MK 5 should be 960/min too
MemeThis was my first thought. My preferred starting location in northwest northern forest has that one nearby pure coal node that I can send 240 to a first coal plant and the extra 30 splits southeast to the nearby sulfur nodes for an early gunpowder factory.
Alt screws recipe, don't forget that
What are "screws"?
Trees of satisfactroy.
"That which is to be eliminated," gotcha.
Or "The real enemies".
Instructions unclear, burned down all screws in vicinity
That’s what engineers do. Reality is not perfect, so we learn to work with the imperfections.
That's not an argument for 270. It's an argument for "fast enough." A belt speed of 300, or 350, or 400, or 480 or whatever would work just fine.
nah, the devs know what they are doing with conveyors
270 is there because the devs just want people to bring in the 9s multiplication table which is woefully underused at first. Having a filled MK3 requires overclocking and so entices players to unlock that capability, and then enables 3x3x30 balancers. Every number has been meticulously chosen to either work out during the early parts of the game, to drive players to side-track on certain unlocks midway through, or to purposefully induce inconveniences later on. There is a lot of depth to the balancing of this game.
Yeah CSS has put a ton of thought and planning into the ratios. Whenever you think the numbers don’t line up, that’s entirely intentional. They wanted to add a challenge.
No easy stuff, but...
So you want conveyors to be slower? Just use splitters and do math I'm sure their is a way to split a ratio with 1 smart splitter or something
Or alternatively just split output from a miner into two, them turn one into the main line and the other one into a factory that uses 30 resources per second and let it overflow. Voilà you now have a perfect 240 line with free extra output on the side.
OP's complaint, which I share, is the irregularity of the progression. 1x, 2x, 4.5x, 8x, 13x. The 13x is out of place, and the 4.5x is way out of place.
Granted, it makes no functional difference in terms of actual gameplay. It's just aesthetically offensive. Like some bashing a cymbal exactly twice, off meter, in the middle of your favorite song.
Or just clock your stuff to 240 instead of 270 if it's that big of an issue
So you want to not run at maximum output?
120 = 2*60
240 = 2*120
480 = 2*240
960 = 2*480
It would be a nice sequence. 270 also is the only one not divisible by 60. My opinion got's nothing to do with splitter ratios
But honestly, if they were like this from the start it'd be great. But nerfing mk3s would kinda suck
But the 270 number makes a lot of sense when you think about it.
You see, splitters only divide by 2 if you use 2 outputs. If you use all three outputs, you divide 270 into 90, then into 30, then into 10. Or alternatively, you can divide the 90 into 2 45's.
Many machines require 30 resources per minute. Foundries require 45 per minute. So the Mk.3 belt is the only belt we have in game which can be perfectly split into both of those options. If the Mk.3 belt was 240, you could only get to 30, never 45, not without load balancing.
Well, you see, the problem with that argument is that... well... manifolds exist. I have literally never done what you're describing and if they nerfed mk3s to 240 I would absolutely be happy about it if they boosted mk5s to 960. Nevermind the extra endgame belt capacity, I would be happy about getting the 2x throughput per tier upgrade.
I guess it depends on what you do, but I'm fairly sure that the fact the belts are 270 instead of 240 isn't going to make your manifold run any worse. Sure, it divides it into 2 which leaves you with 135 which isn't cleanly divisible. However you can easily turn a 270 belt into a 240 belt, but you can't do it the other way around.
the fact the belts are 270 instead of 240 isn't going to make your manifold run any worse
It does actually make them better. I can fit up to 12.5% more machines onto one mk3 belt. But I use mk3 belts in literally 2 factories, and one of them was planned to be upgraded to mk4 asap. For me, the satisfaction of getting the 2x progression would vastly outweigh the loss of 11.1% of max throughput in a single factory
Some of us don't use manifolds.
Mk3 already does 240. It even does more than that.
Disagree! The 270 has more factors. Can make load balancing easier.
240 has 4 more factors than 270, it's the 9 that makes all the difference since splitters and most recipes have stronger 3 affiliation
... Obligatory manifold plug
More total factors. Almost all of the factors of 240 are also factors of 120. 270 gives us lots of useful new factors like 9, 45, 90...
Plus you can do differences, like mk3 split to mk1 and mk3 gives 60 and 210, which offer even more factors. 240-60 or 240-120 doesn't add much capability.
The good thing about 270 is that it also supports 240
It's a rate, not an amount. A splitter with output belts of the same mark attached will divide evenly regardless of belt speed. I have never heard of even a theoretical example where the choice of 270 is helpful, much less seen one in my or anyone else's save.
If you need 500 screws, having 2 belts is better than 3. So 270 is better than 240.
