Slight Correction: Locomotives have a weight value of 2000 and not 3000 which means the drag modifier for 1 wagon trains is: Normal Trains: 0.9975 Reverse Trains: 0.9966r
@@thecarwasherofshangri-la Two locomotives in the back would allow for even more wagons I think since both locomotives can be in the curved part and you do not need a curve in the other ends since it can be a terminal :)
Thanks man, fun video Artillery trains have an air resistance of 0.015, compared to wagon's 0.01 and loco's 0.0075 So if loco-first have 100% drag, wagon-first have 133% drag and arty-first have 200% drag. Probably why artillery was so shitty. As for energy efficiency, I'm wondering if we aren't in a flamethrower scenario. The one where even the worst, almost-empty oil patch can power your entire train fleet no problem.
I think the energy efficiency concern is less about the materials, and more about lag/logistical overhead. Unless you're using wood/coal, you probably can make way more than you need and making less is better because you can do other things with your CPU, rather than because it's easier.
@@haph2087 Except trains are so ridiculously fuel efficient that it doesn't really matter. I have literal thousands of rocket fuel floating around on Fulgora, and solid fuel piles up so high I'm literally recycling it.
The only application where "locomotives not in front" is a no-brainer is trains with more than 1 locomotive. Putting the extra locomotives in the back has literally no downsides. You still get the drag bonus from the locomotive in the front, the station is next to that locomotive and doesn't block inserter positions, and your station platforms fit in the same footprint as if you used 1 locomotive. Well, actually, there is 1 downside; You don't get the increased breaking force.
@@Michaelonyoutub True, fuel logistics is ever so slightly more involved and can in rare instances be an actual problem. But I'd guess that most players switch to drones for fuel at some point. And in most cases where you are using belts, you usually run them to the next set of train stations too, so you're passing the back ends of the trains anyways. The only exception that I've seen is a city block scheme where the fuel comes in on its own train. So if you really don't have the space for one extra fuel belt, then your station layout has to be weirdly hyper-optimized.
@@roderik1990 True, better acceleration from _less_ drag and better braking from _more_ drag are very very very close, to the point where I would say you can assume they cancel exactly. I simply did not want to leave the _advantage_ of wagon drag unmentioned after I mentioned it as a _disadvantage._
The algorithm recommended this video to me and I love it. You’re thorough, have a great voice and are exploring something fun while not making the video longer than necessary. Subscribed.
Great testing! I am a fan of a 1-8-(-1) train where the tail pushes. This gives a slightly shorter requirement on the straight as you mentioned and has the subjective bonus of having smoke from both ends of a moving train.
Since you can get legendary rocket fuel really easy by just duping it on aquilo, I would like to see a test using legendary rocket/nuclear fuel, they give a really great acceleration boost, maybe the "realistic" scenario has the reverse pull out ahead stronger, since they are more equalized with the normal in acceleration, so the faster stopping matters more
I love how this gaming community has a game with just about limitless land to build but they will obsess about getting just a few pixels of space out of a design
i tried and failed to make reverse trains work in a death world i was doing about a year ago. This is going to make me consider using them for a space age run with friends, that plus the goofiness factor with running them makes me like them a lot. Very good and informative video!
One potential advantage to wagon-first trains is simplicity in expanding logistics. I'm currently working on a set of blueprints that features factories that are served from a single wagon section of a train, tileable so you can place as many factories as you have wagons. You can have multiple trains in parallel if multiple resource types are required, and you can have a factory for each wagon on the train, each serviced by its own wagon of materials. The advantage of this particular layout is that if you need to increase production, just slap down more factories along the ones you already made, lengthen your trains, and maybe modify your mining bases to accommodate for the length of your new trains. But, as you've pointed out in your video, the train station does remove a lot of potential unloading zones on one side, and when I experimented with this train layout when prototyping my blueprints, I found this caused a lot of issues with my factory layouts, too.
There's multiple options, I default to the mod "Blueprint Sandboxes" though it's only one option of many. It's not the one this video uses I'm sure, but it still serves the same purpose.
In the "Surfaces" tab of the editor, there should be a few buttons to fill the map with lab tiles and clear any entities/decoratives. Should yield a map similar to this.
In my vanila playtrough, I had a 64 wagon train for coal. It was 32 wagons in front, then 8 locomotives and then 32 wagons behind. The loading station was U shaped and those locomotives fit in the bend.
