▶Subscribe for more Shapez 2 and other factory games 🔴Watch more on Twitch.tv/nilaus 📄Support on Patreon to get access to Blueprints and Save Games: patreon.com/Nilaus ➡Full Shapez 2 Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLV3rF--heRVsALWExxYuukXqv_5MoN_Ag.html
I think the modus operandi of this game revolves between the finer level blueprints and the space blueprints. I think you’re really finding your groove with these episodes, between creating a smaller blueprint and then implementing it on the larger scale. You’ve been one of my favorite creators in the factories genre, Thanks for the shapes content, I am loving it.
It's funny that the complaints on the videos are that you just stamp blueprints down everywhere. That's the best part of this game (and factory games in general), with a solid foundation you can stop worrying about the little things and get working on higher order problems. This build is very impressive with how easy it is to continue stamping pieces down and get a huge 12 lane factory going quickly. Just need to remember which corners to color ;) An interesting thing about this game is how you can tackle the shape construction in different orders. In my head I want to stack the shapes first, then cut them. But here you cut them first and then stack them. You can actually take a totally different production path than someone else to solve the same problem, which is really interesting and different from most factory games that have a less abstract item you are trying to create, so the steps are linear
I think a lot about the ordering as well, and when looking at the final shape, I think it does make more sense to stack first, then cut it apart, color and reassemble. If you take into account the shapes needed to progress through the task however, you do need to be producing the unstacked shapes first. I think the only real difference it saves is the former version requires one painter per corner and the latter version requires 3 painters per corner (one per base shape).
people seem to not notice that what would take one machine in most factory building games takes several in shapez so you need to stamp down blueprint to actually progress at decent pace
@thibauthanson7670 The game naturally guides the player into using modular blueprints to increase output quickly and efficiently, as once the blueprints are created, the game at the macro scale plays identically as it does at the micro- scale (a brilliant bit of game design I'd add). That being said, there is no one correct way to play and if you'd rather pipe the resources together and build custom factories for each shape rather than stringing together modules, you have the freedom to do that. Don't limit your enjoyment based on what others do.
@@ConflictZv Good advice! Also, no one is stopping a player from NOT using Nilaus' blueprints. You can design your own, and enjoy weaving the complex beltwork on these designs and fiddling around to route belts where space is already occupied (squeezing belt launchers in to make some more space, moving around other belts, switching layers...). That can easily occupy you for days. You can try to use logic gates to solve jams in your belts resulting from different path lengths (via rerouting to trash). There's lot's of things to optimize. And you also don't need to maximize the modularization to the extreme - you can also use more handcrafted platforms if you want. But for a UA-camr it's of course much easier to show some interesting progress in a video when he's utilizing the modules as much as possible.
The platforms alone scream "make me a modular blueprint! Then snap me together with other modular blueprints!" Like not using city block design would likely be a much harder approach to the game, as it's practically designed to favor city block design.
I don't often post comments, but I have to today. I'd like to thank you, I can't play any more as I haven't had a PC for a few years. We have the same vision of video games, beauty and functionality, and this can be felt in all your lets plays, especially this one. Keep up the good work.
What I often do is instead of incrementally building my task shapes and continually adding on new shapes, I pin and build the final shape in the task, with spaces between each step, and then disconnect the steps to simplify into the current step target shape. Then, when I hit each task's quota and move to the next step, I just connect it to the next modifier and it's done. Super clean, allows me to plan in advance, and focus on more important parts of my factory like planning out my next shapes, or untangling the massive amounts of resource lines I accidentally built too close to my vortex and now I have belts and fluid lines criss-crossing AH why was I so stupid how did I think building this close was a good idea I have INFINITE space to use...
I saw an image of using a platform as a way to cross a space belt with a space pipe rather than going beneath and have integrated it in my setups. The same thing obviously also works for belts needing to cross each other. This allows for much more compact setups as you don't need the extra space for the belts/pipes going below and back up.
Great episode! Including the design of the stacking module was a great change. It's fun to watch you work through the routing and layout to make things work.
