From Player To Player (Theocrafting, Builds, Blueprints, Tips, Workarounds)

[Peppe]

next version will support a smelter, but of course a different way ... because vanilla-code-limitations ... but it counts the result.

2 more simple examples of drillhead-repair with request-chests

pictures

drying water in place is better, you transport the end-products - but depends on how far.
also end-products can transformed into unicomp.

I like the rebalance to drillheads and toolheads. Much less expensive to run.

I see good tradeoffs where I could run 4 dirt miners with drillheads with ~4 support machines or 32 drills without. The drillheads now only cost ~13% of the total unicomp output of a washing setup where before they cost more than the total output. Power and space savings I think make it interesting decision to pay recurring repair costs or recurring power/space costs from more drills.

How are you looking to tune the ore washing process? Should it be a net unicomp loss?

This may be intentional, but I think stone might be a hair too valuable in unicomp. I plan a ore washing setup for 5 blue belt of input (40 MC washers). It kicks off a ton of waste water and I compress that to mud and eventually it is just under 16 unicomp off the contaminated water to mud cycle. To run the ore washing with no modules I need 400 stone a minute = 20 unicomp. I think this is a good state it means I need stone/unicomp input from outside my ore washing. With the changes to drill heads I don't need the huge setup I had last version, but still a modest setup of ~7 master washers and 4 drill head diggers could supply all my stone or I could consume the unicomp and run maybe just 1-2 washers/diggers to fill the gap in stone and close the loop.

If I use yuoki productivity modules on the furnaces turning stone ore into brick I only need ~14 unicomp of stone. Since I generate 16 just washing ore I can run a small unicomp surplus with just my ore washing and a single unicomp -> stone ore -> stone brick furnace setup (~5 furnaces with 2 mantis modules each). No need to make dirt and wash it for stone + process the extra for unicomp. Still a pretty complex production and maintenance chain, but a little less interesting without having to provide stone or unicomp from outside the ore washing loop to sustain it.

I think it is very valuable for the extra output (5 lanes of ore becomes lanes of 8 plates), but the cost to run toolheads may need a tweak to make an interesting trade off/design decision on how you keep the gravy train running.

Drillbits run on duratol would toolheads run on nuatreel instead of stone brick? Looks like it would be the same 20 unicomp to make 200/m nuasteel pellets with basic crushing or 16.67 if you crush with toolheads. It would be a small surplus if you convert slag (2/m) to unicomp and do advanced processing and a small loss with basic processing (overall -2 unicomp a min). Nuatreel would be a little more interesting than the stone brick cycle, but the small surplus (1.21 unicomp/m) concerns me.

Duratols crushing/pressing ratios have it cost about 50% more in unicomp by the pellet stage... using 50% more nuasteel pellets in the toolhead repair recipes would shift it to a loss no matter what you do. I get -7 and -12 advanced crushing vs not. That is ~3-4 master washers washing for stone converting their outputs to unicomp -- if stone value also does not change washing for alien fragements + stone seems to be the best source of unicomp at the moment.

Sorry to ramble on!

[YuokiTani]

I look from outside to the washing process as normal player without high knowledge to the mechanics. From this perspective you build what you need and take it as it is. I'am not sure, but in normal gameplay are many other things also todo to progress in game so it's maybe not enough time to go very deep into mechancis. Of course there should no simple uc-benefit loop aviable, but with investing time, make calculations, build setups - i think you deserves a small gain. i don't see this to problematic and i assume in play you need also stone for landfill and walls, any maybe you are happy to find a way to get some more uc. It would break if the surplus also is enough to create power for the complete build. (pfw-addon it's intended)

The stone-brick was a balance change in a very early test of this mechanic (because stone gets useless in later game)

you may wonder, but i do not deep calculations or make huge setups, it's simply a time thing. also i made or need to bring in some other decisions. for example - my first idea was also to crush slag and press/burn them back into stone - because i want a alternative to landfill. on first look its good, but on a closer not. slag can transform into uc->stone, and you get stone from dirt-washing and also crystals can turn into uc->stone. so it's nearly impossible to make the balance right or give the player a reason to go this way. the current solution, makeing slag-bricks is a good way to provide a solid building material.

i appreciate every contribution to improve the mod. this helps me to get the balance right or fix errors and misunderstandings.

