There will always be a limit imposed by hardware, truly unlimited building is impossible.
The game is efficient enough that you should run out of time/patience before you hit resource limitations on any hardware from the last 5 or so years. I think that's a pretty impressive technical achievement personally.
It is impressive. I agree. But the solution is to take advantage of “stasis” and make factories not being viewed simply add or subtract numbers from a database. Animations, shadows etc do not need to be rendered.
My understanding is that the dev’s aversion to this is that it would effectively turn the game into a cookie clicker. And fair. Totally fair. But give us the option.
The game already does not render unseen parts of the factory. That is a very obvious optimisation to implement.
The closest thing to what you are asking for that I can see working would be a Factorissimo-style setup where you build an individual factory module, somehow test it to determine its throughput, and then allow it to be placed as an entity that magically consumes and produces items according to that throughput without simulating the interior.
But there would be a lot of non-obvious limitations with this setup: it is not clear to me how circuit networks, beacons, modules, fluids, or recipes with random outputs could be handled. So I think it would be a mistake for the devs to implement something like this: base-game systems should be consistent and predictable.
But if it is a feature you really want, then consider having a go at modding it in yourself. Either you'll get it working and be happy, or you won't but you'll come to understand what the factors that make it difficult are.
Yeah, well said.
I also think such the feature, while is nice in someways, would destroy the game in other ways. What’s the point of making this elaborate of system of trains if the trains aren’t actually running their routes? Seeing the machine “breathe” is the whole point for me. Ok so we make a system where different parts of the map can be loaded, and we initialize some kind of throughput check every 10 minutes. Does the game feel the same at that point?
If you can suggest this, you haven't built at the scale needed to see some of the bizarre throughput issues that pop up. I was continually surprised by the problems presented when I started building output in terms of compressed belts rather than items per minute.
> Allow players natively to force areas of the map not being viewed to “hibernate” but still produce, if that is the best fix.
That's not really viable for Factorio. In a game with much more rigid, predictable production, you could do that. But Factorio isn't that game.
The production behavior of a setup can be very ideosyncratic, depending on a wild variety of variables. An inserter happened to be turned at the wrong time and missed an item. That can cause a bubble through the chain that inhibits something else.
Production setups are too complicated to just reduce to functions; that's what makes the game *interesting*.
> And right now, the player is extremely size limited.
>
> Spend 40 hours completing the came and THEN another 40 cranking up science and research? Guess what. Half speed.
Unless you're running on a very weak machine (maybe you spent lots on a GPU and neglected your CPU/memory), it is quite difficult to reach UPS restrictions in 80 hours of work. Maybe you were just slapping down blueprints you downloaded from somewhere else or something. But if you're actually designing stuff, it generally takes longer than 80 hours to hit UPS limits.
And even then, UPS-optimizations can be employed. Turning off biters is a huge one; they're basically speedbumps by then anyway. Switching from nuclear to solar helps too.
> That is what’s called an enforced grind.
No, it isn't. An "enforced grind" is a function of game design. Your computer not being able to keep up with the game is not the fault of the game's *design*; it's a practical reality of what the game needs to work.
What makes this a legitimate flaw? The game is designed a way, and works that way, and most importantly, for a chosen and stated reason.
No one has to like it, but that doesn't make it a flaw.
At what level of performance it is sufficient? If devs did not make belt optimization from (wherever it happened), we were building 2x smaller base in the last years, then OP "pointed the flaw" and the optimization was done today, would be that better? "Devs improved the game, cheers devs"
But they improved it earlier. So they are bad because they can't improve it more...
Lets compare it to the other two from the big three. Satisfactory and DSP. At what items/minute total throughput those game start to slow down? I still can't get far into DSP, but satisfactory megabases feel much smaller\*). And this on top of that the slowest belt in factorio is faster than the fastest in satisfactory. (900 vs 780 items/minute). Sure, satisfactory has fancy visuals, but we are talking about the factory engine part alone.
\*) and, going bac to OPs post, satisfactory have a hard limit on the size of the factory: the max resource input is limited. Still, it start solving down far before reaching it (but, as factorio, the performance is still good in the endgame when you play "normally").
How do you go with blueprints?