I'm cool with just stamping down blueprints. The goal should be efficient use of time. It isn't like you aren't designing blueprints too. Love the single level paint design last video. Very handy.
One design principle I've started adding to my blueprints is making sure all inputs/outputs use all lanes and levels for a space belt (eg, make miners output on all 4 lanes and levels and same for stackers), this means you never really need to worry about what is happening on a particular level of a blueprint and can handle major merging/splitting purely with space belts. For example if I want to mine 2 levels of shapes, instead of having a miner for level 1 and a miner for level 2, I have 1 miner that outputs to both level 1 and level 2 at 50% and then merge those lines with space belts. Doing this removes the need for any level specific considerations in your blueprints since also know all blueprints will provide balanced input/output across all lanes/levels.
@@tacklemcclean You don't have to distribute yourself, when you split lane in 3 it automatically balances out. So you put 4 extractors on one belt, then split that belt across 3 levels
So I’ve been playing this kind of along with you, and one of the kind of eureka ideas I had WRT your blueprint designs is that you only need one blueprint “block” for each machine (of which there are like 12 total including rotations?), and you can modularize everything. Idk if this is a particularly novel thought, but it definitely helped me transition from cooked spaghetti to the kind in the box.
I really love your builds. really beautiful. i wanted to copy them but needed to stop. You and KoS teached me a lot on Factorio . Now , i want to make my own builds. Very slow but its the next level of enjoying this game ^^. Thanks a lot
I think when you flipped the green it changed the orientation of the shapes from your original plan. Our build philosophies are very different. Really enjoying the series. Looking forward to the next one!
Yeah, that's exactly what happened. The logistics block that splits out the different cut pieces into two sides was originally placed twice in the same orientation. I was wondering how long it would take him to notice from the moment he flipped that entire factory section. And really, the only part that needed to be flipped was the single incoming space belt at the bottom, which was a waste of blueprint points to copy in the first place.
There comes a time in every young factory builders life where they just say fuck it, and copy nilaus's design. Thank you very much Nilaus the stacker design was brilliant.
Loving this series so much. I think you have the balance just right between doing some designs live with us and then composing things from larger blocks to blast through the tasks.
The fun in this game is finding your own solution. Even if your design sucks, and it may be not efficient, you still accomplish the task anyway. If it works, it works. Spaghetti base is not a problem
I love the stacker is truly usable for all belt layers. So if you only have the bottom layer - it will work. And with 2 layers it will work. Which makes it easier to do the flattening of belt contents and still just use your stacker.
Using 20 blueprints to make one single shape and paint, YES. I am now trying to merge all my blueprints into 12x12 output, kinda challenging, love it. Make as many blueprints as you can, if looks simetrical, its the right way xD
Nilaus, this has been a great journey learning and playing this game. Your videos have been very informational and has impacted how I play the game. Keep doing your thing 👍👍
Nice setup! I really enjoy the game and learn from your nice designs. Btw: you can pin the tasks that aren't active yet to see what you have to build while the delivery is still ongoing.
Loved the multi level combiner, totally didn't think of raising those droppers up a level even though the splitets and rotators operate on all 3 levels
A lot of the mid game is the same as the start but instead of placing down individual building your placing modules that do the same but with multiple lanes of shapes. You still need to decide which shapes your starting with and the process your using to get the end product. So yes you are using a lot of blueprints but it’s not the same as other factory games because the product you need is always changing.
So if you want effective 3 floor designs you need to use the swapper over the stacker in order to merge the flat objects. That way you can put an entire belt on one floor and just layer it on each floor. Later on you have to use stackers and crystals but then you just triple a single floor design.
You are having way too much fun with the twisted and looped tracks lol, your 3 layer combiner was friggin excellent though, I had to use a 2x2 floor so your design really impressed :)
"'Too much fun', what's that mean? It's like too much money, there's no such thing! It's like a girl too pretty, with too much class; bein' too lucky; a car too fast. No matter what they say I've done, well I ain't never had too much fun!" 😄
That challange was great. I painted all the pieces at the source and send them to a final stacker that evolved with each layer. I didn't had the 3rd layer available. I'm tempted to redo it xD. But i might build something similar for the permanent parts. I really like the videos so far.
