Macerators and pulverizers are pretty easy to use, doubling ore output. Grinders from Factorization seem to produce more, but need a bigger factory setup. At the end of the day, which one produces the most using the least?

  • Define "better". Output? Total resources used? Amount of resources input before you break even on the investment? Less fussy to use long-term? – SevenSidedDie Apr 17 '13 at 20:55
  • @SevenSidedDie Just in general. – user28379 Apr 17 '13 at 21:57
  • That's not really specific enough to be an answerable question and avoid "not a real question" close votes. "Better" depends on what you want from it, and the answer will be different depending on what you're looking for—or put another way, there is no "better", just trade-offs. – SevenSidedDie Apr 17 '13 at 23:12
  • @SevenSidedDie That better? – user28379 Apr 17 '13 at 23:17
  • Much better, yes. – SevenSidedDie Apr 17 '13 at 23:25

Grinders will give you a 3:1 ratio of output metals to input ores, while macerators will give you 2:1. A grinder takes more in resources and infrastructure to get up and running – however, the more resources you process, the smaller the initial cost of setup becomes as a percentage of output. Therefore the longer you run a grinder setup, the more it pays for its original cost, and before too long the grinder becomes strictly better in terms of ratio of output to setup costs.

  • It's probably worth noting that pulverizers give you slightly more output than macerators, since you sometimes get bonus dusts of different materials from them. (Of course, you can't overclock them...) – Shinrai Apr 18 '13 at 5:27
  • @Shinrai If it was a three-way versus question, yes, but it would only be a tangent to what the question is actually about: the easier 2:1 processors vs the annoying-to-craft Grinder. – SevenSidedDie Apr 18 '13 at 15:03
  • "At the end of the day, which one produces the most using the least" - the answer is grinders, but if that's too much work the answer is pulverizers. I upvoted your answer for being good, I just felt like it was worth noting that macerators and pulverizers are not identical in output like the question frames them.. :) – Shinrai Apr 18 '13 at 15:41

Think of them as tiers.

  • The Pulverizer is a T1 tech; easy to get, easy to power, but kind of self upgrades to T2 as your powerflow/system grows (it works faster when has more energy)
  • The Macerator is also a T1 tech, but self upgrades to T2 when you get overclockers and the like (T3 would be the rotary Macerator)
  • The Grinder is a T3 tech. It's expensive to make. It is quite powerful, however, and has many more uses than a Pulverizer or a Macerator.

I haven't messed with it much, so I'm not sure if this is true or not, but the Grinder doesn't use any source of power. Factorization power generation and use is still very much a WiP.

At the end of the day, you will probably already have a competent Macerator/Pulverizer setup that you don't even have a need for a Grinder by the time you can achieve it.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy