[0.12.x][v0.12.8] Bob's Power mod

[bobingabout]

at some point, yeah.

[SHiRKiT]

Right... it was supposed to be 0.5 seconds, because when I made the mod, the original solar panels and accumulators took 0.5 seconds. I havn't updated it with newer times.

Aawwhh and I was here thinking that you got realized that 10 seconds for a Solar Panel was too much =\

[bobingabout]

Right... it was supposed to be 0.5 seconds, because when I made the mod, the original solar panels and accumulators took 0.5 seconds. I havn't updated it with newer times.

Aawwhh and I was here thinking that you got realized that 10 seconds for a Solar Panel was too much =\

Well, it probably is, but 0.5 is too fast too. I'm thinking a 2x2 should take 2 seconds, a 3x3 about 4.5 seconds and a 4x4 about 8 seconds.

[orzelek]

I think that your steam engines might be a tad to efficient.
Effectivity set to 4 would mean it produces 4 times energy it consumes if I understand how stuff works.

It seems like slightly to efficient - might get those to a lower value and increase total power capacity. It will be a challenge then to actually heat up lots of water to make engine work at full capacity.

DyTech power has it solved in different way - with upgrades effectivity actually decreases which I also found strange. Better and more costly hardware gets worse on energy conversion rates there.

[bobingabout]

who's to say how much power is actually in a peice of coal? 150% efficiency in the boiler and 4x efficiency in the steam engine sounds silly, but perhaps the original designs were only operating at 30% and 20% efficiency, so this 150% (original is rated 2/3, or 66.6% in code, making 150% 225% of the original) is actually only 67.5%, and 400% is actually only 80%, the original machines were just crap, and my versions fix the flaws. at least that's how I look at it. I reduce the ammount of steam used in each engine so that you can fit more engines on a single pump as you upgrade them, this effect alone causes a decreased output in power, not an increase, the 2x and 4x efficiency scaling are to counter this drop, to actually give you an advantage.

think about steam engines (trains). Sure, more powerful steam engines usually had a bigger boiler, but they also changed the designs of the actual mechanics too to make steam usage more efficient. A later design of a similar sized engine could easilly produce double... tripple, or more pulling power from the same fuel. This effect can easilly be seen in the flying scottsman, the previous owner <butchered> the preserved engine to "upgrade" it, making the A3 gresley more powerful than any of the A4s in existance (the next model) simply by changing a few design features.

Why can't my steam engines do the same? think of it less of a 400% fuel efficiency, and more of 4x the efficiency as the original.

[gixbit]

who's to say how much power is actually in a peice of coal? 150% efficiency in the boiler and 4x efficiency in the steam engine sounds silly, but perhaps the original designs were only operating at 30% and 20% efficiency, so this 150% (original is rated 2/3, or 66.6% in code, making 150% 225% of the original) is actually only 67.5%, and 400% is actually only 80%, the original machines were just crap, and my versions fix the flaws. at least that's how I look at it. I reduce the ammount of steam used in each engine so that you can fit more engines on a single pump as you upgrade them, this effect alone causes a decreased output in power, not an increase, the 2x and 4x efficiency scaling are to counter this drop, to actually give you an advantage.

think about steam engines (trains). Sure, more powerful steam engines usually had a bigger boiler, but they also changed the designs of the actual mechanics too to make steam usage more efficient. A later design of a similar sized engine could easilly produce double... tripple, or more pulling power from the same fuel. This effect can easilly be seen in the flying scottsman, the previous owner <butchered> the preserved engine to "upgrade" it, making the A3 gresley more powerful than any of the A4s in existance (the next model) simply by changing a few design features.

Why can't my steam engines do the same? think of it less of a 400% fuel efficiency, and more of 4x the efficiency as the original.

Because there has to be a drawback to this to keep it's value in gameplay rather than being the end all power source and completely overpowered. We're talking about a game, not real life. In real scenarios, we have a lot of technology to make a lot of things more efficient, In real life these things are welcomed without hesitation. However, this is a game, and the concept of making something that easily satisfies power requirements goes against the fun of the game. Thats why it needs to have a major drawback, that makes it harder to use so that it scales with endgame better, not just something you can slap down in blueprints and spam it. I can't say what you need to do personally, but, you've played the game yourself, You can sure add more power and machines until you run out of map (never usually). However, the issue is usually with space management. On the one hand you build solar panels and they take up an asston of room but, they're flexible on where you place them. However steam engines make a lot of pollution and require a constant source of fuel or they drop in power.

Those are drawbacks in the original game, If you want to make a mod that introduces a new steam engine, it makes far more sense to add equipment that consumes more fuel, generates more pollution and creates more power. I mean based on the game mechanics. Rather than introduce boilers that use less and less fuel, and steam engines that generate more and more power allowing you to put down like 20 steam engines on a line rather than 6-8. And space management is hardly a draw back with numbers like 400% and 150%. That's an extreme example of course.

If you're trying to balance your mod against the game it's one thing, but if you're trying to incorporate real life logic into a game where a lone dude can create an entire factory compound from a pickaxe and a dream, You're probably using the wrong mindset for this. What you really need is to evaluate how to incorporate machines such as these into the game without ruining the endgame experience for players who like a challenge. There needs to be a particular aspect of these machines that makes them harder to use so that their value in the endgame and the like creates fun vs. output. That's my suggestion to you, You can completely ignore it on your own merit.

[faldazar]

I honestly think that the balance with the engines+boilers is fine. They need to be this efficient, because they have a huge competition in solar panels+accumulators that use no fuel at all and create no pollution at all for a slightly higher initial cost.
In the vanilla game every player will at some point change their power set up to solar panels, but with this better engines it is actually viable to be the mean guy that doesnt care for this alien planet at all, instead of being forced to build clean energy.

imo the "the end all power source" will still be solar panels, so everything is fine with this mod.

[bobingabout]

Indeed. I have a setup of MK4 boilers and MK3 engines, disconnected from the power grid in favor of the field of MK2 and MK3 solar panels, and high capacity accumulators.

at least I think it's MK4 boilers. it's definitely MK3 engines.

[Degraine]

My recent games have all been completely solar agnostic, just for the hell of it. I'm interested in seeing how far I can drive the pollution of a base down by using the extended modules available. I'm also using Klonan's oil burner because dammit I want to use oil firing already. I lose the efficiency of your boilers, but it produces a different fluid that has greater energy content - it boosts the output of steam engines a little, which is nice.

[F-W]

Well, it seems to me, that high tier boilers and steam engines are completely-100%-overpowered. Why?

Boilers in original factorio has there energy conversion efficiency = 50% (it is very good number!). It means, you gain 4MJ of electric energy from 8 MJ of heat energy from fuel (efficiency of steam engines =100%, so they convert all energy of boiled water into electric).

T2 boilers in this mod have efficiency = 75%. Well, for me it is a huge jump! But it is not the worst.

T2 steam engine in mod has effectivity = 2. It not only allowed you to fit more engines on single pipe, but it also doubled the amount of energy, that produced by boilers. So that numbers are multiply together. I made a simple experiment to illustrate this.

Put boiler and steam engine on the separate network, with no fuel and some empty accumulators. And than put a single piece of coal (8MJ) into the boiler, and look how mush energy will stored in accumulators when coal burned out. This is a result:

Mk1 boiler with Mk1 steam engine produces 4 MJ of energy - as expected.
Mk2 boiler with Mk1 steam engine produced 6 MJ of electric energy.
Mk2 boiler with Mk2 steam engine produced 12 MJ. What about law of conservation of energy?
Mk3 boiler with Mk3 steam engine can produce 32 MJ of energy! And, finally,
Mk4 boiler with Mk3 steam engine produced 48 MJ. It is a 600% more than coal creates heat, and 1200% boost compared to original boilers!...

Well, if you speak about realism, in real life energy conversion efficiency can't be much than 100%. Best turbine have this parameter to 60%, and conventional combustion engines all less than 50% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_co ... efficiency). Ok, I don't know, how much power is in a piece of coal, maybe MC^2, but this is a boiler - not reactor which annihilated coal with antimatter)) So, I think, it will be good to consider, that piece of coal provides 8 MJ of heat energy, as it mentioned in tooltip. And total energy output must be not greater than 100%)).

I think, that you can balance this by changing boiler and steam engine parameters. Boilers could rise there efficiency from 50 to, maybe 80-85%. It looks little, but it is an example of "power of little numbers". Efficiency=75% means, that you need 1,5 times less fuel to provide same amount of energy. It is a huge economy of fuel. As for steam engines, i think, it's better keep there effectivity parameter =1, and make them to use more water. Or, maybe, for more realism and difficulty, make first engine effectivity less than 1, rising to 1 with tier (somehow first one works without bearings after all )...

And if you want to make steam power more usefull compared to solar energy - I think you must make solar more expensive. Because in your mod with cheap steel and cheap basic circuits, it is twice - three times easier to switch to solar. (and accumulators with twice capacity and same cost too!) So, as you added a lot of new resources, you could make solar to need some rare materials to craft (as in real life).


And what will happens, when you are breaking the law of conservation of energy? Infinite source of energy! Here, this setup can generate more energy, than it consumes:

To Bob.jpg (213.17 KiB) Viewed 25116 times

Mk4 boiler and mk3 engine. And no module at all!

How much more it produses? Well, with one single piece of solid fuel it produses 50 pieces. So, why we need solar, coal or oil? We will produse enegy from nothing!

[Cooolaid]

this might solve your problems

https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... 91&t=13782

[crysanja]

i guess you are right that it is wrong.

maybe the coal useage should go up, but the pollution production stalled or reduced in proportion.

---
the real problem is with picking real units for the game.
if the Factorio team would create their own units, this problem could never exist in the first place.

[bobingabout]

The big issue I have with the steam power entities is that the game already gives you something that is fairly efficient, it doesn't give you much room to work with when upgrading if you want to keep things within the realm of realism. So I basically say... How much power is in a peice of coal? instead of 8MJ, maybe it should be more like 80MJ? If that were the case, the base game boilers and furnaces and stuff is pretty low in efficiency, and mine add a lot of improvements. 48 from 80 is only 60% efficient which is still realistic. The problem is to change a coal to 80MJ for the purposes of realistic feedback would require a lot of reballancing across the board, and I just didn't want to write in scripts to try and reballance everything.

The steps in improved efficiency of the steam engines is a bit high, but the MK3 steam engine is my desired end point. Perhaps the stats should be on a MK4, with a new MK3 somewhere between MK2 and the current MK3.

as for the hydrogen fuel blocks thing... Hydrogen was never intended to be used as a fuel source in my mod, that was added in later as a control method, you can make it from the oil chain if you need more, or burn it if you have too much, as a means of ballancing Oxygen, Hydrogen and Chlorine. Now that I've added the void pumps, I could just remove the Hydrogen to Fuel block recipe, and that issue would be solved.

[F-W]

So, you think, 12-times fuel consumption reduction is OK and pretty ballanced?


I want to say, that original factorio numbers are quite good. Maybe, with your longer production chains you need some more energy. But, in my view, 2-3 times fuel use reduction will be enough, not 12 times.

[bobingabout]

Maybe this needs a config, like everything else.

[adalah217]

Well, it seems to me, that high tier boilers and steam engines are completely-100%-overpowered. Why?

How much more it produses? Well, with one single piece of solid fuel it produses 50 pieces. So, why we need solar, coal or oil? We will produse enegy from nothing!

Well, from a design perspective, the solar power produces energy from nothing too. You plop down a solar panel and it produces energy from nothing in the game (besides sacrificing the space for the solar panel area). Of course we can rationalize this as "well it takes sunlight!" But the reality is, the solar panel uses no resources, as sunlight is not a resource here. In the game, this steam engine you've produce is (I'm assuming) far less efficient than the same area of the most upgraded solar panels, right? Well, all you need is a way to rationalize this "infinite" energy source, just as we can rationalize the solar panel "infinite" energy source. Maybe the higher end boilers are able to utilize wind and solar, but require the first spark of energy to come from somewhere else?

All I'm trying to say is the real world explanation can be made up later to account for the game's design. Game design shouldn't necessarily be compromised by real world design.

[Cooolaid]

the solar power produces energy from nothing too. You plop down a solar panel and it produces energy from nothing in the game (besides sacrificing the space for the solar panel area). Of course we can rationalize this as "well it takes sunlight!" But the reality is, the solar panel uses no resources, as sunlight is not a resource here.

Actually:
Solar Panels—The panels are made up of photovoltaic (PV) cells, ((light hits your solar panels with "photons" (particles of sunlight).)) which convert sunlight into direct current (DC) electricity throughout the day.
Inverter—This device converts the DC electricity generated by the solar panels into the alternating current (AC) electricity ((converts those photons into electrons)).
The electrons flow out of the solar panel and into an inverter and other electrical devices. The inverter converts that "DC" power (commonly used in batteries) into (AC) power.