I can't wait to be in the endgame with this. I want to find the absolute maximum rate of input to the vortex, and split it evenly between all the milestone shapes.
Once you unlock "send train into the vortex" upgrade it becomes practically unlimited. When you finish 9 milestones only two things are left for endgame: * Scaling it up more, which feels empty very soon. I've built 8 * 2 * 4=64 lanes of each milestone shape, reached level 200 and borequit. That "top 0.1% worldwide" number is fake btw, there is no live leaderboard. * Building MAM to serve milestone 10, which is "bring me 3000 of this randomly generated shape. Than 3100 of this shape". It does not need scaling beyond 1 space lane. It is a different sort of challenge though, but I need to get my life back, so will try in a month. This game has been like these train loops: very exciting but very short
@@PotravnyyVV To be fair, the developer acknowledged this from the start by saying that the game offers around 25 hours of content, and some players even played around 100 hours. So it's clear that it's much shorter than the classic factory games. You can read this on the Steam store page of the game, in the block "What the developers have to say". They're also asking for community feedback on what to implement next.
He's said a few times on discord that he's avoiding making a Make Anything Machine because once you do, the game is basically over.
4 місяці тому+3
I just completed the game and the only next thing I can do is MAM machine, but thats it. It was fun, but very short fun :/ wish there was more things to play with
Question: When you got to the second shape goal here, why not just add the stacker to stack the circles on the squares at the beginning? Does the painter not paint both levels?
It feels different to have no power or efficiency cost. You can just brute force your way through anything. Throw away 3/4's of a shape? Sure, I'll just make 4 copies for full throughput.
Neat blueprint Fu, but I think for this shape you could've saved a lot of complexity by just stacking the shapes first since every corner has the same colour :D.
I guess this falls in the "generic" vs "specific" camp, but you could also do the swapper trick if you just need to combine two shape parts on the _same_ level. 31:00 I wonder if that was because you _flipped_ the set of platforms when you put it down. Perhaps it flipped everything _on_ the platforms as well?
2 questions for you! 1) Can you spend some time in a future episode explaining your methodology on how you choose which icons to use for your blueprints? I'm having a hard time figuring out how I want to label my blueprints. 2) Isn't the ratio for stackers 6:1? If so, wouldn't that mean your 3-level stacker is missing 50% of the stackers it needs to run at 100% given that the ratio you built it with is only 4:1? Love watching your videos! I get a lot of inspiration from them for my own blueprints and builds.
@notaboutroses1710 Possibly, but as soon as he upgrades the belt speed to the same level as the stacker speed, his stacker will be back to the wrong ratio again. Pretty sure that even with every upgrade at max level, it's still a 6:1 ratio.
Will it eventually be a good idea to make a bus in this game? Seems like it shouldn't be that much of an issue to bus in all the basic shapes and colors and then have a large staging area to create the final shapes.
The thing I find annoying with train loaders is that the shapes have to be orientated exactly, if they have the same shapes but are rotated 90, 180 or 270 degrees it'll not load in correctly and it seems the loading progress reverts even - I see why they have done it, it makes sense when all four (or more) parts are different, but it's not explained in the game which is a bother until you realise it yourself.
I noticed a similar thing. for some of the tasks you can split a shape 4 ways and just deliver all 4 bits, but if you dont orient them the same way, the train loader just deletes them. I assume its intentional to have you modularising and standardising inputs and outputs.
