Factorio Forums

What?

Make the biochamber able to perform the 3 basic solid fuel recipes.

Why?

Every step of module crafting can be performed in the EMP. But rocket fuel, a much cheaper and less valuable item than modules, doesn’t get the same treatment. Why? It’s just kind of odd and unsatisfying, because it seems like a very simple change to make. Biochambers only gained the ability to crack oil and make rocket fuel during the final week before release. It could be that the developers simply forgot to give them this functionality, during such a busy time.

I don’t think it’s against the rules to bump my own suggestion just once, right? The board has been kind of quiet lately, and I’ve always had the feeling that this post of mine was just posted at an unlucky time and got buried by other activity. Maybe it will be seen more now.

Edit: I was completely unaware of this other guy who happened to bump a ton of his posts at this exact time What a coincidence. I really would have waited a bit longer had I noticed that. But I guess there’s no taking it back now.

+1. Maybe it should also support the Aquillo fuel recipes for completeness.

Also solid fuel feels a bit neglected in the overall game: it has no dedicated Gleba recipe, is worse for driving cars and trains, and worse than rocket fuel in terms of energy efficiency once you gain access to biochambers.

CyberCider wrote: Sun Nov 16, 2025 10:13 pm Edit: I was completely unaware of this other guy who happened to bump a ton of his posts at this exact time What a coincidence. I really would have waited a bit longer had I noticed that. But I guess there’s no taking it back now.

Don't worry, if the suggestion is good other people would find it with the research, if not you just expose it to more criticism ^^

CyberCider wrote: Mon Dec 02, 2024 5:59 pm Biochambers only gained the ability to crack oil and make rocket fuel during the final week before release. It could be that the developers simply forgot to give them this functionality, during such a busy time.

Really ? i don't remember that, i think the jellynut=> rocket fuel is older than their ability to crack oil.

I'm curious as to where you plan to use this if it is ever implemented, i believe the suggestion may have not received much traction earlier because there is not a game situation i can think of where it would be tempting to use

mmmPI wrote: Mon Nov 17, 2025 7:28 am Really ? i don't remember that, i think the jellynut=> rocket fuel is older than their ability to crack oil.

I mean the vanilla rocket fuel recipe. The biochamber can do it with extra speed, productivity, and a more interesting design. And I think that answers your other question as well: Rocket fuel production on Nauvis and Vulcanus, where I already use biochambers for the rocket fuel step.

CyberCider wrote: Mon Nov 17, 2025 5:34 pm I mean the vanilla rocket fuel recipe. The biochamber can do it with extra speed, productivity, and a more interesting design. And I think that answers your other question as well: Rocket fuel production on Nauvis and Vulcanus, where I already use biochambers for the rocket fuel step.

Ah, that wasn't clear from what you wrote because i thought biochambers necessarily had the ability to make rocket fuel from jellynut, otherwise you'd be in trouble to leave Gleba.

I read your words about using biochambers for the vanilla rocket fuel recipe on Nauvis, it's a big waste of nutrient to use that on Nauvis imo, because oil is infinite there, so i personnally don't think it's tempting to try and boost the productivity, and in Vulcanus it's even worse, because you don't even need nutrient on the planet, if i was tempted to suggest to use something else it would be the cryogenic plant.

Of course that's just my opinion, i think it would suit the idea of a mod for those reasons, it sound like a less efficient, more complicated method, like a self-imposed challenge, and not too hard to code, you can have a look there https://mods.factorio.com/mod/glebaadditions . But who knows maybe in 2.1 ^^

mmmPI wrote: Tue Nov 18, 2025 11:54 am I read your words about using biochambers for the vanilla rocket fuel recipe on Nauvis, it's a big waste of nutrient to use that on Nauvis imo, because oil is infinite there, so i personnally don't think it's tempting to try and boost the productivity, and in Vulcanus it's even worse, because you don't even need nutrient on the planet, if i was tempted to suggest to use something else it would be the cryogenic plant.

Don’t worry, I do it purely for fun . My suggestion has nothing to do with how many people do or don’t currently make biochamber rocket fuel on other planets, all it aims to add is some consistency.