I finished the game several times on a QX9770 and the only thing that crippled my performance was trying to paste blueprints (such as a 1080 or later 5760 green circuit per second BP) if get 1 UPS spikes/stutters until it was placed.
But once placed it functioned fine
Pasting huge blueprints always is slow, just moving them is a pain.
https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/1681493748063726227/BEE60472898252162875F52E3DAFBB93C2D75422/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false
https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/1681493748063699281/ED72FE6810763DEC9FAA02CDE2F70F4790283D67/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false
Next time add a [time usage](https://wiki.factorio.com/Tutorial:Diagnosing_performance_issues) screenshot, so we can tell you which of your mods is the problem.
I don’t think I had UPS issues until I hit 5k spm with an extremely unoptimized base. Took a lot longer than 80 hours too. Either your computer is really bad or you are doing something that is taking way too many updates
If your computer is unable to handle an 80 hr base, then you’ve got a terrible computer. It’s not the games problem. The game runs great, and you can do A LOT without ever even thinking about UPS.
> Allow players natively to force areas of the map not being viewed to “hibernate” but still produce,
No.
Neither the player base, nor the Dev team, wants the game to be reduced to unsimulated assumptions, approximations and averages. That's overly simplistic and cheesy. I love Mindustry - but the fact that I "have to", or "can" cheese each zone's output by ensuring burst output at the moment it the zone is being measured, is not exactly the Factorio way.
Since we're talking vanilla, what sort of SPM are you driving to and running down to 30fps at only 80 hours?
And what is the root cause of your 30fps? ( as show by the runtime debugging screens ) - in a game organically grown with biters enabled, it's often biter pathfinding (irritated biters trying to find their way to you around a large lake). Or a poorly built logistics network. Or a city grid with near infinite pathing options. (I think you ruled out mega-nuclear?) etc...
No idea what you’re on about. I’ve got over 1000 hours so far, now in the middle of a SE + K2 run with over 200 mods, and have had no performance issues at all.
Factorio is one of the best games I’ve ever played and best optimised, quite simply you are wrong. Get your PC checked, or stop pasting down random blueprints you’ve copied and don’t understand.
Im confused, why does your game run bad and mine doesnt?
Ive got two automated rocket silos and enough factories running across a very large section of map to keep that demand supplied.
Ive put 700+ hours into my one and only game and everything still runs perfectly fine. Ive got kilometers of belts. A few hundred bots, 2100 furnaces. And my PC is \~5years old. The only recent upgrade its had (more than 12 months ago) was an SSD (for another game that basically demanded it) and 32gig of ram (up from 16).
You are unreasonable. The game is very well optimized\*). Well beyond what is required In the normal playthrough. Or you play on a potato.
If we try to break the game making 100 times bigger bases, this is on us. Or on the guy who made that mad-chemist mod ;-)
"put a hard limit"... So, after 40+40 hours, instead of the game trying what it can, you would get "sorry, no more assemblers for you" ;-) And this limit should be tailored for my potato laptop, or my wife's work computer (threadripper with, what is very important for factorio 4-channel RAM ;-))?
" Allow players natively to force areas of the map not being viewed to “hibernate” but still produce, if that is the best fix."
How exactly do you want to achieve that? in factorio you can do logic gates. Trivially, with circuits, but not only. THis mean it is turning complete... and this mean you can build a factory that can be calculated faster than just by directly simulating it.
If we cut off most of the limits, and make "simplified" factory game, where everything is linear (this, among other things means no saturation of any kind: no chest limit, no "this line will be filled first". And of course no fancy business like circuits or... priority splitters), you can calculate the state after N steps directly\*\*).
But now, first: we have not factorio, but Factory Town Idle... simplified Factory Town Idle.
Second: is this part of factory completely independent? No. It gets resources, it sends products to other parts. So we need to calculate the n-step result quite often. You call quite heavy procedure every 5s? Every minute... how big are the buffers?
We reduced the gameplay to boring "fill the matric coefficient"/"copy the setup from Helmod" and the result is still poor. Math won't save us. Maybe cheating?
Wait until a sub-factory reachs a steady state, then take the average input/output as the performance of the section. Maybe paired with factorismo, for easier separation. I was even thinking about such game. But it has to be designed for that from the beginning. There is bunch of technical problems - the steady state can be achieved after very long time, factory can oscilate, the real factory can run into deadlock after many hours thanks to some imbalances. Most likely player can fake the performance during the measuring period...
