Fixed game crashing in NPE if it can't find anywhere to spawn a biter. Fixed possibility of dying just before a cutscene in NPE, which would lead to a crash. Fixed a bug in NPE where Compilatron would sometimes loop around smashing things. It would be interesting to see the memory used at each of these paste levels, it might be possibly correlated.- Energy consumption is no longer shown in the tooltip for void energy sources. The belt increase was tapering off as well, thus at excessive scale well below 60 UPS performance could reverse again.įull raw data available for download: here The likely better solution is to scale at least 1 of the designs to 60 UPS, and then scale the other deigns to that same amount of production.Īlso of interest is that the cost per paste appeared to start increasing linearly after 200 pastes on the bot design.
![0.16.51 factorio download 0.16.51 factorio download](https://games-cdn.softpedia.com/screenshots/Factorio_7.jpg)
ex: A design that does 10K science per minute at 80 UPS would in effect beat a design that did 1K science per minute with 11 copies of it at 66 UPS. Though this method would be more favorable towards smaller and more granular designs. Scaling designs to achieve 60UPS should be most representative of what a megabase is capable of. With this data, we can see that we need to scale up designs significantly to ensure that the performance characteristics are catalogued correctly. The bot design loses in the first couple of pastes, but then pulls ahead when we reach the hundreds of pastes. The DataĪs we can see, there is a pretty clear non-linear relationship for scaling to the number of pastes. However, we are not comparing the relative performance of bots vs belts, we are comparing how different types of designs scale. In terms of absolute production, the bot paste produces slightly more than 4,900 plates per second, while the belt one can at most produce 4,800 plates per second (in practice it will be slightly less). We can benchmark each map and then divide by the number of pastes in each map to get the effective score per paste. From here we will create a lot of maps with varying number of pastes of each. One is supplied by bots, the other belts. Both blueprints consist of 18 furnaces that approximately produce 2 blue belts of material each. It's possible that the cost per paste scales differently between the two classes of design.įirst we will create two basic blueprints, one with bots, one with belts. We should test belts and bot exclusive designs separately, as well as a mixed test.
![0.16.51 factorio download 0.16.51 factorio download](https://www.mg-sky.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/download_factorio-768x380.png)
We may want to consider testing the map with none of these production cells and then subtract out the overhead. The Testįor our test we will need to create separate but identical production cells, and copy them as many times as needed. It is also my prediction that in the gradual climb period of the graph, that belt based designs have a steeper curve, which could result in bots beating belts at many pastes, even if they won at a few pastes. My prediction is that the cost per paste starts high at 1 paste, then decreases for a little while, after which it gradually rises as we approach infinite pastes. That is to say, if we had 1000 rows of furnaces, would performance be equal to 1/1000th the cost of 1 row of furnaces? Does the performance characteristics change if we use bots only? or belts only? or trains? The simple question being asked is if the performance scaling of designs is linear. The greater number of entities you have, the more each one costs. Performance does not scale linearly to the number of entities. Test-000002 : Does performance of designs scale linearly to the amount of entities? Factorio Version 0.16.51 The TLDR