I will soon be worki ng on this and there are 500 screws. Sure, I have Mk5 belts and I do not need the items and I will most likely have 5 belts anyway, but still.
If you need anything between 240 and 270 and you have Mk3 as maximum, 270 is helpful to have instead of having 240.
what could you possibly do with that many miners?
The same I do withe everything else. Put it in storage and then sink the rest or just halt production.
But I never ask myself what I should do with it. I ask myself if it will be fun to do and then I do it.
That's an argument for using a faster belt rather than a slower belt - not that there's anything special about 270 per se.
I reacted to
I have never heard of even a theoretical example where the choice of 270 is helpful
And a 270 belt is indeed faster than a 240 one. And having e.g. 250 is a theoretical example where 270 is helpfull.
That's fair
No? 240 has 20 divisors and 270 has 16. If we're talking factors, both have only 2, 3 and 5.
And besides, machines balance themselves. You don't need to do it yourself
This always comes up. People really, really want to believe that the 270 is clever somehow. But you notice they never give examples.
The truth is that balancers of any kind are mostly useless, manifolds being a more elegant solution to almost everything. And in the few cases where a balancer is worthwhile, the balancing happens by splitter math, not belt math.
More fun to believe that 270 is clever than to see it as incongruous, I guess.
If your source, like a miner, is at 240, MK3 will act just like 240 a minute. If you need a belt for the steel screw recipe (makes 260 per minute), a belt providing 240/min won't cut it.
More throughput gives you more options, always. If you don't like the divisor of a higher throughput, the don't go that high.
I suppose 270 might be more useful for a 1:n splitter than 240 but not because it has more factors (because it doesn't). You can easily get 240 out of 270 by splitting it into 2 120s. If you need to divide by 3 a lot you just use 270, if you need a lot of 2s, you can throttle it to 240.
240 is divisible by 3 only once, and the best you can get out of it is 180 (which has more divisors than 270 funnily enough). But you can get the same from 270
But this whole discussion is useless for me anyway. I have used perfect splitting only a few times to load trains. Using mk5 belts
Points for trying to throw them a bone, but 240 is divisible by 3 as many times as you want, because it's a rate and not an amount. Unless you care about having the split hit integer values every time the clock cycles exactly 60 seconds. Which, of course, you don't.
I do the same thing with trains, and I can add one more example for balancers, which is radioactive stages. You don't want that stuff piling up like it does in a manifold, so a balancer is nice. But as you point out, all Mk5 is just fine for that.
Dude, lots of people care about things working out to integer item/min values. Your preferences are not everyone's preferences.
They care about having those integers pop up exactly every sixty seconds? Pick different rates, and you will still get integers - just on a different cycle. The efficiency (in whatever terms you wish to measure efficiency) is identical. Who cares about how frequently you cycle to integers?
Are you suggesting that a rate of say, 7.5 item/min should still satisfy people who like integers because it's the same thing as 15 items every 2 minutes? Honestly trying to understand your viewpoint. If I've got you wrong, can you give an example?
Of all the comments, I suspect this one gets closest to pinpointing the difference in perspective. I have to dash to work, but I will be thinking about this and make a point of getting back to it later.
Yes, please do! It would be very satisfying to resolve this breakdown in communication.
Can make load balancing easier.
The best way to load balance in this game is to not load balance.
There's zero benefit, and the added complexity and items will just slow down the engine.
Example?
If you can’t figure this out you haven’t discovered how each and every recipe has a perfect overclock ratio, for each belt.
There's plenty of recipes in that tier range where 270 can pop up as a magic number; but to not even notice the steel foundries they build to even unlock the Mk. 3 belts take 45 inputs, a multiple of 270. Whoopsie daisy.
OK. Take whatever you think you need 270 for, and replace it with 480. It still works just fine.
And how do I take 480 when I've just unlocked Mk. 3 Logistics?
That's just an argument that faster is better than slower. Not that there is anything special about 270. What happened to the "magic number?"
45 Iron/Coal inputs times six is 270. There's your magic number. Concrete has a similar example (which you suddenly need automated at scale for encased steel beams).
You're arguing from an end-game unlock perspective without any consideration to the game's need to balance around progression. And by ignoring that necessity, you're able to just arbitrarily declare any (very valid) argument isn't real. And if that's the perspective you're looking to come from, you'll never be satisfied. (In addition to being very outwardly selfish.)
Would 240 work fine? Sure. Would 300 also work fine? Sure. But 270 accomplishes the 240 rate and also allows for the even balancing in the examples above, which I'll remind you, are much more relevant at the time you unlock that logistics rank.
QED: Arguing for the reduction of belt speed in Mk. 3 belts helps nobody and hurts in several examples provided in this thread.
Not only that, divide 270 by 30, that's exactly enough speed for 9 machines. And in many, manyyy situations, you will need 30 items per minute.
So, that makes 270 a number that you can easily turn into 30 or 45. I seriously don't get what the other person doesn't understand or what he's trying to argue.
Splitting the 270 into 90s and the 90s into 30s works out so well for making supplementary factories for the earlier iron pieces too.
The other person is somehow OCD enough to be REALLY bothered by the belt progression not being perfectly even, but not OCD enough to appreciate 270 iron ore perfectly splitting and balancing into 6 rotor assemblers. (Or 6 steel foundries, or 6 concrete constructors etc.) Because the idea of "Just let the extra ore backup." or "Just let the machines get ahead and turn off sometimes" offends my aesthetical senses WAY more personally.
You can feed the same six machines, with the same recipes, with belts of any speed - slower or faster, actually available or merely theoretical - and the balancing will still be even. Same result if you overclock or underclock the machines, or the miner. The process will just go that much slower, or that much faster. Nothing will starve, or choke, or behave in any undesirable fashion, unless of course you do something silly like trying to push more material through a belt than its rate is up to. All of this remains true even after calling me names!
The argument is not for a reduction of Mk.3 belt speed, or belt speeds overall, as such. It's for regularity of progression. 1x, 2x, 4.5x, 8x, 13x, is just weird. Admittedly it doesn't really hurt gameplay, so it's a quibble rather than a serious critique. But "drunken powers of two" just offends the senses.
tl;dr: You misunderstand what the rest of us mean by "even balance."
Maybe this is finally getting to the misunderstanding in what the rest of us want, but your first statement is wrong, or at least misunderstanding what is "undesirable."
If I take my 6 steel foundry manifold, and feed it from a 240 belt, my miner that is extracting at 270 will back up and shut off. Also my foundries absolutely will occasionally "starve" and turn off temporarily (as the manifold requires a collective 270/min input to remain online). A machine that is not running at all times is the very definition of unoptimized and unbalanced. My goal, and also it seems the goal of most players, is to have all machines running at all times, and that includes the miners.
So no, what you said is *not* true and the scenario you describe *will* behave in a manner the rest of us deem "undesirable."
There's a reason you find yourself thinking you need to remind us all that these numbers are rates and not amounts, it's because the rest of us are factoring out the "per minute" out of each term as them matching is a given in the way we are approaching this game.
For our requirements for "balance" to be met, the total consumption rate of a factory must perfectly match the total input rate into that factory, and for that to be possible, the belts must be at least as fast as their needed throughput.
So, if Mk. 3 belts were still 240/min: my steel foundry manifold would still be six machines, but they'd be downclocked to consuming 40 per min. And the same is true for my concrete factory. (I suspect you might at this point ask why I just wouldn't leave them clocked to take 45 per min since the total output would remain the same, but this would be missing the whole goal we're trying to achieve here.) And at some point, CSS decided that buffing the Mk. 3 belt to 270 and allowing for a slight miner overclock was more fun than having to underclock 6 machines to achieve the same satisfying balance across the two major factory types (steel foundry and concrete quarry) that become your goal at the time you're unlocking Mk. 3 belts.
And I understand that the numerical unevenness in the progression is off putting. But the idea that they *have* to be evenly spaced (or even that they should be) is purely aesthetical preference. Personally, and it seems like a lot of folks in this thread agree, I would rather the input/output speeds of the machines match up in the gameplay timeframe that I unlock these belts in, than be able to look at a chart and see a proper power of two progression; I got that out of my system plenty during my engineering education.
Also, the OP is literally asking for the reduction of Mk. 3 belt speed to 240, so your presence in this thread is absolutely supporting that. And if that's not what you're trying to argue for, then now you know why you're getting the responses that you are.
What exactly is so special about regularity of progression? If anything, I find the irregularity makes it much more interesting.
That's not an example. And the reason you didn't provide one is that none exist.
How about machines that require input of 45? You can evenly supply 6 of them
I think its great because i only run manifolds
it still makes load balancing easier. the only new factors for 240 are 120, 80, 48 and 16, and the rest are just factors of 120. 270 brings a whole lot of new ones
have fun being throughput limited to 1 belt instead of X belts
Sometimes i make 2 manifolds if i need more than my fastest belt can supply
still limited by 2 belts rather than by the machines themselves then
I am only really doing blueprint factories at the moment so there is no other option
1 megafactory >>> lots of smaller factories
Not sure my laptop could handle that, do you experience much lag with megafactories?
nope.
design the factory for software limitations, not hardware ones.