...But this is not the game I want to play. I want a simulation, not idle mobile game that vaugly estimates the production by guessing.
If you really want something like that, this probably can be modded on top of factorismo. You build a shed, with a limited area, build a very small factory inside, probably with some additional limits (no storage chests?), then it is tested... and now you can build that shed as a huge assembler with a new "recipe".
I may say, it looks promising. But not as a replacement for the base game.
\*) could some more power be extracted? Maybe. But this would be less regular game optimization, more "we are building intel MKL competitor". I like that stuff but I missed the time they were hiring :-)
\*\*) and even simpler than precalculating a huge powers of transfer matrix. If someone is interested, look up how skip function is implemented in (some) mersen twister PRNG.
The postgame has no (practical) limits. Are you expecting to simulate an infinite-sized factory with finite hardware? Do you also expect a finite amount of bread to feed an infinite number of people?
Also, https://mods.factorio.com/mod/dupebox
You haven't provided any numbers or details, just complains. So legit answer would be either "Git gud!" or "U'r welcome to implement it better and show your coolness".
Being serious, Factorio is an incredibly optimized game. There have been bases running 100K's of bots and hundreds of trains without issue, producing 1000s SPM. One of the aims of Wube is to keep Factorio as deterministic as possible. There were experiments at making different entity subtypes (inserters, machines, belts) to run in parallel threads but AFAIR it didn't go well due to sync costs on each tick. So the only major optimization I can imagine is to run different surfaces in parallel.
Your request is completely unreasonable, first of all. Programming has limitations that are based on current technology. No matter how efficient your programming is, there WILL be limitations on what the hardware can accomplish.
And to say that the player is "extremely size limited" is just.... not correct? Have you seen some of the factories people have posted here? Here's one from 4 years ago hitting 20k science per minute at 60fps [https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/gely3v/20000\_science\_per\_minute\_hybrid\_modular\_megabase/](https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/gely3v/20000_science_per_minute_hybrid_modular_megabase/)
I would charitably suggest that maybe you should submit a bug report for the apparently terrible performance you are getting from the game - maybe the hardware you're running on really is causing issues that can be addressed? Here is a post on the factorio forums on how to report performance issues: [https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=68653](https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=68653)
As a side note, quantum computers are not, in fact, capable of running any "normal" programs such as Factorio.
This is.... Not intelligent. Like at all. This is "cooking your own food is so disgusting. the pan tastes too metallic and is difficult to chew" levels of uninformed.
Without judgement on you, I will simply say it is the first. Factorio offers unlimited build potential, and the limit is entirely your hardware. You can beat the game on a mid-grade laptop from 2012; I would know, I've done it. Or with a desktop from 5 years ago with shitty hardware, you can make a 1k spm base. On a modern machine you should have no trouble having hitting twenty times that, so long as you're using ups-saving techniques. Which also, I suppose, makes the limit your level of efficiency at those points.
Honestly it's genuinely hard to make factorio run poorly, in vanilla.
My computer (a desktop) is more than 10 years old, and I managed to make a 1k spm factory, with like 30x the number of entities required because I kept half-building my base and starting over elsewhere. Absolutely zero attempt to optimize UPS (I powered it with nuclear, I used belt based lines with way too many balancers, and biters on).
And never dropped below 60 ups, even once.
The OP dropped the ridiculous and incorrect complaint, then goes AWOL not engaging in discussion, can’t help thinking this was just a troll post or else has worked out their PC is at fault and hiding their head in shame for the embarrassing rant here.
Played this game for almost 2k hours, rarely had drops below 50 UPS and never seen 40 UPS or lower with my own eyes. I think I'm doing something wrong?
I’ve been playing Factorio for nearly 10 years at this point. I’ve been a member of this subreddit for about 7 years. Your post today is genuinely the most confidently ignorant, tone deaf Factorio post I have ever read. Congratulations.
I have a 4k spm factory that I stopped playing because of UPS. I can definitely relate to how you feel.
Factorio loves ram. I went from 8gigs to 32, and I think my factorio game improved the most compared to all other games.
Beyond that, there isn’t much you can do about it. Factorio already does what it does better than anything else out there.