I made the exact same Void design 😂 I call it "the Mulcher" Well I also added some belt readers to see a small amount of data about the thing I'm tossing out
According to some guide on the Steam Workshop: "Note: There is unsolved bug atm - where if space belt curves right after extracting [the shape miner] it slows down by 10-15% Try to exit the extractor [shape miner] with a straight space belt first." - maybe that bug also applies to fluid miners. It was a recent post, just a few days ago ("Extracting. All perfectly configurable. 2 floors required.", "By tommmmmm")
@@Nilaus im glad i read the comments before asking "why are you unloading the trains and not just jumping them into the vortex?" now i know :) ive only seen your videos so was wondering why i thought it was a thing already but i guess it was just a preview. wdyj 😅
A couple minor reasons I can think of to use short trains. 1) Short trains are adorable. 2) Multiple carriages require multiple loaders, which looks less clean. They also split your output between multiple platforms, increasing buffer time before your first train is loaded. 3) Multiple trains will stagger their pick ups & drop offs, so you don't have to worry as much about the loader backing up. Though this would be applicable only to long railways, and would require some micromanagement to send the trains out at staggered intervals. Meanwhile, the minor benefit of one longer train is that it would require a few less platform points. I think, anyways ... I'd have to check the math.
Is there a reason you didn't just add the circle on top of the square before any cutting or painting? Maybe I'm missing something that is in this second version of the game
He does for designs that are purely symmetrical. but for things like the stackers for example, that's not actually symmetrical due to routing differences.
I’m sure I’m not the first one to say but why double the whole setup of splitting and painting and merging and not simply stack your initial circle of a blank square and have that as the initial piece you put into your factory for splitting painting and all the other steps.
I think it would be interesting to see you take one shape (maybe one of the milestone ones) and create a factory for it without your blueprints, trying to make as much as possible on just a little space. Maybe a Painter + Stacker design comes out of that :)
Is it possible to paint all layers of a shape from 1-3 without splitting them up? Also love how Nilaus just has a working factory, wants to do an upgrade and destroys the correct part of the factory :D
▶Subscribe for more Shapez 2 and other factory games
🔴Watch more on Twitch.tv/nilaus
📄Support on Patreon to get access to Blueprints and Save Games: patreon.com/Nilaus
➡Full Shapez 2 Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLV3rF--heRVsALWExxYuukXqv_5MoN_Ag.html
I think the modus operandi of this game revolves between the finer level blueprints and the space blueprints. I think you’re really finding your groove with these episodes, between creating a smaller blueprint and then implementing it on the larger scale. You’ve been one of my favorite creators in the factories genre, Thanks for the shapes content, I am loving it.
21:30 I appreciate you leaving that in because I made the same mistake before. Glad I'm not the only one
It's funny that the complaints on the videos are that you just stamp blueprints down everywhere. That's the best part of this game (and factory games in general), with a solid foundation you can stop worrying about the little things and get working on higher order problems. This build is very impressive with how easy it is to continue stamping pieces down and get a huge 12 lane factory going quickly. Just need to remember which corners to color ;)
An interesting thing about this game is how you can tackle the shape construction in different orders. In my head I want to stack the shapes first, then cut them. But here you cut them first and then stack them. You can actually take a totally different production path than someone else to solve the same problem, which is really interesting and different from most factory games that have a less abstract item you are trying to create, so the steps are linear
I think a lot about the ordering as well, and when looking at the final shape, I think it does make more sense to stack first, then cut it apart, color and reassemble. If you take into account the shapes needed to progress through the task however, you do need to be producing the unstacked shapes first. I think the only real difference it saves is the former version requires one painter per corner and the latter version requires 3 painters per corner (one per base shape).
people seem to not notice that what would take one machine in most factory building games takes several in shapez so you need to stamp down blueprint to actually progress at decent pace
@thibauthanson7670 The game naturally guides the player into using modular blueprints to increase output quickly and efficiently, as once the blueprints are created, the game at the macro scale plays identically as it does at the micro- scale (a brilliant bit of game design I'd add). That being said, there is no one correct way to play and if you'd rather pipe the resources together and build custom factories for each shape rather than stringing together modules, you have the freedom to do that. Don't limit your enjoyment based on what others do.
@@ConflictZv Good advice! Also, no one is stopping a player from NOT using Nilaus' blueprints. You can design your own, and enjoy weaving the complex beltwork on these designs and fiddling around to route belts where space is already occupied (squeezing belt launchers in to make some more space, moving around other belts, switching layers...). That can easily occupy you for days. You can try to use logic gates to solve jams in your belts resulting from different path lengths (via rerouting to trash). There's lot's of things to optimize. And you also don't need to maximize the modularization to the extreme - you can also use more handcrafted platforms if you want.