You know you can just balance before the manifolds, right? One big y:x balancer for x manifolds and you are done. No need to balance for potentially hundreds or thousands of machines fed by that manifold system.
this limits you to the maximum throughput of one belt.
my way limits you to the maximum production rate of the machine.
higher throughput.
My guy, I have a savefile with close to 1000hrs. You just clearly dont understand my point, as I talked about using one balancer if you need more than one manifold belt, and balancing all the inputs from y belts to x manifold belts. That way you can have x or y belts of throughput, whatever is smaller.
but either way your throughput is constrained by x or y belts.
when you do it direct, your only restriction is the machine itself.
The x or y belts is how many belts you balance… you can theoretically build a 1000:1000 balancer.
im talking about optimizing for maximum throughput, not balancing for perfect ratios...
What is way, exactly? Because it sounds like you never merge or split your belts, feeding items directly from machine to machine, in fear of "bottlenecks."
But... a Mk. 5 belt has a capacity of 780 items per minute (or "780", for short). A machine has to have a base item consumption/production of 312 or more in order to take up that capacity all by itself. Of the roughly 200 recipes in the game (all of which involve at least 2 such numbers) , only about a dozen has rates that approach that value. Most of the numbers are in the single or low double digits. So in practice, a block of 8, 12 or 20 machines altogether are still more of a bottleneck than the single Mk. 5 belt feeding them.
The only way I can make sense of your concerns is if you are either still in the early game, or you are unwilling to calculate the throughput of your factories and just throwing capacity at the problem.
thats correct. it helps maximize throughput. there is some occasional merging only when absolutely necessary, such as when a machine requires more than the output of one other machine.
and who knows what the future holds? my factory will be more futureproof as a result, having the capacity to be pushed further easier. capacity is the throughput here and its all there is. otherwise im playing a solved game, which is something i may as well do in microsoft excel.
there is some occasional merging only when absolutely necessary, ...
So you never split your outputs? But that means your entire production chain is throttled by the link with the lowest consumption. Everything upstream from them is clogged by their own overproduction. This is particularly bad for first step, the processing of raw ore. A full overclocked Mk. 3 Miner on a normal iron node produces 600 Iron Ore per min. That can feed 8 fully overclocked Smelters producing Iron Ingots. Even if you design everything to use Coke Steel Ingot for the maximized throughput, an single Foundry of that only takes a maximum of 187.5 Iron Ore/min - you are leaving two-thirds of the available Iron Ore unused. In order to maximize the throughput of your easily duplicated machines, you left the throughput of much more limited resource nodes underutilized.
I don't understand why being bottlenecked by the machines rather than the belts is preferable for you, when the machine-bottleneck is almost always narrower.
and who knows what the future holds?
Probably an insurmountable roadblock, because oil and aluminum processing really doesn't like surplus items clogging the output.
otherwise im playing a solved game,
Find the processing step that needs the greatest number of machines, and build that many machines of every step. Daisy-chain them together across the steps, and you're done. If anything, the math here is easier than having to build an 11-to-25 splitter array to balance 720 Concrete between a row of 25 Assemblers and 12 Manufacturers (just to bring an example from my own experience).
only if its not the end of the line.
else, to ensure maximum throughput is maintained, an entire new line is made, exactly as the old one is, designed around the last machine's theoretical maximum output.
and surplus clogging isnt an issue when you have overflow splitters and the ticket machine. every single belt everywhere in the factory has an overflow splitter going to its own ticket machine.
each line for each item is entirely independent so you dont run into those constraints you mentioned. desired production is decided upon creation.
only if its not the end of the line.
You gotta quote what's you're replying to if you want this sentence to make any sense.
and surplus clogging isnt an issue when you have overflow splitters and the ticket machine.
Ah, so you're so hellbent on not using splitters that you have to insert an overflow splitter into every belt connection in your factory? And you prefer throwing most of your total production into the trash as low sink value intermediaries, rather than letting the machines run below maximum overclock? Or just not building 40 machines for an 8-machine job merely because a different step in the process needs 40 machines.
each line for each item is entirely independent so you dont run into those constraints you mentioned.
Well, eventually, you'll run into a problem of one of your factories needing at least 85 Constuctors to make enough Steel Pipes, but the world only having 49 Coal nodes in it. And that's just the point where you cannot simply downplay the insane logistics and opportunity costs that are incurred well before that.
all resources are infinite in this game. everything is either going to research, storage, or the trash, since theres no definitive endgoal to the game in its current state.