I'm too much in love with trains to disgrace them this way. I would never, no matter how much data you present on their efficiency, it will never happen.
Very cool video. Thanks for the science! Does atmospheric drag change based on the planet? I could definitely see this setup being used on Fulgora where fuel efficiency is unimportant and compact load/unloading stations are a must.
It would be interesting to see how the performance difference is affected by congested networks and as the typical block size tends towards the length of trains. My gut is that, as ability to stop becomes the limiting factor for train speed and keeping blocks unreserved, this will further favour the wagon-first design
So, legendary nuclear fuel (and possibly legendary rocket fuel as well) might actually be *faster* with reverse trains, since they can (probably) accelerate faster than decelerate. So, additional air resistance will decrease the time it takes to break more than it will increase the time to accelerate.
I did this to make a tiling design with 1-4 stations slightly narrower, giving better roboport and pylon efficiency. Didn't think about the air resistance but I don't think fuel efficiency really changes my mind
To follow up pm your closing thoughts, of compact builds is the goal a more practical answer to recommend would be bidirectional trains, as their stops are entirely vertical rather than horizontal and can fit in series as little as 4 tiles apart
Does the drag modifier apply to backwards locomotives? Because that would open up _the_ most cursed trains: double headers, but with the locomotives pointing inwards towards the wagons.
So, reverse trains are slightly worse in through-put and fuel efficiency. But they are slightly better in terms of space and station shape flexability.
imo the freight cars look more aerodynamic than the locomotives lol Also, iirc streamlining isn’t really effective until speeds somewhere past 100 mph (for example, look at the UP FEF-3s that were designed to operate up to 120 mph, though it isn’t known if they ever did get up to that speed), though idk how fast Factorio trains are.
Nice!! I use 2-8 trains ans it bothers me to make 2-8 trains because ot not in the middle of a block, so i wonder is it better to make 1-8-1 trains? Visually all wagons would be exactly in the middle of a block to make nice simmetrical load/unload stations. And then i get to this video! What do you think about 1-8-1 trains?
FFFFFFF- if only i had thought of this when i was making a similar train network that doshdoshington used in his k2 playthrough but couldnt make it tileable with 1:2 trains and scrapped the whole idea and went with a very nice looking bus 😭
not only the locomotive is on the back "pushing" the wagons, but he even have 3 wagon trains, good luck balancing the output, what do you use? a 4 to 4 balancer and just feed it with 3 belts? or no balancing at all? that could be even more cursed
My strange city block design has an evil flaw where I need to deviate from the pattern to build fluid wagon unloading. Essentially no reasonable station could draw from all 4 fluid cargo wagons, it was always exactly 1 tile off. Having learned about reverse trains, I can now fix this irregularity. But do I really want to?
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Slight Correction: Locomotives have a weight value of 2000 and not 3000 which means the drag modifier for 1 wagon trains is:
Normal Trains: 0.9975
Reverse Trains: 0.9966r
I mean... effectivly the same as in the video.
Thanks for correcting the locomotive weight though ^-^
wtf do you mean this game has atmospheric drag
It should be different surface to surface.
even space ships have drag
@@kuber2317 robot movement speed affected by this too?
@@Michaelonyoutubnot in space
@@mattb6001 Only the pink ones.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I NEEDED ON FULGORA THANK YOU!!!
Oh damn, I thought this is neat but ultimately not useful, but it makes a lot of sense to use it on fulgora!
Why?
@@wherdgosmall little islands, too small for multiple segments of a train to be in a straight stretch.
I think double headed trains are more practical
@@thecarwasherofshangri-la Two locomotives in the back would allow for even more wagons I think since both locomotives can be in the curved part and you do not need a curve in the other ends since it can be a terminal :)
I am going to make it my mission to use all these cursed designs in my base, simultaneously
Backwards and forward trains on the same track, with separate stations for each?
@@tortenschachtel9498 how about omni-dorectional trains with two locomotives back to back with cargo wagons on each end?
I am going to do that next time I play multiplayer
@@ClowdyHowdyA train reverse-sandwich. Absolutely terrible and lovely
Just by thinking it, I feel messy already
Double headed trains, but with the locomotives facing the cargo wagons in the middle.
I've actually run a base using 12-6-6-12 trains before. Wrapped the locomotives around the u-turn in the station and loaded on 2 tracks
@@AaroLyali that's hilarious
You mean double butted trains.
this is cursed. please continue.
