Factorio Forums

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:29 am**

jchardin64 wrote: ↑
Tue Aug 11, 2020 9:10 pm
But since it's basically creating useful stuff (O, Cl, NaOH) from nothing, it shouldn't be possible to also make it supply excess energy.

It's not actually making it from nothing though, it's making it from water. A lot of people ignore that water part, but if you think about it, it's a resource, but one where the supply doesn't run out, just like Oil.

I think the "Break even" point would simply be to double the cost of Electrolysis, or was it quadruple, it's been a while, but balancing the energy from Hydrogen against the electrolysis cost is something I've spent a lot of time on over the years.

I get what you're saying that you shouldn't get "free energy" from burning it, but, I've looked into what other games do. For example, Oxygen not included. They used to have this realistic method where you could use electrolysis to get oxygen and hydrogen from water, then put the hydrogen into a specific power plant to burn it, and get energy out, not enough to even power the electrolyser. Many people complained that hydrogen even existing was pointless and a pain in the backside, and made electrolysis an undesirable method of getting oxygen.(Especially when you consider that water itself is a valuable resource.) So they changed it so that burning hydrogen could not only power the entire electrolysis process, but only use about half of the power it generated. In other words, they've done the reverse of what you're saying I should do.

Keep in mind I'm trying to keep everyone happy here, this is one of those "Massive headache" topics, where no matter what you do, somebody isn't happy with the result. There's people like you who believe that you shouldn't be able to make an electrical profit on burning hydrogen, but then there's the other group of people who would consider it pointless if you couldn't gain energy from doing it.
Sure, your argument has reality on its side, in reality, it costs more to create the hydrogen from electrolysis than you get back from burning it, but realism doesn't always make for the best gameplay.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 6:56 pm**

Oil isn't *exactly* inexhaustible like water -- it does slow down over time. Another big difference is (for typical map settings) it's not available in nearly as many places on the map, so if nothing else it's more of a logistic problem to get it or its products to where they're needed. But I see what you're saying.

bobingabout wrote: ↑
Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:29 am
I get what you're saying that you shouldn't get "free energy" from burning it, but, I've looked into what other games do. For example, Oxygen not included. They used to have this realistic method where you could use electrolysis to get oxygen and hydrogen from water, then put the hydrogen into a specific power plant to burn it, and get energy out, not enough to even power the electrolyser. Many people complained that hydrogen even existing was pointless and a pain in the backside, and made electrolysis an undesirable method of getting oxygen.(Especially when you consider that water itself is a valuable resource.) So they changed it so that burning hydrogen could not only power the entire electrolysis process, but only use about half of the power it generated. In other words, they've done the reverse of what you're saying I should do.

They did a similar thing in Space Engineers a few years ago. You can turn ice into O + H very rapidly and for a VERY small amount of energy (since you need O for life support right from the start, before you have the resources for more than just a couple of solar panels). Then they introduced H-burning generators (which look like a V8 engine and not a fuel cell like actual spacecraft have). They burn H without using any O -- I have no idea how that works in the vacuum of space -- and you get about 10x as much power out as you put in to your ice processor. This was all considered balanced because you have to mine ice (a limited resource) to make it work, and realism can go right out the airlock.

One thing you could do that would make everyone happy, is add a "Bob's Realism Mod". Just override some of the recipes with different time/energy/quantity values. Players who want it could install it, those who like things as they are don't have to. I'd be happy to help out, the tweaks I've been making are working pretty well.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 6:57 pm**

jchardin64 wrote: ↑
Wed Aug 12, 2020 6:56 pm
Oil isn't *exactly* inexhaustible like water -- it does slow down over time. Another big difference is (for typical map settings) it's not available in nearly as many places on the map, so if nothing else it's more of a logistic problem to get it or its products to where they're needed. But I see what you're saying.

bobingabout wrote: ↑
Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:29 am
I get what you're saying that you shouldn't get "free energy" from burning it, but, I've looked into what other games do. For example, Oxygen not included. They used to have this realistic method where you could use electrolysis to get oxygen and hydrogen from water, then put the hydrogen into a specific power plant to burn it, and get energy out, not enough to even power the electrolyser. Many people complained that hydrogen even existing was pointless and a pain in the backside, and made electrolysis an undesirable method of getting oxygen.(Especially when you consider that water itself is a valuable resource.) So they changed it so that burning hydrogen could not only power the entire electrolysis process, but only use about half of the power it generated. In other words, they've done the reverse of what you're saying I should do.
They did a similar thing in Space Engineers a few years ago. You can turn ice into O + H very rapidly and for a VERY small amount of energy (since you need O for life support right from the start, before you have the resources for more than just a couple of solar panels). Then they introduced H-burning generators (which look like a V8 engine and not a fuel cell like actual spacecraft have). They burn H without using any O -- I have no idea how that works in the vacuum of space -- and you get about 10x as much energy out as you put in to your ice processor. This was all considered balanced because you have to mine ice (a limited resource) to make it work, and realism can go right out the airlock.