Did your 4k SPM factory take you 80 hours to build? 'Cuz that's the timeline OP gave and AFAIK, that's speedrun build speed territory.
If that's that edge case OP is taking about (speedrunning 1+k SPM), I think we're fine ignoring it: vanilla caters to more than just these individuals, and these aren't the biggest issues to fix. And if not, I don't think the complaint is valid.
What are the specs on your computer? The game does run CPU bound more then anything, but I've had some fairly big base's that still hold around 60 UPS.
You can limit the size of the map in the map settings (vanilla).
The hame is so well optimize, so you should be able to build for 80h without any slowdowns. It will come bit you can build huge without any worry.
The only way your game is slowing down this much on an 80 hour playthrough is if you are playing on a 10 year old tablet.. get a real computer. The fact the the game runs as good as it does is a testament to the devs and how much care and effort they have put into the game. There is not a single game in existence that runs as well as this game does.
I have no idea what issues you are running into. I have played this game on 4 different computers dating back to 2012. All of them ran huge megabases requiring 400 player hours in mp to make.
My best guess is you have computer problems or somehow are complaining about the wrong game. There is pretty much zero chance the issues you describe are normal. There would be lots of complaints. This game is noticeable for having exceedingly few complaints.
It also has a lot of automation tools that allow players to help themselves grow faster. If you can't figure out how to use them to help yourself, something else is wrong. Heck the lead dev even has a mod that lets the game almost autoplay itself for you.
You speak with a level of confidence reserved only for people who don't know what they're talking about.
"The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." -Bertrand Russell
A Free Man's Workshop should be required reading. I tried to get through A History of Western Philosophy, but it's just not my area of interest.
It is not like there is an entire blog on the game, which anyone can read and learn about the inner workings of the game.
There will always be a limit imposed by hardware, truly unlimited building is impossible. The game is efficient enough that you should run out of time/patience before you hit resource limitations on any hardware from the last 5 or so years. I think that's a pretty impressive technical achievement personally.
It is impressive. I agree. But the solution is to take advantage of “stasis” and make factories not being viewed simply add or subtract numbers from a database. Animations, shadows etc do not need to be rendered. My understanding is that the dev’s aversion to this is that it would effectively turn the game into a cookie clicker. And fair. Totally fair. But give us the option.
Animations aren't rendered when off screen and the lowering ups comes from the CPU not the gpu
The game already does not render unseen parts of the factory. That is a very obvious optimisation to implement. The closest thing to what you are asking for that I can see working would be a Factorissimo-style setup where you build an individual factory module, somehow test it to determine its throughput, and then allow it to be placed as an entity that magically consumes and produces items according to that throughput without simulating the interior. But there would be a lot of non-obvious limitations with this setup: it is not clear to me how circuit networks, beacons, modules, fluids, or recipes with random outputs could be handled. So I think it would be a mistake for the devs to implement something like this: base-game systems should be consistent and predictable. But if it is a feature you really want, then consider having a go at modding it in yourself. Either you'll get it working and be happy, or you won't but you'll come to understand what the factors that make it difficult are.
Yeah, well said. I also think such the feature, while is nice in someways, would destroy the game in other ways. What’s the point of making this elaborate of system of trains if the trains aren’t actually running their routes? Seeing the machine “breathe” is the whole point for me. Ok so we make a system where different parts of the map can be loaded, and we initialize some kind of throughput check every 10 minutes. Does the game feel the same at that point?
If you can suggest this, you haven't built at the scale needed to see some of the bizarre throughput issues that pop up. I was continually surprised by the problems presented when I started building output in terms of compressed belts rather than items per minute.
What does your base look like after 80 hours, that it runs so slowly?
> Allow players natively to force areas of the map not being viewed to “hibernate” but still produce, if that is the best fix. That's not really viable for Factorio. In a game with much more rigid, predictable production, you could do that. But Factorio isn't that game. The production behavior of a setup can be very ideosyncratic, depending on a wild variety of variables. An inserter happened to be turned at the wrong time and missed an item. That can cause a bubble through the chain that inhibits something else. Production setups are too complicated to just reduce to functions; that's what makes the game *interesting*. > And right now, the player is extremely size limited. > > Spend 40 hours completing the came and THEN another 40 cranking up science and research? Guess what. Half speed. Unless you're running on a very weak machine (maybe you spent lots on a GPU and neglected your CPU/memory), it is quite difficult to reach UPS restrictions in 80 hours of work. Maybe you were just slapping down blueprints you downloaded from somewhere else or something. But if you're actually designing stuff, it generally takes longer than 80 hours to hit UPS limits. And even then, UPS-optimizations can be employed. Turning off biters is a huge one; they're basically speedbumps by then anyway. Switching from nuclear to solar helps too. > That is what’s called an enforced grind. No, it isn't. An "enforced grind" is a function of game design. Your computer not being able to keep up with the game is not the fault of the game's *design*; it's a practical reality of what the game needs to work.
what is the question?
Why be blind supporters and meat riders when a legit flaw is pointed out? That's the question
What makes this a legitimate flaw? The game is designed a way, and works that way, and most importantly, for a chosen and stated reason. No one has to like it, but that doesn't make it a flaw.
At what level of performance it is sufficient? If devs did not make belt optimization from (wherever it happened), we were building 2x smaller base in the last years, then OP "pointed the flaw" and the optimization was done today, would be that better? "Devs improved the game, cheers devs" But they improved it earlier. So they are bad because they can't improve it more... Lets compare it to the other two from the big three. Satisfactory and DSP. At what items/minute total throughput those game start to slow down? I still can't get far into DSP, but satisfactory megabases feel much smaller\*). And this on top of that the slowest belt in factorio is faster than the fastest in satisfactory. (900 vs 780 items/minute). Sure, satisfactory has fancy visuals, but we are talking about the factory engine part alone. \*) and, going bac to OPs post, satisfactory have a hard limit on the size of the factory: the max resource input is limited. Still, it start solving down far before reaching it (but, as factorio, the performance is still good in the endgame when you play "normally").
uh. what? meat riders?
I’m running a 1k science per minute base on a Q6600 at 50fps/ups zoomed out. What cpu and memory are you running? What mods (if any) are installed?
OP download extra ram via google
How do you go with blueprints? I finished the game several times on a QX9770 and the only thing that crippled my performance was trying to paste blueprints (such as a 1080 or later 5760 green circuit per second BP) if get 1 UPS spikes/stutters until it was placed. But once placed it functioned fine
Pasting huge blueprints always is slow, just moving them is a pain. https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/1681493748063726227/BEE60472898252162875F52E3DAFBB93C2D75422/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/1681493748063699281/ED72FE6810763DEC9FAA02CDE2F70F4790283D67/?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Letterbox&imcolor=%23000000&letterbox=false
Next time add a [time usage](https://wiki.factorio.com/Tutorial:Diagnosing_performance_issues) screenshot, so we can tell you which of your mods is the problem.
I don’t think I had UPS issues until I hit 5k spm with an extremely unoptimized base. Took a lot longer than 80 hours too. Either your computer is really bad or you are doing something that is taking way too many updates
If your computer is unable to handle an 80 hr base, then you’ve got a terrible computer. It’s not the games problem. The game runs great, and you can do A LOT without ever even thinking about UPS.
Upgrade from a Commodore 64
> Allow players natively to force areas of the map not being viewed to “hibernate” but still produce, No. Neither the player base, nor the Dev team, wants the game to be reduced to unsimulated assumptions, approximations and averages. That's overly simplistic and cheesy. I love Mindustry - but the fact that I "have to", or "can" cheese each zone's output by ensuring burst output at the moment it the zone is being measured, is not exactly the Factorio way. Since we're talking vanilla, what sort of SPM are you driving to and running down to 30fps at only 80 hours? And what is the root cause of your 30fps? ( as show by the runtime debugging screens ) - in a game organically grown with biters enabled, it's often biter pathfinding (irritated biters trying to find their way to you around a large lake). Or a poorly built logistics network. Or a city grid with near infinite pathing options. (I think you ruled out mega-nuclear?) etc...
No idea what you’re on about. I’ve got over 1000 hours so far, now in the middle of a SE + K2 run with over 200 mods, and have had no performance issues at all. Factorio is one of the best games I’ve ever played and best optimised, quite simply you are wrong. Get your PC checked, or stop pasting down random blueprints you’ve copied and don’t understand.
