Thruster fuel can not be Packaged

[Sinno]

TL;DR: Packged Thruster fuel and Thruster oxidizer when?

Hey there, So I wonder if it is possible to create the Thruster fuel and Thruster oxidizer and also Package them in a barrel? so I will be able to send these barrels to my other ships so they are only for traveling and are not mainly used to create the fuel themselves, this way I can have a very fast ship with ready fuel barrels inside

[CyberCider]

You’re specifically not supposed to be able to this. Every space platform should be a flying factory, not just a conventional “spaceship”. That’s also why the rocket capacity of ammo is very low.

But, if you really want to, you can send water barrels+carbon+iron ore from a planet’s surface, then process those on the ship. You will have to store the liquids in some storage tanks though.

[Sworn]

Nah, I'm just against those arbitrary artificial blockers.

Having to constantly keep a steady supply of ammo and fuel is even harder.
Those blockers just make the game inconsistent.

Loads of thing in space age are to damm forced because "it is intended to".

Factorio was always about how you could do it in a good way or in a terrible way. Space age itself clearly goes against it in so many ways, making it inconsistent.
People keep arguing that this is the "intended way". That sentence takes so much potential away from the game, there should not be the "intended way". "There is the ship, it needs fuel and ammo", how one goes about handling those should be to each player.

I was sending ammo to my ships from ground, after while I realize how cost it is to keep up with the rockets just for ammo + the actual science or whatever you need to carry, plus the potential of running out of ammo and losing the ship, then I switch to in ship factory. And that was great. Had the option, you experiment with it, learn and enjoy the game. Removing this just make the game lesser than it could be, which is why I'm against it in this and similar threads.

Sample, as the thread mentions, one can't barrel fuel for the ship. Can barrel sulfuric acid, can barrel a -150º gue, but can't barrel a fuel, even though we make nuclear fuel rockets.... Would be very nice to have the ship fuel actually using rocket fuel, nuclear rocket fuel as part of the ship fuel itself, instead of the easy way out of making it in space with iron and carbon.

Like landfill that for some reason is denser than tungsten, just to be harder to ship to Gleba, this doesn't "add a challenge" one makes infinite landfill in Vulcanus and also have infinite rockets there as easy as making iron plates. It is just a bad design, going out of the way to make something "harder" and yet not really accomplishing it, just because it is the "intended way".

I rather have consistence over arbitrary "this is the way to play".
Coal syntheses should be unlocked once you reach space science and have contact with carbon but instead is unlocked in gleba with a recipe that doesn't even use gleba ingredients, just because there is where you were "supposed to make rockets" from carbon.

Having foundations locked on Aquilo instead of having it be a combination of Vulcanos and Fulgora tech, just like the deep elevated rails is unlocked after both planets, foundation should be tungsten and holmium, simple because gleba and Aquilo already have their own landfill, and at this point you already have a big enough Vulcanus and Fulgora that is irrelevant having foundations. Can already cover gleba with landfill, and it's centered on one trip of each planet, there is no need to do something on Fulgora or Vulcanus at this point. Can argue on Nauvis since it has the exclusive better science labs now, but fundation in Nauvis is also irrelevant.

Anyways, I think we should be able to not only barrel fuel and oxidizer but also make in on ground, only thing exclusive to space, should be space science, as the name implies, it's made in space.

[mmmPI]

A regular quality thruster consume up to 120 fluid per second, if you want to "go fast" as the OP suggest, that would represent around one stack of barrel every 5 second. I'm rounding generously here.Even with a single thruster, it would be terribly inneficient to do with the current ratios of fuel.

Besides it seem logical to me that "thruster fuel" can only be made in space, since thruster can only be placed in space.

[Sworn]

A regular quality thruster consume up to 120 fluid per second, if you want to "go fast" as the OP suggest, that would represent around one stack of barrel every 5 second. I'm rounding generously here.Even with a single thruster, it would be terribly inneficient to do with the current ratios of fuel.

Besides it seem logical to me that "thruster fuel" can only be made in space, since thruster can only be placed in space.

With that logic, thruster should only be made in space as well.... No need for thrusters to research and make a space platform, then everything else should be build from the space platform. So one would build the starter pack, platform and asteroid collectors in ground, use the collectors and the asteroid itself to research space science, and then from there, it would allow to build space thrusters, space cargo bays and so on, those are all "non-essential" space only items , even the asteroid crusher should be after researching space science. Everything in space, since they are only placed in space

Regardless of the inefficiency, that is exactly why it should be allowed. It doesn't make as a compelling reason to block it, it makes for a even better reason to allow it

[apriori]

I have to second Sworn's theses.

Too many unneeded restrictions and "intentionations".

Why not to produce thruster fuel on a planet? Send ingredients from space and use them to produce fuel.
Why not to run a thruster on a planet (for testing purposes maybe)? Build a thruster setup and have fun with circuitry or... biters
Aquilo's foundation is "just because I can"-stuff. No need to use — there are other landfills or there's no need to landfill. At least while I'm on 120 SPM stage.

