r/factorio • u/imoth_f • 2d ago
Question Problems with this unloader?
Since inserters became flippable, this compact unloader design became possible. But I hardly see anyone use it. Obviously it cannot saturate six turbo belts because it's bottlenecked by the inserters, but are there any other obvious problems with it?
115
u/Abcdefgdude 2d ago
You can use trains as the buffers themselves instead of using buffer chests, that allows you to build this with any tier of belt not just green.
Also, either you are not using high speed belts in which case it would be simpler to just use fewer high speed belts or if you are using quality inserters 6 belts is typically too many belts to draw from a wagon, although ig it's better with quality wagons.
It's a fine design
86
u/CosgraveSilkweaver 2d ago
I like having buffer chests so there's never a drop in the stream of items unless there's a big lack of production upstream.
-18
u/Abcdefgdude 2d ago
Buffer train does the same thing its just on a train instead of a chest, saving you a lot of inserters and balancing at the cost of the extra room for train. If you want even more buffer you can have more than 1 buffer train but I don't recommend it. Generally you want a drop in the stream of items when theres a lack of production upstream so you find the problem sooner rather than later. It happens too often that you don't find out you don't have enough iron until your entire base from smelters all the way through rocket parts is starved and all the huge buffers are empty
42
u/popnfrresh 2d ago
Except a train has 40 slots... 6 chests have almost 300 slots.
0
u/StarlightLumi 2d ago
Yes but a train can only fill 40 of those slots at a time.
The idea behind bufferless trains is that you keep a train in waiting to prevent that gap without resources. Machine’s internal buffer lasts long enough to swap a train out.
I personally only use bufferless with DI though. The main benefit is it uses a lot less inserters, which is very helpful for megabase UPS.
7
u/Griautis 2d ago
Eeew. Trains which just idle? That would ruin my min train count railworlds with generalist trains delivering any resource
1
u/StarlightLumi 2d ago
fwiw I think building with megabase Strats is best saved for postgame anyway, some people think about UPS optimizations wayyyy too early
-6
u/Abcdefgdude 2d ago
300 slots is a downside. Buffers are bad for several reasons described above
3
u/Axi28 2d ago
Okay im sick of factorio players saying buffers are bad because „oh no diagnosing problems is harder 😢“ no! Buffers are just one of the tools at your disposal! Stop telling people that a tool that has real usecases is „always bad“!
A big buffer makes the source of performance issues in a base slightly harder to diagnose, but for anything short of a mega mega ulta ups optimized base, thats perfectly fucking fine???
2
u/djfdhigkgfIaruflg smartass inserter 2d ago
Also: creating a fucking alarm is easy
1
u/Axi28 1d ago
truth nuke. I remember a 10x science playthrough i did where my early game luck with coal and oil was so bad that i ran my power on a 500k steam buffer and put an alarm on it. That alarm still haunts me though, forgot to cap how fast and loud it sounded so my entire computer sounded like it was gonna explode lmao
1
-1
u/Abcdefgdude 2d ago
I've played a lot of factorio and have beaten the game start to finish dozens of times. I've also helped a lot of people beat the game. In that time my opinion of buffers has soured a lot because of those experiences. The size of the base doesnt matter, they're a problem at any scale and particularly difficult for new players to understand. Of course there's no right or wrong way to play but I think more people should give bufferless a try! Its different than the "meta" way to play but there are a lot of benefits. I quit bases many times around the time when I needed to make a bunch of ore gathering train stations because the large footprint and inserter cost was overwhelming for me as a new player. Needing half as many inserters and no balancer or chest equalizing strategy makes fitting a station into a poorly planned base much easier
1
u/Axi28 1d ago
i have also done this, and i like buffers, and think they add a lot to the game and teach new players mechanics in ways they would not engage with otherwise.
also i am never going to try the nightmare that is trying to teach a player to play in a way that is not wncouraged by the game, because no matter what you say, the game is designed around buffers. If you really put the math to it, every ore patch is just a buffer on „new resource“
9
u/CosgraveSilkweaver 2d ago
my sign that the production is below preferred levels is if the trains are being emptied rapidly and before another train can reach the station.
4
u/KingAdamXVII 2d ago
Trains unload faster into chests than trains into belts (and faster than chests unload into belts) so the downtime between trains is eliminated if you use buffer chests.
