Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.

Abi.m

Do we really need a sulfur geyser?

Recommended Posts

Abi.m    4

I dont understand the need for a sulfur geyser. The production of sulfur ingame from Sour Gas Boiler (SGB) is correct but in IRL it is also a byproduct of crude oil refining to petrol. Not everyone ingame wants to build a SGB in every colony, so petroleum route should have sulfur production. Also sulfur is also found near volcanoes. That should have been a feature as well. Lava solidifying to a composite tile of igneous and sulfur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MinhPham    51

I don't think they will offer a lot of sulfur per geyser, just enough to power the sugar rocket.

Edit : Agree with the petroleum route, since  the oil refinery deletes 50% of the oil mass, i think it is ok to have some sulfur as a byproduct of the refinery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meltdown    103

Adding sulfur geyser is the easiest solution to make it renewable without sour gas boiler. Tweaking existing production chains before going on holiday break is a risky move as introducing new bugs or breaking the balance would leave far more people upset than the lack of renewable sulfur already does. Consider this as a temporary fix before looking for a proper integration of sulfur into colony life cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sasza22    3141

Nothing wrong with having a natural source of sulfur. It`s basically a sulfur volcano wich makes sense. Works for the ONI world where each geyser produces only one type of resource. They could add another source through the oil refinery as well but for now it works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to get your hands on fullerene in the current build without spawning fullerene comets in sandbox mode? How do you make supercoolant for stuff like sour gas boilers otherwise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Khullag    171

cmon, do you want to have a geyser for everything? we have a cool process of getting sulfur through SGB an you want to dumb it down to a geyser?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
avc15    485

gating sulphur behind one of the most mechanically complex builds in the game isn't great for new players.

A geyser is necessary. It's ok if the geyser is rare, though. (edit: or a critter morph that poops sulphur. Or some other mechanism)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
goboking    1853
21 hours ago, Abi.m said:

Also sulfur is also found near volcanoes. That should have been a feature as well. Lava solidifying to a composite tile of igneous and sulfur.

I could get behind lava rocks being run through the rock crusher to produce sulfur and igneous rock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JRup    264

So now we might as well stop accidentally dripping crude on hot abyssalite and then cooling it down with an AETN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blash365    775
On 12/16/2020 at 9:07 AM, MinhPham said:

I don't think they will offer a lot of sulfur per geyser, just enough to power the sugar rocket.

Edit : Agree with the petroleum route, since  the oil refinery deletes 50% of the oil mass, i think it is ok to have some sulfur as a byproduct of the refinery.

I absolutely agree that sulfur should be a biproduct of the refinery. That would preserve the mass in the game.

Too bad we didnt post this earlier.:/

 

Sidenote: it is not 50%, since there are also 90g/s of NG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0xFADE    553

The sulfur geyser is too far away to be of any use. Late game food is trivial and usually completely sustainable through ranching. The in game window for the need of sulfur is pretty small unless they use it in some other process later.  I’d rather have a guaranteed chlorine/natural gas geyser. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blash365    775
33 minutes ago, 0xFADE said:

The sulfur geyser is too far away to be of any use. Late game food is trivial and usually completely sustainable through ranching. The in game window for the need of sulfur is pretty small unless they use it in some other process later.  I’d rather have a guaranteed chlorine/natural gas geyser. 

I would expect the sulfur geyser to be moved to another planetoid in the long run anyway.

Otherwise the swamp biome would be quite a joke:

  • water geyser
  • enough po2 for ages
  • enough sand to clean po2
  • critters who increase your food drastically
  • free food for the critters

Then we only need a copper ore volcano to also get free energy.^^

Most likely things will spread out a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sith515    24
22 minutes ago, blash365 said:

Then we only need a copper ore volcano to also get free energy.^^

There's several minor volcanoes to feed hatches with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blash365    775
6 minutes ago, Sith515 said:

There's several minor volcanoes to feed hatches with.

There are no hatches on the swamp start planet. I was referring to the plug slugs. The next obviously not sustainable thing on the first planetoid.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0xFADE    553

I'm saying the geyser is too far away, as in it isn't on the starter location or the teleport location(which sort of is the same location in that you can transfer things between them without rockets) or even the next closest location.  You don't need sulfur for food by that point in the game.  Food needs to be solved way before you get to those locations and resolved as you expand.  Maybe for rockets but isn't co2 better than sugar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sasza22    3141
5 hours ago, 0xFADE said:

Maybe for rockets but isn't co2 better than sugar?

Currently it is. Gives more range and the extra module the sugar allows is needed for the oxydizer anyway. But we don`t hav everything implemented yet. Maybe there are other uses for sulfur or sucrose planned which would make the geyser worthwhile in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
melquiades    141
On 12/16/2020 at 8:03 AM, babba said:

Still no Plutonium-Geysir in the game :confused:

Plutonium occurs naturally as a decay product, there are no relevant deposits of it in nature. People need to craft it if they want to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
silverbluep    32

If it occured naturally as a decay product; then there would be deposits of it. It's natural occurence is trace amounts in uranium ore; as uranium sometimes irradiates itself into plutonium. It's naturally occuring but not a decay product; like everything after Uranium.

Small amount of sulfur to keep a few critters going or to occasionally power a rocket is nice I think; until you get your sour gas boiler running. As long as it's not powerful I'm fine with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nakomaru    1991
On 12/19/2020 at 12:40 PM, 0xFADE said:

I'm saying the geyser is too far away, as in it isn't on the starter location or the teleport location

Silly me for not checking. It is.
image.thumb.png.cc52b0b4fa58eb0f9ff5b66dc422649f.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites