I don't really use trains in Satisfactory (hell I don't even know if I ever unlocked them) but this is super cool and an invaluable resource for when I start using them. Thank you for taking time to make this video.
in 1.0 trains are going to be unlocked earlier and should be cheaper to build so i would highly recommend using a train system as i myself find it a lot of fun working with trains.
i can happily admit i have never even heard of all of the interchanges after roundabout. but, now i want to start building them, just waiting for the update. btw, those builds are fire, thanks for all the work :)
I was already using cross intersection with path... I honestly didn't think it would be in the top performers, you need to get WAY more complicated and take up way more space to get better results, I'm both happy and surprised.
2 Observations: A: With a single path zone, Double Roundabout is 6 transits better than Roundabout w/ slip lanes. But with split path zones, Roundabout w/ slip lanes is 3 transits better than Double Roundabout. I wonder if that's just due to statistical randomness, or if there's some reason for that. B: Reverse Roundabout w/ slip lanes is clearly better than the both of them though. Against the Roundabout w/ slip lanes, it has a routing advantage (because left turns don't block each other). But against the double roundabout, it just seems to have the advantage of offering twice as many parallel "waiting spots" in the approach lanes (even though nobody actually needs to wait in the slip lanes). I wonder if the double roundabout could be improved if it had separate approach lanes for entering the clockwise and counter-clockwise circles... [edit:] And while we're adding lanes, a cross junction with added slip lanes would be interesting too.
A) There is no randomness in the train operation. All tests start from the same save state with the power off in the test track. The first minute of the test the trains are still spreading out, they all start lined up at their first station. B) adding an additional waiting spot will likely improve performance but it would need to be tested to confirm. The save file I use for the tests is my channel links, if you want to have a go at it. It is setup for stacked interchange but the trains are in the starting positions for a test. You can build any interchange you want there.
Thank you. The turbine interchange was popular on the Reddit before I even started playing, but it was created in an update before signals and train collisions. So I can only take credit for the signaling choices I made.
You're my hero, I love your dedication to efficient transportation. I'll being taking this with me into 1.0. One thing though. I do think I will make my interchanges into a mound shape so that each train has a tiny boost if they have to stop and start at a merge. Edit: Man, I knew that the gains would be negligible but I never thought the annoyance of implementing it would be so high.
I remade as much of the Stack Exchange and Reverse Roundabout w/ Slip Lanes as I could in a modded blueprint designer and put it up on satisfactory-calculator but it seems I can't link it. I gave up on making the stack into a mound, but maybe I'll revisit later down the road.
@@BitwiseAssembly I've shoved the blueprint in there and it's just another thing to see it running, thanks for providing that! It's a bit thicker since I spaced the roads a bit and a bit taller because I used thicker bases so I was kinda worried if it was gonna fit but I guess I'm bad judge for that. I think I'd like to try making this next [watch?v=EaYaBRcryb8] I'm not sure if I'll be able to fit it into a blueprint though so it might just end up being a centerpiece like you were talking about.
There is one downside to the turbine interchange, that I would need to fix before I consider using it. There is not enough clearance for the pioneer to ride on top of the train.
Question -- I noticed in some of the wide shots that you have the station "arrival" lines all cris-crossing to get into the pink stations, and that on several occations a train had to wait before the cris-cross as an earlier train slowed down to enter the station. Wouldn't this have a ripple affect across the various blocks, which would affect the end results? At the very least it's an extra variable that needs to be accounted for.
There is two reasons a train would stop in station waiting zone. 1) the station the train wants is occupied. 2) another train is traversing the station path zone. Both affect the max possible score an intersection can get and it affects the higher scoring intersections more. When I am scoring the tests I am using the uncropped view. This allows me to see the trains in the waiting zones. I only saw a few instances of a crossover delay that would have reduced the score. The lost point(s) from the station limitations would not change the ranking if I added them. The intersection most affected was the stack interchange. Hopefully that answered your question.
hello ! first of all congratulations for the quality of the video moreover I am impressed by the quality of the stats (similar to the scientific field...) I am a player that never using trains and I wondered if it allowed to be as fluid on the flow of resources used as with conveyors belt ? Again brilliant work of data and stats !
Trains offer more flexibility in the movement of resources than a belt line. If you’re asking about the transfer rate there are a lot of variables you would need to consider, if you are comparing a train line to a belt line.
