Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Regular reports on Factorio development.
cbhj1
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by cbhj1 »

V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:12 pm
The solid fuel in 0.17.0 did not really work. The science only consumed miniscule amounts (especially since you could make it from light oil) so it was still just a matter of time.
If sulfur was on HO, then that would change the amount of SF produced to be more in line with consumption, as well as step away from the 'eggs in one basket' approach currently dominating.

lacika2000
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 7:25 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by lacika2000 »

gorothdablade wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:00 pm
lacika2000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 1:00 pm
So what do you think? ;)
An addition I would add, is that excess production isn't just lost... its burned off.

This could be represented with a smoke stack for each HO, LO, and PG. The smoke stack only lights up when that specific fuel line is backed up for a visual cue to the player, and possibly even generate more pollution as a "penalty" of sorts for not properly using the production. This penalty is not as steep as a complete deadlock, but still noticeable (unless you are on some peaceful variety).

This way the production doesn't just vanish (not very factorio), it is converted into a form that we don't want until you balance the factory (adding a new problem to solve). The player is also alerted to the fact there is a problem with out a deadlock occurring (if the devs are feeling generous they could even have an alert pop up).
I REALLY like the idea of higher pollution being coupled with not drawing the right amounts of products (a.k.a. autoflaring). This could be a very effective reason, combined with the low overall yield in BOP, to nudge the players towards AOP.

netmand
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:20 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by netmand »

I wish to repeat my content with the changes to help counter the repeated arguments against. We'll always hear more from protesters and they do deserve to be heard; but often their voices drown-out the people like me that support forward progress.

People stating the game is being dumbed down too much aren't convincing me. I play vanilla, nothing but, and play casually somewhat. I stick to a general plan. I've learned a bunch of techniques and tricks to do to make things work well and efficiently, I've yet to launch my first rocket/satellite within 15 hours. The game is still not so easy that I'm now making accomplishments that I couldn't before. It's the opposite of boring, on the nights I play I have to set a timer to make sure I go to bed at a reasonable hour.

Do I like the oil change? yes. Why? It changes the way I play petroleum. My current game I had restarted with 0.17.60. I haven't launched yet so I'm still working towards space science. So yes I've tech'd into Advanced oil processing, but still use Basic oil processing at some of my refineries, because I can and it makes sense where they are and for their purpose. Do I suck as a player? maybe. Am I having fun? Absolutely! Have I played the game a lot? My steam counter has me playing this game for thousands of hours, I have a 0.14.x map with over 2,000 hours spent on it.

No one here has talked about the logistical cost saved when you have a PG-only refinery. So what if it produces 10 less? Now I don't have to deal with the 60 non-PG oils, its storing, conversion, transport, and powering all of that to do so. You guys that don't see the other side of this coin just don't get it. ok it broke your past experience, now you can't do things the same way. Easier for you? Easier for your family? That doesn't mean it's easier for all, and I would argue at the level of "easy-ness" this applies. What's wrong with making something like the development of the oil production process a bit smoother?

I accept change, I accept that an experimental build may not play optimally for me. And if these hard-nosed people have their way, maybe we'll go back multiple oils in the basic oil processing recipe. Just know that all of you that have rage-quitted will be missed (no game wants to lose a player) but we know there are new potential players being made every day. Count on it.

lacika2000
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 7:25 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by lacika2000 »

cbhj1 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:23 pm
V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:12 pm
The solid fuel in 0.17.0 did not really work. The science only consumed miniscule amounts (especially since you could make it from light oil) so it was still just a matter of time.
If sulfur was on HO, then that would change the amount of SF produced to be more in line with consumption, as well as step away from the 'eggs in one basket' approach currently dominating.
Indeed, as I (and perhaps others) have also proposed before: if sulfur can be produced from HO with high yield and from PG with low yield, the player has yet another option to avoid fluid gridlocking. This would be very similar to the SF production options from all three oil types currently, but for sulfur. :geek:

cbhj1
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by cbhj1 »

netmand wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:27 pm
Do I like the oil change? yes. Why? It changes the way I play petroleum.
not trying to twist words, but this part struck me

This is at the heart of the issue as I see it, with the current recipes, the entirety of the refinery setup is for the production of one fluid instead of each fluid having a valuable use. Leaving us with a crushing complexity to reward ratio.

netmand
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:20 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by netmand »

lacika2000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:29 pm
cbhj1 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:23 pm
V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:12 pm
The solid fuel in 0.17.0 did not really work. The science only consumed miniscule amounts (especially since you could make it from light oil) so it was still just a matter of time.
If sulfur was on HO, then that would change the amount of SF produced to be more in line with consumption, as well as step away from the 'eggs in one basket' approach currently dominating.
Indeed, as I (and perhaps others) have also proposed before: if sulfur can be produced from HO with high yield and from PG with low yield, the player has yet another option to avoid fluid gridlocking. This would be very similar to the SF production options from all three oil types currently, but for sulfur. :geek:
I like that making sulfur wouldn't compete for the same resources as making plastic. However it adds a bit more complexity to making processing units. For me it's not terrible though. I would imagine that moving sulfur to heavy oil might affect the coal liquefaction end-game logistics. Affecting sulfur in turn affects acid, gotta think more on that one...

Serenity
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 961
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 6:16 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by Serenity »

lacika2000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:29 pm
This would be very similar to the SF production options from all three oil types currently, but for sulfur.
And sulfur has more sinks than SF. Naively, you could produce batteries / accumulators for later. You could rig up a setup that produces sulfur from all and switch depending on which is backed up, but that's not newbie friendly.

I have a feeling though that the team is very reluctant to introduce new recipes.
The oil industry would be a great candidate for more complexity with late game rocket items. Like a more complicated rocket fuel chain.

RocketManChronicles
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 2:38 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by RocketManChronicles »

My final note on this thread (as I am abandoning Bland Factorio)...

This oil change was the final nail in the coffin for me to play anymore Bland (some of you refer it as Vanilla) Factorio. This is just way too easy. I bum-rushed Advanced Oil Processing (so much for preventing that), got the Heavy and Light Oil I need for my factory; basically, it consists of 6 Refineries with some Chemical Plants for cracking all to produce just enough Light Oil for continuous rockets. And then there are 40 Refineries still on Basic Oil Processing, because of the built-in flare stack, I can produce all the Petroleum Gas I want for the entire base and infinite Science. This is so damn easy it is just stupid, like I feel dumber having this setup. I have so many Oil Pumpjacks just feeding this stupid setup that I could care less about "efficiency" as I get all I need. I probably lost IQ points doing this quick playthrough to see how this oil change affects the game... it affected me.

So, I am in modded, and damn happy that I get challenged to deal with non-flare stacked recipes.

That is what this new BOP is, flare stacked oil processing. And looking at my base setup, I would suggest this change to be reverted, because honestly, it looks stupid. Crude -> PG -> Win

netmand
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:20 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by netmand »

cbhj1 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:38 pm
netmand wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:27 pm
Do I like the oil change? yes. Why? It changes the way I play petroleum.
not trying to twist words, but this part struck me

This is at the heart of the issue as I see it, with the current recipes, the entirety of the refinery setup is for the production of one fluid instead of each fluid having a valuable use. Leaving us with a crushing complexity to reward ratio.
oh what a wonderful way to put that it changes your experience. I've read all comments to that effect. I'll acknowledge that figuring out multiple outputs on one building is rewarding, but it mystifies me that you guys need to preserve that particular experience so well that you'll argue for weeks about it. Can we not move past this? Why is it not ok to "move" it to Advanced oil processing?

User avatar
_Attila_
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by _Attila_ »

I agree, it is time to move on and give actual feedback on the new way of doing things.
But I am going to wait for the dust to settle and some actual new UI features (blueprint rework or something) before I start a new game.
Attila's QuickBar Mod - Auto-links hand crafted item to first free quickbar slot if not already linked.
Attila's Signals Mod - Alternate signals to use in same circuit as standard signals.
Attila's Zoom Mod - Modifies zoom functionality.

mcdjfp
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 12:42 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by mcdjfp »

V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:12 pm
2. Sure, just imagine the flare stack there then or assume it's the tall tower in the graphics, no problem?
Yes problem. The flare stack comment was an example. The point of #2 that I feel that with all of the simplifications to puzzles happening, claiming that you are preserving the puzzle no longer means anything, at least to me.

Even 4-5 times the number of basic refineries will be easier to set up than the cracking chain to allow the use of the advanced oil processing recipe. It appears much simpler to use the advanced/cracking to get enough heavy and light, then use the easier to set up basic for whatever additional petroleum gas is needed.

I keep track of the Friday Facts (and sometimes read other posts as well) and the closest thing I ran across was a suggestion to use categories in place of temperature. Anyways, the post where mining hardness was removed declared that mods wouldn't be able to put it back. "So, the internal mechanics for these two things were removed and mods cannot bring them back." according to Bilka. (pickaxe and mining hardness). If the intention was to replace them with a different mechanic, it was not communicated very well.