[Peppe]

I look from outside to the washing process as normal player without high knowledge to the mechanics. From this perspective you build what you need and take it as it is. I'am not sure, but in normal gameplay are many other things also todo to progress in game so it's maybe not enough time to go very deep into mechancis. Of course there should no simple uc-benefit loop aviable, but with investing time, make calculations, build setups - i think you deserves a small gain. i don't see this to problematic and i assume in play you need also stone for landfill and walls, any maybe you are happy to find a way to get some more uc. It would break if the surplus also is enough to create power for the complete build. (pfw-addon it's intended)

The stone-brick was a balance change in a very early test of this mechanic (because stone gets useless in later game)

you may wonder, but i do not deep calculations or make huge setups, it's simply a time thing. also i made or need to bring in some other decisions. for example - my first idea was also to crush slag and press/burn them back into stone - because i want a alternative to landfill. on first look its good, but on a closer not. slag can transform into uc->stone, and you get stone from dirt-washing and also crystals can turn into uc->stone. so it's nearly impossible to make the balance right or give the player a reason to go this way. the current solution, makeing slag-bricks is a good way to provide a solid building material.

i appreciate every contribution to improve the mod. this helps me to get the balance right or fix errors and misunderstandings.

Whatever your approach is works... cause I love this mod set I haven't tried PFW yet because I think i saw you said a rework was coming.

Just wanted to give feedback on the washing process. Before the 4x toolhead change I think it was around -60 net loss on unicomp, so was a big swing in one version to go from a big loss to get the ore doubling benefit to a small gain/loss depending on the finer points of your build. I didn't think of a normal player so it is probably in a good spot for them where they have to create the main washing, recycle the toolheads, recycle the dirty outputs, and supply just a hair more stone bricks than the process can generate. Rather than needing a huge stone generating setup or unicomp surplus to run. It took me 3-4 creative iterations to get something I liked.

I haven't built it in-game yet, but on the furnace process ... it looks like it is throwing off a ton of slag in foreman. I see 5 unicomp to run and 42 unicomp output. Power requirements may be huge to compensate? Material wise I show 54 smelters and 9 chargers needed to supply my throughput target of 5 lanes in 8 out. If i was to make my stone for washing with bricks off the slag from furnaces it would still have ~4000 slag a minute surplus ~40 unicomp worth and subtract 5 unicomp for the rich dust consumed for net 35.

Net washing and smelting together would be positive 10 unicomp a minute per lane of blue belt input with the bulk of the gain in the furnace stage.

3000MW per unicomp and 1200 MW to convert it to fuel = 1800 MW / 60 seconds = 30 MW second per unicomp. 30MW * 50 unicomp surplus = 1500 MW/s?
I think rough estimate the machines for that scale would use maybe 250-300MW?

[YuokiTani]

you should make a build, i think foreman is wrong.

(0.75 UC) 15 ore -> wash -> normal smelt 9 pure iron -> 18 plates + ~4 with efficency (20%) ~ 22 plates = 1.1 UC (+0.35)
(0.75 UC) 15 ore -> wash -> adv 9 pure iron -> 18 plates + 4 slag no eff possible = 18 plates = 0.9 UC + 0.04 UC = 0.94 UC (+0.19)

every 10 cycles is 1 rich-dust = 0.1 UC consumed, can possible made from slag->uc

so it depends on efficency modules and if you need a very fast smelting (and can handle the output).

generate stone from nothing (dirt-digging) is intended to prevent dead-lock if some ressource not spawn, you play a scenario, or you simply to lazy go outside your base. in all cases you need a lot of energy, material and space to produce a surplus. and compare to other mods you don't get much better equipment ^^

[Peppe]

you should make a build, i think foreman is wrong.