@@BitwiseAssembly flexibility and being able to group together an entire production run and dispatch it to different plants more easily than with belt conveyors? To have the same fluidity as belt conveyors, do I need to take into account the train's travel time and the quantity it carries? And possibly add several trains on the same track/or more wagon per train? thank you for taking the time to answer my beginner's questions :D
You can find plenty of answers to belts vs trucks vs trains elsewhere, but the simple answer is belts are perfect for short distance. Trucks and trains can both be good for high throughput medium to long distance. Belts are your only option for short distances, but can be as long as you want. You could have a belt bridge network that spans the map. Belts get harder to manage the longer they the network. You have to upgrade each section with new tiers and if you have to add a new belt line if you require more capacity. In contrast, roads and rails can be reused by new routes. If you need a higher capacity on the same route, you can add another truck or train on the same path. If you need a new route, you only need to build a road or track from existing infrastructure to the new location. Trucks vs trains is interesting. Trucks need fuel which can be more difficult to get started. Trucks can go pretty far round trip with just coal making a good strategy to have a single truck bring coal to a central place to fuel other truck stations. There is no such thing as a road in Satisfactory. You build foundations that trucks drive on. This means there's no pathing information. To automate a route, you must record yourself driving the route in a loop. This makes trucks simple for small routes. Once a route is recorded, you can only delete "nodes". You cannot move them. It is easy in the beginning to mess up a route you record. The easiest way I've found is use the vehicle path mode (shows connected lines instead of just arrows), then if you make a mistake, you can back up and try to resume the route and delete nodes later. You can add more trucks to the same route without recording a new route. You must drive and record new routes. Trains are a new level of complexity. Tracks have a set of rules and nuances that make them difficult to get started. I struggled at the beginning until I watched a few RU-vid videos on how they functioned and how to build sections. It took a bit of practice. Now building tracks isn't difficult. There's a pattern to it. Tracks and stations take up a lot of space. In terms of the whole map, not much, but if you're used to belting everything, a simple U-turn takes at least 7 foundations wide and train stations are huge. It takes a bit to get used to the scale. Trains are electric and work off your grid rather than needing fuel. In some ways this is easier. Train networks can be expanded. A new route only needs to connect new areas to existing tracks. Trains routes can be managed by scheduling between train stations. To create a new route, you create a schedule from one train station to another. The game figures out how to route the train on your track network. You don't need to record yourself driving the train first. This makes it easier to make new routes, especially longer ones. You can play the game however you want. Personally, I like seeing trains and truck driving everywhere. Roads and tracks add to the aesthetic of the game. If I needed to create a new long distance route, a belt bridge would be more daunting than adding more roads or tracks. Roads are simpler with blueprints. Beautiful curves are easier with the blueprint plus mod that gives a larger blueprint area.
Do you think we could get a world download for this save file? I'd like to play around with some different intersections, but I'm far too lazy to build one of these test setups myself 🤣
The levels for the stack interchange are all 10m apart. If the entry hight is 0 the levels are at +15, +5, -5, -15. As to if I will make a tutorial, I am not sure if I will. I have been avoiding talking in videos, so I need to figure out a method for the video to be easily understood without talking.
You should watch my video train signals testing for more insight. But the answer is depends the longer the entry block length the higher speed the train will maintain. But the relationship is not linear leading to some very long entry blocks if speed is the only consideration. Train will start requesting a reservation when two things are true. The train is in the entry block and braking distance calculation to the path signal says to start braking.
Big takeaway for me is that trains will use slip ways - I've never built them because I sort of thought the pathing wouldn't use them properly, but it looks like it used them fine in this test.
I think for interchanges with lanes for every direction, like turbine or stack interchange, block signals are better, because the trains don't need to "request" their right of way (like they do for path signals) and instead just fly through the interchange at max speed. If you use (subdivided) paths, they need to enter the block in front of the signal first, to request green and if that block is to short, they slow down for the still red path signal, through which they slow down the whole interchange. I guess if there was a subdivided path stack interchange, it would be slower than the block signal version too. For normal intersections or roundabouts tho it's way easier to just use (subdivided) paths.
Combination of two factors. 1) Trains will not enter a path zone unless there is a block zone it can reserve on the other side. 2) trains can wait in a block zone in the interchange which could allow the next train to go around the waiting train. I did not test the stack interchange with path or subdivided path because it did not meet the criteria to require a path signals.
It did not meet the either criteria to require path signals. None of the zones had 2 entrances and 2 exits where two trains could traverse without hitting or a train stopping in any of the zones could cause gridlock.
@@BitwiseAssembly so for that type of intersection it is best to go with only block signals? I do also have a stack interchange (slightly different) but i used path signals
@@BitwiseAssembly with "for that type" i meant the stack because i already built one as i said. It currently opperates with a normal path signal not subdevided or anything
Ok, sorry for the confusion. so path vs block,I believe that any interchange that can support a Block only signaling solution will perform better than a solution including path signal. But the difference may be so minor you will not notice the difference unless you are stress testing the interchange.