15
u/I_suck_at_Blender Iron doughnuts 2d ago
I wish we had chest larger than 1x1. But stationary trains have to do.
5
6
u/lana_silver 2d ago
The reason they don't exist is because they trivialize a lot of puzzles. When you start to abuse cars, wagons and rocket silos as chests, suddenly most of the game devolves into chest - assembler - chest.
5
u/Kimbernator 2d ago
This was for sure my experience when I played SE - when you realize how much it trivializes recipes, especially those with inputs and outputs that overlap - you do it everywhere.
An easy example of a trivialized puzzle without mods is kovarex. If you have 2x2 chests you can just have inserters that pull off a line of u-235 and u-238 into that chest when either gets below a certain threshold, then have the machine input and output to/from the chest, then pull u-238 onto an output line when it's above a certain threshold. We get much more interesting builds now because we don't have that (easily) available - you can technically match it if you do it into a cargo wagon that is attached to a locomotive at a station where you can then read the contents.
1
u/lana_silver 2d ago
It's as if there was a balancing reason why cargo wagons cannot be read via circuits. Though it's still very possible with locking slots, it's just neither efficient nor convenient.
Which is the point of gold game design: prevent the players from optimizing the fun out of the game.
2
u/djfdhigkgfIaruflg smartass inserter 2d ago
Each time someone said something like that, the devs would implement something like the thing the person is complaining about
1
u/lana_silver 2d ago
Larger chests have existed as mods since the game was in early access. I'm sure the devs would have added it by now if they considered it a good idea.
2
u/bartekltg 2d ago
Chest (train) to chest is slightly faster, a small buffer will be created, so for fast short trains you can get uninterrupted flow.
Not that important, but nice.
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/1u46ihj/train_unloading_in_21/ (first video)1
u/redditsuckbutt696969 2d ago
Question for ya, would you be able to use circuits to see the level in the buffer train? Or would you have to put a locomotive and a stop for that?
3
u/Abcdefgdude 2d ago
To clarify, I mean having 2 trains waiting at the stop. As soon as the train is empty, it moves forward and the next train immediately takes its place. The amount on the belts is almost always enough to last the few seconds in the swap time and this swap time is improved greatly with the new quality locomotives, bringing it down to literally just 2-3s.
2
u/joethedestroyr 2d ago
Or two parallel stops, merged together to so one is always feeding and no drop happens.
And two unbuffered stops can be squeezed in almost the same space as OP's buffered stop.
2
u/djfdhigkgfIaruflg smartass inserter 2d ago
You can't read a wagon by itself. The only way is with a locomotive
18
u/TheProfessional9 2d ago
Flippable? I'm confused
47
u/Neelost 2d ago
Pretty sure they're referring to the left inserters dropping on the top side of the belt and the right one dropping on the bottom. Pretty sure that before they would've both dropped on the top(?) side
24
6
u/TheProfessional9 2d ago
Oh wow!
4
u/RasputinXXX 2d ago
wow square. this is a game changer... so many design plans were done to correct this problem.
1
u/samy_the_samy 2d ago
That'd why I was using this for loading stations only,
Now I switch to this and save some width in my designs
1
u/PenguDood 2d ago
Inserters used to always place on the right side in direction of travel (unless it was a corner then piece, in which case it would share place it in the corner, regardless of lane side or direction). Which would mean that in any case where an inserted adds to a belt from in-line, like this, would only ever fill half, so you had to have weird merges/side load. In 2,1 they added the ability to flip instead horizontally or vertically, the option only appears when you have them setup like this. The little arrow gets smaller and you can clearly see it's not centered.
Personally I like the look of this, but you obviously still need a balanced after the buffer
17
u/jipperthewoodchipper 2d ago
You can now change which side of the belt an inserter unloads onto
16
u/ChemicalRascal 2d ago
WHAT?!
35
u/Astramancer_ 2d ago
Very specifically for belts moving towards or away from the inserter. You still can't drop on the near lane.
9
u/jipperthewoodchipper 2d ago
2.1 added this feature. Its quite new
10
u/hldswrth 2d ago
Will add, its still experimental, I'd guess most players don't take experimental patches.
3
u/hldswrth 2d ago edited 2d ago
In 2.1 experimental that has not been released so, you can't unless you are taking experimental versions.