But for a UA-camr it's of course much easier to show some interesting progress in a video when he's utilizing the modules as much as possible.
@@ConflictZv you can only paint the top layer, so you cant stack, cut and colour all levels. You have to colour before stacking
this is a game made for Nilaus. It truly makes sense to approach this with "city blocks" design. Nothing else scales well haha
The platforms alone scream "make me a modular blueprint! Then snap me together with other modular blueprints!"
Like not using city block design would likely be a much harder approach to the game, as it's practically designed to favor city block design.
I don't often post comments, but I have to today. I'd like to thank you, I can't play any more as I haven't had a PC for a few years. We have the same vision of video games, beauty and functionality, and this can be felt in all your lets plays, especially this one. Keep up the good work.
"So far we are not seeing anything completely incomprehensible" - Nilaus, while looking at a completely incomprehensible build
It's not spaghetti, its lasagna
You haven't seen my 3 layered stacker blueprint! 😀 Nilaus' one is very clean and straightforward in comparison.
What I often do is instead of incrementally building my task shapes and continually adding on new shapes, I pin and build the final shape in the task, with spaces between each step, and then disconnect the steps to simplify into the current step target shape. Then, when I hit each task's quota and move to the next step, I just connect it to the next modifier and it's done. Super clean, allows me to plan in advance, and focus on more important parts of my factory like planning out my next shapes, or untangling the massive amounts of resource lines I accidentally built too close to my vortex and now I have belts and fluid lines criss-crossing AH why was I so stupid how did I think building this close was a good idea I have INFINITE space to use...
I saw an image of using a platform as a way to cross a space belt with a space pipe rather than going beneath and have integrated it in my setups. The same thing obviously also works for belts needing to cross each other. This allows for much more compact setups as you don't need the extra space for the belts/pipes going below and back up.
Great episode! Including the design of the stacking module was a great change. It's fun to watch you work through the routing and layout to make things work.
My own designs weren’t bad, but yours are next level my friend!
I'm cool with just stamping down blueprints. The goal should be efficient use of time. It isn't like you aren't designing blueprints too. Love the single level paint design last video. Very handy.
One design principle I've started adding to my blueprints is making sure all inputs/outputs use all lanes and levels for a space belt (eg, make miners output on all 4 lanes and levels and same for stackers), this means you never really need to worry about what is happening on a particular level of a blueprint and can handle major merging/splitting purely with space belts. For example if I want to mine 2 levels of shapes, instead of having a miner for level 1 and a miner for level 2, I have 1 miner that outputs to both level 1 and level 2 at 50% and then merge those lines with space belts. Doing this removes the need for any level specific considerations in your blueprints since also know all blueprints will provide balanced input/output across all lanes/levels.
It becomes a bit annoying though on a miner, with its 16 outputs, to distribute to 12 belts when you have 3 levels. 1.333 outputs per belt.
@@tacklemcclean You don't have to distribute yourself, when you split lane in 3 it automatically balances out. So you put 4 extractors on one belt, then split that belt across 3 levels
@@PotravnyyVV ah, makes sense
So I’ve been playing this kind of along with you, and one of the kind of eureka ideas I had WRT your blueprint designs is that you only need one blueprint “block” for each machine (of which there are like 12 total including rotations?), and you can modularize everything. Idk if this is a particularly novel thought, but it definitely helped me transition from cooked spaghetti to the kind in the box.
I really love your builds. really beautiful. i wanted to copy them but needed to stop. You and KoS teached me a lot on Factorio . Now , i want to make my own builds. Very slow but its the next level of enjoying this game ^^. Thanks a lot
I think when you flipped the green it changed the orientation of the shapes from your original plan. Our build philosophies are very different. Really enjoying the series. Looking forward to the next one!
Yeah, that's exactly what happened.