I have seen both sides of the delayed teaching issue, and it wasn't pretty either way. As the learner the one wrong fact (confusion, misunderstanding, whatever you want to call it) at the beginning multiplies as time goes on. As the teacher, once than train of confusion gets underway, it is much more difficult to stop then simply explaining things properly at the beginning.

I do not see how it is easier to debug a misbalanced cracking as your first lesson in linked fluid outputs, than to see that your fluid tank/solid fuel production overflowed and it needs to be fixed. The interactions are more complex once cracking is involved, and figuring out the bottleneck is more difficult at that point. How does one figure out that too little Light Oil -> Petroleum Gas production is what cut off the Heavy Oil Supply when the refinery stopping because an output was full apparently wasn't clear enough with the old recipes.

I ENJOYED having to deal with the unwanted outputs. It required more thinking and more planning. Its removal reduces the value of the game to me. Ingredient count was a nice sense of advancement, and required some early game planning. Is planning becoming a bad word?

Also this is a base breaking change (in other words a major change) as far as I am concerned. Whatever happened to going stable first and perhaps having several 0.17 stables. (See FF #306's thread)?

netmand
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:20 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by netmand »

RocketManChronicles wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:53 pm
My final note on this thread (as I am abandoning Bland Factorio)...

This oil change was the final nail in the coffin for me to play anymore Bland (some of you refer it as Vanilla) Factorio. This is just way too easy. I bum-rushed Advanced Oil Processing (so much for preventing that), got the Heavy and Light Oil I need for my factory; basically, it consists of 6 Refineries with some Chemical Plants for cracking all to produce just enough Light Oil for continuous rockets. And then there are 40 Refineries still on Basic Oil Processing, because of the built-in flare stack, I can produce all the Petroleum Gas I want for the entire base and infinite Science. This is so damn easy it is just stupid, like I feel dumber having this setup. I have so many Oil Pumpjacks just feeding this stupid setup that I could care less about "efficiency" as I get all I need. I probably lost IQ points doing this quick playthrough to see how this oil change affects the game... it affected me.

So, I am in modded, and damn happy that I get challenged to deal with non-flare stacked recipes.

That is what this new BOP is, flare stacked oil processing. And looking at my base setup, I would suggest this change to be reverted, because honestly, it looks stupid. Crude -> PG -> Win
You're a lot better than me. Looks like I have a long way to go in vanilla. I'm glad they aren't making the game rougher for those people like me, and glad that there is modification available to possibly support players that have this game figured out a lot faster than me.

(Actually I don't like the term vanilla either, I wish something like "base" or "un-modded" caught on instead, but hey we live in a world where my president "tweets")

User avatar
5thHorseman
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by 5thHorseman »

In my current game I've totally converted to AOP and it went smoothly. Not easily. Not dumbly. Smoothly. I found no loss of challenges from previous runs except I never had to store excess fluids so I guess I lost that brain bender, but really I didn't miss it.

Thanks for continuing to improve the game!
Image Image

User avatar
V453000
Factorio Staff
Factorio Staff
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 5:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by V453000 »

mcdjfp wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:13 pm
V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:12 pm
2. Sure, just imagine the flare stack there then or assume it's the tall tower in the graphics, no problem?
Yes problem. The flare stack comment was an example. The point of #2 that I feel that with all of the simplifications to puzzles happening, claiming that you are preserving the puzzle no longer means anything, at least to me.

Even 4-5 times the number of basic refineries will be easier to set up than the cracking chain to allow the use of the advanced oil processing recipe. It appears much simpler to use the advanced/cracking to get enough heavy and light, then use the easier to set up basic for whatever additional petroleum gas is needed.

I keep track of the Friday Facts (and sometimes read other posts as well) and the closest thing I ran across was a suggestion to use categories in place of temperature. Anyways, the post where mining hardness was removed declared that mods wouldn't be able to put it back. "So, the internal mechanics for these two things were removed and mods cannot bring them back." according to Bilka. (pickaxe and mining hardness). If the intention was to replace them with a different mechanic, it was not communicated very well.

I have seen both sides of the delayed teaching issue, and it wasn't pretty either way. As the learner the one wrong fact (confusion, misunderstanding, whatever you want to call it) at the beginning multiplies as time goes on. As the teacher, once than train of confusion gets underway, it is much more difficult to stop then simply explaining things properly at the beginning.

