A New Direction [BC API/RF API]
- Thread starter Queue
- Start date
-
The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
- Status
One tidbit of info, it is me and @SatanicSanta doing itYou can't just say that and not give us any more information
You can't just say that and not give us any more information
That's why I didn't give any info.
One thing I ask in these type thread that has yet ro be properly defined is, "What do you mean by depth and complexity?"
Define it. Is it having a bunch of steps to get to a goal? Is it crafting? What do you mean?
Define it. Is it having a bunch of steps to get to a goal? Is it crafting? What do you mean?
Can't be defined to were it would satisfy everyone. You are asking The Good Magician Humphry what colour Mila Mermaid's panties are here.
(sorry Xanth reference LOL)
That's the true crux of this whole debate, what may be interesting to one, may be boring to another. There is no real way to please everyone.
Unless someone comes up with a mod that uses the RP API, makes it "complex" (ie GT like) but puts it in as an addon to something like TE. If you use the lossy items, but power it properly/enough you get some kind of bonus?
That way folks can still have their plug and play, and those who want a challenge can get a reward for it.
Maybe make the "hardmode" generators create more than 80RF/t and allow it to be used for higher end machines that require more constant power to run properly to do "insert amazing thing here"
Just tossing out ideas
Personally I hate the different voltage system (it's a level of headache I'm just not interested in), but I do like having tiered powered transmission (existing conduits) and machines that slow down when their internal power buffer is low. Low quality conduits makes everything run slowly, so you'll want to upgrade to ensure your machines are running better.
Perhaps a bigger resource difference/crafting mechanic between the tiers? Getting to max tier in TE is not too hard normally, which defeats the tiers a bit.
I'd like perdition per machine. Makes sense, the machines are on standby, ready and waiting. Perhaps all machines in general could be like the MFR mechanic of sleep, once they turn on, they have a duration before they actually start working. So machines could be put in off, wakeup or standby mode. Wakeup will perform work after a delay when they've received an item at no power loss, Standby has no delay, but a constant energy drain. (This is beyond the RF power design, but an idea to throw out there for tech mod devs)
Perdition per energy cable doesn't seem right to me. Run a 5 long cable, attach 20 machines to it, and only suffer Perdition for those 5 cables, compared to what the system actually has of 20 machines.
Again, just ideas from what is out there already.
Perhaps a bigger resource difference/crafting mechanic between the tiers? Getting to max tier in TE is not too hard normally, which defeats the tiers a bit.
I'd like perdition per machine. Makes sense, the machines are on standby, ready and waiting. Perhaps all machines in general could be like the MFR mechanic of sleep, once they turn on, they have a duration before they actually start working. So machines could be put in off, wakeup or standby mode. Wakeup will perform work after a delay when they've received an item at no power loss, Standby has no delay, but a constant energy drain. (This is beyond the RF power design, but an idea to throw out there for tech mod devs)
Perdition per energy cable doesn't seem right to me. Run a 5 long cable, attach 20 machines to it, and only suffer Perdition for those 5 cables, compared to what the system actually has of 20 machines.
Again, just ideas from what is out there already.
Celestialphoenix
Too Much Free Time
Is there a difference between 'voltage' and 'tiered transmission'?
[Anyone remember the IC2 advanced machines add-on??]
I wouldn't mind seeing a trade off of perdition per cable over perdition per connection.
-tier II is 0.1/unit, but 3% per connection.
-highest tier would be lossless over distance, but waste 10% per connection.
(To me both mean the same; a set limit to the maximum capacity/throughput)
I like the idea of machines and engines having warmup/cooldown times- keeping a machine 'hot' requires a steady supply of power, but boots the processing time/efficiency per process.
[Anyone remember the IC2 advanced machines add-on??]
I wouldn't mind seeing a trade off of perdition per cable over perdition per connection.
{per connection would be similar to TE in ultimate 1.4.7- where you'd loose 5% every time RF entered into a conduit}
-Lower tier cables loose 0.2RF per unit, and 2% per connection.-tier II is 0.1/unit, but 3% per connection.
-highest tier would be lossless over distance, but waste 10% per connection.
This keeps low grade cables useful later on, but the higher grade ones can carry insane amounts over long distances...
So something similar to the old IC2 energy network (barring glass fibre)? As you tier up voltages, it gets more 'lossy' per packet, but packets get larger so overall you have lower loss with higher voltage.
Not really, what's annoying is when you have different voltage generation that requires the correct voltage cable, then the correct voltage converter before it goes into a machine. Get any one of those things wrong somewhere, and boom, something explodes. I don't really see it adding gameplay value.
If "block A" generates 100RF a tick, and you plug in "el cheapo cable" that can only transmit 5RF, the remaining 95 gets held in the internal buffer of "block A". Block A is only being 5% efficient because of the cable, especially if it's still using 100% of the fuel to output that 5%. That's enough of a penalty to the player without resorting to things being fried.
So, what happens when things are overloaded or over-supplied with RF?
