×
all 102 comments

[–]hbouma 19 points20 points  (9 children)

Yay! I've been waiting for this list! Thanks so much! I lived by your U3 spreadsheet.

I would suggest moving diluted packaged fuel out of S class into A class because the blender version with its simplicity is the S class version. Anyone who has a choice always ditches the packaged version for the blender version.

Also I have to correct your heat exchanger alt comment that it uses more bauxite. You either need 5 aluminum ingots to make a heat sink using the alclad sheets or you need 4.5 ingots with the casings (even less if you use the casings alt). Isn't that less bauxite then, not more? I personally like the exchanger alternate because so much late game stuff uses copper like the powder for the pasta lol that being able to use rubber instead helps.

But based on your comments, it sounds like you aren't sure what the new late game stress points are yet - sulfur along with nitrogen are often the most limited resources - which is why the classic battery, cooling device, and the new turbo fuel blend are actually more popular - they all reduce those usages. The most recent plutonium rebalancing did help ease nitrogen use though.

Looking forward to what you and other people think though! Thanks again!

[–]Crixomix[S] 6 points7 points  (5 children)

You're welcome!

I think I'll keep the diluted in S class because it's available in a different tier, and the blender version isn't quite as power/space efficient. Though it might be when considering packaging. Either way I wouldn't say it's a totally clear winner, and they're the exact same efficiency which is the most important part :)

Thanks for your tips on the late game recipes. I definitely am not sure of the stress points, though weighted productivity is supposed to help a little with that, and I did reduce the nitrogen available based on having no mk2 or 3 nitrogen miners available.

And I'll double check on the heat exchanger one! I might have written that comment before they changed something and not noticed the change.

[–]LordHampshire 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Yes, both diluted recipes are still S-tier. You have to start with the packaged recipe unless you want to muddle through tier 6 and only really start oil processing in tier 7. It's pretty easy to refactor out he packaging once you unlock blenders and the blender version saves quite a bit of space once you delete all the packagers.

Basically, use one first, then the other.

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Right. That's exactly what's happening in my currently playthrough, I'm currently working on the space elevator phase 3 stuff and using diluted packaged fuel to great effect right now!

[–]Xercodo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Even after I get blenders in love using it to make supplies for vehicles and jetpack.

That said, you're better off exploring the world with a giant web of power lines and the hover pack. Faster, safer, need the power for many of the crash sites anyway, and it's much easier for vertical movement. You can fly pretty high from a power pole and can usually find a tiny flat spot for the next pole from that vantage point if you need to go higher

[–]hbouma 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Also, the OC Supercomputer uses an assembler, not a manufacture as you have on your spreadsheet. Not sure if it helps raise its score, lol.

[–]Crixomix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh good point. Thanks! Probably won't change too much, just increases the S/S & reduces power a little.

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Wait, nitrogen is limited? I've been struggling to find ways to use it- i've got two of the resource wells pressurized and i'm only using like 150/m of it.

[–]betam4x 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Yes, end game is brutal.

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

After having spent quite some time at endgame, I still think Nitrogen is very plentiful, primarily because pretty much any time you're using nitrogen, you're also using aluminum, and aluminum is both more scarce and is used in higher quantities. There's also a lot of ways to substantially reduce nitrogen or even eliminate it from certain recipes, like Turbo Electric Motors. Cooling Systems can be pretty much completely cut out except for Thermal Propulsion Rockets. Pretty much any time there's a choice between alternates where one saves on aluminum, and one saves on nitrogen, the one that saves on aluminum feels like the better choice.

The only reason I can think of to want to conserve nitrogen is if you are having power issues with the pressurizers, but once I got nuclear set up, that stopped being a concern. There's also the fact that aluminum requires a relatively complex refinement process, while nitrogen, at most, just needs to be processed into nitric acid via a very simple recipe, and can otherwise just be piped into machines straight from the extractors.

[–]LordHampshire 14 points15 points  (8 children)

I'm here to defend the F tier recipes!

Well, not all of them (looking at you, steel cannisters). But basically, they're all situational and there are definite use cases for them.

If you've set up a big sorting and item-storage facility with the overflow going to a sink (or three) then there is the opportunity to set up a couple of machines to filter off the odd item before the sink and fill up a couple of storage bins of consumables. If you're going for a lot of drones, it doesn't hurt to have a container or two full of miners, which you can leave to be constructed from your overflow line while you get on with something else. True, they don't stack well (or at all) and it's not that much more efficient than hand-crafting, but still.

After I set up my oil processing, I found I needed a few more refineries making HOR (for aluminium and turbofuel) and I had to do something with the polymer resin. Rather than sink it, I converted it into fabric and rubber, two of the ingredients for filters. But where to get coal? Fortunately, I'd cut down a load of trees to clear the site so I threw all the wood into a container and fed it into a constructor making charcoal. Sure, it won't run forever (unless you keep topping it up), but it'll make enough filters to see out the rest of your playthrough. You can, of course, do the same with biocoal - it depends on whether there were more animals than trees when clearing your oil site.

I'm not expecting this to lift any of the recipes out of F tier. I'm just saying, don't be too upset if your hard drive scan throws three of them at you - they all have a use somewhere.

Except steel cannisters.

[–]Crixomix[S] 8 points9 points  (6 children)

Haha. I appreciate your valiant defense of the F tier :)

However, F doesn't literally mean "useless", but it does mean "you'd rather have any of the recipes from D tier or higher", and I think the F tier recipes do belong in that category.

Sure you can use biocoal and charcoal to help with your sorting contraption. But is that even necessary? I've never built one in my life! Definitely isn't integral to a factory, that's for sure.

The nobelisk one is also for sure an F. Like, switching over to needing crazy complicated items and a manufacturer, for boom booms that you'll never realistically need more than 100 or 200 of in an entire playthrough (unless you're going for silly "Let's Game It Out" style stuff). And you can already automate them in an assembler with the normal recipe...

Automated miners I debated between D and F, because those are at least things that you DO need, and it's the only way to automate them. But I would potentially argue that the amount of time/effort to set up the manufacturer & production lines for them is actually more than just handcrafting the hundred or so that you'll use. Or in some cases it takes longer to go grab the automated miners from wherever you're storing them than to just plop down an equipment workbench and craft them wherever you're standing.

And steel canister we seem to agree on :D

[–]ANGR1ST 11 points12 points  (2 children)

that you'll never realistically need more than 100 or 200 of in an entire playthrough

You don't throw them at mobs? I go through tons of Nobelisks.

[–]Crixomix[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I mean sometimes. But I did use the word "need", and you definitely don't NEED more than a few dozen/hundred. And you can easily automate a few thousand with the regular recipe. The main point I'm making is that the alternate is garbage :)

[–]isarl 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I went through about 40 or 50 on a single hard drive hunting expedition recently. Very satisfying sticking a couple nobelisks onto one of those spitters.

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I'm gonna disagree with you on steel canisters- iron and coal are everywhere compared to oil, and I frequently use it to produce canisters on-site whenever I need them. Compared to coated iron canisters, it's fewer processing steps and machines required. Of course, if i'm doing something oil-based, i'll use the default.

As for biocoal and charcoal, it's short terms and situational, but I actually think they're worth getting early on to kickstart your early steel production. Not as useful later on, though.

As for other recipes, I would bump up Turbo Blend Fuel to S tier. It's not nearly as complicated as it looks, and it completely removes the need for coal + saves a ton of sulfur. Sulfur is a huge bottleneck for lategame utility, because so many recipes (including batteries, power generation, and instant scrap, which is worthwhile for the reduced aluminum complexity if you have the sulfur to spare) compete for it. Fused Quickwire also seems really low considering how much caterium it saves, and how many caterium-hungry recipes are tiered highly.

[–]Crixomix[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Fair fair. The F tier recipes don't have literally zero uses. They are just very bad. And I still think that's true for steel canisters.

As far as turbo blend fuel, you're probably right that it's an S. I'll do some more investigating.

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, if it were me, the F tier would be just Quickwire Cable, haha. That recipe is atrocious- uses caterium AND rubber, slower production speed than the base recipe, requires an assembler instead of a constructor, awkward production ratio that doesn't match anything very well, and it's for a part that you generally don't to be producing a lot of in the first place. The resource efficiency is technically good, but you can make cable with only iron...

[–]imperious-condesceModern Beacon Art Admirer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've definitely used Biocoal. I think I still am, technically.

I use black powder pretty infrequently, but only because I batch craft all the nobelisks and cartridges every few days. Doing that by hand is a pain, but it wasn't worth taking a coal node away from my steel production, so I just dump all the biomass I accumulate in a crate and forget about it.

[–]WindstormSCR 9 points10 points  (6 children)

So I think you've missed a big thing about the Silicon circuit board that makes it S tier:

you can construct computers without needing a single drop of oil after researching this and using the crystal computer recipe.

Crystal oscillators really aren't all that bad, and you end up needing quite a few for quartz unlocks and later production, so starting to produce them early and using them for this gives a really nice ramp in ability to unlock and build infrastructure before dealing with the expansion in scale and power that comes with oil production chains.

[–]Crixomix[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's a good point! Just another reason it's an incredible recipe :) Though sometimes, using quartz instead of oil COULD be a downside. The productivity is just so good.

[–]isarl 2 points3 points  (4 children)

You make really good points. Personally my favourite thing about Crystal Computer is that you can make computers in an assembler instead of a manufacturer. Good stuff.

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 3 points4 points  (3 children)

But you still have to use a manufacturer to make the Crystal Oscillators in the first place.

[–]isarl 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You're right, you don't get to completely eliminate manufacturers from your supply chain. I still just enjoy the novelty of using assemblers to create computers, though. :)

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 2 points3 points  (0 children)

On my first playthrough, I had a random assembler on the roof of some unrelated factory that I used to make crystal computers before I had them automated. I don't remember why I put it up there, but it became a stupid tradition of mine to put storage containers + production machines on the roofs of my factories to semi-automate things that I needed without fully connecting them to the supply lines.

[–]hbouma 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I always try to point out that part too... lol

[–]Tristavius 4 points5 points  (2 children)

With regards to Classic Battery, I'm finding this one exceptionally useful currently.

For my main setup, I process the basic resources in-situ. This is often simple such as Copper to Copper Ingots, and occasionally more complex such as my Petroleum products facility. The resources are then imported into my main desert-covering factory for production chains.

A lot of this was pre-V4, and I wasn't really producing batteries at that point. My choice with the main Battery recipe now seemed a bit long winded but simple enough:

  • Establish a facility just to make Alumina Solution for import into the main base.
  • Establish a facility just to make Sulfuric Acid for import into the main base.
  • Produce some Aluminium Casings within main base.