I do not see how it is easier to debug a misbalanced cracking as your first lesson in linked fluid outputs, than to see that your fluid tank/solid fuel production overflowed and it needs to be fixed. The interactions are more complex once cracking is involved, and figuring out the bottleneck is more difficult at that point. How does one figure out that too little Light Oil -> Petroleum Gas production is what cut off the Heavy Oil Supply when the refinery stopping because an output was full apparently wasn't clear enough with the old recipes.

I ENJOYED having to deal with the unwanted outputs. It required more thinking and more planning. Its removal reduces the value of the game to me. Ingredient count was a nice sense of advancement, and required some early game planning. Is planning becoming a bad word?

Also this is a base breaking change (in other words a major change) as far as I am concerned. Whatever happened to going stable first and perhaps having several 0.17 stables. (See FF #306's thread)?
You say that it's harder to debug AOP with cracking than the basic one? So is the puzzle being gutted or made harder? Regardless, it introduces the problem, but gives you a tool to fix it. The multiple output blocking problem as of "reading in the gui and understanding that it is a problem" can be vastly improved with the new entity guis that are coming. The rest of the problem is figuring out how cracking works, which at this point the player should have enough familiarity with basic oil and some oil products that it should be non-trivial yet not a huge wall, but time will tell and we can only speculate.

I actually don't remember if the mining hardness categories or whatnot were added after the FFF or beforehand. I wasn't involved in the implementation so I would have to ask or investigate.

We are planning to have a 0.17 stable candidate quite soon.

lacika2000
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 7:25 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by lacika2000 »

V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:21 pm
We are planning to have a 0.17 stable candidate quite soon.
Ah, that’s good news. In case you need go tweak anything in BOP, I guess we on the forum have provided enough options and ideas to consider (e.g., two or three products in BOP, HO and/or PG to sulfur, etc. ;) ).

I am looking forward to reading the FFF that will announce the 0.17 stable version.

crambaza
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by crambaza »

netmand wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:27 pm

No one here has talked about the logistical cost saved when you have a PG-only refinery. So what if it produces 10 less? Now I don't have to deal with the 60 non-PG oils, its storing, conversion, transport, and powering all of that play the game to do so. You guys that don't see the other side of this coin just don't get it. ok it broke your past experience, now you can't do things the same way. Easier for you? Easier for your family? That doesn't mean it's easier for all, and I would argue at the level of "easy-ness" this applies. What's wrong with making something like the development of the oil production process a bit smoother? Count on it.
*whew* close one. I agree, now that they made it easier, it saved you from all that playing the game... while playing the game...
:?


*New Idea: Maybe at this point, the Basic Oil recipe should just spit out Plastic and Sulfur directly, and then Advanced Oil spits out Lubricant and Solid fuel directly. This way you can balance Basic and Advanced Oil based on your factory needs without all that pesky game play getting in the way...

Theikkru
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by Theikkru »

V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:06 am
The "there are too many things on petroleum gas" point is really dangerous to change - if for example we would put sulfur into heavy oil, it could very easily happen that your refinery would deadlock because you only want to produce batteries/acid, say for mining uranium and laser turrets. Even with AOP and proper automated cracking system, the only solution would be to store your petroleum gas/light oil products somewhere - introducing the same problem as BOP used to have, without a possible proper solution. This can happen right now, too, in a case when you would want to produce a lot/only lubricant, or a lot/only rocket fuel. However both of those cases are quite unlikely and generally don't happen too often, or for too long period of time, as the amount of petroleum gas is pretty much always high.
Is there something wrong with the sulfur from solid fuel idea?
lacika2000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:15 pm
If not: do you have a better solution to facilitate the mechanics of allowing multiple outputs without being affected by backlogging on all three at the same time? Just saying “no to autoflaring” will not change the devs’ mind...
See above.
netmand wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:01 pm
oh what a wonderful way to put that it changes your experience. I've read all comments to that effect. I'll acknowledge that figuring out multiple outputs on one building is rewarding, but it mystifies me that you guys need to preserve that particular experience so well that you'll argue for weeks about it. Can we not move past this? Why is it not ok to "move" it to Advanced oil processing?
Because it may actually make things worse for new players in that it teaches them a bad lesson (that oil refining is a 1-in-1-out recipe), and punishes them for putting more effort into their factory. (See this post for details.)

netmand
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:20 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by netmand »

mcdjfp wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:13 pm
I have seen both sides of the delayed teaching issue, and it wasn't pretty either way. As the learner the one wrong fact (confusion, misunderstanding, whatever you want to call it) at the beginning multiplies as time goes on. As the teacher, once than train of confusion gets underway, it is much more difficult to stop then simply explaining things properly at the beginning.
Sorry I don't understand to which fact, confusion, or misunderstanding to which you are referring? If you are talking about a building that potentially has a recipe for multiple outputs (i.e. petroleum gas, light oil, heavy oil), then (discounting mods) forgive me but I think that's the only one. So how does this multiply? There isn't a building later that has 4 outputs as far as I know.

