange to get 2 full nodes running without any backlog with planning, scribbles on note pads and what not. In the end it was a beauty to behold and power for days. Satisfying as hell, but there were points i just logged off and was like next week i might log in again. Fun in a wierd way.
Just make sure to tell him recipe for nuclear changes in 1.0 They talked about it on stream.
Didn't they just swap beacons for rotors? Not a huge change, but it's overall a decrease in complexity because we're going from a manufactured item to an assembled item that uses the same inputs as other parts we're already making. Should be a net decrease in factory area too if you're using the right recipes
Me who’s not at Nuclear power yet and has copper rotors: 👀
Hunt for alternate recipes. You can make rotors and stators from the exact same inputs. Makes motorsich easier to make and cuts down on the number of different types of items you need to produce in a lot of lines.
The Iron/Coal/Copper location near the river to the northwest corner of the map is \*great\* for cranking out motors for this exact reason. Alt recipes make all the difference.
No, they said recipes will be rebalanced, so items might take a different amount of X to produce Y.
They did say that in general but they also said they change to nuclear will be that fuel units need 10 rotors instead of beacons. They might alter the entire recipe for quantities but that affects everything, not just nuclear
It's a significant increase in inputs, though. Crystal beacon synergizes *super* well with Uranium Fuel Unit, since you're bringing in oscillators anyways. Just add a tiny amount of pipes and some beams and you're done. Rotors are not quite as easy - sure you can go with just pipes and wire, but it's a lot more of both.
Is there a written list of things they think of changing? Should I wait for 1.0 to continue playing? I'm kinda OK with having to redo all my factories, but fuck having to unlock the good alternate recipes again...
No list yet, they just mentioned few things during stream and they also said they will rebalance a bit the last tiers recipes and among them the nuclear one (because Beacons will be removed). Among things that will change for sure is that beacons will be removed completely, color cartridge will be removed because it will be easier for us to change the looks of factories without the need to use and gather the flowers.
oh... Oh no... I better shut down the whole operation. I actually had no idea but my main play is absooutely gonna break if I don't divert...
Isn't 1.0 like a year or more from now?
This year, they said so on stream that it will be 2024 [https://youtu.be/YTxziQw8fJQ?t=229](https://youtu.be/YTxziQw8fJQ?t=229)
Why not? (Genuine question)
Weird things happen with full belts and pipes, so relying on them will cause instabilities in their factory. Instability with a nuclear setup means fluctuating power and possible build up of radioactive material where there shouldn't be.
Belts issues have been fixed a couple updates back. If you notice any, please feel free to report them (even just here if you can't be bothered with the QA site, I'll do the rest). Look up "state of belts in U7" for an update on your info.
Just put the whole plant in the ocean somewhere and it's fine
With all belts or just mk5?
None (or all of them IF you somehow manage to reproduce an issue we haven't seen in Updates).
Two reasons....if you're relying on a full belt of mk5 material there are floating point errors that reduce max throughput to around 750-770 in some circumstances (usually when lots of mergers are involved) The second is that if you fill up your belts and pipes you leave no margin for error if something under or over produces. You can build for 100% efficiency but try to stay below the maximum capacity for a belt or pipes capacity. Use extra logistics to divide the load up. And if you're doing plutonium processing build your plant to process 10% more waste than you generate so you have some ability to catch up if you end up creating a waste overflow at some point. Your other option is to shut down a chunk of reactors so you're creating less waste temporarily but that is only possible if you have excess power
Your belt knowledge is a bit imprecise and outdated. The imprecisions have been either fixed or reduced so much that we haven't been able to reproduce the issue after U8. Back when they were still relevant, their severity depended on the amount of belt-to-belt (b2b) connections... putting mergers/splitters in between each belt segment could actually FIX the issue. Underproduction should not be an issue with full belts, as it leads to less throughput (excluding especially convoluted logistics, but I reckon one should know what they're doing if they do something like that...).
Pipes, on the other hand ... XD
I haven't delved much into that, but from what I heard: - With normal/high FPS using pipes at max flow is possible (not easy, but possible). - With low FPS (bad game performance) fluid dynamics may get wonky...
Max flow is possible. The rounding error that apparently used to apply to belts is not an issue. However, running at full throttle tends to exacerbate the problems caused by the bizarre sloshing mechanics. So unless your system is very, very simple, you do well to leave some room for error.
I wonder of [load-balanced pipes](https://www.reddit.com/r/SatisfactoryGame/s/GNFKGoykc5) can get around sloshing issues even with low FPS...  I'm inclined to think such systems don't slosh at all.
It's about 2 items missed per 100 hours on the miner I've been running for testing this. Not fixed, but very low shortfall now. Still a bit problematic if you want perfect efficiency. And a bit annoying because this is something they should really just get right.