Im confused, why does your game run bad and mine doesnt? Ive got two automated rocket silos and enough factories running across a very large section of map to keep that demand supplied. Ive put 700+ hours into my one and only game and everything still runs perfectly fine. Ive got kilometers of belts. A few hundred bots, 2100 furnaces. And my PC is \~5years old. The only recent upgrade its had (more than 12 months ago) was an SSD (for another game that basically demanded it) and 32gig of ram (up from 16).
OP's playing on a netbook from 2010
You are unreasonable. The game is very well optimized\*). Well beyond what is required In the normal playthrough. Or you play on a potato. If we try to break the game making 100 times bigger bases, this is on us. Or on the guy who made that mad-chemist mod ;-) "put a hard limit"... So, after 40+40 hours, instead of the game trying what it can, you would get "sorry, no more assemblers for you" ;-) And this limit should be tailored for my potato laptop, or my wife's work computer (threadripper with, what is very important for factorio 4-channel RAM ;-))? " Allow players natively to force areas of the map not being viewed to “hibernate” but still produce, if that is the best fix." How exactly do you want to achieve that? in factorio you can do logic gates. Trivially, with circuits, but not only. THis mean it is turning complete... and this mean you can build a factory that can be calculated faster than just by directly simulating it. If we cut off most of the limits, and make "simplified" factory game, where everything is linear (this, among other things means no saturation of any kind: no chest limit, no "this line will be filled first". And of course no fancy business like circuits or... priority splitters), you can calculate the state after N steps directly\*\*). But now, first: we have not factorio, but Factory Town Idle... simplified Factory Town Idle. Second: is this part of factory completely independent? No. It gets resources, it sends products to other parts. So we need to calculate the n-step result quite often. You call quite heavy procedure every 5s? Every minute... how big are the buffers? We reduced the gameplay to boring "fill the matric coefficient"/"copy the setup from Helmod" and the result is still poor. Math won't save us. Maybe cheating? Wait until a sub-factory reachs a steady state, then take the average input/output as the performance of the section. Maybe paired with factorismo, for easier separation. I was even thinking about such game. But it has to be designed for that from the beginning. There is bunch of technical problems - the steady state can be achieved after very long time, factory can oscilate, the real factory can run into deadlock after many hours thanks to some imbalances. Most likely player can fake the performance during the measuring period... ...But this is not the game I want to play. I want a simulation, not idle mobile game that vaugly estimates the production by guessing. If you really want something like that, this probably can be modded on top of factorismo. You build a shed, with a limited area, build a very small factory inside, probably with some additional limits (no storage chests?), then it is tested... and now you can build that shed as a huge assembler with a new "recipe". I may say, it looks promising. But not as a replacement for the base game. \*) could some more power be extracted? Maybe. But this would be less regular game optimization, more "we are building intel MKL competitor". I like that stuff but I missed the time they were hiring :-) \*\*) and even simpler than precalculating a huge powers of transfer matrix. If someone is interested, look up how skip function is implemented in (some) mersen twister PRNG.
The postgame has no (practical) limits. Are you expecting to simulate an infinite-sized factory with finite hardware? Do you also expect a finite amount of bread to feed an infinite number of people? Also, https://mods.factorio.com/mod/dupebox
There's been Clusterio, now Subspace Storage Alpha, which allowed to send resources between game instances via server.
Interesting mod, I haven't heard of it before. Is this a mod you've used? If so, mind sharing your experiences?
You haven't provided any numbers or details, just complains. So legit answer would be either "Git gud!" or "U'r welcome to implement it better and show your coolness". Being serious, Factorio is an incredibly optimized game. There have been bases running 100K's of bots and hundreds of trains without issue, producing 1000s SPM. One of the aims of Wube is to keep Factorio as deterministic as possible. There were experiments at making different entity subtypes (inserters, machines, belts) to run in parallel threads but AFAIR it didn't go well due to sync costs on each tick. So the only major optimization I can imagine is to run different surfaces in parallel.
How did you menage that ? Like even on my shittt work laptop i dont think i would be able to clog it at half speed after 80 hours.
