Rocket's meta is in a good way but still a problem

[SamLogan]

Hello,

I've tested the new beta branch patch :

The new rocket meta is really good and progressive, that's a great evolution from this meta :

 

Here's the new meta (some examples)  :

CO2 = 1 cargo + 1orbital cargo @ 4 tiles (1,4 speed)

Sucrose + oxylite = 2 cargo @ 4 tiles (0,6 speed)

Steam = 4 cargos @ 6 tiles (0,3 speed)

Petroleum + LOX = 4 cargos @ 12 tiles (0,9 speed)

LH + LOX = 6 cargos @ 9 tiles (1 speed)

From that, it's a perfect and progressive meta.

The problem for me, is the radbolt engine, really too powerfull (it's my favorite engine, it's not just for crying) because :

- No oxidizer is needed.

- Radbolt is the easiest ressource to produce.

- A radbolt engine can carry 4 cargos @ 24 tiles (!) (0,6 speed) so same cargos as the steam engine but with x3 speed.

 

Two solutions for me :

- Make radbolt really hard to handle and produce.

- Or reduce the power of the rocket.

 

Once again, my goal is no to complain, Klei do a great work. It's only my analysis.

 

 

[Yunru]

But have you seen how much radiation the radbolt engine puts out with each launch? 

[SamLogan]

20 minutes ago, Yunru said:

But have you seen how much radiation the radbolt engine puts out with each launch? 

Deleted in space or it has been changed with the new patch.

[sakura_sk]

I think Radbolt engine is right where it belongs: an upgrade to small petroleum but downgrade to petroleum or hydrogen engine.

But... if a nerf of tile range should be considered, it just needs a radbolt capacity reduction. (Reaching 24 tiles depends on fuel only). Although that range stands in between petroleum and hydrogen engine's.

Spoiler

*Probably the above table needs revisions because I still haven't tested max range and combinations after the max height change of latest update.

 

[Sasza22]

1 hour ago, SamLogan said:

- Make radbolt really hard to handle and produce.

I hope they`ll go this way. The easy radbolt production makes the whole radioactive branch awkward. You should be needing uranium from the third planetoid to create large numbers of radoblts.

[Electroely]

I think the Radbolt engine is in a good spot ATM. With the rework to the module limit, the radbolt engine's description fits it well - it specializes in long-range travel but with a relatively low module capacity. Even with 2 fuel tanks, the Hydrogen module can still have an advantage in module count over the Radbolt engine, which wasn't the case before.
Also important to note that a hydrogen rocket with 2 fuel tanks can do a round trip to any destination on the starmap that isn't on the outermost ring, assuming it takes off from the starting planet (which is usually the case).

1 hour ago, Sasza22 said:

I hope they`ll go this way. The easy radbolt production makes the whole radioactive branch awkward. You should be needing uranium from the third planetoid to create large numbers of radoblts.

I feel like if there's an issue here, it's that radbolt collectors are capable of storing virtually infinite amounts of radbolts. You can begin producing radbolts relatively early (which is fair considering they're required to research), but with a decent radbolt source you can build up enough radbolts to fuel just about anything by the time you research and need other radbolt consumers. IMO, radbolt collectors should stop producing radbolts if they reach a specific threshold (maybe x10 their current production?). The energy consumption would instead go into keeping those radbolts contained (maybe with lower wattage) so having a large reserve of radbolts would require both good radiation sources and good power generation.

[Sasza22]

Quote

Disabled Radbolt Generators slowly lose stored radbolts

Hopefully this helps balancing he system.

[RageLeague]

Why there's 2 lox tank for 2 fuel tank in the petrol engine? I thought 450 lox can support 1800kg fuel, unless fuel changed in the last patch.

And also why all small cargo tank?

On the radbolt engine, you need to consider that it doesn't produce power but it produce a bunch of nuclear wastes and germs directly below it. You need to reserve more space to deal with the byproduct. Other engine produces relatively harmless material as their exhaust like steam or CO2, so even if you don't deal with it, it's not a huge deal(the heat will just dissipate, and you can easily remove co2 and steam). With the radbolt engine, you have to deal with it unless you want radiation germs and nuclear fallout everywhere in your base.

[Primalflower]

i think the rocket engines are in a pretty good spot right now given the other qualities that the radbolt engine lacks in 
(on board power, height limit, exhaust [though this can be undone if you have an elevated rocket 'bay'])