I'm not saying it's a bad thing, either. I'm kinda indifferent here - I think both the current 'Way things work™' and your proposal have a merit. Of course, the 1% number was just thrown as an example.Rahjital wrote:[...]As for the second point, I don't quite view it as a disadvantage. If you build so many accumulators that your power network can't handle them then you probably need to improve the network already. Of course, the number doesn't have to stay at 1% of capacity, it could be a lot lower, even below the treshold for preventing solar panels from charging the accus for night - as long as the energy losses are significant enough to mean you need a huge number of solars and accus to power a factory through night, I'm fine with it, especially if the costs for both increase. It would make getting a solar powered factory an achievement instead of the most efficient option.[...]
Well, I don't think anyone tried to make a battery for an electric smelter, mostly because it's a waste of energy and lithium. There are, however, batteries capable of powering whole cars. Remember that Factorio implies stellar travel, since we have a human on a non-earth planet.Rahjital wrote:[...]The power requirements of a notebook versus an electric smelter are a different beast, though. As far as I'm aware, we don't have a battery that can provide sufficient voltage and current to smelt alumina.
As for solar panels, I kinda like how they help reduce your coal consumption by providing power during the day, though I agree that they could use a cost increase and perhaps a slight reduction of their power output. Personally, I would add a cost increase to accumulators too, as right now they are very cheap themselves.
In my opinion, the 'space per MW' cost of solar panels feels appropriate - cutting their output also means increasing this aspect. Since both panels and accumulators have a base build time of 0.5s, though, it's my guess that any cost they currently have is a sort-of placeholder anyway, until the devs feel the time has come to give them proper, dedicated thought beyond "players can has those". That being said, I still feel that 'free, unlimited energy' should have to compete (with progress, growth, and all the other things limited by oil) for a place in the players 'grand plan of resource allocation'.
In other news: I really like how half of this page is just the two us discussing numbers. Anyone else care to post, or did we scare everyone else away?
OP, what's your opinion?