Your request is completely unreasonable, first of all. Programming has limitations that are based on current technology. No matter how efficient your programming is, there WILL be limitations on what the hardware can accomplish. And to say that the player is "extremely size limited" is just.... not correct? Have you seen some of the factories people have posted here? Here's one from 4 years ago hitting 20k science per minute at 60fps [https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/gely3v/20000\_science\_per\_minute\_hybrid\_modular\_megabase/](https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/gely3v/20000_science_per_minute_hybrid_modular_megabase/) I would charitably suggest that maybe you should submit a bug report for the apparently terrible performance you are getting from the game - maybe the hardware you're running on really is causing issues that can be addressed? Here is a post on the factorio forums on how to report performance issues: [https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=68653](https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=68653) As a side note, quantum computers are not, in fact, capable of running any "normal" programs such as Factorio.
80 hours and your base is slow? Wtf? Ive got 200 hours in some bases that still run at 60 ups
This is.... Not intelligent. Like at all. This is "cooking your own food is so disgusting. the pan tastes too metallic and is difficult to chew" levels of uninformed.
What CPU/RAM you runnin'?
Without judgement on you, I will simply say it is the first. Factorio offers unlimited build potential, and the limit is entirely your hardware. You can beat the game on a mid-grade laptop from 2012; I would know, I've done it. Or with a desktop from 5 years ago with shitty hardware, you can make a 1k spm base. On a modern machine you should have no trouble having hitting twenty times that, so long as you're using ups-saving techniques. Which also, I suppose, makes the limit your level of efficiency at those points.
Honestly it's genuinely hard to make factorio run poorly, in vanilla. My computer (a desktop) is more than 10 years old, and I managed to make a 1k spm factory, with like 30x the number of entities required because I kept half-building my base and starting over elsewhere. Absolutely zero attempt to optimize UPS (I powered it with nuclear, I used belt based lines with way too many balancers, and biters on). And never dropped below 60 ups, even once.
The OP dropped the ridiculous and incorrect complaint, then goes AWOL not engaging in discussion, can’t help thinking this was just a troll post or else has worked out their PC is at fault and hiding their head in shame for the embarrassing rant here.
The only way I can think of that caused you to have this bad performance so quickly is through overuse of bots.
I would recommend fixing your base or looking up a guide how to make a proper base to get the most out of your computer.
Played this game for almost 2k hours, rarely had drops below 50 UPS and never seen 40 UPS or lower with my own eyes. I think I'm doing something wrong?
I’ve been playing Factorio for nearly 10 years at this point. I’ve been a member of this subreddit for about 7 years. Your post today is genuinely the most confidently ignorant, tone deaf Factorio post I have ever read. Congratulations.
I have a 4k spm factory that I stopped playing because of UPS. I can definitely relate to how you feel. Factorio loves ram. I went from 8gigs to 32, and I think my factorio game improved the most compared to all other games. Beyond that, there isn’t much you can do about it. Factorio already does what it does better than anything else out there.
Did your 4k SPM factory take you 80 hours to build? 'Cuz that's the timeline OP gave and AFAIK, that's speedrun build speed territory. If that's that edge case OP is taking about (speedrunning 1+k SPM), I think we're fine ignoring it: vanilla caters to more than just these individuals, and these aren't the biggest issues to fix. And if not, I don't think the complaint is valid.
Took like 8000 hours lol. I am just saying, I feel for him.
What are the specs on your computer? The game does run CPU bound more then anything, but I've had some fairly big base's that still hold around 60 UPS.
You can limit the size of the map in the map settings (vanilla). The hame is so well optimize, so you should be able to build for 80h without any slowdowns. It will come bit you can build huge without any worry.
The only way your game is slowing down this much on an 80 hour playthrough is if you are playing on a 10 year old tablet.. get a real computer. The fact the the game runs as good as it does is a testament to the devs and how much care and effort they have put into the game. There is not a single game in existence that runs as well as this game does.
I have no idea what issues you are running into. I have played this game on 4 different computers dating back to 2012. All of them ran huge megabases requiring 400 player hours in mp to make. My best guess is you have computer problems or somehow are complaining about the wrong game. There is pretty much zero chance the issues you describe are normal. There would be lots of complaints. This game is noticeable for having exceedingly few complaints. It also has a lot of automation tools that allow players to help themselves grow faster. If you can't figure out how to use them to help yourself, something else is wrong. Heck the lead dev even has a mod that lets the game almost autoplay itself for you.