0:51 'traditional 3 wagon trains' ...heresy!!
Had to pause there too lmao
He probably just meant 1-2 trains.
@@Etrexum No, there are clearly 3 wagon unloading bays so it's a 1-3 (and 3-1) train that is talked about.
@@Soken50 Oh. Well, I didn't want to fact-check myself in case I got cursed with the truth.
@@Etrexum Then carry on your blissful existence...
Thanks man, fun video
Artillery trains have an air resistance of 0.015, compared to wagon's 0.01 and loco's 0.0075
So if loco-first have 100% drag, wagon-first have 133% drag and arty-first have 200% drag. Probably why artillery was so shitty.
As for energy efficiency, I'm wondering if we aren't in a flamethrower scenario. The one where even the worst, almost-empty oil patch can power your entire train fleet no problem.
I think the energy efficiency concern is less about the materials, and more about lag/logistical overhead. Unless you're using wood/coal, you probably can make way more than you need and making less is better because you can do other things with your CPU, rather than because it's easier.
You need to go quite bog to worry about lag.
But thats also where youd start doing niche weird things like reverse trains xD
@@haph2087 Except trains are so ridiculously fuel efficient that it doesn't really matter. I have literal thousands of rocket fuel floating around on Fulgora, and solid fuel piles up so high I'm literally recycling it.
@@SimonWoodburyForget False.
It doesn't matter none.
It does matter little.
Welcome to the world of micro-optimizations!
This is amazing on Fulgora, where space is limited and fuel is plentiful.
The only application where "locomotives not in front" is a no-brainer is trains with more than 1 locomotive. Putting the extra locomotives in the back has literally no downsides. You still get the drag bonus from the locomotive in the front, the station is next to that locomotive and doesn't block inserter positions, and your station platforms fit in the same footprint as if you used 1 locomotive.
Well, actually, there is 1 downside; You don't get the increased breaking force.
Though I don't think that boost in braking performance outweighs the loss in acceleration and fuel efficiency in most situations.
You also have to run fuel lines to the front and back with multi locomotive trains with engines at the front and back
@@Michaelonyoutub True, fuel logistics is ever so slightly more involved and can in rare instances be an actual problem.
But I'd guess that most players switch to drones for fuel at some point. And in most cases where you are using belts, you usually run them to the next set of train stations too, so you're passing the back ends of the trains anyways. The only exception that I've seen is a city block scheme where the fuel comes in on its own train.
So if you really don't have the space for one extra fuel belt, then your station layout has to be weirdly hyper-optimized.
@@roderik1990 True, better acceleration from _less_ drag and better braking from _more_ drag are very very very close, to the point where I would say you can assume they cancel exactly.
I simply did not want to leave the _advantage_ of wagon drag unmentioned after I mentioned it as a _disadvantage._
I love that i find this AFTER spending hours on a railway book...
Leaving best for last (rewriting the whole book :D)
Make a separate book
The algorithm recommended this video to me and I love it. You’re thorough, have a great voice and are exploring something fun while not making the video longer than necessary.
Subscribed.
Great testing! I am a fan of a 1-8-(-1) train where the tail pushes. This gives a slightly shorter requirement on the straight as you mentioned and has the subjective bonus of having smoke from both ends of a moving train.
1-X-1 trains are nice aesthetically since their are symmetric
Angry upvote for the quantum finish joke
Fun fact: All "normal" rail systems are backward compatible.
And don't forget to click "publish"
Totally did not misread that as 'Punish' xD
STOP
PLEASE MAKE HIM STOOOOP
Normalcy be damned, I am absolutely using this cursed setup in my build.
Since you can get legendary rocket fuel really easy by just duping it on aquilo, I would like to see a test using legendary rocket/nuclear fuel, they give a really great acceleration boost, maybe the "realistic" scenario has the reverse pull out ahead stronger, since they are more equalized with the normal in acceleration, so the faster stopping matters more
You can also produce infinite free rocket fuel on Fulgora, as long as you drop the ice down from a Space Platform..
Now I want to try this 👀
I mean, you can also produce infinite rocket fuel on gleba. The deciding factor between the different methods is the easy of grinding quality.
They changed the rocket fuel recipe on aquilo a couple days ago, you can't dupe it anymore.
Keep up the amazing videos really high quality man!
I love the unique concepts on your channel! You are inspiring me to try out more non-standard builds
You changed the outcome by measuring it!
this game is amazing. its so unique you can optimise in ways you didnt know you could.... thanks mate!!! pretty sweet!
I love these types of deep analysis of game mechanics and clever tricks.
this is absolutely horrible
well done
Definitely fun and cool discovery.
But if you have to worry about space, your factory isnt big enough.
I love how this gaming community has a game with just about limitless land to build but they will obsess about getting just a few pixels of space out of a design
Like most unusual things, they have their niche applications.
The cool thing is that we can see differences.
i tried and failed to make reverse trains work in a death world i was doing about a year ago. This is going to make me consider using them for a space age run with friends, that plus the goofiness factor with running them makes me like them a lot. Very good and informative video!
The saved space alone is enough for me to use them, by the way.
Wait, this is such a simple idea, I am fascinated I never ever thought of this.
One potential advantage to wagon-first trains is simplicity in expanding logistics.
I'm currently working on a set of blueprints that features factories that are served from a single wagon section of a train, tileable so you can place as many factories as you have wagons. You can have multiple trains in parallel if multiple resource types are required, and you can have a factory for each wagon on the train, each serviced by its own wagon of materials.
The advantage of this particular layout is that if you need to increase production, just slap down more factories along the ones you already made, lengthen your trains, and maybe modify your mining bases to accommodate for the length of your new trains.
But, as you've pointed out in your video, the train station does remove a lot of potential unloading zones on one side, and when I experimented with this train layout when prototyping my blueprints, I found this caused a lot of issues with my factory layouts, too.
Gonna start making 1-1-1 reverse trains because thats just even more cursed
Such an underrated factorio youtuber!!!
@9:00 w8 what do you mean most people don't rocket fuel their trains
Damn, I was just figuring some out train stops and thinking “why tf can’t I place stations on curves”. This is awesome!
used this strategy once or twice before 2.0 and it is SO useful in a Fulgora base that has to deal with things
This is very cursed and very interesting! I hate it. Looking forward to the next video!
"Traditional 3 wagon trains" may be the most cursed things about this video.
How do people set up this map editor without going to a real map? Embarrassed to say I’ve been struggling to figure this out
There's multiple options, I default to the mod "Blueprint Sandboxes" though it's only one option of many. It's not the one this video uses I'm sure, but it still serves the same purpose.
In the "Surfaces" tab of the editor, there should be a few buttons to fill the map with lab tiles and clear any entities/decoratives. Should yield a map similar to this.
In my vanila playtrough, I had a 64 wagon train for coal. It was 32 wagons in front, then 8 locomotives and then 32 wagons behind. The loading station was U shaped and those locomotives fit in the bend.
Big day for 1-1 train fans 🗣️
Nice educational video, thanks 👍
I'm too much in love with trains to disgrace them this way. I would never, no matter how much data you present on their efficiency, it will never happen.
This is HUGE! THANKS!
7:40 did you account for 32bit floating point inprecision?
jk great video + i might try this train type in a future base
also if factorio is gonna be regular content im defo subscribing :D
Very cool video. Thanks for the science! Does atmospheric drag change based on the planet?
I could definitely see this setup being used on Fulgora where fuel efficiency is unimportant and compact load/unloading stations are a must.
thanks I wil be sure to cite this in my manifesto
It would be interesting to see how the performance difference is affected by congested networks and as the typical block size tends towards the length of trains. My gut is that, as ability to stop becomes the limiting factor for train speed and keeping blocks unreserved, this will further favour the wagon-first design
You've convinced me. Maybe ill use on my next play through. Or my next planet. It looks funny and thats sorta a plus. Maybe
So, legendary nuclear fuel (and possibly legendary rocket fuel as well) might actually be *faster* with reverse trains, since they can (probably) accelerate faster than decelerate. So, additional air resistance will decrease the time it takes to break more than it will increase the time to accelerate.
I can feel Dosh either getting absolutely excited or completely terrified already
So put the first locomotive first and all the rest in the back. Gotcha
You use more than one locomotives? How long are you trains?
I did this to make a tiling design with 1-4 stations slightly narrower, giving better roboport and pylon efficiency. Didn't think about the air resistance but I don't think fuel efficiency really changes my mind
Nice! What about double-headed trains though? 😅
place them both in the back in opposing directions
To follow up pm your closing thoughts, of compact builds is the goal a more practical answer to recommend would be bidirectional trains, as their stops are entirely vertical rather than horizontal and can fit in series as little as 4 tiles apart
Does the drag modifier apply to backwards locomotives? Because that would open up _the_ most cursed trains:
double headers, but with the locomotives pointing inwards towards the wagons.
@@Pystro Your genius is almost scary :0
@@Takyodor2 "Brilliant, but scary"
Ah, the shopping cart design. so this is why it's called a "Mall"
Oh God. What have you unleashed...
your videos are really good.
This is really really cool!!!!
So, reverse trains are slightly worse in through-put and fuel efficiency.
But they are slightly better in terms of space and station shape flexability.
Think of them as minecarts that are pushed around and they are beautiful again.
Have you informed Dosh doshington? would he enjoy it?
So, 1 locomotive in front, all others in the back (for long single drive direction trains)?
imo the freight cars look more aerodynamic than the locomotives lol
Also, iirc streamlining isn’t really effective until speeds somewhere past 100 mph (for example, look at the UP FEF-3s that were designed to operate up to 120 mph, though it isn’t known if they ever did get up to that speed), though idk how fast Factorio trains are.
I wish I had never seen this.
speaking of cursed... do locomotives still have the lowest drag coefficient when they're facing backwards?
Nuking the one pipe system was uncalled for 🤣
I will now use 1-2-1 trains with the middle cars being locomotives
後ろに設置しての停車駅省スペース化は目からウロコやった😂
空気抵抗や燃費を考慮しても十分これにする価値あり！
ただ醜いのには同意する...😅
I'd call these Shopping Cart Trains
I do use 3-8 trains together with double headed
[ ][ ][ ]
I started using these when I had to fit stations into a single chunk for ribbon maze addon.
Where was this video when i was forced to making stations 2 (nearly 3) wagon width because otherwise i couldn't fully fit a wagon?
How do You make lap and lap time counters ?
The worse part is that those designs are realy usefull.
Does anyone have a blueprint to the train station at the beginning of the video?
Nice!!
I use 2-8 trains ans it bothers me to make 2-8 trains because ot not in the middle of a block, so i wonder is it better to make 1-8-1 trains? Visually all wagons would be exactly in the middle of a block to make nice simmetrical load/unload stations. And then i get to this video!
What do you think about 1-8-1 trains?
If I ever get on multiplayer I’m going to use reverse trains to mess with everyone
I guess I should switch from using 2-4 trains to 1-4-1 trains because only the front car matters.
I didnt even know that the wagon can be in front of the train :D
minecraft truly was ahead of its time
Dammit. Now I have to remake my rail book.
I used that design only to make my friend that like thing to look nice rage
Reverse Trains:are peak
Heh. I've used pusher trains a couple times, but I could never bring myself to making that my default design 😂
Pro tip: to show prototype info use (Ctrl+Shift+F)
okay but what if you did wagon-locomotive-wagon-wagon
is that just silly? or could it change something slightly
I didnt know the devs considered something as tiny as drag on waggons o.o
Train station in the way of first wagon loading, so it's not really optimal.
FFFFFFF- if only i had thought of this when i was making a similar train network that doshdoshington used in his k2 playthrough but couldnt make it tileable with 1:2 trains and scrapped the whole idea and went with a very nice looking bus 😭
not only the locomotive is on the back "pushing" the wagons, but he even have 3 wagon trains, good luck balancing the output, what do you use? a 4 to 4 balancer and just feed it with 3 belts? or no balancing at all? that could be even more cursed
My strange city block design has an evil flaw where I need to deviate from the pattern to build fluid wagon unloading. Essentially no reasonable station could draw from all 4 fluid cargo wagons, it was always exactly 1 tile off. Having learned about reverse trains, I can now fix this irregularity.
But do I really want to?
I had the exact same problem, and came to the same solution. As far as I can tell, it's worth it, but it does bring me pain on some level.
Interesting 🤔
Thank you for your facts, but I choose sanity over this
I share this sentiment
What the hell?? Its so simple, why didn't i think of this??
Remember, 666 is just 2/3 of 1000
what was fluid wagon data
was great thank you
Now do doubleheaded reverse trains.
How bout a train with a locomotive sandwiched between cargo wagons?
Why does this guy sound exactly like Superfast Matt? Lol