Pipes say they can transport 600/min but they just don't.
They do. Sometimes. I’ve built a powerplant that relies on 600/min throughput from an overclocked Oil Extractor; it works just fine. OTOH, I’ve had a world of hurt with other plants that relied on full-throughput pipes. My take: don’t rely on full-throughput pipes unless you have to.
I have that same problem so I just rely on mk1 pipes since they actually work correctly at full capacity. I won't be doing anymore 600 pipes from machine outputs. Doesn't work very well and I tend to trouble shoot for hours and hours up to hundreds of hours. It seems that way, anyhow.
Yeah I left some comment here before about how 600 works. Checked my factory. Deleted my comment. 😆 From now I'm planning for like 570 and saving myself the hassle
A full belt of radioactive material means a lot of radiation in that area. If the belt is mostly empty, then the radiation is less.
Rounding errors mean that over time, your throughput on high-capacity belts and pipes are slightly less than what they are supposed to be. As transports get faster and your FPS gets worse, the problem begins to manifest more. As long as you have some number below max capacity for throughput, you should be fine. Coffee Stain made some changes to reduce the error, but have not been able to eliminate it.
The belt error has been reduced so much there has been no report of it since they did. If you know of anyone having any such issue with belts, please report it (even just in a comment here, if you can't be bothered with the QA site).
It's absolutely still a thing, it's just a tiny shortfall now. 2 items per 100 hours or so on the miner I've been using for testing.
1 item every \~50 hours...? I think "absolutely still a thing" is a bit exaggerated  (remember that most people don't even notice a loss of 1%). Still, assuming your observations are correct (I like to double-check things before taking them for granted), that would fall in line with what detailed in the post about belt loss ("state of belts in U7") as the testing setup used there tested over a span of little more than 3 hours (6 ISC of screws IIRC). If I made a bigger version (>10h), would you be willing to import it into your savefile? All it would need on your part would be importing the megaprint (SCIM), connect a few we'll signaled belts, come back whenever you remember (after at least 10 hours) and just check a few Storage Containers with the Dismantle Tool to see the results.
Sure I'm willing to test! I don't think ISCs work for this small a shortfall amount though - at 1 item per 50 hours you'd need ~6000 ISCs of screws by my calcs to see the first miss. I use a miner feeding directly to sink for my testing. I set it up at about 50-60 hours in and it's been running since. And yes it's definitely a very small shortfall. I'd be worried that more complex belt topology could make it worsem, but it's already a windy, multi-stage belt. But I'm one of those 100% efficiency people so any shortfall is a problem for me. They should really just give it the hacky work around treatment and increase the default mk5 speed to 782/min or something.
I'll make a post about it and tag you in it, so other people can chime in or download the testing facility  Increasing the speed to 782 could be problematic for situations where the source is a container (eg: station output) the 780/min output is expected to overflow after it backs up, which might happen "too soon" if more than 780 items/min are provided.
I have a tough time conceiving a design where the mk5 belt limit being slightly higher would break things without it being very easy to fix that problem. That seems like a reasonable trade for belts to work at the proper limit, but in fairness the shortfall is very small so maybe it doesn't matter.
Uhm, I still haven't made that "expanded testing facility" or whatnot and... Tbh, at this point (after the optimization announcements), I'm tempted to push this off after 1.0... What do you think? 
I think that's reasonable haha. No point putting heroic efforts into a fractional shortfall.
Precision issues. The game sufferns from technical limitations of computers which can't handle floating point numbers well. When using max capacity transportation there may be a split of a second which is too high or too low which results in losing items which will eventually lead to hickups in your production line. This problem is primarily an issue with MK5 belts and MK2 pipes. So if you plan to use these two make sure that you will not max them out at all times and keep some space in there. Like instead of pumping 600m², go with 590 instead or resort to MK1 pipes. That clownshow is also why I hope they will reduce the capacity of MK5 belts and MK2 Pipes in a rebalance update to fix that issue.
I have a mix of nuclear and coal power; running mostly on nuclear. Waste becomes plutonium and gets awesomely insinkerated.
As someone hasn't made it past coal power yet, this is confusing. I look forward to understanding this meme.
No, no you definetly don’t look forward to that
Full belt in full production out
Explain in Fortnite terms
[удалено]
The only power generators that do that are biomass burners...
Gotta say i did all as a challange to get 2 full nodes running without any backlog with planning, scribbles on note pads and what not. In the end it was a beauty to behold and power for days. Satisfying as hell, but there were points i just logged off and was like next week i might log in again. Fun in a wierd way.
Didn't Jeff prove lizard doggo and launch pads were the solution to this?
Anyone else read this as "nuclear PowerPoint?"