The logistics block that splits out the different cut pieces into two sides was originally placed twice in the same orientation. I was wondering how long it would take him to notice from the moment he flipped that entire factory section.
And really, the only part that needed to be flipped was the single incoming space belt at the bottom, which was a waste of blueprint points to copy in the first place.
There comes a time in every young factory builders life where they just say fuck it, and copy nilaus's design. Thank you very much Nilaus the stacker design was brilliant.
Loving this series so much. I think you have the balance just right between doing some designs live with us and then composing things from larger blocks to blast through the tasks.
The fun in this game is finding your own solution. Even if your design sucks, and it may be not efficient, you still accomplish the task anyway. If it works, it works.
Spaghetti base is not a problem
I love the stacker is truly usable for all belt layers. So if you only have the bottom layer - it will work. And with 2 layers it will work. Which makes it easier to do the flattening of belt contents and still just use your stacker.
i love the organization of your factories and how simple problems are solved with the use of the blueprint system
Using 20 blueprints to make one single shape and paint, YES. I am now trying to merge all my blueprints into 12x12 output, kinda challenging, love it. Make as many blueprints as you can, if looks simetrical, its the right way xD
Nilaus, this has been a great journey learning and playing this game. Your videos have been very informational and has impacted how I play the game. Keep doing your thing 👍👍
Nice setup! I really enjoy the game and learn from your nice designs.
Btw: you can pin the tasks that aren't active yet to see what you have to build while the delivery is still ongoing.
Loved the multi level combiner, totally didn't think of raising those droppers up a level even though the splitets and rotators operate on all 3 levels
I will follow this series forever ❤❤let's Keep having fun 😊
cripes i feel like a complete maroon when i watch you solve these problems so easily.
A lot of the mid game is the same as the start but instead of placing down individual building your placing modules that do the same but with multiple lanes of shapes. You still need to decide which shapes your starting with and the process your using to get the end product. So yes you are using a lot of blueprints but it’s not the same as other factory games because the product you need is always changing.
So if you want effective 3 floor designs you need to use the swapper over the stacker in order to merge the flat objects.
That way you can put an entire belt on one floor and just layer it on each floor.
Later on you have to use stackers and crystals but then you just triple a single floor design.
11:23 "That was important". hahahha my man here couldn't bear green paint on a red train
Nice 21:55 cut edit 😂
You are having way too much fun with the twisted and looped tracks lol, your 3 layer combiner was friggin excellent though, I had to use a 2x2 floor so your design really impressed :)
"'Too much fun', what's that mean?
It's like too much money, there's no such thing!
It's like a girl too pretty, with too much class;
bein' too lucky; a car too fast.
No matter what they say I've done,
well I ain't never had too much fun!" 😄
Whoever says this all just blueprints is obviously new to the game here😂
That challange was great. I painted all the pieces at the source and send them to a final stacker that evolved with each layer. I didn't had the 3rd layer available. I'm tempted to redo it xD. But i might build something similar for the permanent parts.
I really like the videos so far.
I can't wait to be in the endgame with this. I want to find the absolute maximum rate of input to the vortex, and split it evenly between all the milestone shapes.
Once you unlock "send train into the vortex" upgrade it becomes practically unlimited.
When you finish 9 milestones only two things are left for endgame:
* Scaling it up more, which feels empty very soon. I've built 8 * 2 * 4=64 lanes of each milestone shape, reached level 200 and borequit. That "top 0.1% worldwide" number is fake btw, there is no live leaderboard.
* Building MAM to serve milestone 10, which is "bring me 3000 of this randomly generated shape. Than 3100 of this shape". It does not need scaling beyond 1 space lane. It is a different sort of challenge though, but I need to get my life back, so will try in a month.
This game has been like these train loops: very exciting but very short
@@PotravnyyVV To be fair, the developer acknowledged this from the start by saying that the game offers around 25 hours of content, and some players even played around 100 hours. So it's clear that it's much shorter than the classic factory games. You can read this on the Steam store page of the game, in the block "What the developers have to say". They're also asking for community feedback on what to implement next.
1:17 Famous last words, considering there are randomized operator goals and logic to automate them. XD
He's said a few times on discord that he's avoiding making a Make Anything Machine because once you do, the game is basically over.
I just completed the game and the only next thing I can do is MAM machine, but thats it. It was fun, but very short fun :/ wish there was more things to play with
It's early access. Hopefully more will come
Question: When you got to the second shape goal here, why not just add the stacker to stack the circles on the squares at the beginning? Does the painter not paint both levels?
Only top level
It feels different to have no power or efficiency cost. You can just brute force your way through anything. Throw away 3/4's of a shape? Sure, I'll just make 4 copies for full throughput.
Neat blueprint Fu, but I think for this shape you could've saved a lot of complexity by just stacking the shapes first since every corner has the same colour :D.
And then what? Painting only paints the top layer
@@Nilaus Oh, that I didn't know! Sorry!
I guess this falls in the "generic" vs "specific" camp, but you could also do the swapper trick if you just need to combine two shape parts on the _same_ level.
31:00 I wonder if that was because you _flipped_ the set of platforms when you put it down. Perhaps it flipped everything _on_ the platforms as well?
At the end of this playthrough are you going to build a make-anything-machine? Or maybe do the hexagon campaign?
OOOOH I am so excited for payday so i can finally play this game! GREAT VIDEO NILAUS!
History repeats itself at 30:25 and 37:51
2 questions for you!
1) Can you spend some time in a future episode explaining your methodology on how you choose which icons to use for your blueprints? I'm having a hard time figuring out how I want to label my blueprints.
2) Isn't the ratio for stackers 6:1? If so, wouldn't that mean your 3-level stacker is missing 50% of the stackers it needs to run at 100% given that the ratio you built it with is only 4:1?
Love watching your videos! I get a lot of inspiration from them for my own blueprints and builds.
Pretty sure the 4:1 is because he upgraded the speeds, but don't quote me on that.
@notaboutroses1710 Possibly, but as soon as he upgrades the belt speed to the same level as the stacker speed, his stacker will be back to the wrong ratio again.
Pretty sure that even with every upgrade at max level, it's still a 6:1 ratio.
@@Chris_The_Sam_Man He uses bent stackers, which have a 4:1 ratio
Straight stackers 6:1, but he's using bent stackers, which are 4:1.
@@browncoat697 I knew I was forgetting something lol. Almost forgot those gems exist.
Without fear of reprisal? Oh no, the shapez mafia has gotten to him...
I'm confused, how do you ride the trains? It's great fun watching them go, but can you imagine riding one?!? Great series, thanks!
Very good! Thank you.
I assume by signal you meant a sign? You can actually put signs floating in the air. You had room to do so on your stacker block.
Rlly beautyful Stacker and nice Video👏
Today is gonna be epic!
while i havent seen any nice looking designs, its actually possible to make a 1x1 24 belts in 12 belts out stacker
where did you find those designs? can you give me some directions?
Will it eventually be a good idea to make a bus in this game? Seems like it shouldn't be that much of an issue to bus in all the basic shapes and colors and then have a large staging area to create the final shapes.
I have been busy working on my MAM.
I still have to fix some issues, iron out some quirks and make it faster.
But it works for now.
*it ist built for 12 lanes.
doesn't a MAM kinda ruin the fun once you've completed it?
The thing I find annoying with train loaders is that the shapes have to be orientated exactly, if they have the same shapes but are rotated 90, 180 or 270 degrees it'll not load in correctly and it seems the loading progress reverts even - I see why they have done it, it makes sense when all four (or more) parts are different, but it's not explained in the game which is a bother until you realise it yourself.
I noticed a similar thing. for some of the tasks you can split a shape 4 ways and just deliver all 4 bits, but if you dont orient them the same way, the train loader just deletes them. I assume its intentional to have you modularising and standardising inputs and outputs.
@@SuperOrcy Yeah that's probably why. Or it could be that they didn't want to spend time coding it - and, of course, it's still in EA.
