I invite the feedback from all - how would this impact game play? Can this idea be improved upon? Do you like it? Would it make play more interesting for you? Does it make sense to introduce into the .15 branch? This is a solution in need of a problem. Introducing tripping stones and forced designs...

I guess I'd need a better idea of what your exact goal is for the form factor. It was an interesting problem, regardless, so I hashed out this little contraption which I *think* might be useful to your requirements. The design is too long to post a screen of, but see what you think? 0eNqdXMuO20YQ/BW...

I suppose. Although given that pumps are 30kW/each, I'm not sure how hard you'd want to focus on efficiency at 1800/s water transfer :) If you haven't seen this , it might be worth a look. In a nutshell, at 1200/s fluid flow, you can go about 16 pipes between pumps, at 1500/s, you're down to 6 pipes...

Any particular reason you're using stacks of 18 exchangers? In 2 by X arrangement, corner reactors will produce 120MW, while the middle reactors will produce 160MW, which can be equaled by 12 and 16 heat exchangers respectively. I've made just such a design, and it's definitely possible with a littl...

If you're going to use productivity modules in your labs, then the speed research isn't a waste, since they let you get by with fewer labs, which therefore requires fewer total productivity modules. But otherwise, all the research is doing is saving you a little bit of space and a minuscule amount o...

2) The interaction between high-level productivity and speed modules can exceed the sum of their individual contributions, giving you more output, with less input, with less power/unit consumed. This is a common misconception. There is no way for production/speed module setup to exceed the power/un...

Can we get longer UG pipes now? If we could justify extending the UG belts, surely an extra space or two for the pipes, to let us route underneath two reactors? Trying to work around these heat pipe changes are really rubbing that shortfall in my face, you could say.

... What's the point of having nuclear scale so well for large designs if you can't have large designs anymore because there's not enough room for all the water/steam/heat pipes so close to the reactors? That might be point, I think. Because the scaling IS ridiculous, especially in the early stages...

The current situation - even if it likely originates with the fact that water and steam used to be interchangeable - has gameplay benefits as well. It forces you to design with a mind towards your water supply, whereas a single pump would otherwise be good for 10's of GW worth of boilers and heat ex...

Yeah, this is definitely going to take some redesigning for big assemblies. I haven't had time to do some in-depth testing, but there's definitely benefit to running multiple pathways when it comes to getting maximum work out of each heat exchanger. But heat pipes are pricy little buggers before end...

Much thanks. Surprisingly enough, that particular ratio is pretty much absent from all the many hits about reactor ratios and design. But patch 0.15.11 has me going back to the drawing board for reactor layout, and I couldn't remember if the 1:10 pump:exchanger ratio I was previously using was arbit...

Is the conversion ratio of water to steam via boilers and heat exchangers definitely 1:1?

This little device is a good High/Low triggering device, I've found.

Overall though, I don't quite agree with you. Loaders do bring some new possibilities into the game, even if a few, and if train loading/unloading is allowed for them, they could truly become useful. And they're already coded, so adding them to the game shouldn't be a problem. But the game can perf...

Those aren't true lane balancers, you realize? They stop functioning properly at full compression, and won't compensate for uneven consumption downstream (as the example on the left demonstrates). I general find it easier to keep the lane balancing separate from the belt balancing. Things get messy...

Is there something specifically wrong with it? I will point out this: it looks like you're using Speed 3 modules in your buildings. Unless you really need to save on space, you may want to compare the cost of those modules versus just adding more refineries and chem plants. :) Also, the speed 3 modu...

Hi, nice work but i guess you inserted the 1-1 and 1-2 only as a joke. This would be real examples of 1-1 and 1-2 if you like: balancer.png Those aren't true lane balancers, you realize? They stop functioning properly at full compression, and won't compensate for uneven consumption downstream (as t...

And here's the Proof of the Loaders OverPowerdness: ... Now, if anyone wants to refute this, they're welcome to post their designs functioning in actual factories. Sarcasm noted, and it's absolutely a fair question, although I might suggest you went out of your play to find some dull and ridiculous...

There are a lot of posts analyzing the interaction of beacons, but the rough consensus can be said to say: 1) Don't bother with efficiency modules in beacons 2) The interaction between high-level productivity and speed modules can exceed the sum of their individual contributions, giving you more out...

Yeah, I found that if the pump check conditions were set for less than 50, you started to get infinite cycling where the pumps would be endlessly triggering each other, but at 200 unit check difference, things seem to quiet down quickly. And while you do technically lose natural autolevelling, it's ...