(0.75 UC) 15 ore -> wash -> normal smelt 9 pure iron -> 18 plates + ~4 with efficency (20%) ~ 22 plates = 1.1 UC (+0.35)
(0.75 UC) 15 ore -> wash -> adv 9 pure iron -> 18 plates + 4 slag no eff possible = 18 plates = 0.9 UC + 0.04 UC = 0.94 UC (+0.19)

every 10 cycles is 1 rich-dust = 0.1 UC consumed, can possible made from slag->uc

so it depends on efficency modules and if you need a very fast smelting (and can handle the output).

generate stone from nothing (dirt-digging) is intended to prevent dead-lock if some ressource not spawn, you play a scenario, or you simply to lazy go outside your base. in all cases you need a lot of energy, material and space to produce a surplus. and compare to other mods you don't get much better equipment ^^

Here is the build. Foreman has it right... maybe I just described it wrong. And I as way off on power consumption. Only 95MW. No modules used.

build

Washing 5 belts of raw ore = 4 belts of pure copper


14 x 8 Smelter setup (56 total), 4 belts of pure copper = 8 belts of copper plate


Recycle Contaminated water to unicomp ~15 a minute.
Press slag to bricks to supply tool repair ~200 bricks a minute.
Remaining slag convert to unicomp ~40 unicomp a minute for the 4k slag.
Consume ~5 unicomp to create rich dust and recharge Heat cubes.


Consume a modest 95MW


1 Hour Production Stats:
Net ~50 unicomp a minute.

[YuokiTani]

looks still balanced to me ...
50 UC = 1000 Ore/min and consume is ~ 12K so its only ~ 8% profit
to reach this you need a huge amount of material to invest and some time to get the 136.800 Tech-Signs to make your build possible.
but energy-consume can be a little higher. (and i will think about the slag-output/slag transform)

i think production-modules in furnances gives you a higher profit with lower cost.

can you post your foreman calculations ?

[Peppe]

looks still balanced to me ...
50 UC = 1000 Ore/min and consume is ~ 12K so its only ~ 8% profit
to reach this you need a huge amount of material to invest and some time to get the 136.800 Tech-Signs to make your build possible.
but energy-consume can be a little higher. (and i will think about the slag-output/slag transform)

i think production-modules in furnances gives you a higher profit with lower cost.

can you post your foreman calculations ?

Good point that in order to get the unicomp you actually have to consume/store all the output materials.

The repair cycle used to generate a lot more tech signs. Did not notice that until now with the 4x tweak that means you make four times less of those, so you can slowly use the master craft version over time, but it will take longer.

Foreman attached

[YuokiTani]

i have used a different perspective for funny facts if you don't cheat

Foremans Flow

i counted ~ 136.800 Tech-Signs needed to build all Mastercrafted Washer and Smelter ... if you want shorten your time you produce these from a UC-equivalent of 227.620 UC with a plus of 1.396, so 226.224 net. with a gain of 50 uc/min it will take ~ 4.524 minutes ~ 75 hours to make your build possible without the needed additional material.

i think the gain with productivity-modules in vanilla-smelting recalced in uc is higher. but i'am fine with this

[Peppe]

i have used a different perspective for funny facts if you don't cheat

Foremans Flow

i counted ~ 136.800 Tech-Signs needed to build all Mastercrafted Washer and Smelter ... if you want shorten your time you produce these from a UC-equivalent of 227.620 UC with a plus of 1.396, so 226.224 net. with a gain of 50 uc/min it will take ~ 4.524 minutes ~ 75 hours to make your build possible without the needed additional material.

i think the gain with productivity-modules in vanilla-smelting recalced in uc is higher. but i'am fine with this

I was a little worried about tech signs, but then I ran out of stuff I needed from reputation and switched to converting them to tech signs. Now generating 60k of them an hour.

[YuokiTani]

i saw in a let's play video problems with 14.7 MW generator-setup not get enough water. here 2 example-build for you to modify, improve or expand.

a 13.2 MW - setup all water consume

picture

a 14.6 MW - setup with some reserves

picture

[Peppe]

Never know how many pumps a power setup needs.

This setup only needed 4 pumps per blue generator:

14.5 per

58.2 MW shown in power screen, so about .1 per generator off from perfect.

Tiles side by side with the pumps mainly being the limit on how close you can cram them. If not aligning to pump running them touching didn't cause an issue.

[Peppe]

i saw in a let's play video problems with 14.7 MW generator-setup not get enough water. here 2 example-build for you to modify, improve or expand.

a 13.2 MW - setup all water consume

picture

a 14.6 MW - setup with some reserves

picture

Curious on the math for these things.

