[0.12.x][v0.12.12] Bob's Metals, Chemicals and Intermediates

[SuperSandro2000]

maybe later

[bobingabout]

New poll.

Bearings... they're a fairly high level ingredient already in most of my factories, apearing at steel level at the earliest. Should I make them more difficult to craft (and slightly more realistic) by including lubricant in their recipe?

Vote, discuss.

[Degraine]

Didn't see the poll in time to vote, but I'm for titanium and above, personally. Sort of like transport belts not requiring lubricant until the third tier.

One thing that bugs me about the vanilla game is the way the express splitters and underground belts don't require lubricant to make, yet the standard express belts do. Seems like a weird omission.

[bobingabout]

Didn't see the poll in time to vote, but I'm for titanium and above, personally. Sort of like transport belts not requiring lubricant until the third tier.

One thing that bugs me about the vanilla game is the way the express splitters and underground belts don't require lubricant to make, yet the standard express belts do. Seems like a weird omission.

I actually agree with you about titanium+, which is why that option was there in the first place. Although in reality, Steel bearings do have the lubricant as well, they're also by far the most common, meaning you can get "Expensive" steel bearings that have it. But on a level system, Steel bearings are on par with Fast transport belts, which don't use lubricant, and Titanium on par with Tier 3, and the T3 belt, Express, does.

On the other hand, I can see why people would say even steel bearings should require Lubricant, current recipes don't start untill they're already at a higher tier, first apearing in Assembly machine MK4 for example, where the Assembly machine MK3 already requires plastics, in the electronics, to be able to be built, meaning adding lubricant to the MK4 isn't much of a push.


Yeah, thats a peculiarity with the game's belt recipes. Rather than requireing the belt of it's tier to build, the splitters and underground belts require the previous tier, plus upgrade material. In my opinion, the recipe of the splitter/underground belt should change either to be the same as the basic recipe, but using the upgraded belts, or require the same incredients to upgrade it (Perhaps in increased quantities, since it requires more than 1 belt to make the first one) as the belt does.

Perhaps I'll have a look at the belts later, and post a report in the ballancing forum.

[Degraine]

Actually, looking at the recipes, express (and fast) splitters do require belts of their level, it's just underground belts that don't.

[bobingabout]

Yeah, I found this out when I did a little research.
I posted a report about it in the balancing forum, here: https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... =16&t=6067

[bobingabout]

Okay, Poll says Lubricant, on all bearings. So far I've edited the recipes so that all but steel require lubricant, and will probably add lubricant to steel too, unless I forget.

So, time for a new poll. This time I want to ask about the Air compressor and Water pump.

Currently, the air compressor will create the fluid "Compressed Air", which is a renamed clone of "Liquid Air" from DyTech and Tree Farm, as part of the Nitrogen chain.
It will also act as an interface between Pipes, and Air Canisters, creating Bottled Hydrogen, Oxygen, Nitrogen, Chlorine and Hydrogen Chloride, and unpack them back to empty canisters and the fluid gas too. There are other gasses like Nitrogen Dioxide or Sulfur Dioxide, but due to being rather specialised, I felt that they would be best left to be created after unpacking, or refined directly, rather than worrying about packing them for transport. Which kind of makes you wonder why I did Hydrogen Chloride, because it's pretty much as specialised as Nitrogen Dioxide... oh well. The biggest problem with it i've noticed so far though is that being a 1x1 structure, it's a bit awkward to work with, because you need 3 access points. Items in, Items out, and Fluid in/out. This means that you need to feed something in from one of the sides, making it quite bulky, and space wasting. A 2x2 structure would probably use less space.

Secondly, the Water Pump creates Water, and Lithia water (part of the Lithium chain). The advantage of the water recipe is basically, you can create water anywhere, without having to pipe it across the map when you don't have any water around for miles. In theory, it's supposed to dig down to find water underground, like an underground spring. I plan to also add some fluid packing recipes to it, like barrels of Glycerol, but I havn't decided exactly what I want to pack yet. Packing all of the standard game fluids doesn't sound like a bad idea, but there are already mods that do that.


Anyway, the question for the poll is this: How many of each type of pumps should I create? Specifics will be in the poll.

[Degraine]

I have a suggestion. Is it possible to code a fuel that doesn't produce pollution with the existing boiler/trains, or would you have to make your own to recognise hydrogen as a non-polluting fuel?

[bobingabout]

I have a suggestion. Is it possible to code a fuel that doesn't produce pollution with the existing boiler/trains, or would you have to make your own to recognise hydrogen as a non-polluting fuel?

Unfortunately, the current game engine defines polution by the entity (factory/vehicle etc), not the fuel, so changing polution levels for specific fuels isn't currently possible. The only way it might be achieved would be to remove polution per tick using scripts, but then that can get messy, because the entity might not be running at full power, resulting in the script cleaning more polution than is being generated, on top of it using a lot more CPU power as it scans for these entities using a hydrogen fuel every tick.

[Degraine]

I see. Well, that's a shame. Fingers crossed that changes in the future, but it does sound like they're doing something with liquids and alternate fuels so hopefully varying pollution levels will become possible too.

I do definitely think a 2x2 building for the air compressor would make life a lot easier. The water pump too, for that matter.

[bobingabout]

I do definitely think a 2x2 building for the air compressor would make life a lot easier. The water pump too, for that matter.

Been playing with it have you?
I was thinking possible a 1x2, but depending on orientation, probably would be kind of awkward.

[Degraine]

Actually I haven't been able to get the most recent version of this one or the power mod to load in 10.12 (or 10.08 for that matter). And ores keeps throwing up an error about line 104 in data.lua: attempt to index field 'iron-ore' (a nil value). If I disable that line in data.lua, another error about assignID and stone comes u, but setting Enhance Stone in the config to false and disabling line 106 in data.lua lets me load up the game and all five mods are loaded again.

I finally remembered something too: Electrolysers use basic circuit boards rather than basic electronic circuit boards, seems like a bug.

[bobingabout]

Actually I haven't been able to get the most recent version of this one or the power mod to load in 10.12 (or 10.08 for that matter). And ores keeps throwing up an error about line 104 in data.lua: attempt to index field 'iron-ore' (a nil value). If I disable that line in data.lua, another error about assignID and stone comes u, but setting Enhance Stone in the config to false and disabling line 106 in data.lua lets me load up the game and all five mods are loaded again.

I finally remembered something too: Electrolysers use basic circuit boards rather than basic electronic circuit boards, seems like a bug.

That is a very strange bug, I've tested the ores mod over here with 0.10.9 and 0.10.12 before I released it, and it worked fine on both...
The lines you mentioned, 104 and 106, are they the data.raw.resource overide lines for the icons of iron ore, and stone?
Being icon overides, they're not important, but the filenames are named correctly, and it seems to work for me, so I don't know what would be causing it...

What version of the game are you running? (OS and 32/64 bit?)
Are you also using any other mods with the game? (that might mess with stone and/or iron-ore)

[Degraine]

I'm on Windows 7, 64-bit. Right now, I'm using Adv. Radars, Belt Storage, CleanPipes, Floors, PocketBots, Rail Layer, Robo Charger and Wagons. I've no idea which of those would be affecting it. I disable Cartmen's mods when I run yours for obvious reasons, so they shouldn't be conflicting...

And yes, it's just the icon lines.

[bobingabout]

I'm on Windows 7, 64-bit. Right now, I'm using Adv. Radars, Belt Storage, CleanPipes, Floors, PocketBots, Rail Layer, Robo Charger and Wagons. I've no idea which of those would be affecting it. I disable Cartmen's mods when I run yours for obvious reasons, so they shouldn't be conflicting...

And yes, it's just the icon lines.

I looked at Cartmen's mod, it is possible this could cause an error, but if you disabled it, it's not that.
The only one I've looked at from that list so far is Wagons, and I don't think that would be causing an issue, because it doesn't do anything to the resource entities.

my sugestion would be disable everything except unmodified versions of bob's mods, then turn the others on one at a time untill it breaks.

or we could forget about tracking down the cause, and I could take the safer path, and add a few lines to check to see if the ore exists before I try to modify it, which should fix the error anyway.

[Gaest]

And ores keeps throwing up an error about line 104 in data.lua: attempt to index field 'iron-ore' (a nil value).

It's definitely because of Cartmen's mod.

In ..\prototypes\resource\base-edit.lua first lines are

Code: Select all

data.raw["resource"]["iron-ore"] = nil
data.raw["resource"]["copper-ore"] = nil
data.raw["resource"]["coal"] = nil
data.raw["resource"]["stone"] = nil

You can delete these lines, it will make the Cartmen's and Bob's mods compatible. Hovewer, one of the main points of Cartmen's mod in its current state is replacing of all ores with one "unknown mineral field" ore. Without mentioned code lines the game will place either "unknown mineral fields" as well as basic and modded ore fields.

Edit: oh, just checked his thread, he mentioned these lines himself a few hours ago.

[bobingabout]

It's definitely because of Cartmen's mod.

he also said he disabled that. I'll add the existance checks anyway.

[cartmen180]

And ores keeps throwing up an error about line 104 in data.lua: attempt to index field 'iron-ore' (a nil value).

It's definitely because of Cartmen's mod.

In ..\prototypes\resource\base-edit.lua first lines are

Code: Select all

data.raw["resource"]["iron-ore"] = nil
data.raw["resource"]["copper-ore"] = nil
data.raw["resource"]["coal"] = nil
data.raw["resource"]["stone"] = nil

You can delete these lines, it will make the Cartmen's and Bob's mods compatible. Hovewer, one of the main points of Cartmen's mod in its current state is replacing of all ores with one "unknown mineral field" ore. Without mentioned code lines the game will place either "unknown mineral fields" as well as basic and modded ore fields.

Edit: oh, just checked his thread, he mentioned these lines himself a few hours ago.

ah yes, i realised a couple days ago that those lines are not necessary at all for my mod to work, so i removed them in the new version. Version 0.5.0 should be fully compatible with all of bob's mods except the ores.
It is going through some changes to make it more compatible with other ore generation mods. What would be nice is if i can figure out how to check for autoplace controls added by other mods and disable them if that particular ore is already included in my mod. Otherwise there would be way to much of the ores that overlap in our mods. Not good for balance at all :p

[Airat9000]

it would be good to add a resource natural gas and learn from it and acid gas for Petroleum

[bobingabout]

it would be good to add a resource natural gas

Having a minable resource like oil being natural gas is possible.

Natural Gas and Petroleum Gas are effectively the same thing as far as usage goes.

and learn from it and acid gas for Petroleum

I'm not sure what you mean by this.
Are you sugesting Research a refining recipe to turn natural gas into petroleum gas?