49 or so machines for every line ensures that no bottlenecks can crop up beyond the mining machine's production, something easy to mod for additional outputs.
unfortunately the biggest things i dislike about this game that factorio deal with much better are having a proper endgoal and an infinite world. having a finite world that isnt randomly generated effectively makes the game a solved game. and having no endgoal effectively makes the game pointless after youve done all the research beyond whatever goals you decide to make for yourself. as a result, any factory you make is effectively predetermined by whatever goal you set for yourself.
also every machine is being underclocked for perfect ratios. nothing is overclocked.
they used to be at 240 back in the day. it's nice having them at 270 as it's the perfect ratio for 6 foundry's making steel ingots with the alternate recipe.
FYI -- there is no downside to having the belts run faster than you need, as eventually it will backfill and only run as fast as the machines need.
It's also perfect for machines that require 30 material per minute. For many recipes, a number like 270 perfectly fills 6 foundries or 9 smelters/constructors perfectly.
This bothers me so much, just because it doesn't fit the sequence, but I won't deny that it comes in handy sometimes because it's a multiple of 45.
What's handy about a multiple of 45?
It makes splitting easier and cleaner. Splitters split by 3x, so it's easier to consecutively split those items again if the base number is cleanly divisible by 3 or 9.
240 example:
240/3=80
80/3=26.6
This only gives you one clean split.
270 example:
270/3=90
90/3=30
30/3=10
10/3=3.33
This gives you 3 clean splits.
Many machines use 30 resources per minute, which makes the 270 division a lot more useful than the 240 division.
And even something like the foundry, which uses 45 per minute is a lot easier than 240.
240 splits into 80, which cannot split into 45 no matter how hard you try. Not without injecting material, at least.
270 splits into 90 which is very easily splittable once again by another splitter that has two conveyors at the output, as that's exactly 2 splits of 45 items each.
I get your point but it‘s actually not that hard to split 240 into 45 packages you just need to keep halving until you get to 15 and then merge them again
You can, but I think it's a little bit less effort to do it with 270. In the end, it really doesn't matter how you do it, if you're having fun, that's all that matters. I just think the number is very convenient.
It's a rate. There is no rate which will not divide evenly by 3 (or any other number) over time. Are you planning to play the game for exactly 60 seconds?
How is there "no rate which will not divide evenly by 3"? I literally just gave you an example on why it won't. If you're planning to make inefficient factories that fill up, then sure, your explanation on why it doesn't matter does make sense.
Personally, however, no, I'm not trying to play the game for only 60 seconds, but I am trying to make my factories 100% efficient and without overclocking, and that's absolutely easier to do with the 270 number. Especially because in most cases, I'm not going to be overclocking nor downclocking.
Take the setup you described, and replace your Mk.3 belts with Mk.4 or Mk.5 belts. It will function identically. The 270 is not helping anything.
A Mk.4 conveyor is the only thing that splits Into 2x240, but that's ONLY assuming that you're not using all 3 outputs.
A Mk.5 conveyor splits into 3x260, which is still closer to 270 than it is to 240, therefore, you're still factually incorrect.
The 270 number does make sense, whether you see it or not. Really don't know what you're trying to say here. Help me understand?
All of the numbers in your examples are on point only as the clock cycles exactly 60 seconds. Pick any other length of play, and the result is off. But this is definitely a case where empiricism beats naked rationalism. Just run the experiment. You'll see that I'm right. If you think about it while watching it run for a bit, you will also see why I'm right.
What are you even talking about, everything in the game measures in throughput/min. 270 fills: 9 smelters perfectly at 30 resource/min. 6 foundries perfectly at 45 resource/min. Playing for longer than exactly 1 minute doesn't change a perfect 100% fill rate
THIS, EXACTLY THIS. I don't understand what the other guy is trying to say.
Man, there's no point discussing nor arguing about this with you. I've given you multiple reasons why 270 is a good number to keep Mk.3 conveyors at. You are obviously failing to see facts and reasoning. If you're going to ignore those reasons and pull out statements like the 60 second thing, I can't help you.
Everything in the game is based on a 60 second timer, there's no reason to pick any other time besides 60.
Btw, I don't WANT my machines to fill up. That's not 100% efficient. Therefore I'm not going to use faster conveyors if I don't have to. Nor the resources to build faster conveyors if they're not required.
You do pick a timer other than 60 seconds - every time you play the game. And your machines will not fill up, provided that you balance. And that balance does not depend on any particular belt rate.
I don't have those belts unlocked in my current world yet. I use manifolds. 270 > 240
Why would anyone want it to be slower? That's ridiculous. But you have been in almost every comment chain trying to say no one is giving you examples. We are all playing the same game my friend. When mk 3 is the best we have, it works being able to belt balance with them if I need to do that for some reason. I like it because it's different. I like that I can have 3 tiers of clean splits when all I have is mk3.