3x3 boiler says 3.6 MW. Alone it runs ~7 vanilla steam engines. (3.5kw). Also can run a 3x3 + 4 vanilla boilers and fully supply the standard 1/13/10 vanilla steam power setup @ 5MW.

So 14.6 generator should be 14600 / 3600 = a hair over 4 boilers to a generator. Looking at the code for the generator, does the 88% effectivity on the big generator skew that, so it really needs 16,600 boiler capacity? That is still only 4.6 big boilers. Just scratching my head cause simple math from display values works for vanilla stuff, but not for the blue generator and probably others...

[YuokiTani]

1/0,88 * 14.7 / (0,75 * 3.6) = ~ 6.2 it's closer to the game-experience but of course also wrong. (i thinked this a long time ^^)
i think i had read somewhere if the water goes faster through it will absorb less heat - so much more water needs heat and this is above the internal max-number (or flow restriction). It's more a water throughput problem.
my fluid_taken/tick calculations is based on (old?) vanilla 510kW/0,1 flow/100% eff. These big things more to test game-limits and solve puzzles

nice setup - i was sure someone can do a better example

[Fatmice]

Boilers are modified pipes, so you do not need to put intervening pipes. In fact, doing so will reduce the heating efficiency per space and throughput (longer pipes lead to less throughput). Flow rate doesn't affect heating as fluid's temperature is modified each tick before it "flows." As long as the fuel is sufficiently long burning, there is no noticeable effect when fluid consumption is high. When fluid consumption is higher than theoretical throughput, you will see issues.

Here's some math.

The 14.6 MW is 88% efficient. Fluid consumption of water assuming temperature is 100

14600 KW / 0.88 / 85 KJ / 60 ticks = 3.25312 units / tick

An off-shore pump is only 1 units / tick so you need 4 of them. However you need pipes to connect them which decreases final throughput. The best scenario is to connect the off-shore pumps directly to the boiler, which has 4 connections.

Now you also need to figure out the number of boilers

14600 KW / 0.88 / 3600 KW / 0.75 = 6.14478

So you need 7 of them. Here lies the issue. A boiler is a pipe. At 4 pipes long, the theoretical throughput is only 2.5 units / tick. We need 3.25312 units / tick. So fluid flowing through our 7 boilers will definitely not meet the target if they are laid out linearly. This is where you must figure out how to navigate around the this limit through some clever design involving small pumps and storage tanks.

I suggest you read this thread. viewtopic.php?f=134&t=6066

[YuokiTani]

14600 KW / 0.88 / 3600 KW / 0.75 = 6.14478

i think you make the same mistake as i a long time. because boiler's efficency applies to the burner not to the heat transfer-rate.
so the boiler transfers 3.6 MW but uses 4.8 MW worth in Fuel. otherwise would vanilla setups not work. vanilla-boiler has 390 kW at 50% - and common/suggested setup is 13/10 -> 13 * 390 kW = 5070 kW -> 10 Steam-engines.

[kab83]

Boilers are modified pipes, so you do not need to put intervening pipes. In fact, doing so will reduce the heating efficiency per space and throughput (longer pipes lead to less throughput). Flow rate doesn't affect heating as fluid's temperature is modified each tick before it "flows." As long as the fuel is sufficiently long burning, there is no noticeable effect when fluid consumption is high. When fluid consumption is higher than theoretical throughput, you will see issues.

Here's some math.

The 14.6 MW is 88% efficient. Fluid consumption of water assuming temperature is 100

14600 KW / 0.88 / 85 KJ / 60 ticks = 3.25312 units / tick

An off-shore pump is only 1 units / tick so you need 4 of them. However you need pipes to connect them which decreases final throughput. The best scenario is to connect the off-shore pumps directly to the boiler, which has 4 connections.

Now you also need to figure out the number of boilers

14600 KW / 0.88 / 3600 KW / 0.75 = 6.14478

So you need 7 of them. Here lies the issue. A boiler is a pipe. At 4 pipes long, the theoretical throughput is only 2.5 units / tick. We need 3.25312 units / tick. So fluid flowing through our 7 boilers will definitely not meet the target if they are laid out linearly. This is where you must figure out how to navigate around the this limit through some clever design involving small pumps and storage tanks.