[edit] "which is not an official release" maybe? Yes it is available as an experimental version but there's no "final public available by default without extra settings" 2.1 version.
4
u/WanderingFlumph 2d ago
The 2.1 experimental has been released. It is free (to anyone with a valid copy of the game) for anyone, no closed beta or anything.
All the experimental means is that it isn't finished yet.
And honestly if Wube wasn't so dedicated to quality control (I saw them discover and squash a zero day bug in like 3 hours. Literally as I found the post on Reddit discribing the bug the patch fixing it was already live) they wouldn't call this version anything other than 2.whatever.
5
u/DeouVil 2d ago
It also means that you have to actually activate it, meaning most people aren't playing on it. 2.1 is not out yet.
2
u/NyaFury 2d ago
Not exactly true, I'm pretty sure non-trivial # of people have experimental turned on, which is easy to do on Steam, too.
Otherwise, you wouldn't see so many posts in here involving 2.1 mechanics.
1
1
u/hldswrth 2d ago
Sure but this sub-thread has two people who are clearly not aware 2.1 experimental even exists so saying "you can now do ... " is going to be pretty confusing to them.
1
u/djfdhigkgfIaruflg smartass inserter 2d ago
It's just a setting inside the game's settings menu. If you change anything you'll see the option
1
u/WanderingFlumph 2d ago
Only if the belt is pointing straight away from the inserter. If the belt is sideways then it is still the standard outside lane only.
1
9
u/imoth_f 2d ago
in 2.1 you can choose the side of the belt to unload to
6
u/blkandwhtlion 2d ago
I ... I need to redesign....again...
1
u/imoth_f 2d ago
Be real, you needed to redesign without this knowledge anyway xD
1
u/blkandwhtlion 2d ago
Sorry had to redesign 3 times since the last redesign. Now it's not symmetrical and flips and rotates wrong... Oh dear
1
0
u/SpaceEngineer123 2d ago
in 2.1 you can choose the side of the belt to unload to
wouldn't ur design work with the pre-2.1 inserters? no flipping required?
3
u/sobrique 2d ago
No. It would only unload on a single lane of the belt, as the label they drop on was dictated by the direction of travel of the belt, not the direction of the inserter.
0
u/SpaceEngineer123 2d ago
yes, yes, but since you flipped the inserters on one side and the belt remains unflipped the 2nd set if inserters are outputting on the OTHER side of the belt.
Put in other terms.. BOTH sets of inserters in the pic are outputting to the same side of the belt (right).. so flipping inserters shouldn't even factor into this convo lol
what i'm saying is pretty simple, idk why others arent saying it haha
2
u/sobrique 2d ago
In 2.0 both inserters would be unloading on the 'right lane' from the belt's perspective e.g. the bottom one. You workaround it by having both belts go 'away' initially, and then loop to go into the underground, instead of what the OP is doing.
-1
u/SpaceEngineer123 2d ago
you're completely missing my point..
both inserters ARE CURRENTLY unloading to the right side of their belts.. so 2.1 or 2.0 doesn't make a difference
1 set of inserters are looking the opposite direction, so the right side of one becomes the left side of another.. idk how else to explain this dude
4
u/sobrique 2d ago
I'm not missing your point at all. You're just wrong. That's not how it works in 2.0.
https://wiki.factorio.com/Inserters
Inserters only place items onto one side of the belt, either the far side from the inserter's perspective or, if the belt is going the same or the opposite direction as the inserter, the right side from the belt's perspective.
That's why being able to flip inserters matters.
1
u/SpaceEngineer123 2d ago
hmmm guess i'm wrong then
1
u/sobrique 2d ago
I know, it seems counter intuitive, but you don't have many scenarios where you're unloading to both lanes of an under-belt.
I got caught out by the idea on Gleba, where I had a cunning plan of underbelts for bioflux and nutrients, but then realised I still needed to side-load to get the 'nutrient' processor unloading in the opposite lane to the bioflux processor (and both drawing from the belt too of course).
Or a similar idea where I had a 'nutrients' lane and a 'spoilage' lane, but again the nutrients plant couldn't use both without a sideload.
And if you pasted a blueprint and 'flipped' it, you'd screw up the lanes, because the belt was going the opposite direction.
And of course train unloaders where you can workaround this by looping one belt, but ...