It's that one weird tool every mechanic has in their tool box that is pretty generally useless but there are some use cases where it's perfect.
But my main reason for wanting it to stay 270 is because it's faster and wanting it to be slower feels silly to me.
Yeah but it prevents you from perfectly exploiting an installation.
How?
Well it doesn't fit perfectly right. Either one of your machines is suboptimal, either overloaded.
No. No, it isn't. XD
I just want to chime in to say, after reading these comments you made here, you're either an S-tier level troll or you really just don't understand how the game/manifolds/math works.
Honestly either way, hope you have a nice time out there in the world.
I don't think he understands how anything works in all honesty.
I did allow a couple of my comments to get snarky, like several others in the thread. However, there is only one person in the thread who has been repeatedly, expressly insulted, called names, and systematically downvoted even on comments which do not contain the faintest hint of offensiveness. That's the person you're calling a troll.
I didn't really mean "troll" as a value judgement. More just thought it was funny how you inadvertently made it clear that the most effective way to troll satisfactory players is just to aggressively not understand a mechanic or what is being explained.
Because clearly folks in this sub will go to the end of the earth trying to explain and come to an understanding.
I think all the downvoting came from it feeling imbalanced (lol) where folks felt like they were trying to understand what the miscommunication was or what your point was but you pretty consistently came across as trying to make them understand simply that they are wrong and you are right. Whatever point you were originally trying to make got lost here (I'm still genuinely curious).
People were understandably frustrated by this especially because.... it's just not very likely that you are the only correct one and everyone else is wrong. It doesn't necessarily mean you're totally wrong and everyone else is right. The game of who's right gets in the way of understanding. I'm sure what you were saying made sense to you (unless you ARE trolling) . But the fact it didn't make sense to many other people means that if you want it to make sense to others... you might need to change tactics.
After everything, as near as I can tell, it boils down to this:
I was convinced that those supporting the 270 rate (and actually still suspect that at least some of them) believe that there is something you can do with 270 that you either (1) cannot do at all with another rate, such as 240, or (2) cannot do as efficiently in point of e.g. power or resource usage, above and beyond just doing things faster (obviously 270 is faster than 240). As in, I thought they think that if you switched to 240, then even for new builds, this would necessarily result in something starving or choking, or balancers becoming unusable, or something like that. Whereas evidently they just find it easier to think about, or pleasing from the standpoint of numerical symmetry (the same sensibility that in me is offended by the irregular rate progression).
More specifically, it appears that the love for 270 mainly involves certain recipes, at a certain stage of the game - with perhaps the best example being the standard Steel Ingot recipe at right about the time when you first get it, since this is also when you get Mk.3 belts. That recipe takes 45 of each input per minute, and produces 45 per minute. 45 divides into 270 six times. You overclock your miner to 270, divide among the six machines, and call it good. Your belt running at 270 is exactly fast enough for that. A belt running at e.g. 275 or 280 would accomplish the exact same thing, but the fact that Mk.3 runs at exactly 270 has that feel of a perfect fit.
If we imagine Mk. 3 belts running at, instead, 240 for example, you would overclock the miner to 240. Then you would probably either underclock one of your six machines, or drop to five machines and overlock one of them. Or if you wanted to use a balancer, you would spread the custom clocking evenly across the machines. This would work identically except at a slightly lower rate than with 270. But it would not give you that "Ahah!" feeling of those particular numbers lining themselves up perfectly without your intervention.
I would argue that this costs you the same feeling, just in different places. For instance, at 270 you are overlocking your miner to 225%, instead of a nice round 200% (as with 240). And your 270 ingots per minute does not divide evenly into an arbitrary mix of Steel Pipe constructors and Steel Beam constructs the way 240 would. So I still think this is really the Texas sharpshooter fallacy in play. But anyway, if my understanding of the other side is correct, the difference in perspective comes down to pure aesthetics. My preference for a regular progression in the rates of belt marks also comes down to pure aesthetics. So at that point any argument would be like fighting over whether strawberry or vanilla ice cream is better.
As for anyone who really does think that there is something you can do with 270 that you can't do with 240, other than going 27/24 faster, and in terms of actual in-game effectiveness ... yep. Still wrong. XD
something you can do with 270 that you can't do with 240,
If you plug a Mk.3 and Mk.1 belt into the outputs of the same splitter, you get a 9:2 splitter with just a single machine. If Mk.3 were 240, it would need a way bigger arrangement with a recursion line and whatnot. No, I don't know where it could be useful, but you asked for anything.
Concrete, for example, takes 45 limestone per minute. I overclocked a Mk 2 miner so I could get 270 limestone per minute and split it six ways to get an even 45 limestone/min into each constructor.
A manifold with belts of sufficient speed - any sufficient speed, would accomplish the same thing. The 270 rate is not helping.
Some people like load balancing.
Edit to add: some people haven't unlocked mk 4 belts yet .
The rate is not relevant to load balancing. And the argument about not having Mk4 belts is just an argument for faster instead of slower - not that there's anything special about 270.
Yes, but there is a point in the game where you dont have mk4 belts yet, so 240/min would mean you have one concrete producing building less per manifold
About a million things. It’s just great to have both options.
Steel
Vanilla steel recipe is 45 iron + 45 coal. MK3 belts allow you to feed 6 foundries from one coal node.
What sequence exactly
Faster belt always > slower belt
design for slowest belt and then upgrade to fastest belts.
watch your factory's potential and throughput skyrocket.
Doesn't steel have 45 inputs right at that time? 6 machines fills perfectly with that no? There's also lots of 10/15/30 in and out at that point progression which fits nicely as well.
But the real question, if you want 240... Why can't you just feed 240 onto the belt? 270 is the max, you don't need to have max full belts everywhere... If you disagree i wanna see your 60/120 HMF factory build.
Having a faster belt really shouldn't be a problem... Especially when it fits with most of what you will be building at the time.
Also yes there should be a way to get all out of a fully overclocked mk3 miner on a pure node.
Yep, my early game steel production always consists of six foundries, first only connected by mk2 belts and then brought to their full potential with mk3 belts.
240 totally break screw recipe which need 260 per minute, at moment you unlock it you need to have 260 or more belt to make it clean
That's a an argument for using a belt with sufficient speed. Not that there's anything special about 270.
Well, you might not have unlocked faster belts yet?
Mk3 is 270 because it's a multiple of 45 and that's the standard rate of consumption/production for foundries. Also if you can do 270 you can do 240 as well, belt speed doesn't change your output rate you can use a faster belt than you need you don't need to always match belt speeds.
Just like Mk5 belts could've been 720/min but they gave us 780 so that you can add the rate of a mk1 belt to a 720 flow. Why ? I'm not sure, but since it can do 720 anyway why would I be complaining ?
When have they said that is the reason?
You dont get 270 from any miner with a clean overclock, while you would with a 240 and that seems like it would be a far stronger reason to choose a number over that single recipe.
I don't know if they officially said it was the reason behind it but you can't divide 240 by 45, you can with 270 so that's why it makes sense, when you realise you unlock mk3 belts around the same time that you're worling on steel parts, using foundries.
And your argument doesn't make sense because if you can do 270 then you can do 240 as well so it can fill that rome anyway, but it can also do more like feeding a manifold of 6 foundries. It's not all about what a miner can output it's about optimizing logistics.
CSS are doing a great job designing and balancing Satisfactory and there is always a reason behind every decision they make, maybe you're just not thinking far enough out of the box to realise why.
Also steel is the first time you *need* concrete automated for the encased steel beams, and the 270 rate allows for a manifold of 6 concrete constructors.
maybe you're just not thinking far enough out of the box to realise why.
Lol.
We dont even know if exact recipes were set in stone before the belt speed was, it would be more likely that the belt speed was set before any specific recipes were finalised, otherwise it seems like they are working backwards in developing.
When making a complex game you dont start by saying "this recipe must be 45/min. That is the most important thing. Now, belts must all work around this one recipe. Not 4 times, not 8, but 6."
Wait why? What’s wrong with them being 270
Nothing. It's actually better than 240.
I always thought the math is:
mk1 = 30 X 1 X 1 = 30
mk2 = 30 X 2 X 2 = 120
mk3 = 30 X 3 X 3 = 270
mk4 = 30 X 4 X 4 = 480
mk5 = 30 X 5 X 5 = 750 ???
Nah 😀
I did not realize I had such a strong thing for prime factorization until I read through this comment chain
I liked the challenge of going from 120 to 270 and realizing I have to rethink the math
I will tell you a secret. You can use mk3 belt with 240 items/min on it.
It gives you additional room if you need it, but there is no penalty for using it in your favorite ratio to the baseline
But I would like to see mk 5 buffed.
I was also annoyed about this because yes, the jumps from 60-120-270 is a little annoying in that it breaks the trend.
But, you can still run 240 on a mk3 if you merge 2 mk2 if that’s what you want so bad. The great thing about 270 is that it’s great for the 45 IPM multiples (I.e steel ingot production).