Any one person is only a new player once, once presented with the recipe with the multiple outputs, there is no proverbial train here. The difficulty in this respect is the same whether the recipe is presented in BOP or AOP.

It sure felt like a compelling argument there but after thinking this through, maybe needs more clarification? How about some examples?

netmand
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:20 am
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by netmand »

crambaza wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:44 pm
netmand wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:27 pm

No one here has talked about the logistical cost saved when you have a PG-only refinery. So what if it produces 10 less? Now I don't have to deal with the 60 non-PG oils, its storing, conversion, transport, and powering all of that play the game to do so. You guys that don't see the other side of this coin just don't get it. ok it broke your past experience, now you can't do things the same way. Easier for you? Easier for your family? That doesn't mean it's easier for all, and I would argue at the level of "easy-ness" this applies. What's wrong with making something like the development of the oil production process a bit smoother? Count on it.
*whew* close one. I agree, now that they made it easier, it saved you from all that playing the game... while playing the game...
:?


*New Idea: Maybe at this point, the Basic Oil recipe should just spit out Plastic and Sulfur directly, and then Advanced Oil spits out Lubricant and Solid fuel directly. This way you can balance Basic and Advanced Oil based on your factory needs without all that pesky game play getting in the way...
You forgot to add crafting sulfur and plastic by hand by standing on the oil well.
(sorry couldn't help commenting on your dramatization)

FuryoftheStars
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 389
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Friday Facts #305 - The Oil Changes

Post by FuryoftheStars »

V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:12 pm
4. Mods are absolutely the solution to more replayability, more complexity and more of everything.
My only quip with this is that a person shouldn't be buying into a game for its mods.
V453000 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:12 pm
FuryoftheStars wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:17 pm
I still disagree that this "is really dangerous to change". This already happened pre-AOP & cracking (hence why you all feel as though the 0.17.60 change needed to be made, if I understand correctly) and so really is no more "dangerous" should it fail. PG would still be required in a lot of things and you can always rebalance the production and consumption ratios to compensate (I certainly would not advocate moving sulfur production from PG -> HO while keeping the same numbers). And if someone is really going to go all hog wild on one product while completely neglecting the rest, then this should happen. You could also make it so sulfur production is similar to solid fuel where you can get it from all 3 fluids, but HO has the best efficiency, and/or you could also introduce reverse cracking (alkylation) recipes (identical to cracking recipes only requiring sulfuric acid instead of water) as a later tech unlock after AOP.

I do have one separate question, though. Obviously you all changed BOP like this because you still perceived it as an issue. You just changed Chem science to use solid fuel in 0.17.0. Aren't most new players going to be using the latest stable (0.16.51)? How do you know that this did not solve the problem?
But exactly, it's "not dangerous" except it would basically need to introduce reverse-cracking recipes because of the bad case that could happen (and IMO shouldn't). Reverse-cracking sounds like a big mess, though I'm not entirely sure what do I think about that to too much detail.

The solid fuel in 0.17.0 did not really work. The science only consumed miniscule amounts (especially since you could make it from light oil) so it was still just a matter of time.
Well, it wouldn't "need" to (edit: referring to introducing reverse-cracking), though I wouldn't consider that a bad thing, either, IMO. If the numbers are balanced a bit based on "typical" expected and required usage, then it should be fine. Again, if someone goes all hog wild on running down only one fluid, they really don't have much room to complain about one or both of the others backing up the whole process. All 3 fluids would have their uses at all times.

Also, this:
cbhj1 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:23 pm
If sulfur was on HO, then that would change the amount of SF produced to be more in line with consumption, as well as step away from the 'eggs in one basket' approach currently dominating.


I also am really disliking the term deadlocking being thrown around about this because technically it's not deadlocked. Provided you have something for production going on that's using all 3 continuously, then it frees itself and continues, just some of the products may not be able to hit full production speed anymore. And really, that's not a huge deal. You just need to rebalance your production and consumption a bit better.
Last edited by FuryoftheStars on Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply

Return to “News”