It's actually less pollution now, though the old balance not only had high pollution but it was 50% fuel efficient which is what the tooltip formerly meant by inefficient.slippycheeze wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:21 pmPollution output is much higher, which means more resources spent on biters, to balance that out?WkdPanda wrote: ↑Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:07 pm Question on power output/efficiencies. The burner turbine is a first step for power. But It seems to output more then a steam boiler+2 steam engines?
Was looking at the play-through Xterm is doing, and he is only using the burner turbines instead of moving to steam.
That's no longer the case however, as it's now 95% fuel efficient which makes the burner turbine the superior choice for a smaller footprint (Also no pump or pipes needed) and just a sixth of the pollution at just 5% additional fuel usage.
It needs at minimum an 80% fuel efficiency to balance that out without totally discouraging its use. A lower pollution burner that eats a little more fuel is more appealing for small outposts and backup power systems (A burner accumulator), while the lower efficiency makes it unappealing as the primary source which naturally demands more turbines/fuel to satisfy higher power requirements.
That's how I'd balance it to maintain relevance late game without it being complete trash or overpowered anyhow. Although, that also sounds good for space exploration due to no water usage and being dirt cheap compared to panels, even with a reduced efficiency rate.
In light of my new understanding, I agree with you entirely.
