Oilwells, pipe madness vs barrels.

[Lady Naween]

I was thinking, since it is a royal pain in the ass to set up a oilfield with pipes trying to keep it as minimal as possible to save on UPS.. Would it actually be worth it to have assemblers pour it into barrels and bots carrying it off to the train station and from there to the main refinery. Anyone got any idea if in the end that would save UPS or not? Or is the hit from oilwells so small it isn't worth it?

[Lingluo]

I don't know.Perhaps using coal liquefaction and completely ignore those oil fields will have better results.There's no automation about setting up oilfields.

[Killcreek2]

I'm inclined to think that it would not be worth the trouble to have each well output directly into an barreler. Considering the flow of a depleted well compared to the assembler speed. Possibly the increased pollution would actually negatively affect the overall UPS, idk.

You could put the barreler in the centre of the field, and bunny hop over to the station with a few bots, but that still involves a minimal piping solution & would only save on a few pipes anyway while adding the bots UPS instead.

Personally, I enjoy setting up oil fields: each one is a unique different piping puzzle, unlike ore fields which tend to be mass-BP near-identical copies every time. It's a nice change of pace, imo, like another minigame.

[Maelstrom]

Is there some reason you're not using the fluid wagon? I haven't built a single barrel since 0.15 was released.

[Warlord]

Originally posted by Maelstrom:

Is there some reason you're not using the fluid wagon? I haven't built a single barrel since 0.15 was released.

The OP might already be using it. What I got out of it was that the OP is thinking of using a bot to take barrels from each oil pumpjack to the station, where it was unbarreled and the empty barrel returned.

I can't imagine that can save anywhere near the amount of resources. But doubling (quintupling?) the number of objects per jack seems like a bad idea. Two inserters, an assembler, a passive and active provider chest, and a pumpjack one ach spot seems like a big waste.

[Maelstrom]

Originally posted by Warlord:

Originally posted by Maelstrom:

Is there some reason you're not using the fluid wagon? I haven't built a single barrel since 0.15 was released.

The OP might already be using it. What I got out of it was that the OP is thinking of using a bot to take barrels from each oil pumpjack to the station, where it was unbarreled and the empty barrel returned.

I can't imagine that can save anywhere near the amount of resources. But doubling (quintupling?) the number of objects per jack seems like a bad idea. Two inserters, an assembler, a passive and active provider chest, and a pumpjack one ach spot seems like a big waste.

Maybe. What I do on oil fields is have all the pumpjacks facing outward and then I use underground pipes to connect all the pumpjacks to a big rectangular pipe rail that feeds a train or directly into the refinery. It cleans up most of the pipe mess and leaves the maximum amount of room available for beacons.

[Lawlzer]

I usually just connect everything up and put it into a oil... holder... (too early to remember the name), then connect that up to an assember (or two if crazy), then have that assembler turn them into barrels which my trains take and leave more behind, then if I want at the base I either use bots to turn the oil barrels into normal or just do it without bots.

[Lady Naween]

Yeah I do use fluid wagons, it was just an idea to avoid the pipe mess you end up with when you got those 30+ wells to connect up. Ill keep doing it the old fashioned way then despite how much I hate putting down all those pipes.