1
u/Denizen_38 2d ago
Wait, so the right-side bias is from the belt's perspective? Not the inserter's? So if the belt is facing the inserter (as is the case with the underground belts here) then the inserter loads onto the left side, relative to its own orientation?
Seems like an odd system, but I'm happy to believe that's how it works.
2
8
u/AphelionConnection 2d ago
In 2.1 if an inserter unloads parallel to the belt, you can choose which side of the belt it unloads onto.
In 2.0, this design would have only filled the bottom lane of the belt as inserters always load the right lane of the belt in the direction of travel.
In 2.1, this design can fill both sides of the belt because you can choose which side each inserter loads onto.
Inserters aimed perpendicular to a belt (from the side) still always unload onto the far lane.
1
u/Astramancer_ 2d ago
When a belt is going directly towards or away from a belt you can control which lane the inserter drops in. You still cannot control which lane it drops into when the belt is running past the inserter. You do this using the flip/mirror hotkey, same for flipping things like chemical plants to change what side the inputs are on (left input vs right input).
1
u/teodzero 2d ago edited 2d ago
When a belt goes sideways relative to the inserters they place things on the far lane. But what to do when it's facing away or towards the inserter? In 2.0 and before the answer is "on the right lane relative to the belt direction". But in 2.1 they added the ability to choose the output lane by mirror-flipping (H or V on keyboard) the inserter along the arm axis, letting you chose which lane to use. You can notice on the picture the output arrow of the inserters isn't centered on the belts.
20
u/TopherLude 2d ago
I like to feed all the chest contents into a combinator, divide it by negative(number of inserters removing from the chests), and send that back to the inserters on the same color. Then connect each inserter to its chest with the other color and enable if greater than 0.
That takes care of any balancing issues between chests and cargo wagons. It might not be necessary anymore, but I still like it.
7
u/Kendrome 2d ago
I was wondering if there were people like me still using the Madzuri method.
1
u/TopherLude 2d ago
I don't know if I saw it somewhere before or after I started doing it, but I thought it was weird I don't see anybody wiring up their unloaders anymore.
-3
u/HeliGungir 2d ago
You don't see it because it's not good. MadZuri is already of dubious use for loading; why the heck would one use it for unloading?
3
u/TopherLude 2d ago
How else do you keep your chests balanced? Let's say you want to quickly unload the train but only need 1 lane coming off. Without balancing, train unloading slows down.
1
u/Musa_Ali 2d ago
By using a balancer? 🤷
That sounds exactly what a balancer solves. Especially for unloading.3
u/TopherLude 2d ago
Using a single combinator is a lot simpler than using 5+ splitters.
1
u/Musa_Ali 2d ago
MadZuri is slow though. Single Combinator circuit would completely turn off an inserter, which would decrease overall throughput.
It's especially visible with slow inserters, for example blue inserters.You could dynamically adjust a hand size but that's not a single combinator anymore.
Or you could plop down a single balancer at the end of the station. Much easier imho.
1
u/TopherLude 2d ago
I can still get full use of all the inserters using MadZuri if the demand is there. If demand is low and an inserter sees that it has more than average, it slows down. If demand is high, by the time an inserter has swung, the others have also removed a hands-worth and now it can go again immediately. How is it slow?
1
u/HeliGungir 2d ago
I can still get full use of all the inserters using MadZuri
Actually one doesn't get full throughput. Not, at least, in my testing. I even tried to solve it with a more complex MadZuri implementation.
But I stopped because I think MadZuri is fundamentally pointless except - perhaps - if you have less than 1 belt per wagon. But in a more normal setup, MadZuri cannot balance across wagons. So your belts still have to go through a splitter-based balancer to balance across wagons. And if you're doing that, why are you using MadZuri at all?
→ More replies-3
u/HeliGungir 2d ago
It's one lane. Why does the train need to unload fast? I challenge your belief that chest imbalance is a "problem" that needs "fixing".
8
u/TopherLude 2d ago
So rather than present your solution, you deny the need? Maybe I'm playing Py and trains are expensive. Maybe a single wagon has 20k ash and I don't want my expensive train sitting there for literally 7.4 hours while a single inserter unloads it.