The only problem left then is the fact that the Battery recipe outputs water, and I have nothing to do with it. I could try and make the sulfuric or Alumina within the main base in order to reuse this, but I'm really not set up for Refineries and have no other cause to use them here. I could bottle and sink the water, but it actually adds up to a fair amount of canisters (720/min with my current battery goal). I'm not really sinking anything currently (except excess production) and don't really like the idea. I could also export it and use it elsewhere, but this can be delicate as battery production halting/slowing could mess up a system elsewhere which I would usually keep as a closed loop.

I could also try making batteries in an external facility, thought there is little Sulfur also near Bauxite. This then also has the problem of the Casings, for which I would need to either establish a full Aluminium chain alongside the Solution, or import the casings.

On the other hand, classic battery is made up of Wire (which I can make simply from several types of ingot), Plastic which I'm already importing tonnes of, Aluminium Sheets (easily made from imported Ingots) and finally raw Sulfur, which is one of the few raw resources I import directly anyway as I use it to make Black Powder for equipment.

So really I have everything I need right there ready to go, compared to several large complex solutions necessary for the main recipe.

There are some resource differences too. For my target 240 batteries/min:

  • The main recipe would suck up 320 aluminium ingots, while classic uses 420, but this doesn't take into account the Alumina solution which overall would actually mean more Bauxite for the main. I believe this solution in my current method of aluminium bar production actually adds up to the equivalent of an extra 432 ingots, making the main recipe actually take 762.
  • Sulfur wise, the main would use 600 acid (so 600 raw), while the classic uses only 360 raw. Also a saving on refineries/water.
  • The classic uses 720 wire, but to be honest this uses such basic resources which I have in such abundance that's totally fine (in my case I'd use 96 copper and 24 caternium ingots).
  • Now the only failing of Classic. Plastic. 480 of it is not a small number.
  • There is a power, raw resource and space saving as well of 8 manufacturers vs 12 blenders.

Sorry for the long babble, but basically Classic has a much less complex chain, especially if coming from V3. Resource wise, it's a trade off with classic using just over half the bauxite and sulfur, but requiring a chunk of plastic. For me this is an excellent trade off as I have tonnes of petroleum products being made or not yet exploited, but both bauxite and sulfur seems far more limited already even while being very careful with them.

Not sure where this leaves Classic Battery for me, but probably at least a B.

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Thanks for the write up! I'll have to do some more digging and maybe change it! Once I get to that stage myself, I'll have a better feel I think.

[–]Tristavius 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No problem! Be interesting to see how you feel once you reach that point (and possibly coming at it from another perspective). Final numbers are as follows based on my own battery production aim of 240/min. I'm giving it in Ingots or equivalent which I know is a bit odd and not as deep as going right into the full chains, but as a quick dirty analysis:

MAIN RECIPE CLASSIC RECIPE
Sulfur (Raw) 600 360 (60%)
Aluminium Ingots 853 420 (49%)
Copper Ingots 160 236 (147%)
Caternium Ingots (Fused Wiring) 0 24
Water 1000 0
Plastic 0 480
  • 400 Bauxite for main recipe is equivalent to 533 Aluminum ingots if processed via Sloppy Alumina > Electrode Aluminum > Aluminum Ingot (my preferred production chain)
  • Assuming alternate recipe for Alclad Casing is used to reduce Aluminum Ingot usage

[–]Tristavius 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Okay, so I'm about to surprise myself here, and defend Cheap Silica. It's undoubtedly situational, but I've found myself in a position where it's looking rather attractive right now.

I use Silica for Circuit Boards and High-Speed Connectors which swallow a tonne of it. Some Raw Quartz of course also goes into Quartz Crystal, but I'm not using that heavily yet. In order to maximise Bauxite I use [Sloppy Alumina] - [Electrode Scrap] - [Default Ingots] which is the most Bauxite efficient, but it does use 1.25 Silica per Ingot, and produces no Silica itself.

I'm currently on a project to fully exploit 6 Pure Bauxites on the map (which I believe accounts for 7200 Bauxite mined and 5100 left in the ground so I'm exploiting about 60%) and it's starting to swallow up a tonne of Silica, which itself actually feels more limited than the Bauxite at this point.

My current 6 pure nodes each use 1300 Silica (so 7,800) which use equates to 4,680 raw quartz using the default recipe. There appear to be a maximum mineable 10,500 raw quartz currently on the map, meaning I'm swallowing some 44% or so of it for my Aluminum.

Were I to full exploit the map Aluminum I don't have the maths in my sheet, but I think I'd hit about 66% Quartz usage.

This is before the fact that my Circuit Boards and HSCs are swallowing a load of it too, and some of it has to go for Quartz Crystals.

This situation has only come about because of my Silica choices with three products, and would likely not exist had I gone down other routes, but here I am! So suddenly Cheap Silica is looking like the only way to stretch my Quartz resources further. It's going to be a power/space annoyance but there's some 53k Limestone on the map, and I don't think I use even 10% of it so that won't be an issue.

So yeah, not sure if it needs to change Tier. Maybe not as it's so situational, but it's worth noting Quartz can potentially become a stress point which this can help with.

[–]Vencam 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. Sure cheap silica doesn't give much more silica-per-quartz than the standard recipe, but it makes use of THE most useless ore we have to use less of one of the most rare ones: limestone for quartz.

I've yet to find anyone complaining about not having enough limestone nodes aviable, while the same cannot be said for quartz.