And here’s a fun fact I learned since originally posting this:
As you can see, the last time the developers implemented a Gleba based machine that could craft rocket fuel, it could also craft solid fuel. So now that the biochamber has this role, I really believe the same should be the case.

CyberCider wrote: Tue Nov 18, 2025 3:12 pm Don’t worry, I do it purely for fun . My suggestion has nothing to do with how many people do or don’t currently make biochamber rocket fuel on other planets, all it aims to add is some consistency.

I understand you say now the suggestion has nothing to do with the other players, but if you are going to bump the thread again you should probably consider wether or not the suggestion has any sense for those other players beyond your personnal appreciation of consistency .

I thought maybe i missed a situation where this suggestion would provide some objective benefit to players, but i understand now that it wasn't the case, you'd prefer to use the biochamber in some places where you can't, whereas for "consistency" i'd rather use cryogenic plant. It sound enough like a personnal preference that i linked a mod.

CyberCider wrote: Tue Nov 18, 2025 3:12 pm And here’s a fun fact I learned since originally posting this:

As you can see, the last time the developers implemented a Gleba based machine that could craft rocket fuel, it could also craft solid fuel. So now that the biochamber has this role, I really believe the same should be the case.

I knew about the FFF 431 since it was published, it's older than your OP, it doesn't make sense as a justification to me, as what you need on Gleba isn't solid fuel, but rocket fuel, because that is what is used to make the rocket parts, and now you have a special receipe to do it. Similar in Aquilo where solid fuel is dump for ammonia and rocket fuel used to make rocket parts, and you have special recipes to make either from ammonia.

In current version of the game, there's no reason to do solid fuel on Gleba, you are refering to a state of the game that is long gone, older than the FFF itself.

It's just my opinion, i understand you have another, but again , especially if it has nothing to do with the other players and it's more that you like using biochamber purely for fun in places where they don't necessarily shine, but you think the design challenge is interesting, i would very much advise the mod that focus onto just that

mmmPI wrote: Tue Nov 18, 2025 7:02 pm I thought maybe i missed a situation where this suggestion would provide some objective benefit to players, but i understand now that it wasn't the case, you'd prefer to use the biochamber in some places where you can't, whereas for "consistency" i'd rather use cryogenic plant. It sound enough like a personnal preference that i linked a mod.

Well, when I first gained access to biochambers and biter eggs, I had scaled back my Nauvis base and it was annoying to defend my oil field. Biochamber oil cracking makes oil-from-asteroid more practical. I'd say this is useful for anyone going Gleba first on a small Nauvis base since Gleba doesn't give you good defense options for Nauvis.

h.q.droid wrote: Wed Nov 19, 2025 1:58 am

mmmPI wrote: Tue Nov 18, 2025 7:02 pm I thought maybe i missed a situation where this suggestion would provide some objective benefit to players, but i understand now that it wasn't the case, you'd prefer to use the biochamber in some places where you can't, whereas for "consistency" i'd rather use cryogenic plant. It sound enough like a personnal preference that i linked a mod.

Well, when I first gained access to biochambers and biter eggs, I had scaled back my Nauvis base and it was annoying to defend my oil field. Biochamber oil cracking makes oil-from-asteroid more practical. I'd say this is useful for anyone going Gleba first on a small Nauvis base since Gleba doesn't give you good defense options for Nauvis.

I haven't changed my mind since i wrote this :

mmmPI wrote: Tue Nov 18, 2025 11:54 am I read your words about using biochambers for the vanilla rocket fuel recipe on Nauvis, it's a big waste of nutrient to use that on Nauvis imo, because oil is infinite there, so i personnally don't think it's tempting to try and boost the productivity,

It sound backward to me to claim you're going to generate extra pollution on Gleba by sending nutrient to nauvis so you can be more productive on the infinite oil from asteroid. If you don't have good defense option for Nauvis, the situation will be worse on Gleba, and you're worsening it needlessly. And what kind of game is this where you "scale back you Nauvis base so you don't use the oil anymore" ,that's not "objective benefit" to me, that's so far fetched i don't think it's meant to convinced me, more like to justify what was previously described as "feelings".

mmmPI wrote: Tue Nov 18, 2025 7:02 pm I understand you say now the suggestion has nothing to do with the other players, but if you are going to bump the thread again you should probably consider wether or not the suggestion has any sense for those other players beyond your personnal appreciation of consistency .