So when you say it produces energy from nothing, it's quite the opposite. - it produces it from "photons" which then gets inverted into Electrons, then into Electricity..


Maybe the mod needs an Inverter in different sizes and a couple of other units, before Protons can be used as Electricity through the solar panels.
Also can be used as a step to actually finishing off the creation of batteries, since DC is used within Batteries to make energy.
A few steps one must do before actually being able to produce electricity & items in several ways.. (hint hint)

[adalah217]

the solar power produces energy from nothing too. You plop down a solar panel and it produces energy from nothing in the game (besides sacrificing the space for the solar panel area). Of course we can rationalize this as "well it takes sunlight!" But the reality is, the solar panel uses no resources, as sunlight is not a resource here.

Actually:

Maybe the mod needs an Inverter in different sizes and a couple of other units, before Protons can be used as Electricity through the solar panels.
Also can be used as a step to actually finishing off the creation of batteries, since DC is used within Batteries to make energy.
A few steps one must do before actually being able to produce electricity & items in several ways.. (hint hint)

I'm well aware of how solar panels work in the physical world

However in a literal sense, in the game, solar panels do not take in photons. Photons do not exist. A simple day and night system exists.
Going off that, the solar panels in the game produces energy from nothing, similar to how the "infinite energy" steam engine works.

In the game, just come up with a physical world explanation for how the boiler and steam engine produces "energy from nothing". Taking my example from earlier: the boiler just needs to be lit at first with coal or other material. After that, it can utilize wind and solar to produce far more energy than is gained normally by burning the coal in the first place.

Again: All I'm trying to say is the real world explanation can be made up later to account for the game's design. Game design shouldn't necessarily be compromised by real world design. You're complicating the game with realism to a point where it wouldn't be fun.

[Kayser]

I disagree that config is the solution. Part of the fun with a mod-pack you want to compare your buids/efforts with others'. The more you individualize, the less interesting those comparisons will be. (What fun is is to say: -Hey, look at my clever energy build with Bob's mods; by the way I turned all the yields down 50-times to engineer a problem that didn't exist in the first place.)

The problem with the closed loop is both that the efficiency of the boiler/steam engine is too high, and that the energy cost of electrolysis is way too low. It actually makes sense to use hydrogen for fuel, but that should not yield more energy than it took to make it.

I still like, however, that it makes conventional power generation a viable option to solar. So, if the efficiencies of the steam chain are loweded (as I would like), solar should follow. I don't have an issue with that (the issue I have with solar is that feels much easier to make a lot of MK1 solar cells than to set up production and use MK2:s, as it is only 50% better. I would like to see one or two more generations of solars, with 100% increase per generation or so.)

Still GREAT work with the mods. Love the depth and complexity it adds overall.

[KNOWFEAR1337]

The problem with the closed loop is both that the efficiency of the boiler/steam engine is too high, and that the energy cost of electrolysis is way too low. It actually makes sense to use hydrogen for fuel, but that should not yield more energy than it took to make it.

Actually it SHOULD make more power than it took to make or what would be the point in making fuel out of it,

"Since each mole of water requires two moles of electrons, and given that the Faraday constant F represents the charge of a mole of electrons (96485 C/mol), it follows that the minimum voltage necessary for electrolysis is about 1.23 V.[17] If electrolysis is carried out at high temperature this voltage reduces. This effectively allows the electrolyser to operate at more than 100% electrical efficiency. In electrochemical systems this means that heat must be supplied to the reactor to sustain the reaction. In this way thermal energy can be used for part of the electrolysis energy requirement.[18] In a similar way the required voltage can be reduced if a fuel (such as carbon) is reacted with the oxygen produced. This results in some of the fuels energy being used to "assist" the electrolysis process and can reduce the overall cost of hydrogen produced.[19]

However, observing the entropy component (and other losses), voltages over 1.48 V are required for the reaction to proceed at practical current densities (the thermoneutral voltage).

In the case of water electrolysis, Gibbs free energy represents the minimum work necessary for the reaction to proceed, and the reaction enthalpy is the amount of energy (both work and heat) that has to be provided so the reaction products are at the same temperature as the reactant (i.e. standard temperature for the values given above). An electrolyser operating at 1.48 V would be 100% efficient."

there are also cars that run straight off of this reaction