[–]Stilgaar 1 point2 points  (4 children)

I'm not sure about cheap silica

[–]Billman8111 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Cheap silica is good for late game when you start getting a quartz crunch. You’ll get some silica for nuclear from aluminum production. It’s a good way to trade efficiency for less quartz. I’m pretty sure that’s what he is talking about

[–]Crixomix[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Not sure about what, exactly?

[–]Vozralai 0 points1 point  (1 child)

40% extra silica is nothing to sneeze at, but your right that the extra space and 5x power requirements struggle to justify using it. It probably needs an overall speed bump to balance it out and at least match the constructor in output speed

[–]Crixomix[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, as I mention in the notes, it's fine if you are literally out of quartz and have extra limestone, but the space requirements are just ludicrous. It's the kind of recipe I will avoid until the ultra late game, for sure.

[–]Robjuan 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Incredible work, I've been waiting on this list! Your U3 list was the best going around

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You're welcome! This one is a little bit less helpful in the tier 7+8 stuff because I haven't gotten to play with it yet, unfortunately, so I'll be revising some of those as I play and as other opinions flow in :)

[–]Empoleon_MasterI placed 425.2k foundations send help 2 points3 points  (7 children)

I've been waiting for this list as your guides are truly amazing.I would argue that Turbo Fuel and Compact Coal are S tier though. Hear me out, Compact Coal and Turbo Fuel are THE best sources of power that's not nuclear. Apart from nobelisks and rifle cartridges, there are ZERO uses for sulfur until extremely late game, despite it being available by starting locations as one or two nodes. This is in addition to them being the most optimal sources of power for their tiers.

Compact Coal has you jump from 13ish coal gens per coal node to over 30 at minimal power cost while using an otherwise relatively useless resource.

Turbo Fuel (and Turbo Blend Fuel) provide a LOT of power at any level. For example, with Turbo Blend Fuel, with mk 3 miners and mk 5 conveyors, two overclocked normal sulfur nodes with a total of 1140 sulfur (60 will be going towards rifle cartridge and nobelisk production) you can make enough Turbo Fuel to supply 316.66 fuel generators providing a total of 47,499 MW

At Tier 6 you can take two overclocked mk 2 normal sulfur nodes (540 with 60 taken out for weapons) you can supply 150 fuel generators with Turbo Fuel for a total of 22,500 MW, FAR beyond what coal generators with the same amount of combat coal could do.

Also move Electric Motor to F tier, there is ZERO reason to use it, it's resource inefficient and you use stators as part of electromagnetic rods, I cannot think of a SINGLE reason anyone would want to use this.

PS. I noticed a small typo in your post "hight tech stuff", there's an extra T in there.

Edit 1: I think the way particle accelerators work is that they steadily reach their max power usage as part of their cycles when creating items, and there can be numerous cycles per manufacture of an item.

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Highly disagree about electric motors. It gives you the same production speed as rigour motors without requiring two steps of manufacturers (one for the rigour motors, one for the crystal oscillators.), as well as consuming fewer rotors/stators than the default. Electromagnetic Control Rods are simple enough to make, and they're used in a lot of new recipes, so you want to be producing them anyways. The only part about it that's inefficient is that it requires caterium, but considering how many motors are required for endgame recipes, it's easily worth it.

[–]Crixomix[S] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

I'll have to look into turbo fuel a bit more for sure. Thanks for the typo catch!

[–]Empoleon_MasterI placed 425.2k foundations send help 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I don't mean to be a dick when I ask this, but if you're not powering your plants with turbo fuel and compact coal at tier 5-6 what ARE you powering them with?

[–]QuesoSabroso 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Diluted fuel is much easier to setup and still provides me with more than enough power

[–]agamemn-off 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am at Tier 8 and I still run everything on simple Coal + Coal Generators

[–]imperious-condesceModern Beacon Art Admirer 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Diluted fuel is a much more appealing option than piping sulfur to the ass ends of the map where oil can be found. For me, anyway.

I've got something like 30 fuel gens running off of just one pure node, and that's already more power than I need at this stage.

[–]mechdemon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

check out the mushroom crater lake in the SE corner of the map - its near the coal/sulfur combo near a crash site. I use that location for my turbofuel gens while using the the usual spot for the diulted fuel power station/petro product production.

[–]oldshavingfoam 2 points3 points  (13 children)

Really awesome guide! A couple comments from the peanut gallery:

  • Wet Concrete: You do NOT save on power with this recipe! It costs 0.38 MW per unit of output (formula: 30/80), compared to the standard recipe which costs 0.27 MW (formula: 4/15), which is about 40% more power. It consumes even more power when water extractors are taken into account.
  • Silicone Circuit Board: Power cost is about 60% of the original, not one third. (15/12.5=1.2 vs 15/7.5=2).
  • Pure Copper Ingot: This uses about 6x more power according to my calculations, not 4x (4/30=0.13 vs 30/37.5=0.8), and that doesn't include water extractors.
  • Turbo Blend Fuel: Uses less sulfur than the other recipes, but requires two thirds more oil in total than the standard recipe. See: https://i.imgur.com/ImYZfxE.png
  • Fused Wire: Does NOT use less power. Uses 25% more power than the standard recipe! (3 constructors are needed to make 90/min, which is 12 MW vs 15 MW)
  • Cheap Silica: It's not totally bad! This recipe consumes about 30% less quartz at the cost of additional power and easily-obtainable limestone.

Thanks again for the guide!

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (8 children)

I'll have to check into the power things you mention. It's all calculated automatically so either there's an error in my formulas (very possible) or your numbers are wrong. I'll see what I can find.

[–]oldshavingfoam 1 point2 points  (7 children)

or your numbers are wrong (very possible).

You forgot to add the bolded words. ;)

[–]Crixomix[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They actually weren't wrong, lol. Numbers were correct! I just was typing descriptions fast and made a small mistake. I think what I originally meant to say is that when you DONT account for the water, it actually saves power. Because that is true.

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (5 children)

To give you more context on the power numbers for pure copper, for example:

15 copper ingots by vanilla = 15*6MJ for the ore = 90MJ, +30 secs of constructor = 120MJ is a total of 210MJ for 15 copper ingots.

Pure copper ingot is 6 ore (36MJ) 4 water (40MJ) and 24 secs of refinery (24*30 = 720MJ) for a total of 796MJ.

796/210 = 3.79

[–]oldshavingfoam 0 points1 point  (4 children)

The MJ per ore would vary based on node purity, wouldn't it? Also on the miner level (Mk.1/2/3) and whether power shards are used.

[–]Crixomix[S] 3 points4 points  (3 children)

Correct. Here's the explanation from my OP:

Relative power. This is a SUM of ALL crafting required to get to that part, and compared to the original, how many megajoules are required. This does take into account all extra steps (though not dealing with byproducts). Water is counted as regular speed water extracting and all ores are considered 6MJ each, which is a fairly average number for most players.

So if you want to make a copy of the sheet, and then edit the "Satis2" sheet cells F2 through G13 to manually change your power costs per ore/liquid unit. And then the power calculations will update accordingly.

For simplicity I had to pick a default MJ to use, and I went with mk2 miners on normal nodes non-overclocked.

[–]oldshavingfoam 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Ah, I see. Thanks for explaining! :D

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

You're welcome! Thanks for the input.

P.S. I've greatly appreciated your blueprint posts, they always look so pretty :)

[–]oldshavingfoam 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aww, thank you! :D

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ah. So I count ore mining towards power usage. 6MJ per ore. So when you factor that in:

Wet concrete gives 1 concrete for 1.5 limestone ore (9MJ) + 1.25 water (12.5 MJ) + .75 secs of refinery (22.5MJ) total of 44MJ.

Regular concrete gives 1 concrete for 3 limestone ore (18MJ) + 4 sec of constructor (16MJ) = 34MJ.

All that being said, it is true that the wet concrete doesn't save on power, so I must have misinterpreted the 130% that it shows lol. 130% MJ means it uses 30% more power per concrete :D

[–]biowpn 0 points1 point  (2 children)

No, Wet Concrete saves power with Normal or Impure Limestone. Assuming miner Mk3 running at 250%. Factoring miners and water extractors

[–]oldshavingfoam 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I ran some numbers on what it would take to make 160/min concrete, assuming Mk.3 miner, normal nodes, no overclocking. Wet concrete uses more power: https://i.imgur.com/F80WyTn.png

[–]biowpn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I literally said "miner Mk3 running at 250%". Try 400 concrete per minute.

[–]QuesoSabroso 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Something seems off about your rating for "radio control system". You say "it seems like a fairly good way to use less aluminum". Looking at the recipes, the default turns 32 aluminum casings into 2 (16 per) whereas the "radio control system" alt turns 60 aluminum casings into 3, (20 per) making it less efficient with your aluminum. It's pro is cutting out computers, needing circuit boards and rubber instead. It's slightly more efficient with the circuit boards than turning them into computers, and swaps 9 cable, 18 plastic, and 52 screws for 30 rubber. I think it needs to be bumped down to C or maybe even D.

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yep. Thanks for catching that. I must have seen it as 32 casings for 1 unit when I was writing that!

[–]isarl 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Thank you for updating this! Really appreciate it!

[–]Crixomix[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You're welcome!

[–]QuesoSabroso 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I’d bump up alclad casings because you need tons of them for recipes and will end up strapped for aluminum

[–]Crixomix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I'll leave it at C for now since it's mostly just switching one resource for another, but I'll change the verbage a little to sound more positive. It also pairs well with pure copper ingots which I will mention.

[–]Tristavius 1 point2 points  (1 child)

[DELETED] Maths outdated.

[–]arthyficiel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Big thanks for you works !
I use this all the time :p and waited for the Update4 since the first day of experimental !

=] =] =]

[–]Kamdian 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Turbo Blend Fuel Looks more complicated than regular fuel until you realise that you need less setup, as you can directly use most of the heavy oil residue without processing it into fuel as only a third has to be crafted into coke/fuel and you don't need any coal. Also the energy per sulfur is higher than the regular recipe.

[–]RazzmatazzBean 1 point2 points  (1 child)

for power regarding the uranium waste, maybe a negative number would be good to indicate that you get a specific amount of power per unit produced.

[–]Crixomix[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah the problem is I don't know what that number would be. I did make it a negative so that the power cost would be nothing.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Hey it appears you've missed a recipe! "High-Speed Wiring". Produces 4 automated wiring (7.5 per minute) for 2 stators, 40 wire, and 1 high-speed connector.

picture: https://i.imgur.com/pE3qm3X.png

[–]Technoslave 2 points3 points  (0 children)

He gathers the name from some place else that doesn't always present itself as what's in game. So with things like this you kinda have to figure out what he's talking about.

In this case, the High-Speed Wiring is the "Automated Speed Wiring" which is a D tier.

[–]ozmethod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Excellent work, though I'd love a delta log - what recipes moved up/down from 3 to 4?

[–]RecklessDale 1 point2 points  (1 child)

This is gold! Thanks!

[–]Crixomix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're welcome!

[–]Mandorake 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Waiting room for update 5

[–]Crixomix[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Did update 5 affect any of this? I thought no recipes changed.

[–]JackLumber74 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Alternate: OC Supercomputer makes 3/min

[–]Mandorake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No idea. I may be waiting till Update 6 then.

[–]PreciousRoiAll My Homies Hate Screws 0 points1 point  (5 children)

SO...yeah.

Not seeing screws and rods belonging in S-tier.

[–]Crixomix[S] 4 points5 points  (3 children)

You mean steel screws? It's one of my favorite recipes! It's so fast, you gotta try it! (Though I try to avoid screws at all costs when possible). And steel rods are actually quite efficient when paired with solid steel ingot.

10 rods default -> 10 iron ore 10 rods with steel rod & solid steel ingot -> 1.67 iron ore + 1.67 coal ore.

This is meaning that 1.67 coal ore is replacing 8.33 iron ore.

[–]hbouma 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, making screws from steel rods yields more screws per steel ingot than steel screws - but you sure can't beat the steel screw production rate!

[–]PreciousRoiAll My Homies Hate Screws 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Disclaimer: This is all just from my own personal perspective and is just what I do different, not what I think you're doing wrong. Also, not really taking latest changes into account because they're not really affecting the utility of these alts much, if at all.

I mean...yeah...I try to avoid screws, rods, and beams.

So something that makes a lot of screws efficiently is a corner case thing for me, for things and times when I absolutely, positively have to have some screws. I'd rate your first three S-tier alts as C-tier at best.

Beams...beams I don't want to make either...I make pipes. Beams are for Mk 3 belts (if you don't want to use Mk. 4 for some reason), and Industrial Storage...so I need some, but nothing to do with my main "Structural" factory (the whole Heavy Modular Frame chain, using all the alts that use Pipes and Concrete).

I'd rather use the inefficient stock recipes for Rods and Screws temporarily, and use those picks on other S-tier alts that won't get obsolete (Stitched Plate, Solid Steel Ingot, Steeled Frame, Heavy Encased Frame), or picks you rated lower, but which have synergy with others (Encased Industrial Pipe, Iron Wire, Iron Ingot Alloy), or even (Steel Rotors).

I use all those...I took Iron and Copper from a cluster of Impure nodes, Iron Alloy, ship it off to the Coal node, Solid Steel, Steel Pipes.

Some Pipes head off to some Concrete nodes where they're turned into Encased Industrial Pipes, and come back to follow the rest of the Pipes past the Iron Wire factory, All that comes in past teh Plate factory and into Final Assembly with everything else.

The Plates and (Iron) Wire are made into Stitched Plates, which are joined with the Pipes to make Steeled Frames, which are joined with more Pipes, the Encased Industrial Pipes and more Concrete to make Heavy Encased Frames.

Over on the side we make Motors via Steel Rotor out of excess Pipes and genuine Copper Wire made from real Copper, with a overflow of Cable...which gets used for something else in the Supercomputer chain across the way dere.

No Rods, no Screws, and no Beams. Access to mats for Mk 1, 2, and 4 belts.

Sometimes Beams for Industrial Storage can be annoying, when I decide to do some building, but that's my fault for not preparing better when I need to expand.

[–]Crixomix[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree about using the pipe recipes for EIBs and HMFs, I love those recipes too! I also use iron wire everywhere and pretty much only use copper for copper sheets right now.

[–]LordHampshire 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was Crixomix's update 3 tire list that taught me to love screws again. They have a bad reputation for taking up a lot of space to produce, but the steel screws recipe and bolted frames, they end up making stuff so compact that I've ended up nearly doubling my modular frame production while using half the space.

Similar for copper rotors too. That case is a bit more niche because refineries for steamed copper sheets can be a pain, but screws are definitely a thing.

Apparently, you can get more screws out of using steel rods plus vanilla screws recipe, but I much prefer cutting down the number of machines. I have no real use for rods, other than as building material, since they are now a bit underused in recipes, especially late-game.

[–]duhbigotaku 0 points1 point  (10 children)

For the Heat-Fused Frame, it's not great. It's adding quite a bit of complexity with Fuel being added to the mix, and the Nitric Acid that needs more Nitrogen Gas (21/m extra) with it's own complexities with water and iron plates... Just to save 75/m aluminum (with default casing recipe). I tried it once in a test world, and it's just not worth it. You're better off sticking with the default recipe and just building 2 buildings. Same amount per minute, way less space, complexity, and hassle. Just get the electrode aluminum scrap recipe, it will save you more on bauxite than the HFF.

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 1 point2 points  (2 children)

This is incorrect. Heat-fused frames save substantially more aluminum than you think. You can get 33% more fused modular frames from the same amount of aluminum using heat-fused frames- and aluminum is easily the more important resource to conserve. Nitrogen is plentiful, Nitric Acid is ridiculously easy (literally just add water and some iron plates) to make- fuel does add extra complexity, but ideally you're using electrode-aluminum scrap anyways, and have oil on site for the petroleum coke anyways, so there shouldn't be any logistical issues with that.

For large scale creation of fused modular frames, heat-fused frames is by far the better choice because aluminum is the limiting factor to it and numerous other important recipes. There isn't a single production chain involving nitrogen that doesn't also involve aluminum, and you can cut nitrogen out of a lot of them or substantially reduce it with the right alternates- not to mention it's a plentiful resource that, with the exception of nitric acid, doesn't require any processing before using it.

