Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
not really no,
there is a finite number of coal nodes, a finite number of oil nodes, a finite number of uranium nodes in the map, you don't need to manually feed the power like you do with Bioburners, but they are not infinite amount of power.
also those resources are needed for things other than power.
they are in a weird spot, they are basically resource nodes that can only be used for power, but again there are a limited number of geysirs in the map, so the amount of energy you get from them is limited.
not really, resource costs basically boils down to time, as the is no amount of resources that can deplete. (sure you can only extract a certain amount per minute as the nodes are limited but again only time is needed to fulfill "resource costs")
space requirement is pretty much irrelevant, seeing as you can place foundations in the sky everywhere.
also 50% is wrong. per the wiki:
"The duration of one day in Satisfactory is 60 minutes, consisting of a 45-min daytime and 15-min nighttime."
so you'd only have 25% downtime, and downtime just means build more solars and more battaries so you can bridge the gap.
again you'd just build more solars and more batteries to bridge the nighttime gap,
the only way to balance power that needs no resources ( once build it would need no further resource input, build cost can be ignored since once you have a factory that produces the required materials to build them, you can build as many as you want, given enough time) is making it so tedious/useless people will not want to do it, but at that point, why even bother implementing it?
Ah yes, the comments of "please gib solar panels cuz green energy" have really put thought into it.
But hey, if you want to continue with your delusion that it'll be considered by the devs, have at it. Enjoy your bad faith arguments.
I have nothing invested into this, I never once said anything about green energy, or that I want them to add solar energy to the game, and for the record, my personal opinion, is that green energy is a myth, I dont like solar panels, irl, or ingame, for all the reasons ive stated, and the devs very well may add them at some point, though I doubt any new content will be coming in anytime soon- not with controller access and console ports on the horizon. More likely we will see balancing and bug fixes for a year or so, and then maybe if we are lucky we will get some more content. The devs are unlikely to add any content that modders have already created.
I dont see the problem with the reserved position that they may add them, especially when ive only stated how ineffective they are. Plus, I have used solar energy mods, and again, they arent that good- there are far better sources of power that require alot less investments, like time, materials, space.
Solar is pointless, but if it was in the game i'd use it, just like I use everything else.
-e
I hope they dont add them, but i dont think its out of the question, any player who speaks with certainty on what the devs will do in the future is speaking purely on assumptions, and anyone who thinks their assumptions are facts, are fools.
Yeah, *my* assumptions.
But cool, you keep giving me jester awards, it just highlights how salty you are.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4LlorYbVV0&t=656s
Devs said no.
What a relief.
Projecting, of the two of you are the angry one, which is why i see you as a clown.
You keep saying I want solar added, which I dont, never said i did, you said i wanted 'green' and free energy, which I dont, never said I did.
rofl, keep putting words in my mouth and ill keep giving you jesters. I have the points.
Lol, keep the salt flowing. The sad part is you seem to think you're the only person I'm referring to in my posts, when I'm clearly talking about anyone in this thread that's brought it up.
Toodles. Nothing more to say here.
Let's get a couple things straight pumpkin...
I gave you no awards for starters. That go or goes to someone else... You're the salty one.
And I quoted quantum who quoted you... I didn't quote you. Now before you go making a fool of yourself any harder, how about you take a step back from the computer and clear your head.
What? I was clearly quoting your post to point out that it had already been posted and was not an assumption, and the response was to Quantum. Wtf would you assume I was talking to you for?
because you quoted him and me- geez man, settle down, im starting to feel bad now. ima back out. this is getting weird.
So the question is then how limited they should be in area covered VS watts generated.
The current reality is that you need approx 50K solar panels are needed in a 1km2 to generate 50MW of energy.
Thats quite literally worthless in Satisfactory as even if you somehow manage to fill up the whole map with panels you would be earning 400MW of "free energy".
Lets say we get 100MW of "free energy" from 1 solar panel, even at a minimal setup that produces things at salted snail speed you need 1000MW of energy so you need to build 10 of these.
If it only generates 10MW then you already need 100 of them which is already a lot of buildings to make.
There are two sources of power in the game that have zero input or waste output.
Not having solar is a wasted opportunity.
...and none of those would be infinite free power like solar. Not having solar is a good thing for gameplay purposes. Why even bother with anything else if you could just spam the whole map with solar ?