Is there any punishment for pushing your machines too far beyond normal parameters?
How is this measured from both a GUI standpoint and at a casual glance?
Which side has the problem? is it at the supply? The consumption? The wiring?
How is this then (most importantly) controlled by the player in the late-game?
Is there any punishment for pushing your machines too far beyond normal parameters?
How is this measured from both a GUI standpoint and at a casual glance?
Which side has the problem? is it at the supply? The consumption? The wiring?
How is this then (most importantly) controlled by the player in the late-game?
Celestialphoenix
Too Much Free Time
Kind of- I was about to do a tactical edit and tidy that a little, but seeing that I was ninja'd twice...
The rough idea is that the total %loss over distance decreases with each tier (like the IC2 packets)
but the cost of putting that power into/out of the cable increases with tier. (this would be a set penalty not as a percentage as I mentioned earlier)
The idea is the most efficient networks would be one that combines multiple inputs on a lower tier cable, drops into a higher tier cable for long distance/efficient transport, then into a lower tier cable to feed several machines.
Smaller networks would be better with just lower tier cables, wheres high output generators would need a high grade cable to start with, then a lower grade cable for distribution.
Thats a matter of naming and implementation/consequence- both systems use a "voltage" or "tiered transmission". Its still the same thing.I think this might be a matter of word association, when we see 'voltage' on here we think IC2 and thus melting/explosions, rather than voltage as an alternate name for tiered transmission.
Things melt and explode accordingly.
Though ideally the punishment is proportional to the crime- so supplying 100% the power requirement means optimum efficient, up to 200% could run the machine faster at the cost of extra energy (lost efficiency), more than that an you'll see smoke/hear it overloading- fair warning before it blows. Obviously dropping 1000% would result in you picking shrapnel off the wall.
Control- redstone control switches/engine control, upgrading machines to handle extra power ect...
Last edited:
asie actually discussed this in #EloraamDrama.
Which, as a matter of fact, I am re-using for this RF debate. Feel free to join, it's on espernet.
My biggest problem with machine losses, especially of expensive machines, is that it merely punishes a lack of attention. People will quickly figure out to put a lower rated cable as "circuit breaker" in front of every machine, making it just added tedium. You don't get anything from a mechanic like that, whereas perdition etc. rewards attention. Rewards are, gameplay-wise, a lot better than random punishments as they give an incentive to learn about your system and plan it.
I like the idea of using it as "overclock", though. If you supply too much energy to a machine, it would start to run faster, but also start overheating - emit smoke, make grinding noises and have a chance of shutting down (losing all progress on the current operation). Instead of blowing up, you could implement a mechanic that you need to wrench the machine to fix it (think of circuit breakers). Instead of random griefing, this gives you interesting mechanics: optimal voltage will still give you optimal efficiency, but if you're in a hurry you can invest manual time (wrenching back the circuit breakers) in order to get more out of your machines.
This gives an incentive (full automation) while making the "failure mode" an extra gameplay element. Instead of random punishment, this feels like the player has a choice.
So much arguing.
-----------------------------------------
I like building complex machines. My machines are very complex. Too complex. They like to explode whenever I turn them on, much to my friend's amusement. So I set out, to rebuild it, but this time adding in more failsafes, that end up making my builds even more complex, to the point where I can't figure out exactly what it is that I built.
However, I like it that way.
I like having very complex power systems. I like having power that will cause losses if I do not account for it. I like having the danger of blowing up my entire base. Why?
Because if I did not want a challenge, I would use creative mode.
However, I do want a challenge.
My endlessly exploding power systems are exactly what I set out to build. And eventually, with the help of people who actually know what they are doing, we get something good built.
Lossless power that has absolutely no danger is certainly not fun. It takes the complexity out of setups. It takes out the intelligence needed.
For me, the fun isn't having the power. The fun is having 20 pages of sketches which draw out exactly what is the best setup to minimize power losses, and to reduce the chance of going KABOOM.
Other then that, I really don't care too much about this. Arguing is bad.
Good day.
-----------------------------------------
I like building complex machines. My machines are very complex. Too complex. They like to explode whenever I turn them on, much to my friend's amusement. So I set out, to rebuild it, but this time adding in more failsafes, that end up making my builds even more complex, to the point where I can't figure out exactly what it is that I built.
However, I like it that way.
I like having very complex power systems. I like having power that will cause losses if I do not account for it. I like having the danger of blowing up my entire base. Why?
Because if I did not want a challenge, I would use creative mode.
However, I do want a challenge.
My endlessly exploding power systems are exactly what I set out to build. And eventually, with the help of people who actually know what they are doing, we get something good built.
Lossless power that has absolutely no danger is certainly not fun. It takes the complexity out of setups. It takes out the intelligence needed.
For me, the fun isn't having the power. The fun is having 20 pages of sketches which draw out exactly what is the best setup to minimize power losses, and to reduce the chance of going KABOOM.
Other then that, I really don't care too much about this. Arguing is bad.
Good day.
- Status