Production science pack Suggested modification

Place to discuss the game balance, recipes, health, enemies mining etc.
Post Reply
Manual Inserter
Manual Inserter
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 10:14 pm

Production science pack Suggested modification

Post by nolhaiic »

My English is terrible,So I used translation software, please forgive my mistakes in words and grammar.

I think "production science pack" is different from other science packs. Recipe is not practical and appears too early
The "military science pack" will not be discussed here, because it is not necessary for rocket launching
Other science packs have the same characteristics. What the recipe needs is the parts to synthesize other items, so the surplus productivity in the production chain can be used to produce other items
It's also the direction of the game, telling me what to do next or what I need, and leading me to the next science pack.
for example, I can use the spare parts produced by "Automation Science pack" and "logistic science pack" to combine other items like splitter and Long-handed inserter. I can store the spare parts for later use, and use "electronic circuit" extensively afterwards, which is also a hint to me

However, the "production science pack" is totally different in this respect. All the items in the recipe can only be used and cannot be further synthesized. Although the "productivity module" can continue to be synthesized, it is only upgraded
So I can only use them. In this regard, "Rail" is OK, because it will be used in large quantities, but "electric furniture" and "productivity module" appear too early. These two should appear after there is enough power
At this time, I would like to see more automatic things: robots. They can help me build faster, including huge power plants
Although I can freely choose "production science pack" or "utility science pack" first, but the game shows "production science pack" first, and several technologies are "production science pack" before "utility science pack",such as "Inserter capacity bonus".
It can be said that the game guides me to "production science pack" first and then "utility science pack",
Moreover, I found that "production science pack" and "utility science pack" can be selected after careful reading, because the previous pack needs the previous pack as the front end
So first thing, I think it's more appropriate to put "production science pack" after "utility science pack", at least on the display. Because for me, I prefer robots to build huge power plants, which is more automatic

Secondly, I don't think the content of the recipe is appropriate. the "productivity module" is more suitable for use at the end of the production chain. I only use a small amount of it. I prefer to have a large number of "efficiency modules" than the "productivity module".
The energy consumption of "electric furnace" is very large without a module, which is twice as much as that of "steel furnace". Therefore, the first thing I need after "electric furniture" is "efficiency module"
"Efficiency module" is not only applicable to any building with module slots, but also does not need to change the design. If the "productivity module" or "speed module" is used, the balance of the designed production chain will be destroyed, and it needs to be redesigned to achieve the optimization, and more energy consumption will be generated
"speed module" is also a better choice, because it can synthesize "assembling machine 3" and "rocket control unit"
Although their recipe are the same, their uses are quite different. Personally, I like to have more affluence in the downstream of the production chain, and store the wealth in chests as a buffer or use it in other places. In this regard, "productivity module" is not as good as "efficiency module" and "speed module"
So I think should replace "productivity module" with "efficiency module" or "speed module"

Then I think "electric furniture" need buff
When two "efficiency modules 1" are inserted into "electric furniture", the energy consumption still has 78kw, which is only 12KW less than 90kw of "steel furniture". However, it takes more time to manufacture "efficiency module 1" and occupies 2.25 times of "steel furniture"
In the case of inserting two "efficiency modules 2", the energy consumption is reduced to 42 kW, which is very competitive. But "efficiency module 2" means longer production time, which is too long for a large number of items like "electric furnance"
Therefore, it is better to have one more module slots. In the case of three module slots, the minimum 42kw can be directly reached with three "efficiency module 1", which will save a lot of time
Otherwise, directly reduce the energy consumption of "electric furnace" or increase the forging speed
As compensation, pollution can be increased, or preheating is required like "nuclear reactor", which is balanced by proper preheating energy

These changes can make "electric furniture" use in large quantities faster, instead of having to wait a long time after I have "electric furniture" until there are enough "efficiency modules" (which is a long process) to replace "steel furniture"
On this point, "assembling machine 3" is very good: faster speed, lower pollution, the same floor space, no need to change the design (at most, the "inserter" needs to be upgraded), so a higher energy consumption is acceptable
The "electric furnace" is: the same speed, lower pollution, land occupation becomes 2.25 times, which needs to be completely redesigned, and the energy consumption can be up to 2 times when there is no module, so it is not enough to be an upgraded building of "steel furniture"


1. "Production science pack" should be placed after "utility science pack"

2. Adjust "production science pack" and buff "electric furniture"

Plan A: "electric furniture" + "efficiency module". Great, even if "electric furniture" is not buff, I can use them in combination as soon as I have them
Plan B: "electric furniture" + "speed module". It's not bad. "Electric furniture" still needs to wait for "efficiency module", but I can mass produce and store "speed module" without worrying about their use

User avatar
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1006
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:47 am

Re: Production science pack Suggested modification

Post by NotRexButCaesar »

I believe that the option with the speed module makes more sense. Your argument that efficiency modules are used more often is personal, and doesn’t apply to many people (including me). From a theme and consistency perspective, it makes more sense that the speed module, which is an ingredient, should go there.
III: Think about what you intend to accomplish with an action before execution.
Have you ever heard the gospel? Most have not.

Post Reply

Return to “Balancing”