240 is definitely more aesthetically pleasing, but 270 offers so much utility
Not to be the smart ass but there is no real pattern here. You make an assumption that because 120 is 2x60 that the next should be 2x120 just because 2x240 would equal 480 which would be fine if 780 wouldn't break that pattern and instead be 960.
No
NnnoooooooooooOOOOoooo
no
There’s no reason for it to not be 270. You can still treat it like a 240 belt if you want, but there’s plenty of uses for that extra 30 that you may come across during gameplay.
Is this an attempt at rage bait? I don’t know a situation where lowering it to 240 is better. Maybe the OCD of how the belts scale, but that doesn’t effect the game a whole lot
Mk5 (maybe a mk6?) belt should allow for a pure node running 250% to be used
Alternative: The maximum output should be limited to be set to 780.
Sure - either way. I just don't like to see that I can produce more than a belt can carry, if that makes sense.
The output is already limited to 780 ;-)
If they do not fix the belts to handle 1200/min, I think they will do a small "renormalization":
-Each source is divided by 2. So mk1 miner on, impure - 15, normal - 30, pure - 60.
-each recipe takes half of the "ores"*), nothing else is changed (if it takes odd number of ore, double the recipe first, an example: smelting caterium: 3 ore ->1 ingot in 4 seconds. First double it, 6 ore -> 2 ingot in 8 seconds, then divide ores: 3 ores -> 2 ingots in 8 seconds).
-to prevent buffing trains/drones, divide the stack size by 2.
If applied, it won't change anything in existing factories and production lines. Mk2 miner on a node will result in the same ingots production rate.
But this solution has implications on the other end. Overclocked miners on pure nodes are limited by belts in the early stages. after the change the limit is much greater. But IMHO, this would be seen as a positive change too
*) this includes limestone, coal, sulfur...
Why would you want it to be slower?
Anyway, you could just split it to 2 mk2s and merge them back together. There ya go, 240.
Why don’t we just ask for a controller for belt speed? We already have overclock why not just add something like overclock for belts. Would be super helpful to be able to lower the 60 belts to 30 or just a controller like for lights where you can vary how much power the belts use so as to lower their speed?
Why? Everything that could be done with 240/min belts can also be done by 270/min belts, plus more.
I mean, same thing applies to late game factories, where everything is mk5, even if the belt has, idk, 5 items per minute.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🫡 that made day!
I need Mk 6 conveyors vanilla
780 has lots of really unique factors, though: 13, 78, 156, 195, 260. 960 is too neat and tidy with 4 x 240 and 8 x 120 and 16 x 60.
Like infactorio ratios are slighly off so you have to come up with solutions.
I have thought SO long about why it’s 270 vs 240 (I have almost 2500 hours in-game, so I feel comfortable stating that the amount of time I’ve spent thinking about this is too much), and I accept it. I feel good about the overall reasons why. But it will never stop bothering me a little bit.
It's so that you can feed 6 steel foundries with one overclocked MK2 miner on a pure coal node and get a decent balance of pipes and beams from one factory.
240 is a bad idea but 960 for Mk 6 belts sounds good. That or a second hole on the front of a Mk 3 Miner.
Nah
Preach
Ok if they did that then why would u have over clocking and under clocking. Under clocking isn’t just for saving power fyi. How about we make a blue print of ur factory and give it to use and while where at it how about we do all the work for u. All u got to do is connect the dots. Do a little thinking and no matter what speed they give u I’ll figure out a balance. Plus manifolds already do all the work for u no balance required just accurate math
I just wish programmable splitters afforded balancing capability. Would make things more compact.
No
Mods my friends, mods
Aside from the aesthetic issue, one real issue is that you can’t blindly combine 2 mk3 belts into an mk4 belt
Wouldn’t 960/min not really work out? Because currently with t5 belts you will usually not be able to run at the advertised speeds because something with fps (idk exactly what causes it or why) which makes it so most people use 760/750 as max speed. If you would have 960 belts this would also be the case but bigger more likely you would have to run it at 940 or below.
We need mk2 production as well
design your whole factory for mk1 belts and a target throughput
upgrade all machines to mk5 belts
overclock the shit out of all machines until belts are saturated
upgrade belts
repeat and watch throughput go through the roof
throughput > efficiency
Throughout and efficiency work better together. If you have so much material coming into your machinery that it is constantly full and cannot keep up with the belts, that's not a great design. Not to mention, overclocking isn't a great thing to do as the power consumption graph isn't linear.
maximum throughput is the design. efficiency is unimportant.
Honestly? I really like having it at 270, because I can overclock a pure miner just a tad and have 30 coal to fuel a truck station, gunpowder, etc on the side.