I suggest you read this thread. viewtopic.php?f=134&t=6066

[Peppe]

Boilers are modified pipes, so you do not need to put intervening pipes. In fact, doing so will reduce the heating efficiency per space and throughput (longer pipes lead to less throughput). Flow rate doesn't affect heating as fluid's temperature is modified each tick before it "flows." As long as the fuel is sufficiently long burning, there is no noticeable effect when fluid consumption is high. When fluid consumption is higher than theoretical throughput, you will see issues.

Here's some math.

The 14.6 MW is 88% efficient. Fluid consumption of water assuming temperature is 100

14600 KW / 0.88 / 85 KJ / 60 ticks = 3.25312 units / tick

An off-shore pump is only 1 units / tick so you need 4 of them. However you need pipes to connect them which decreases final throughput. The best scenario is to connect the off-shore pumps directly to the boiler, which has 4 connections.

Now you also need to figure out the number of boilers

14600 KW / 0.88 / 3600 KW / 0.75 = 6.14478

So you need 7 of them. Here lies the issue. A boiler is a pipe. At 4 pipes long, the theoretical throughput is only 2.5 units / tick. We need 3.25312 units / tick. So fluid flowing through our 7 boilers will definitely not meet the target if they are laid out linearly. This is where you must figure out how to navigate around the this limit through some clever design involving small pumps and storage tanks.

I suggest you read this thread. viewtopic.php?f=134&t=6066

Like Yuoki said, the only issue with this is it does not calculate correctly for vanilla, so how can it be right?
Say 10 engines (5100KW / 1 / 390KW / .5 = 26.15 boilers?

The fluid flow is interesting -- i guess through trial and error my design resolved the flow issue by have 2 independent lines (that are 6 pipes each) that combine for a 2 pipe run into the generator. That 2 pipe run is able to supply the flow, but has a slight temperature drop over the run cutting ~.1 KW of performance.

[Fatmice]

Hi, your math is wrong. A vanilla boiler is 390 KW effective.

The math should be
5100 KW / 780 KW / 0.5 = 13.0769 ~ 13 boilers. This is exactly right in-game

5100 KW / 390 KW will also yield the same answer.

[Peppe]

Hi, your math is wrong. A vanilla boiler is 390 KW effective.

The math should be
5100 KW / 780 KW / 0.5 = 13.0769 ~ 13 boilers. This is exactly right in-game

5100 KW / 390 KW will also yield the same answer.

That does not make sense...
Display value in game is energy consumption : 390KW and 3.6MW for each boiler respectively.

So for the vanilla boiler you use the display value directly and ignore efficiency and then for yuoki you factor it in?

Say 7 vanilla engines = 3570KW
Vanilla = 9.15
How many yuoki boilers are needed? .99 or 1.32?

[Fatmice]

Ah I see what you mean. I was doing some other math...Here's the correct math.

You should always factor in the efficiency. If you look at the prototype, there something called energy_consumption and effectivity. The effective consumption is energy_consumption / effectivity. This is the rate of how much energy you would need to feed it to produce the power equivalent to energy_consumption.

For Yuoki 3.6 MW (3600 KW) boiler (Boiler 3M6/4), you would need 1 if you want to support 7 vanilla steam engines at 100%.

(7*510 KW) / 3600 KW = .991667

(7*510 KW) / 3600 KW / 0.75 = gives overall efficiency = 74.375%

To generate 3570 KW you would have to consume 4760 KW of heat. But since the boiler always work at the rated energy_consumption, you actually need 4800 KW of heat from fuel. The excess is simply stored in the fluid.

Regarding vanilla boiler, the game used to display the energy_consumption in-game, which was the value divided by effectivity, so I confused myself, a problem for having played this game since Factorio 0.6.

So the correct math for the number of Boiler 3M6/4 to the 14.7-Generator-S when using water

Effective Power = 3.2754 units/tick * (85 KJ) * 60 (ticks) * 0.88 = 14700 KW
Actual Need = 3.2754 units/tick * (85 KJ) * 60 (ticks) / 3600 KW = 4.64015 or 5 boilers.
Fluid need = 196.47 units/s => 4 off-shore pumps.

The fluid usage is very high and above the 4 pipe theoretical limit so the rest of my other post still applies.