| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
   |
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:24:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Celeste Coeval on 17/04/2010 01:33:15
Factories run for 1 cycle in this chain:
Extractor > Command Centre > Factory > Command Centre.
Raw materials are being delivered to the factory yet it produces 20 units of the processed material for 1 cycle then the factory enters a dormant state, with a flashing white circle around it. Further investigation shows the factory is "waiting for resources". After around an hours observation, the factory has several multiples of the required materials to continue the process, yet it doesn't.
I have tried routing things this way:
Extractor > Command Centre > Factory > Storage Facility. Same issue.
So then I tried:
Extractor > Storage Facility (transfer set to 6000) > Factory > Command Centre.
The factory receives whatever resources are delivered to the storage facility within the same cycle under 6000 units. The factory sits in "waiting for resources mode" while it stockpiles multiples of the raw material.
Whichever way I try this it doesn't work. I can say I had no issues yesterday before this patch doing it this way:
Extractor >(raw material) Command Centre >(raw material) Factory >(processed material) Command centre.
A little help anyone?
 Originally by: Lance Fighter
This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route.
|
Th0rG0d
Pilots From Honour
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:07:00 -
[2]
I couldn't stay interested for more than 1 cycle. I saw that eventually the processor made the finished product, and the new mats were piling up again in the processor's storage, and got bored and logged.
This is the chain I used though: extractor-->silo-->processor-->pcc
I had it go processor-->silo but then realized that it wouldn't allow me to route finished product from silo to pcc, so changed the layout. Sure, I could deliver it immediately, but that would require me to baby sit it.
Side note here, I hope we will be able to lay down more than 1 pcc per planet, because not having enough cpu to support more than 1 processor and the necessary extractors required to support that 1 processor is irritating, to say it kindly. I was more impressed in the earlier builds than this latest one. If this is close to the finished product, I am not looking forward to this at all. 
Adrift in New Eden |
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:16:00 -
[3]
Originally by: T***G0d
Side note here, I hope we will be able to lay down more than 1 pcc per planet, because not having enough cpu to support more than 1 processor and the necessary extractors required to support that 1 processor is irritating, to say it kindly. I was more impressed in the earlier builds than this latest one. If this is close to the finished product, I am not looking forward to this at all.
There will be tiered command centres.
Originally by: Lance Fighter
This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route. |
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 03:45:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Celeste Coeval
... Factory Cycling Times ...
Processor cycle time xx:mm depends on the schematic submit for the processor and seems to be checked every 30minutes after that (at least for lvl1 schematics). 
|
Gecko O'Bac
Achmed-Terrorist
IUS PRIMAE N0CTIS
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 08:20:00 -
[5]
Uhm I was asking myself... Is there any point in the storage facility beside perhaps (and even then only perhaps) finished product?
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 08:29:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Gecko O'Bac
Uhm I was asking myself... Is there any point in the storage facility beside perhaps (and even then only perhaps) finished product?
YES!!!
Having a buffer is essential even in trivial setups in order to make changes easier to handle changes and avoid wasting excess materials.
|
Gecko O'Bac
Achmed-Terrorist
IUS PRIMAE N0CTIS
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 08:54:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: Gecko O'Bac
Uhm I was asking myself... Is there any point in the storage facility beside perhaps (and even then only perhaps) finished product?
YES!!!
Having a buffer is essential even in trivial setups in order to make changes easier to handle changes and avoid wasting excess materials.
And how would you waste excess materials? From what I could see there's none... Unless you have to physically dismantle one PIN to replace it, but due to the contraints on link CPU/grid you're basically better off keeping your extractors where they are and just put up with a lower extraction rate or whatever.
|
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 09:37:00 -
[8]
A lower extraction rate has a bonus though: less management required. The lower extraction rates have higher total deposits than the high extraction rate ones. This allows you to kick back and relax for longer:)
Originally by: Lance Fighter
This is either a troll or a noob... Ill take the noob route. |
Keledia
The Photon Raiders
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 09:59:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Gecko O'Bac
Uhm I was asking myself... Is there any point in the storage facility beside perhaps (and even then only perhaps) finished product?
Gecko, i was thinking the same thing as it seems that both processors and PCC's have enough storage to handle the rate of materials coming in for a pretty much maxed PCC (i.e. all then the cpu/power was being used).
The problem is, is that we (well i) don't know if over flow stops production in a processor. Now that's kind of a problem considering we can't see the stoage capacity of a processor, but we know that it does as processors often build up materials far beyond what is required to produce its selected item.
I suppose if overflow DOES stop production, then i'm wondering if any intermediate storage structures will stop sending materials to the processor(s) to prevent overflow. I asked these in another that a CCP personnel wrote in, but those questions weren't answered unfortunately.
|
Qivalar
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 17:21:00 -
[10]
The point is, I always put a storage between extractors and processor. Why? Because it seems processors have a maximum storage avaliable (12k raw mats from my experience so far, no idea for advanced ones), because extractors have none, if the processor is full then the mats being extracted will go wasted. Unless you actually manage to get the extractor mine less than the processor will use, effectively slowing it down as it wait for the mats to reach 6k again. Putting a storage device, instead, will keep all the surplus there, as 6k will be routed to the processor only when it needs it. In addition, once the extractors run dry, the extra mats stored will keep feedin the processor.
And then, of course, there's the matter of overflow. Does it stop the cycle? In v2 it did
|
Gecko O'Bac
Achmed-Terrorist
IUS PRIMAE N0CTIS
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 18:14:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Qivalar
The point is, I always put a storage between extractors and processor. Why? Because it seems processors have a maximum storage avaliable (12k raw mats from my experience so far, no idea for advanced ones), because extractors have none, if the processor is full then the mats being extracted will go wasted. Unless you actually manage to get the extractor mine less than the processor will use, effectively slowing it down as it wait for the mats to reach 6k again. Putting a storage device, instead, will keep all the surplus there, as 6k will be routed to the processor only when it needs it. In addition, once the extractors run dry, the extra mats stored will keep feedin the processor.
And then, of course, there's the matter of overflow. Does it stop the cycle? In v2 it did
Ok this does seem quite a good reason to use storages. Do they use cpu/grid by themselves?
|
Qivalar
|
Posted - 2010.04.17 19:18:00 -
[12]
Yes they do. I don't remember how much tho, but anyway I think pretty low.
As an alternative, the PCC has some storage by itself. If you don't use lot of extractors (from my experience, 3 or 4 extracting at 100 each for a single resource is fine to feed a processor and have some surplus, but anyway I didn't do any math) the PCC might prove enough as well.
Plus, the extractors are used to break down the links, which i gather have a cpu/pg increase on a linear function basis. Sorry, but I will never do the uber-stack-of-death, even if it will prove worth. It feels... wrong
P.S. I rather like the PI so far. It does need some serious polishing, but the idea is neat. Only, please make so it will not be instanced as it is now... the district thing was promising
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |