Factorio Forums

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 6:12 pm

evandy wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:05 pm

Can you use any fuel cell in any mark of reactor? They just get burned up faster in the higher tiers?

there's an option for bobrevamp. if the reactor revamp is turned on (and you have bobplates and bobpower with new reactors) then you will only be able to use uranium fuel in a uranium reactor, thorium in a thorium reactor and deuterium in a deuterium reactor.
If there option is turned off (or you lack bobpower's additional reactors) then any fuel works in any reactor.

evandy wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 8:30 pm

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 6:12 pm

evandy wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:05 pm

Can you use any fuel cell in any mark of reactor? They just get burned up faster in the higher tiers?

there's an option for bobrevamp. if the reactor revamp is turned on (and you have bobplates and bobpower with new reactors) then you will only be able to use uranium fuel in a uranium reactor, thorium in a thorium reactor and deuterium in a deuterium reactor.
If there option is turned off (or you lack bobpower's additional reactors) then any fuel works in any reactor.

Is that the same revamp as the nuclear recipe change above, or a second click? Definitely planning to run both of those.

Interesting that I will need to run a blended reactor solution in perpetuity to keep the higher tier stuff fueled, but I really like that idea. Will need to see whether to have separate facilities, or go with a big array that blends all types of reactors. Complicated fiddly setups and ratios are factorio after all.

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 12:45 am

in theory, since it costs 1 fusion catalyst to make 10 fuel cells, but you have a 50% chance to get one back from recycling 5... that averages out to getting 1 out of 10... so in theory, unless you get unlucky, once you have a batch of deuterium fuel cells, you don't need the previous tiers to make more.

RocketManChronicles wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 1:37 pm

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 12:45 am

in theory, since it costs 1 fusion catalyst to make 10 fuel cells, but you have a 50% chance to get one back from recycling 5... that averages out to getting 1 out of 10... so in theory, unless you get unlucky, once you have a batch of deuterium fuel cells, you don't need the previous tiers to make more.

Hmmmm.... "In theory"... over a really long time, I can see this being an infinite renewable energy source! LOL. But if the factory must grow, then we need more!

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:45 pm

RocketManChronicles wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 1:37 pm

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 12:45 am

in theory, since it costs 1 fusion catalyst to make 10 fuel cells, but you have a 50% chance to get one back from recycling 5... that averages out to getting 1 out of 10... so in theory, unless you get unlucky, once you have a batch of deuterium fuel cells, you don't need the previous tiers to make more.

Hmmmm.... "In theory"... over a really long time, I can see this being an infinite renewable energy source! LOL. But if the factory must grow, then we need more!

you still need to pump more Deuterium in to make more though, so you have to manage all the waste pure water you get from that process. with pure bobs, you can't just vent it. So, where with the other nuclear fuels, you have to find and manage a finite supply, with deuterium, the challenge is managing the byproducts of an otherwise infinite supply.

For the record, on average, with Uranium you're going to get back enough plutonium OR U235 to make another fuel cell too, so that's renewable, and thorium is a "Breeder reactor", you get back more U235 (which in theory SHOULD be U233, but it was kind of pointless to add that when it would effectively result in the same as just giving you U235) than it cost to make the fuel cell in the first place.

it kinda makes the Kovarex process and the Bobingabout process useless in the current versions. (though bobingabout process is a little more useful because that gives you higher fuel valued fuel cells) at least until I implement other uses for them, such as Plutonium RTGs.

evandy wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 06, 2019 4:08 pm

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:45 pm

RocketManChronicles wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 1:37 pm

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 12:45 am

in theory, since it costs 1 fusion catalyst to make 10 fuel cells, but you have a 50% chance to get one back from recycling 5... that averages out to getting 1 out of 10... so in theory, unless you get unlucky, once you have a batch of deuterium fuel cells, you don't need the previous tiers to make more.

Hmmmm.... "In theory"... over a really long time, I can see this being an infinite renewable energy source! LOL. But if the factory must grow, then we need more!

you still need to pump more Deuterium in to make more though, so you have to manage all the waste pure water you get from that process. with pure bobs, you can't just vent it. So, where with the other nuclear fuels, you have to find and manage a finite supply, with deuterium, the challenge is managing the byproducts of an otherwise infinite supply.

