Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Place to discuss the game balance, recipes, health, enemies mining etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
bobingabout
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 7198
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 1:01 pm
Contact:

Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by bobingabout »

The main issue is this:
The Express Trasport Belts require lubricant in their recipe.
As a result, The Express Belts require an automation step, and an operational oil chain.
The Express Splitters require the belts to be produced, so also require lubricant.
The Express Underground belts do not require Lubricant, nor the Belts.
As a result, the Underground belt is far easier to produce, because they can be built stright out of the inventory with nothing more than Iron plates.

Read below for a breakdown, and possible solutions.


Basic Transport Belt (x2) = 1x Iron Plate + 1x Iron Gear Wheel
Fast Transport Belt = 1x Basic Transport Belt + 5x Iron Gear Wheel
Express Transport Belt = 1x Fast Transport Belt + 5x Iron Gear Wheel + 2x Lubricant

There are no listed "energy_required", which defaults to 1. Since you get 2 for the Basic, time to build 1 basic is half that of the others.


Basic Splitter = 1x Energy(time) + 4x Basic Transport Belt + 5x Electronic Circuit + 5x Iron plate
Fast Splitter = 2x Energy + 4x Fast Transport Belt + 10x Electronic Circuit + 10x Iron Gear Wheel
Express Splitter = 2x Energy + 4x Express Transport Belt + 10x Advanced Circuit + 10x Iron Gear Wheel

There's a little material cost differences from the belt recipes, but otherwise a fairly ballanced set of Recipes. And since the Recipe requires Express Belts, they also require Lubricant to build.


Basic Transport Belt to ground x2 = 1x Energy + 5x Basic Transport Belt + 10x Iron Plate
Fast Transport Belt to ground x2 = 2x Basic Transport Belt to ground + 20x Iron Gear wheel
Express Transport Belt to ground x2 = 2x Fast Transport Belt to ground + 40x Iron Gear wheel

Okay, these are using upgrade recipes, like the original belts, rather than a new version on the upgraded belt. This in itself is not a problem, but the recipes are off. The cost of the Fast version are okay, and make sense... Except for the lack of an energy tag, it should have an energy_required = 2 tag set. The Express version gets even worse, still with no energy tag set, and costing more Iron Gears with no Lubricant cost.


Possible Solutions:
1. If you want to stick to the upgrade system, Add an Energy requirement of 2 to the Fast Transport Belt to ground recipe, and change the recipe of the Express version to as follows, this should put the upgrade costs on par with the costs of the base belts, and the splitters.
Express Transport belt x2 = 2x Energy + 2x Fast Transport Belt to ground + 20x Iron Gear Wheel + 8x lubricant

2. Make the recipes match closer to the splitters. They would then become as follows:
Fast Transport Belt to ground x2 = 2x Energy + 5x Fast Transport Belt + 20 Iron Gear Wheel
Express Transport Belt to ground x2 = 2x Energy + 5x Express Transport Belt + 20 Iron Gear Wheel
This actually makes them a little more expensive, but on par with the splitters.


What does everyone else think?
Last edited by bobingabout on Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Creator of Bob's mods. Expanding your gameplay since version 0.9.8.
I also have a Patreon.

User avatar
ssilk
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 11095
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 10:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Transport belt inconsistancies.

Post by ssilk »

I don't understand what kind of problem you want to solve. :)
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...

Boogieman14
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 12:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Transport belt inconsistancies.

Post by Boogieman14 »

ssilk wrote:I don't understand what kind of problem you want to solve. :)
Consistency in recipes and upgrades?

I think I would prefer the second option, where underground belts just use a number of the same speed belts instead of the lower speed underground belt upgraded.
I don't have OCD, I have CDO. It's the same, but with the letters in the correct order.

User avatar
bobingabout
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 7198
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 1:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Transport belt inconsistancies.

Post by bobingabout »

ssilk wrote:I don't understand what kind of problem you want to solve. :)
The main issue is this:
The Express Belts require lubricant, and Splitters require the belts to be produced, so also require lubricant.
The Underground belts do not require Lubricant, nor the Belts, and are therefore far easier to produce, because they can be built stright out of the inventory with nothing more than Iron plates, where the other 2 require an automation step, and an operational oil chain.
Creator of Bob's mods. Expanding your gameplay since version 0.9.8.
I also have a Patreon.

arl85
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 7:08 am
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by arl85 »

I agree that underground transport should require at least some transport belts of the same type (normal, express, etc...)
Do you need help taking screenshots in-game? have a look to my guide to calculate screenshot dimensions

User avatar
DerivePi
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 504
Joined: Thu May 29, 2014 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by DerivePi »

I can understand why they wanted to have the UG belts as a separate upgrade from the belts themselves (so when you upgrade your line, you can upgrade the belts and UG belts by reusing the existing material - not the splitters though?). But, I agree with the OP that the recipes should be revised. At least 6 belts (consistent with the maximum length of the UG belt - 2 terminals plus 4 UG tiles) should be used to produce the pair of UG terminals. I'd also suggest using just iron plate instead of gears as the additional cost to produce UG belts. The gears are appropriately associated with the belts themselves.

Of special note, this feature can be exaggerated in the Dytech Transportation Mod where the faster belts can extend something like 12 tiles underground.

User avatar
pyrolytic_tungsten
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 4:29 am
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by pyrolytic_tungsten »

arl85 wrote:I agree that underground transport should require at least some transport belts of the same type (normal, express, etc...)
Same here.

Marconos
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by Marconos »

Agreed, express underground belts should require lubricant as a minimum.

jon_joy_1999
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 1:31 am
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by jon_joy_1999 »

I believe the excess gears indicated are being used in place of the lubrication as the method of transport. in the real world materials tend to slide down inclines unless the belts have bulkheads. having the belt made entirely out of gears would eliminate this by providing a traction surface that has positive engagement

User avatar
bobingabout
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 7198
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 1:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by bobingabout »

jon_joy_1999 wrote:I believe the excess gears indicated are being used in place of the lubrication as the method of transport. in the real world materials tend to slide down inclines unless the belts have bulkheads. having the belt made entirely out of gears would eliminate this by providing a traction surface that has positive engagement
Except they gotta come back up again, not just go down. And in theory, simply having more gears doesn't negate the need for lubricant when it comes to speed.
Putting real world issues asside, the main issue is the difficulty scale, lubricant is a significant difficuly increase, having in missing effectively puts it at the same level tech wise as the Basic and Fast belts.
Creator of Bob's mods. Expanding your gameplay since version 0.9.8.
I also have a Patreon.

arl85
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 7:08 am
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by arl85 »

in 0.11.1 express splitters now need lubricant, I think express belt to ground really needs to use lubricant, as OP suggested.
Do you need help taking screenshots in-game? have a look to my guide to calculate screenshot dimensions

User avatar
bobingabout
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 7198
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 1:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by bobingabout »

Ya, I pointed it out to him in the topic where he said he changed the splitters. I think he forgot to fix the belts.
Creator of Bob's mods. Expanding your gameplay since version 0.9.8.
I also have a Patreon.

jon_joy_1999
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 1:31 am
Contact:

Re: Transport belt to ground: cost inconsistancies.

Post by jon_joy_1999 »

bobingabout wrote:
jon_joy_1999
Except they gotta come back up again, not just go down. And in theory, simply having more gears doesn't negate the need for lubricant when it comes to speed.
Putting real world issues asside, the main issue is the difficulty scale, lubricant is a significant difficuly increase, having in missing effectively puts it at the same level tech wise as the Basic and Fast belts.
I wasn't trying to argue for the lack of lubricant required to make underground belts, but was offering an idea for why so many gears are needed, the gears would provide the force to lift the resources back up to the ground

Post Reply

Return to “Balancing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users