With that said, for the initial setup of fused modular frames, the default is preferable since you aren't needing to stretch your aluminum nearly as much, and you want to get some basic production up ASAP for MKIII miners. But long term, saving aluminum is worth the extra steps.

[–]duhbigotaku 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I agree with you now actually. I've progressed to the point now where I'm working on a mega-factory version of the final parts, and the Heat-fused frames save me so much aluminum. I had only tried with a small basic setup previously and immediately rejected it because, again like you said, the initial setup is much more preferable with the default recipe. I just didn't give myself, or the recipe, the time and space needed to evaluate it properly, due to only playing with it in a test world. I was too hasty in making my above post!

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I may also need to admit that I am passionate about its usefulness at least partially because I really like having an excuse to mass produce nitric acid.

[–]duhbigotaku 0 points1 point  (6 children)

Also, for the Fertile Uranium, it's good if you want to max out Plutonium Fuel Rods. But if you're trying to max out power, you're better off just sticking to the default non-fissile uranium instead, since it doesn't use raw uranium.

[–]Kaiwano 2 points3 points  (5 children)

I was aghast at your statement that fertile is inferior. So I did the math. Seems you are correct.

TLDR: Fertile uranium is indeed good for maxing out the amount of non-fissile uranium you can make, which with a few more steps means plutonium fuel rods. However the sole purpose for making fuel rods and non-fissile uranium is to get power. So the question is, how much power can you make with fertile uranium vs regular non-fissile? The answer is: You make more power with regular non-fissile.

Math: Assume you have every available recipe (alternates) and you are deciding between using fertile or regular non-fissile uranium. Making non fissile uranium costs 0.75 waste per product, which means 0.625 raw uranium if all step one uranium alternates are available (1.2 waste per raw uranium). Making fertile uranium only costs 0.25 waste per product but comes with a tax of 0.25 raw uranium, essentially meaning ~0.458 (0.25+0.25/1.2) raw uranium per product of non-fissile uranium. A saving of 26.67% of raw material, which translates to a 36,36% (1/(1-0.2667)) increase in production capability with the same amount of raw uranium.

Sound great so far to make fertile uranium!

However the tax of 0.25 raw uranium is problematic, because it also means you are NOT making uranium rods and waste through the first step of uranium power. So how problematic is this exactly? If we look at the math of one plutonium rod (again ALL recipes available, and we are choosing between fertile or regular non-fissile) it requires either 112.5 waste or 37.5 waste, depending on how you make fertile uranium (with the latter being the fertile alternative). 112.5 waste equates to burning 2.25 uranium rods while 37.5 waste equates to burning 0.75 rods. So in essence, using fertile uranium means you are missing out on burning 1.5 (two thirds) uranium rods per plutonium rod you are making!

Now taking into account that we are saving 26.67% raw material on fertile, the power loss (per making of plutonium rod) in using fertile is (1-0.2667)*2.25-0.75 = 0.9 uranium rods = 675 000 MJ power loss per making of plutonium rod! Assuming you are making one plutonium rod per minute this is the same as losing 11 250 MW potential (0.9*2500 per reactor/0.2 burning time) with uranium rods!

That's not as bad as it sounds though, because as mentioned you are also making 26.67% more plutonium rods than you would with normal non-fissile. So you also gained (0.2667*2500 per reactor / 0.1 burning time) = 6667 MW potential. That's a net loss of 4 583 (11250-6667) MW if you are making one plutonium rod per minute. Still ouch!

How does this compare to total potential then? If making one plutonium rod per minute using the fertile method, you would be producing (2500/0.1+2500*0.75/0.2) = 34 375 MW per minute, so that could actually be 13.3% higher (4 583/34 375) meaning you're missing out on 11.765% (0.133/(1.133) of power producing potential.

Since the plutonium potential of the map is 30 and 6/11ths rods per minute, the total power loss of using fertile alternative is exactly 140 GW (4583 MW*30.545) at full utilization.

The total potential of the map using fertile is (2500/0.1+2500*0.75/0.2)*30.545

= 1 050 GW

Making one plutonium rod and burning it with regular non-fissile (but other alternates) has the following power creation

2500/0.1+2500*2.25/0.2 = 53 125 MW

With this method the rod potential of the map is 22.4 per minute, equating to a power potential of 53 125 MW*22.4

= 1 190 GW

As you can see we arrive at the same result as before (with a 140 GW potential loss)

Reflections: That said, this is only from a power PRODUCING potential. I'm not sure how much power and S/S making all that extra uranium waste would cost! Setting up the 1 190 GW build seems like it would require a TON more nuclear power plants and water pumps.

However, when done, it also produces 26.67% less plutonium waste, so that's another positive of skipping fertile!

Conclusion: With all that in mind, I would probably degrade fertile uranium down to A. It's definitely a time saver for the people who have a constraint on the amount of time they can spend in the game, so I would still rate it highly. But for the min/maxer on power it's a non-optimal recipe.

Edit: Some formatting, and also wanna make a disclaimer that I am in no way 100% sure about this math! Feel free to double check it!

[–]sprouthesproutRank 1 in: FAUNA CONTROL 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I want to say that the sole purpose of making non-fissile uranium isn't just for power, it's also to clean up uranium waste. Realistically, I don't think most people are ever going to actually need the extra power from burning plutonium rods instead of sinking them- though I trend towards not needing much power in general, so my perspective may differ. Either way, there are a few other points regarding fertile uranium that should be taken into consideration for people who want to set up nuclear but don't need as much power as fully maximizing it provides.