One thing you could do that would make everyone happy, is add a "Bob's Realism Mod". Just override some of the recipes with different time/energy/quantity values. Players who want it could install it, those who like things as they are don't have to. I'd be happy to help out, the tweaks I've been making are working pretty well.

Posted: **Wed Aug 12, 2020 7:35 pm**

jchardin64 wrote: ↑
Wed Aug 12, 2020 6:56 pm
Oil isn't *exactly* inexhaustible like water -- it does slow down over time. Another big difference is (for typical map settings) it's not available in nearly as many places on the map, so if nothing else it's more of a logistic problem to get it or its products to where they're needed. But I see what you're saying.

bobingabout wrote: ↑
Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:29 am
I get what you're saying that you shouldn't get "free energy" from burning it, but, I've looked into what other games do. For example, Oxygen not included. They used to have this realistic method where you could use electrolysis to get oxygen and hydrogen from water, then put the hydrogen into a specific power plant to burn it, and get energy out, not enough to even power the electrolyser. Many people complained that hydrogen even existing was pointless and a pain in the backside, and made electrolysis an undesirable method of getting oxygen.(Especially when you consider that water itself is a valuable resource.) So they changed it so that burning hydrogen could not only power the entire electrolysis process, but only use about half of the power it generated. In other words, they've done the reverse of what you're saying I should do.
They did a similar thing in Space Engineers a few years ago. You can turn ice into O + H very rapidly and for a VERY small amount of energy (since you need O for life support right from the start, before you have the resources for more than just a couple of solar panels). Then they introduced H-burning generators (which look like a V8 engine and not a fuel cell like actual spacecraft have). They burn H without using any O -- I have no idea how that works in the vacuum of space -- and you get about 10x as much power out as you put in to your ice processor. This was all considered balanced because you have to mine ice (a limited resource) to make it work, and realism can go right out the airlock.

One thing you could do that would make everyone happy, is add a "Bob's Realism Mod". Just override some of the recipes with different time/energy/quantity values. Players who want it could install it, those who like things as they are don't have to. I'd be happy to help out, the tweaks I've been making are working pretty well.

Probably better just to have an "Expensive Electrolysis" setting, or something that makes it cost 10x as much power, which means you can't get excess energy from burning the hydrogen.

Posted: **Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:03 pm**

Hello! On my first playthrough with these wonderful mods. Thank you so much!

Possible balance issue: As has been mentioned by some, there is an initial surplus of Sodium Hydroxide. But now that I'm in a later stage of the game and need massive quantities of aluminum, alumina production is constrained by how much SO2 I can produce. I already can't use all the hydrogen I produce as a byproduct of oxygen production (flaring off the excess) and venting Chlorine into the atmosphere seems wrongitty wrong wrong.

I checked FNEI for the recipes, and looks like the only source of SO2 is a byproduct of chlorine production. Did I miss something?

I also seem to have a glut of electricity. I've got tons of Petroleum Gas as a byproduct of Sulfur Dioxide production (?) and tons of extra Hydrogen. Trying to burn those off generates way more power than I can use. One thought is to increase the power demands of the Electrolyzers- IRL aluminum production uses a boatload of power. If I may suggest it without being a "gimme" a mod setting for "expensive electrolysis" would be handy.

EDIT: Oops, just saw your response to the previous post on that subject.

Thanks again,

Ostlandr

Posted: **Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:14 pm**

ostlandr wrote: ↑
Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:03 pm
[…]
I checked FNEI for the recipes, and looks like the only source of SO2 is a byproduct of chlorine production. Did I miss something?
[…]

Just to get clear on the chemical formulae:
SO₂ = sulfur dioxide
NaOH = sodium hydroxide

Factorio Forums

[0.18] Please post bugs and balance issues here.

Re: [0.18] Please post bugs and balance issues here.

Re: [0.18] Please post bugs and balance issues here.

Re: [0.18] Please post bugs and balance issues here.

Re: [0.18] Please post bugs and balance issues here.

Re: [0.18] Please post bugs and balance issues here.

Re: [0.18] Please post bugs and balance issues here.