Factorio Forums

Consider removing the 400% ("+300%") limit on asteroid crushers to make it more in line with mining productivity.

The 2.1.7 update
> Fixed asteroid chunks were not marked as lossy catalyst.
radically changed space mining in the late game. Without modules it is
1 chunk -> 20 iron ore + 0.2 chunk.
Effectively 25 ores per captured chunk.
With (very costly) +300% prod bonus
chunk -> 80 ore + 0.8 chunks
400 ores per chunk.

After the change at +300% we get
chunk -> 80 ore + 0.3 chunks
114.3 ores per chunk. 3.5 times fewer ores.

On the other hand, asteroid crusher has no loops influenced by productivity. Chunks are catalysts, and nothin recycle to chunks but chunks, and every recipe in crusher uses chunks. The productivity limit isn't necessary to prevent mater creation and could be removed, so asteroid crushing bonus work more like mining productivity.

The way that asteroid crushing works is that it effectively makes a geometric amount of asteroids. It has been noted that this is effected by productivity at the point of both ores and asteroids.

The proof of the sum of material at the limit time we can provide to a geometric series is the subject of a course of calculus (which isn't to say that it's easy, calculus is notorious as a course used to flunk poor students). But it's also available on wikipedia and it's: a/(1-r). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_series

So the argument is that as you run the station, for the lifetime of the game, this is akin to taking a limit by putting in a value of energy equal to "as high as you can count".

a = Some constant factor, in this case productivity * ores.
r = The ratio of asteroids you get: productivity * 3/10.
So if we interpret that we get:
80 ores / ( 1 - 4*3/10) = 80 ores/(10/10 - 12/10).

If you at this point are going "That math isn't mathing". Yeah, this is the part of calculus where someone goes "that's a positive feedback loop, unless they strictly fix the amount of asteroids coming in by removing productivity you can infinitely generate asteriods by having an asteroid at a station". The series diverges and you won't be getting a proof out of it for an equation because it will be yielding infinite amounts of numbers.

In comparison, a/(1-4*1/5) = 80/(1-4/5) = 80/(1/5) = 80*5 = 400 ores per asteroid.

The interpetation I'd have is that it is fine if you have an infinite amount of one type of ore at legendary, but I'll have to test and make sure this hasn't been messed with, give me a moment to do that.

coffee-factorio wrote: Tue Jun 23, 2026 5:05 pmr = The ratio of asteroids you get: productivity * 3/10.

The chunk is a catalyst in 2.1.x; it doesn't get a productivity multiplier.

Yeah. But sometimes people need a picture to take home with them. And prior to this it was, when I tried out an iron pipes build using just simple asteroid processing I was getting a rather large amount of legendary plates out of a pipes build. I kind of didn't want to field it because I didn't want to make something in an arena where there was going to be breaking balance changes.
That also effectively fixes my gripe with the station being "a better recycler".

It won't effect rate of ore production I think, so ships won't spontaneously start to explode. I only have a class I have to worry about because the ball doesn't have as many collectors around the ship. But it's looking like getting bulk materials from one source is being very, very heavily nerfed.

I... actually kind of like this. Before I could just kind of crush the game with material production. Now I'm incentivized to make bases on planets slightly more.

I'm reading your comment fifth time and still have no idea what you try to do.
First, you are explain to us elementary math. But you can clearly see the results in my post are correct (math is literally the same, the "net consumption = consumption - byproduct" introduces the same 1-r as formula for geometric series does). So why the tutorial?
Then you showing us problems with keeping both old behavior (output chunks are affected by prod. bonus) and new recipe. No one proposed this. And the problem is obvious just from the recipe 1 chunk -> ores + 1.2 chunks

You wouldn't believe it but some people in these games have trouble with ratios.

I'm kind of coming to understand your opinion on it and have one of my own. But I need the numbers first and then I think about it for awhile.

I'd... actually support your idea. If nothing else, someone would go do the steps to do the math and come up with the notion you're right.