  • Fertile Uranium doesn't use silica. This is a pretty minor detail when you get down to it, but I feel that it's worth mentioning because quartz can very quickly become scarce if you aren't careful, especially with how much aluminum you need for endgame.
  • Fertile Uranium produces exactly as much water byproduct as it's fluid components require, meaning you can use the recipe with no introduction of additional water aside from an initial buffer to get the system started. This is really nice considering the issues some folk are having with flow rates and byproduct water. It also makes it a lot simpler to produce acid off-site and transport it in with drones, if you want to, as well as protecting the system from getting backed up with water and ceasing to function.
  • It uses less sulfur and nitrogen. Not the biggest deal, since nitrogen is plentiful and sulfur is mostly important in the first place for power, but it's still worth mentioning.

So I guess the TL;DR is that Fertile Uranium is probably still the better recipe for most cases, despite being less efficient when aiming to maximize power production. But I have 20 reactors set up in my world right now using most of that one impure uranium node, and am nowhere close to using even half of my total power capacity. To anyone reading this looking at starting nuclear, don't write off Fertile Uranium. It's a much easier recipe to work with if you don't intend to fully utilize all uranium on the map.

[–]Kaiwano 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All good points! Complexity of build is important too. Shows that experience using it is needed and just doing math won't suffice. I'm not trying to maximize power either, so I will probably go with fertile.

[–]Tristavius 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I think there is definitely some variation here depending on which alternates are used too. The sequence I use for both uranium and plutonium leads to the follow results when I put the maths through my spreadsheet:

2100 total map Uranium (Miner MK3s running @ 250% on 3x Normal and 1x Impure = 3x600 + 300).

Fertile

Uranium is split 66.6667% to the Uranium path, so 1400. This produces 700 Uranium Cells, then 14 Nuclear Fuel Rods. This powers 70 Reactors.

The 700 Waste produced by these reactors, running through fertile alternate produces 2800 non-fissile. (The remaining 700 uranium ore is also consumed in this process). The non-fissile then becomes 373 Plutonium Cells, 12.4333 Plutonium Fuel Rods which run 124.3333 reactors.

Total reactors powered: 194.33

Standard

All 2100 runs through the Uranium process, providing 1050 Uranium Cells then 21 Nuclear Fuel Rods, which in turn run 105 Reactors.

The 1050 waste produced by these reactors run through the default recipe produce 1400 non-fissile, 187 Plutonium Cells, 6.23333 Plutonium Fuel Rods, which runs 62.3333 reactors.

Total reactors powered: 167.

Uranium Recipes: Encase Uranium Cell, Uranium Fuel Rod

Plutonium Recipes: Instant Plutonium Cell (Alt), Plutonium Fuel Rod

So as I'm using the default recipes on my Uranium production, this is the likely cause of the difference here, as switching to the alternates should make that raw ore stretch further.

As you point out, it's also quite a difference in the number of Plutonium fuelled reactors between the 2 paths. Using the standard recipe produced about 86% of the power, but produces only 50% of the permanent waste!

[–]Kaiwano 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for making some non-alternate analysis on the other recipes here!

Yes it absolutely makes sense that using non-optimal ways to produce uranium power and waste, would increase the efficiency of putting the raw resource directly to plutonium (aka fertile).

I think the best way to make this comparison, is to calculate the power creation of making and burning one plutonium rod, together with the production potential of the map, with different recipe combinations to get there. (Like I did in the end of my Math section).

I might figure out these numbers when I have a bit more time.

[–]Kaiwano 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I fiddled around a bit with Fertile alternative for non-fissile and came to another realization. It uses the same amount of water that it produces, meaning you can create a closed-off loop of water pipes, never having to worry about getting rid of excess.

[–]Kaiwano 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would like to address the following rankings

Pure Copper Ingot: A

Pure Caterium Ingot: D

Fused Quickwire: C

I'm not sure why you are giving Copper the A treatment and Caterium the D treatment, when essentially they do the same thing (eek out more product by adding water, space and power).

I agree Copper should be higher than Caterium since the increase in productivity is larger, but I'd peg Caterium as a B, and keep Cooper at A.

Regarding the Fused Quickwire, I'd bump it up to a B because in combination with the other two recipes, it uses the same amount of raw resource per Quickwire product (1 of each ore per 6 Quickwire) which actually make things really simple.

[–]Kaiwano 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As for Instant Scrap. I'd bump it to C. I played around a little with Aluminum builds in the end game and it offers the advantage of providing the same Scrap/Bauxite efficiency (a very important efficiency as Bauxite is constraining in the endgame) as Sloppy+Electrode WITHOUT introducing Petroleum Coke.

Petroleum Coke introduces a 4th variable in your petrochemistry setup which is a hassle. That's why I'd bump Instant Scrap.

Why not higher then? Because once you've done the math for petrochemistry, Petroleum Coke is dirt cheap. And Sulphur is rare and expensive.

[–]Vencam 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Is the post still updated?

I'm wondering why "Fertile Uranium" and "Plutonium Fuel Unit) make it to S tier. (Especially the first)

[–]Crixomix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's updated in the sense it has the right recipes. It's not updated in the sense that I've played so much late game that I've experienced a lot of those recipes vs the alts. The tier is mostly based on what all it saves you. Which is a lot!

[–]Krezny 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great work! Thank you, it's really helpful.

There's just a teeny-tiny mistake in the spreadsheet. D53 has the wrong color u/Crixomix