I thought maybe i missed a situation where this suggestion would provide some objective benefit to players, but i understand now that it wasn't the case, you'd prefer to use the biochamber in some places where you can't, whereas for "consistency" i'd rather use cryogenic plant. It sound enough like a personnal preference that i linked a mod.

Hey, consistency is nice, many people appreciate it. And there are people out there who wish the biochamber had more uses on other planets, I see them in various spaces pretty regularly. And who can blame them, Gleba is one of the best parts of the expansion, having more interactions with Gleba mechanics would always be great. Besides, this is an extremely minor feature, it could be added in a small patch with no special fanfare. Some people would appreciate it, others would not be affected by it at all.

I knew about the FFF 431 since it was published, it's older than your OP, it doesn't make sense as a justification to me, as what you need on Gleba isn't solid fuel, but rocket fuel, because that is what is used to make the rocket parts, and now you have a special receipe to do it. Similar in Aquilo where solid fuel is dump for ammonia and rocket fuel used to make rocket parts, and you have special recipes to make either from ammonia.

In current version of the game, there's no reason to do solid fuel on Gleba, you are refering to a state of the game that is long gone, older than the FFF itself.

Well, this suggestion wasn’t about Gleba. Of course it would have no use on Gleba, because there is usually no oil there. I don’t think at any point in development, anyone was using the vanilla rocket fuel recipe on Gleba. There was always a plant-based source of it. And it’s pretty safe to assume this biter spawner was not used on Gleba either, but exclusively on Nauvis, like the current biter buildings. When it was cut, the role of an improved rocket fuel crafter on Nauvis was lost. So as a replacement, the biochamber gained the vanilla rocket fuel recipe. And even though it was supposed to be filling the same role, for some reason it didn’t gain the solid fuel recipes alongside it, even though the previous building with the exact same job did have them. To me that sounds quite likely to be an oversight, especially when you consider the circumstances (only a week or so before the final release).

My suggestion is meant to extend the set of biochamber recipes meant for use on other planets. It currently consists of heavy oil cracking, light oil cracking and vanilla rocket fuel. In my (and others’) opinion, this is a pretty small recipe set, and it would be better if it were expanded. Solid fuel just seems like the easiest and most obvious option. I also believe the biochamber should be able to craft landfill, soils, stone bricks, inserters and agritowers, but that’s not the topic of this post.

CyberCider wrote: Wed Nov 19, 2025 8:23 am Hey, consistency is nice, many people appreciate it.

No, that makes no sense, you could be consistently making terrible suggestion backed by ridiculous argument, it wouldn't be appreciated ^^

It very much depend what you consider consistency, here it appears without substance to me, one time you claim you don't care what the other play do, right after that you say "many player do that i see them do".

mmmPI wrote: Wed Nov 19, 2025 3:34 am It sound backward to me to claim you're going to generate extra pollution on Gleba by sending nutrient to nauvis so you can be more productive on the infinite oil from asteroid. If you don't have good defense option for Nauvis, the situation will be worse on Gleba, and you're worsening it needlessly. And what kind of game is this where you "scale back you Nauvis base so you don't use the oil anymore" ,that's not "objective benefit" to me, that's so far fetched i don't think it's meant to convinced me, more like to justify what was previously described as "feelings".

Nutrient is actually cheaper on Nauvis with biter eggs. My oil field was quite far and biters ate it while I was at Gleba.

The key difference between Nauvis and Gleba defense is range. With only Nauvis / Gleba tech, there's no way to out-range expansion-created worms on Nauvis so defense can't be easily automated. While Gleba enemies are harder and have even longer range, they keep walking in so you can shoot them out.

h.q.droid wrote: Wed Nov 19, 2025 9:31 am

mmmPI wrote: Wed Nov 19, 2025 3:34 am It sound backward to me to claim you're going to generate extra pollution on Gleba by sending nutrient to nauvis so you can be more productive on the infinite oil from asteroid. If you don't have good defense option for Nauvis, the situation will be worse on Gleba, and you're worsening it needlessly. And what kind of game is this where you "scale back you Nauvis base so you don't use the oil anymore" ,that's not "objective benefit" to me, that's so far fetched i don't think it's meant to convinced me, more like to justify what was previously described as "feelings".