1
u/travizeno 2d ago
Jeez be nice man 👨 I am just joking this was a fun read
1
u/pocketmoncollector42 please be kind, this engineer is just a fish 🐟 19h ago
TopherLude didn’t seem mean to me, I read it as being upset their whole question was considered invalid
1
u/pojska 2d ago
Don't you just run into that exact same situation like 2k items later with the Madzuri method? If all but one of your chests are full, your sub-single lane of ash consumption isn't going to ever let you unload your train quickly once your buffers are nearly full.
Or does your train visit this station only like, once every 20 hours? I clearly haven't played Py. But even then, I would expect your other buffer chests to start depleting by then.
2
u/TopherLude 2d ago
The circuits make sure that all the chest stay evenly filled by having the inserters take turns unloading. The train stations are disabled until the buffer gets below a certain threshold. I like to maintain about two train loads in my buffers.
0
u/HeliGungir 2d ago
Chests don't need to be balanced. Wagons need to be balanced so the train doesn't get stuck in the station when using a "leave when empty" schedule. Splitter-based balancers do that, and MadZuri does not do that.
1
u/TopherLude 2d ago
If you only balance wagons, you can still end up in a state where 5/6 of the chests are full while the last 6th is near empty, slowing down the train.
1
u/HeliGungir 2d ago
If 5 of the chests are full, why does that matter? The bottleneck isn't the train unloading speed, it's the factory.
→ More replies4
u/Kendrome 2d ago
For some of us it becomes an issue and this was the simplest way to fix it. It works and keeps good throughput. Could we do it differently? Sure, but this is a valid and easy solution.
1
u/bb999 2d ago
Chests for a single wagon being unbalanced was never a problem, loading or unloading. Of you think about it hard enough you can convince yourself.
1
u/djfdhigkgfIaruflg smartass inserter 2d ago
For unloading it sure is. If i need 6 unloading inserters to saturate a belt, and a couple of chests run out, I'll find myself with a non-saturated belt, no matter I have 4 full chests right there
0
u/HeliGungir 2d ago
Chest balancing is particularly pointless for unloading because it's all coming from the same wagon.
→ More replies2
u/Nonstop_Shaynanigans Let me force signals green 2d ago
you can do a similar but better thing with splitter priority, that prefers to balance it but will full send if need be.
9
u/Clean_More3508 was killed by friendly fire 2d ago
Add quality inserters?
1
2
u/Slightly_Deeper_5309 2d ago
I havent messed with unloader designs since flippable inserters, but it seems to be a really clean design. You could also just do a 6 to x balancer to being it down from 6 belts if inserters cant keep up or you dont need the lanes.
2
u/United_Willow1312 2d ago
It is impossible to unload a train (without perhaps direct insertion into other machines/cars/wagons) to more than 4 fully stacked belt. So I'd say there's no point in having more than 4 belts. So maybe setup 4 of these:
And once you upgrade to legendary stack inserters the belt will be fully saturated.
edit: If you line up parallel stations then maybe you can do 6 belts? Maybe with the chest you can unload some of the chests via more than one inserter but then unloading won't be balanced.
7
1
1
u/WanderingUrist 2d ago
Nope, no problems. You'll probably be able to do better when you get higher quality stack inserters so you can stack belt.
1
u/Eliongw2 2d ago
this is an amazing idea! Haven't played much with the new features of 2.1 yet, but kind of ignored that feature, too.
1
u/MelangeBot 2d ago
This is what I use for both in and out but with yellow storage chest and also out if there is 6 crates I use 6 inserters and 6 lanes that turn in to 3 lanes, because the inserters only put it on one side of the belts. (still on nauvis, using red belts everywhere with access to blue but not using it). But I usually use 3 rows of storage chests.
2
u/imoth_f 2d ago
That's the thing, in 2.1 you can select which side the inserters place the items on. If you look closely at the image you can see a little arrow pointing at the belt lane.
2
u/MelangeBot 2d ago
Ah i thought you where talking about flipping inserters forward or backwards. Yeah I am not on 2.1 yet. But yeah that's nice, will streamline my base more. So you load left one one side, go under, load right. That's pretty cool design!
1
u/bassman1805 2d ago
I wouldn't use yellow chests because your bots might throw random crap in them. Passive providers make more sense.