[mmmPI]

With that logic, thruster should only be made in space as well....

Just call it space thruster fuel and it makes it as logic as for space science to you because it's in the name too ?

I mean that seem very very obvious to me that thruster are only ever going to be used in space, unlike crusher for example.

Regardless of the inefficiency, that is exactly why it should be allowed. It doesn't make as a compelling reason to block it, it makes for a even better reason to allow it

There is no compelling reason to change what is currently made suitable for gameplay reason, what you provide is a generic reasonning that has no practical implication in game apart from a terribly inneficient system "just for the sake of it" imo.

Why not to run a thruster on a planet (for testing purposes maybe)? Build a thruster setup and have fun with circuitry or... biters

If there was a good reason provided that would help the suggestion because currently i see none x)

[CyberCider]

Nah, I'm just against those arbitrary artificial blockers.

Having to constantly keep a steady supply of ammo and fuel is even harder.
Those blockers just make the game inconsistent.

Loads of thing in space age are to damm forced because "it is intended to".

Factorio was always about how you could do it in a good way or in a terrible way. Space age itself clearly goes against it in so many ways, making it inconsistent.
People keep arguing that this is the "intended way". That sentence takes so much potential away from the game, there should not be the "intended way". "There is the ship, it needs fuel and ammo", how one goes about handling those should be to each player.

I was sending ammo to my ships from ground, after while I realize how cost it is to keep up with the rockets just for ammo + the actual science or whatever you need to carry, plus the potential of running out of ammo and losing the ship, then I switch to in ship factory. And that was great. Had the option, you experiment with it, learn and enjoy the game. Removing this just make the game lesser than it could be, which is why I'm against it in this and similar threads.

Sample, as the thread mentions, one can't barrel fuel for the ship. Can barrel sulfuric acid, can barrel a -150º gue, but can't barrel a fuel, even though we make nuclear fuel rockets.... Would be very nice to have the ship fuel actually using rocket fuel, nuclear rocket fuel as part of the ship fuel itself, instead of the easy way out of making it in space with iron and carbon.

Like landfill that for some reason is denser than tungsten, just to be harder to ship to Gleba, this doesn't "add a challenge" one makes infinite landfill in Vulcanus and also have infinite rockets there as easy as making iron plates. It is just a bad design, going out of the way to make something "harder" and yet not really accomplishing it, just because it is the "intended way".

I rather have consistence over arbitrary "this is the way to play".
Coal syntheses should be unlocked once you reach space science and have contact with carbon but instead is unlocked in gleba with a recipe that doesn't even use gleba ingredients, just because there is where you were "supposed to make rockets" from carbon.

Having foundations locked on Aquilo instead of having it be a combination of Vulcanos and Fulgora tech, just like the deep elevated rails is unlocked after both planets, foundation should be tungsten and holmium, simple because gleba and Aquilo already have their own landfill, and at this point you already have a big enough Vulcanus and Fulgora that is irrelevant having foundations. Can already cover gleba with landfill, and it's centered on one trip of each planet, there is no need to do something on Fulgora or Vulcanus at this point. Can argue on Nauvis since it has the exclusive better science labs now, but fundation in Nauvis is also irrelevant.

Anyways, I think we should be able to not only barrel fuel and oxidizer but also make in on ground, only thing exclusive to space, should be space science, as the name implies, it's made in space.

Have you ever heard of this thing called “bloat”?

It’s good when there are multiple ways to approach a problem, especially in a game like Factorio. But, when some of those ways are clearly completely impractical, basically “wrong answers”, they don’t contribute to that. They don’t make the problem more interesting, they just make the game more cluttered for no good reason. If someone can’t/has no reason to use something, then why would they even want the ability to use it? Why would the devs go out of their way to add it? All it does is clutter the UI and waste new players’ time. Like, let’s use one of your examples, coal synthesis. It can only be used in space together with another Gleba tech (advanced asteroids), and the only planet it’s useful on is Gleba. If it was unlocked before Gleba, how could that possibly make the game better? It would be like seeing a recipe from a tech you haven’t unlocked yet, because you have no reason to use it yet. And there’s a reason locked recipes stay hidden.

Also, you yourself perfectly summed up why foundation is on Aquilo. If players unlocked it earlier, they would use it a lot more. And space/power network constraints are a big part of Fulgora’s gameplay. It would simply be too easy if you had access to foundation from early on. It, just like the majority of Aquilo techs, is an optional unlock that only megabasers will get any real use out of.

By the way, I think you’re simply overthinking the landfill thing. It’s not heavy for some deeper reason, it’s just a very heavy item. 50 stone compressed into a single item is a lot, compared to similar items. A block of concrete is 1 stone each, and refined concrete is 2 stone each. They actually made landfill 2x lighter than the weight of its ingredients. 1 stone is 2 kg, so 1 landfill should actually be 100 kg instead of the 50 kg it is. How much lighter do you think they should make it?