For the record, on average, with Uranium you're going to get back enough plutonium OR U235 to make another fuel cell too, so that's renewable, and thorium is a "Breeder reactor", you get back more U235 (which in theory SHOULD be U233, but it was kind of pointless to add that when it would effectively result in the same as just giving you U235) than it cost to make the fuel cell in the first place.

it kinda makes the Kovarex process and the Bobingabout process useless in the current versions. (though bobingabout process is a little more useful because that gives you higher fuel valued fuel cells) at least until I implement other uses for them, such as Plutonium RTGs.

Can’t you just electrolyze the pure water and vent the o2 and h2? I haven’t checked but thought you could do this if you needed

EDIT: According to helmod you can electrolyze and vent, and that's usually pretty accurate. Unless the process is so expensive as to be energy negative, then I don't see how that's really a limiting factor. 1 Deuterium Fuel Cell per second takes 1 lead plate, 1 sulphur, and 1,900 water per second. You get an extra 2.375 O2 (19 vent pumps), and 3,751 H2 (38 vent pumps). That's not really all that challenging as far as I can see. You can always use that O2 and H2 with a little compressed air to make rocket fuel; looks like that much is enough for 4-5 rocket fuel per second, but when you're full up then it should be trivial to just vent all the excess gas away.

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 07, 2019 12:06 am

evandy wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 06, 2019 4:08 pm

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:45 pm

RocketManChronicles wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 1:37 pm

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 05, 2019 12:45 am

in theory, since it costs 1 fusion catalyst to make 10 fuel cells, but you have a 50% chance to get one back from recycling 5... that averages out to getting 1 out of 10... so in theory, unless you get unlucky, once you have a batch of deuterium fuel cells, you don't need the previous tiers to make more.

Hmmmm.... "In theory"... over a really long time, I can see this being an infinite renewable energy source! LOL. But if the factory must grow, then we need more!

you still need to pump more Deuterium in to make more though, so you have to manage all the waste pure water you get from that process. with pure bobs, you can't just vent it. So, where with the other nuclear fuels, you have to find and manage a finite supply, with deuterium, the challenge is managing the byproducts of an otherwise infinite supply.

For the record, on average, with Uranium you're going to get back enough plutonium OR U235 to make another fuel cell too, so that's renewable, and thorium is a "Breeder reactor", you get back more U235 (which in theory SHOULD be U233, but it was kind of pointless to add that when it would effectively result in the same as just giving you U235) than it cost to make the fuel cell in the first place.

it kinda makes the Kovarex process and the Bobingabout process useless in the current versions. (though bobingabout process is a little more useful because that gives you higher fuel valued fuel cells) at least until I implement other uses for them, such as Plutonium RTGs.

Can’t you just electrolyze the pure water and vent the o2 and h2? I haven’t checked but thought you could do this if you needed

EDIT: According to helmod you can electrolyze and vent, and that's usually pretty accurate. Unless the process is so expensive as to be energy negative, then I don't see how that's really a limiting factor. 1 Deuterium Fuel Cell per second takes 1 lead plate, 1 sulphur, and 1,900 water per second. You get an extra 2.375 O2 (19 vent pumps), and 3,751 H2 (38 vent pumps). That's not really all that challenging as far as I can see. You can always use that O2 and H2 with a little compressed air to make rocket fuel; looks like that much is enough for 4-5 rocket fuel per second, but when you're full up then it should be trivial to just vent all the excess gas away.

It's still probably around the same kind of infrastructure as setting up uranium/thorium mines and processing plants.

enchant wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:55 am

Checking my power usage, electric furnaces use up the most juice, but robot charging points are an uncontested second. I generally place them willy nilly, but do they use up electricity when not in use, or only when charging a bot?

Mecejide wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 27, 2019 5:18 am

Can you add two tiers of armored artillery wagons and napalm landmines?

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 27, 2019 1:06 pm

Mecejide wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 27, 2019 5:18 am

Can you add two tiers of armored artillery wagons and napalm landmines?

Napalm landmines aren't a bad idea though.

evandy wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:12 pm

This may have been asked before, but since the change to make all pipes the same size and underground length, is there any reason to choose one over the other besides color and aesthetics?