Nutrient is actually cheaper on Nauvis with biter eggs. My oil field was quite far and biters ate it while I was at Gleba.

I think there is a misunderstanding, using nutrient for oil cracking or solid fuel making is a waste of nutrient compared to not using them at all imo, since oil ( or asteroid) is infinite, gaining productivity on the oil is useless, especially if you are going to ship extra stuff from Gleba to achieve such gain, it sound backward. I don't understand when you say nutrient is actually cheaper on Nauvis, cheaper than what ? Either you use nutrient to make solid fuel, or you don't, using them cannot be cheaper than not using them x).

h.q.droid wrote: Wed Nov 19, 2025 9:31 am The key difference between Nauvis and Gleba defense is range. With only Nauvis / Gleba tech, there's no way to out-range expansion-created worms on Nauvis so defense can't be easily automated. While Gleba enemies are harder and have even longer range, they keep walking in so you can shoot them out.

I understand but this doesn't work as a convincing argument, it's true wether or not you use biochamber to make the solid fuel on Nauvis. If you have a poor Nauvis defense to the point where you loose access to your oil patch and you use stuff from space, you're better off making the solid fuel in space where pollution nor productivity matter since you have access to asteroid productivity at this stage. I don't see how it's tempting or objectively better to try and export stuff from Gleba, a planet where pollution/spore does matter.

It's just my opinion again, i understand people that would want to go into over complicated design that are not necessarily efficient but more challenging from the design perspective, i think the mod https://mods.factorio.com/mod/glebaadditions is nice for this, it include this suggestion and others that were mentionned in the way.

mmmPI wrote: Wed Nov 19, 2025 9:12 am It very much depend what you consider consistency,

Ah, I was referring to consistency with other Space Age machines that craft vanilla recipes. When multiple vanilla recipes of the same type are in a clear chain, the machine is generally able to craft the entire chain. Here are some examples:

1) EMP can craft the entire circuit chain (from green to blue, and even additionally including cable and quantum)
2) EMP can craft entire module chains (from tier 1 to tier 3)
3) Cryoplant can craft the entire sulfur chain (from sulfur to batteries)
4) Foundry can craft entire belt chains (from yellow to green)

All I want is for this to also apply to the solid fuel - rocket fuel chain, because it seems to be a thing that generally applies. That is one reason in favour of it, and there are no reasons against it. It’s not overpowered, because fuel isn’t very valuable and biochambers are complex to use. But it’s meaningful enough to be worth adding: Solid fuel is an item produced at scale, use of biochambers makes designs and logistics more fun and interesting, chemical plants wouldn’t become entirely obsolete because they still have several other important exclusive recipes, and the productivity/speed bonus would be tangible.

one time you claim you don't care what the other play do, right after that you say "many player do that i see them do".

Well, just because I don’t care doesn’t mean it’s not true. I wouldn’t bring it up on my own, but when you pointed it out as important to you, you gave me reason to bring it up.

CyberCider wrote: Wed Nov 19, 2025 2:12 pm Well, just because I don’t care doesn’t mean it’s not true. I wouldn’t bring it up on my own, but when you pointed it out as important to you, you gave me reason to bring it up.

I just pointed out that you bumped the thread while claiming you don't care how many people may be interested at first, and then saying many people do a thing that still appear to me unfounded, but hey at least you got an opinion on your suggestion, i understand you don't like it and try hard to convince me to change it, it doesn't work it still sound like made up argument for the sake of it to me, when you can use a perfectly fine mod.

I like that there's potentially something you can do with all the excess solid fuel on fulgora, other than simply deleting it all. But it would be much less worth the effort if you had even better recipes via biochamber. It would also possibly outclass the "native" method to get solid fuel on aquilo immediately, which would potentially affect the initial immersion there.