[Suggestion] Barrelling Thruster Fuel & Oxidizer

[Khazul]

Or maybe I know I don't need to and just need to get a ship moving even slowly, so it can become self sufficient.

Yeah you are free to use the slow and inefficient method for this, my comment was just meant at illutrating a reason to do otherwise, another alternative method. That would work better than the proposed solution.

Anyway - past caring about arguing [Moderated by Koub : don't be aggressive] - 12-13-2024, 15-52-36.png

You can fit 50 fluid in a barrel, and 10 barrel per stack, so 500 fluid per stack of barrels hence 1500 require 3 stacks. When you just send 3 asteroids you get much much more fuel. I would advise doing the math as you said you thought of shipping barrel and even suggested it should be possible claiming to see no reason why you are forced to wait longer than necessary.

You can already in game use a method that's faster for the use case mentionned. If you want to get a ship going and it only need a few asteroid before it is self sufficent. That's what you CAN do in game currently, that's why i think it's the worst use case to illustrate the suggestion.

If it was to make "small ship that don't produce their own fuel" at least, that would have a point, it would be terribly inneficient but consistent. Whereas here i think you are suggesting something that makes little sense with the use case you attach to it.

Is it still better when you also consider the changes that may be need to absolutely ensure that nothing else will consume either the asteroid or its products and that you have taken all required steps to ensure that the ore/calcite (if applicable) does not get taken by a smelter/foundry and that the carbon is not taken by cool synthesis for making explosives and that the water likewise and that the machines involved in making the fuel also perfectly split the ice/water between them?

With fuel barrels while you do need to add unbarrelling and filtered pumps if you do not already have it (all my ships at my current game stage do for coolant, but still need to add a couple of pumps and pipes), that is it. The numbers from barrels are not terrible (100 barrels of 50 try again - you can multiply right?- or run out of fingers?), but in terms of overall expected complexity, a hell of a lot simpler and means no changes to existing fuel production resource thresholds and output targets either.

I havn't used my own numbers in my mod - this is generated the same way as any other fluid it seems to come up with 100 barrels of 50 units each rocket capacity which is also what the wiki says and what every other fluid shows. How many zeros on the end of that per rocket? Is that 2 or 3? Must have been using thumbs hence why you came up with 2 zeros, but who knows, maybe you have many thumbs and short on fingers. The wiki also say 5k fluid in case you wish to further dispute it with more of your BS.

[Khazul]

For anyone else who may find this suggested functionality useful for whatever reason, I made a minimal mod that seems to perfectly suit my needs:

https://mods.factorio.com/mod/k-fuel-barrelling

It just sets the auto_barrelling on the two fluids and nothing else to allow existing game code to treat them exactly like any other barrelled fluid.

[mmmPI]

With fuel barrels while you do need to add unbarrelling and filtered pumps

True forgot another reason why it's not practical to use barrel

The wiki also say 5k fluid in case you wish to further dispute it with more of your BS.

be curious to see where , it appears to be a mistake

Edit : Oh i see now, it's because when the barrel contain fluid you can fit only half the amount of them compared to empty barrel, since there is no filled barrel of thruster fuel in the game i looked up the rocket capacity of the empty barrel not realizing it could be even worse for the barrel with thruster fuel x)

5000 fluid is less fuel than what you get with like 4 asteroids, you'd have plenty leftover iron too so i don't know how to rank how inneficient it is to use barrel exactly. You can get asteroid productivity too, which makes even more fuel from sending asteroid to help ship instead of barreled fuel.

Edit 2 :

I don't see any BS here :

You can fit 50 fluid in a barrel, and 10 barrel per stack, so 500 fluid per stack of barrels hence 1500 require 3 stacks. When you just send 3 asteroids you get much much more fuel.

I think the problem definitly comes from your ability to do math

[Khazul]

5000 fluid is less fuel than what you get with like 4 asteroids

Maybe - but so f****** what?

[mmmPI]

5000 fluid is less fuel than what you get with like 4 asteroids

Maybe - but so f****** what?

Ah that's no maybe that's verified now, that's the point i was trying to make, like you want to get a ship going fast, as the use case mention, then the suggestion doesn't add a faster way than the current one, since you were mentionning for a ship that just need a bit of fuel to get going.

[Khazul]

5000 fluid is less fuel than what you get with like 4 asteroids

Maybe - but so f****** what?

Ah that's no maybe that's verified now, that's the point i was trying to make, like you want to get a ship going fast, as the use case mention, then the suggestion doesn't add a faster way than the current one, since you were mentionning for a ship that just need a bit of fuel to get going.

Is this even a use case you care about? If not - WTF are you even doing in this thread beyond trolling as usual?

Numbers are not everything. Whatever approach is taken will need changes to a ship and some of those change may be big or small and likely a greater consideration than the method or its efficiency. ALL of my late game (post fusion) ships can accommodate unbarrelling trivially but would need much bigger and more extensive change to ensure exclusivity of resource from the hub for (the current prioritization is via belts and nowhere near hub, however unbarrelling is direct from hub for coollant) fuel with the exception of one of them that could handle either case trivially.

For other ships other approaches may be better in context. It doesnt matter. It is an option I think people should have. It wont break anyones game adding it, it will provide a useful option if present (and does for me via a mod). If the devs dont want to, that is fine it is after all THEIR choice, not mine, and sure as hell not yours so stop acting like you think it is. It isnt.

[mmmPI]

Is this even a use case you care about? If not - WTF are you even doing in this thread beyond trolling as usual?

Yeah i think some players may genuinely ask themselves the question before doing the math of why not barelling thruster fuel, so i tried to explained that it was inneficient. And you seemed to doubt it, like " did you do the math or not ?" so i explained to you that yes , i did, and it was easy to do yourself too if you needed information first hand. You keep quoting me on this thread, so i'm answering

If the devs dont want to, that is fine it is after all THEIR choice, not mine, and sure as hell not yours so stop acting like you think it is. It isnt.

Hey i'm just giving my opinion here, which i'm trying to base on facts like numbers. You asked if i did the math.

[Koub]

[Koub] OK Thread locked that's enough.