Seems like some different lengths or something would still be nice to differentiate them. There seems little call to make most of them, except to throw into assemblers as ingredients.

evandy wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:25 pm

Any chance we could get a boiler or burner generator that consumes hydrogen gas? Super flammable, and would make some really interesting builds in seablock. Would need to ensure that electrolysis takes more energy than you get by burning the H2, but being able to use it as fuel, instead of flare it, would make much more sense.

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:42 pm

They're tiered, there are still different lengths.
and as I keep repeating, the original reason for having different pipes was recipes, using a different material pipe for a different purpose and different tier makes sense, but then if you couldn't place it in the world, people would complain about that part of it instead of asking why there's so many different pipes that all do the same thing.

There's 5 tiers total, each tier has more health, and underground distance is increased.

evandy wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 11, 2019 2:25 pm

Any chance we could get a boiler or burner generator that consumes hydrogen gas? Super flammable, and would make some really interesting builds in seablock. Would need to ensure that electrolysis takes more energy than you get by burning the H2, but being able to use it as fuel, instead of flare it, would make much more sense.

The oil boiler already does that, however keep in mind that Angel's mods (Which is usually part of Seablock) replaces the hydrogen with angel's hydrogen which isn't burnable. That is entirely on angel.

For balancing reasons, Hydrogen is actually the only burnable fluid that doesn't have a realistic fuel value. I think the realistic fuel value works out at something like 7.1MJ per unit of hydrogen, but instead I use 45kJ. This is purely a balancing act to make other fluids and items made out of hydrogen keep a similar amount of fuel value, or increase it rather than going down, as well as trying to avoid insane Electrolysis costs without getting (much) more energy out of electrolysis than you put in. (I think you do still get more, but it would only take something like doubling or tripling the electrolysis cost to eliminate that) I mean, if you could get more energy out of burning hydrogen than hydrazine, would you even consider making hydrazine? which leads onto advanced fuel blocks, rocket fuel etc.

Mecejide wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:08 am

Can you rename lithium to lithium plate (all the other nonradioactive metals are called plates and it has the same texture as the cobalt plate and the solder plate) and steam science pack to energy science pack (in FFF #275, the devs said one of the criteria for the new science pack names was that each one started with a different letter, but steam and space both start with s)?

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:17 am

Mecejide wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:08 am

Can you rename lithium to lithium plate (all the other nonradioactive metals are called plates and it has the same texture as the cobalt plate and the solder plate) and steam science pack to energy science pack (in FFF #275, the devs said one of the criteria for the new science pack names was that each one started with a different letter, but steam and space both start with s)?

Lithium never used to look like the rest of the plates, it's only recently in 0.17 that it adopted the same icon as Gold and Cobalt. It's also not considered a building material (neither is Cobalt, even though it uses plate, but Cobalt is also considered an alloying metal. Gold is considered a construction material).
So, Lithium was originally intended to just be an intermediate, like plastic or oil, as it's used to make batteries, and other chemicals. That's why there's no "plate" in it's name.

As for the steam science pack... I was unaware of this "rule", but I guess at the time my focus was more on complaining that they'd broken my mods (converting SP2 into Logistic science pack, of which I already had one) and having to fix everything.
But steam accurately portrays the level of the technology I was aiming at when I made it.

mrvn wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 13, 2019 11:11 am

bobingabout wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:17 am

Mecejide wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:08 am

Can you rename lithium to lithium plate (all the other nonradioactive metals are called plates and it has the same texture as the cobalt plate and the solder plate) and steam science pack to energy science pack (in FFF #275, the devs said one of the criteria for the new science pack names was that each one started with a different letter, but steam and space both start with s)?

Lithium never used to look like the rest of the plates, it's only recently in 0.17 that it adopted the same icon as Gold and Cobalt. It's also not considered a building material (neither is Cobalt, even though it uses plate, but Cobalt is also considered an alloying metal. Gold is considered a construction material).
So, Lithium was originally intended to just be an intermediate, like plastic or oil, as it's used to make batteries, and other chemicals. That's why there's no "plate" in it's name.

As for the steam science pack... I was unaware of this "rule", but I guess at the time my focus was more on complaining that they'd broken my mods (converting SP2 into Logistic science pack, of which I already had one) and having to fix everything.
But steam accurately portrays the level of the technology I was aiming at when I made it.

So space-science-pack should be rocket-science-pack since that's where it comes from. Problem solved.