3 ms·
Any time you find yourself dismissing something many people put a lot of work into, you should be suspicious that maybe you aren’t operating in the same context
by sulam 2y ago
Any time you find yourself dismissing something many people put a lot of work into, you should be suspicious that maybe you aren’t operating in the same context they did. For instance a problem some balancers solve (but many do not) is lane balancing, such that each input has an equal chance to show up in either lane of the output. This solves problems with balancing the pull (input) side, as opposed to the push side, and can recruit idle machines that otherwise wouldn’t get work. This in and of itself doesn’t apply to fully utilized production chains but in times of lower utilization it may matter. As another example, maximizing freshness of components is a factor in the latest DLC and this is much easier to do if you can guarantee equal drawing from all assemblers.
- lupusreal 2y agoBalancers are conceptually cool so I understand the appeal of trying to find aesthetically pleasing, compact or otherwise interesting designs, however I just don't think they have practical use outside of the two niches I listed (loading ores, and fixing mistakes.) For instance on Gleba, you better have a plan to either use or burn the full belt. It doesn't matter if you're balancing the lanes, you need a plan for the same throughput of spoilage.
- sulam 2y agoEqual consumption of all the miners on an ore patch. The opposite ore loading, unloading at an equal rate so trains spend the minimum at a station (probably the more critical part to balance since you can solve the input side with buffering). Taking multiple less than full lines down to fewer full lines in a way that is evenly distributed, either to conserve space or, in larger bases, UPS. On Fulgora, with uneven recycler load, balancing the flow of an unfiltered belt before you separate it. Those are examples I just pulled from my current play through but I could probably find more.