The problem is also that changing belts to require power would likely need considerable internal changes to make belts chain power (you'd need a lot of poles otherwise), would increase UPS costs, and would have virtually no gameplay change.MalcolmCooks wrote:I'd still like some response on thisMalcolmCooks wrote:I have an idea.
Belts will always be next to a drill or inserter, right? Since the amount of energy that the belts would actually require would be minute, as mentioned earlier, would it be reasonable to have the belts siphon some power, or be mechanically driven by, another entity that they are placed next to? In game, this would happen just simply, that the belts would not run if they were not placed next to something they can be powered by. This would actually be no different from current game mechanics, apart from a tiny increase of power consumption, and adding a drain to burner inserters if there is not something else that could power the belt. But it would not appear that the belts work by magic, because if power was lost to the area, if there was no coal in your burner items, or if you placed belts on their own, the belts would not run.
Is it true that a belt must always be next to, at the least, an inserter? Long-handed inserters must be placed away from the belt, but is there any case where it is necessary to have only long-handed inserters?
If the problem is just that the belts are apparantly magic and that ruins the immersion of the game, then does this solve it?
It solves the immersion problem, but you could just pretend that belts already do this and that each one has a very weak battery that can run it for a couple minutes. I worked out a belt piece needs at most 0.1W to run, so a 12J battery being in every belt is nothing when you consider accumulators and their 5MJ storage since they use batteries in the recipe.