I made the exact same Void design 😂 I call it "the Mulcher"
Well I also added some belt readers to see a small amount of data about the thing I'm tossing out
Are you eventually going to make a "Create Everything" machine?
I made a blueprint of platforms shaped like an arrow to help me find my future work areas 😂 2:39
23:40 Wouldn't have been easier to combine a regular circle and square before the splitting/painting/merging? just change the input.
You only paint the top laver, so if you combine first, then you cannot color the lover layers
@@Nilaus ah, i didn't know that.
Well, you can combine then paint than cut again... But paint is free so it doesn't make any sense
18:12 my brain after finishing that is:😵💫
18:20 its not done😵
NIlaus, can you recap on the painter module? it doesn't work 100% its leaves me gaps on the belts... i don't understand why
Not enough paint coming in
According to some guide on the Steam Workshop: "Note: There is unsolved bug atm - where if space belt curves right after extracting [the shape miner] it slows down by 10-15%
Try to exit the extractor [shape miner] with a straight space belt first." - maybe that bug also applies to fluid miners. It was a recent post, just a few days ago ("Extracting. All perfectly configurable. 2 floors required.", "By tommmmmm")
would it not be better to have a train with 3 wagons instead of 3 trains with single wagons?
Am I wrong or could you not just stack the shapes at the beginning, and the cut and paint each quarter at the same time?
You should research trains jumping into the vortex!
60 Research Points. I just don't have that yet
@@Nilaus im glad i read the comments before asking "why are you unloading the trains and not just jumping them into the vortex?" now i know :) ive only seen your videos so was wondering why i thought it was a thing already but i guess it was just a preview. wdyj 😅
I have to ask, why multiple one car trains instead of one longer train? Does it end up being faster? More compact? I don't get it...
A couple minor reasons I can think of to use short trains. 1) Short trains are adorable. 2) Multiple carriages require multiple loaders, which looks less clean. They also split your output between multiple platforms, increasing buffer time before your first train is loaded. 3) Multiple trains will stagger their pick ups & drop offs, so you don't have to worry as much about the loader backing up. Though this would be applicable only to long railways, and would require some micromanagement to send the trains out at staggered intervals.
Meanwhile, the minor benefit of one longer train is that it would require a few less platform points. I think, anyways ... I'd have to check the math.
Is there a reason you didn't just add the circle on top of the square before any cutting or painting? Maybe I'm missing something that is in this second version of the game
I think the painter only does the top level
food for thought - when you design symmetrical (as you tend to do so far) why not only design half and copy the rest in?
He does for designs that are purely symmetrical. but for things like the stackers for example, that's not actually symmetrical due to routing differences.
You could just add more carriages to the train.
you had the green side rigth first time around. then you flipped your blueprints when you copied the red and blue side
I’m sure I’m not the first one to say but why double the whole setup of splitting and painting and merging and not simply stack your initial circle of a blank square and have that as the initial piece you put into your factory for splitting painting and all the other steps.
yeah, that hurt my soul too.
because a painter only paints the topmost layer of a stacked shape, not all layers.
wouldn't it have been simpler to stack before you color, seeing as each layer has the same color?
A painter only paints the topmost layer of a stacked shape.
@@danielh.9010 oh good to know thanks
I wish I can play this game
Can u show how u build the "Diagonal Splitter System" ? Or is there a Scene in another Video already?
I think it would be interesting to see you take one shape (maybe one of the milestone ones) and create a factory for it without your blueprints, trying to make as much as possible on just a little space. Maybe a Painter + Stacker design comes out of that :)
So redo his blueprint making process?
@@kylejohnson8447 No. Make more specific blueprints for combined tasks
@@theokurpierz and then once he does that he should try it again without those blueprints!
I would imagine to create a one belt block and than copy it until enough
Is it possible to paint all layers of a shape from 1-3 without splitting them up?
Also love how Nilaus just has a working factory, wants to do an upgrade and destroys the correct part of the factory :D
Shapes2 doesnt look as complex
“Today we are going to do 3 level”
Ohh
❤
1 like = 1 train diving into the vortex