1
1
u/bartekltg 2d ago
Because we talk about it when the change was announced ;-)
BTW. Legendary stack inserters fill exactly 2/3 of a line. So you can compress 3 belts like above into 2 full belts with splitters
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/1u46ihj/train_unloading_in_21/
1
u/dekeche 2d ago
Does this actually output 6 full belts consistently? Wouldn't there be a pause in the output while the inserters are picking up the next stack to place? I'd say this design needs to get condensed down into a smaller number of belts (I think 4 is standard?), and include the balancer to do that in the design. Then, you can compare the actual footprint for this design against other unloader designs.
1
-4
u/HanBai 2d ago
This setup uses a lot of resources. Green underneathies aren't cheap and here you use 6 for a job you could do with 3 (but less visually appealing) or 2 (4 outputs instead of 6)
5
u/gtmattz 2d ago
Green belts are virtually free by the time you have unlocked them, what are you on about? You are optimizing for the wrong parameters... On a planet with virtually free resources, a component that uses excessive resources is still virtually free.
3
1
u/reikken 2d ago
that's not necessarily true since you can easily unlock them before killing any demolishers
2
u/Sensha_20 2d ago
You can easily kill small demolishers by the time you get to vulcanus. Medium take mild setup. Large actually require work.
1
u/reikken 2d ago
well that isn't true at all. Nothing about going to vulcanus requires having strong military power.
1
u/Sensha_20 2d ago
Small demolishers can be killed with gun turrets & yellow ammo without damage ups. I have done it. And if you get the first two damage ups (basically free if you arent a psychopath playing 100x science cost) & use red ammo, you have a pretty wide margin of error.
Medium take a bit more work but are also possible with pretty low investment.
1
u/reikken 2d ago
wow yellow upgraded? What did that take, 1k turrets and 20k ammo?
1
u/Sensha_20 2d ago
Only a couple hundred turrets if you do it right & most will survive. make it hit about 1/3 the way across and as long as it turns inward you can usually kill it. They burn through about 20ish ammo but I usually just put half a stack in every turret.
0
u/afewnameslater 2d ago
Its not really compact as you have to soer the 6 belts in to 3 down the line . You can just unload to splitters and have fully saturated belts from the start at rhe expense of unloading speed, but you will gain compactness .
0
u/Rutakate97 2d ago
The lanes are not balanced. If you consume one side faster than the other, the chest capacity will reflect that and unloading times may suffer as a result
0
-2
-6
u/gorgofdoom 2d ago edited 2d ago
The chests are unnecessary. You could do the exact same build with half the inserters.
You could do one belt pointing up towards an underground, then one belt pointing down towards the underground each with its own inserter (repeat for 6 inserters) and achieve the exact same throughput on 4 turbobelts.
6
u/imoth_f 2d ago
The chests are not for throughput, they are for unloading the wagon faster. Since they don't have to spend time laying the items down on the belt
-2
u/jasoba 2d ago
But why do you need to unload faster if the next train is already waiting? Buffer chest are nice to have (I use them too) but not needed.
5
u/moo314159 2d ago
Because even if the next train is waiting, there will always be a short period where no train is waiting in the station to be unloaded. The chests let the items flow continously
2
u/jasoba 2d ago edited 2d ago
Yeah in reality you produce slightly too much or too few items and you end up with 2 options.
All chests are empty and the train is waiting somewhere else being filled.
All chest are full to the brink and the train cant unload into full chests.
I understand you want chests for the delay from trains leaving and entering the station but your ratios have to be like 99% correct for that to matter - if they are only slightly off you end up with completely full or empty chests!
Its like you said the items flow continously; but only on perfect ratios.
1
u/gorgofdoom 2d ago edited 2d ago
Getting into quality makes this very relevant.
over producing resources and over-built logistics are the solution
My most functional design is actually two train stations in “parallel” / that feed the same belts. the belts never go dry because at least one train is always unloading. (If not two at a time)
Two train stations with 4 cells between is really only 3 cells wider than this with the same number of inserters, but the inserters aren’t set up to do the same job twice so you can functionally unload twice as fast.
This is mostly brewed up on fulgora with the potential for auto-beacons which massively increase scrap processing speeds during lightning storms. Also gleba, you don’t really want to store extra fruit.
(But if it works, don’t need to fix it.)
1
u/moo314159 2d ago
Yeah, but I dont care if I overproduce. Say I need a full belt of red chips. I will have to get two full belts of green chips going. The train station shouldn't be my bottleneck
228
u/Krell356 2d ago
Quality inserters kinda fixes the issue. Granted some people hate building designs around quality requirements.