Very true.
Then again I think that nuclears could use some sprucing up in other regards as well
.Advanced Solar Panels vs Compact Solars
- Thread starter Aetherr_
- Start date
Then again I think that nuclears could use some sprucing up in other regards as well
.Very true.
Then again I think that nuclears could use some sprucing up in other regards as well
Most def. Nuclear reactors are an insanely cool energy source, and I was psyched to see that they were in the game.
In my humble opinion, they should be second only to fusion reactors, given the proper set up. In other regards I'm not quite as familiar, as I've actually never used Nuclear reactors. Extremely cool system... but it just never seemed worth the risk nor the space for the safer methods.
Plus the fuel is significantly harder to get compared to other fuel sources - particularly considering the kind of 'meh' power generation.
I just wish all the reactor components were blocks and we'd get to build the actual reactors.
OK, portability is not that important, yes. But saying that one-block solar is exactly the same as the setup that takes two chunks of space is a bit unfair.
And are you saying that multiblocks don't reduce lag? I'm not sure about that, but I don't know technical details.
Also, I'm not "fixed" on anything I'm just explaining what I think about solars and solar plants
And I don't use lava method too. At least for now. This is the topic about solars. Am I not allowed to post my opinion here?
You're allowed to post your opinion, and I'm allowed to challenge it. The entire argument about solar panels, and in particular top tier solar panels, came from the days of Tekkit when you had IC2, BC, RP2, and flavor mods in between. You could build up your facilities to produce EU and only EU, convert it to MJ in the field for things like quarries, and that was the entire energy meta-game. With such a sparse variety, people liked to pick on solar panels because nuclear reactors couldn't keep up to them overall. That was the source. That was the core. It didn't matter that the reason they were compacted into arrays was in response to lag. And like with most people and most opinions, they then built up the argument around the opinion instead of building the argument and then reaching a conclusion that forms an opinion. So space requirements, maintenance requirements, portability...all strawman complaints. They were all rationalizations built up around the idea that solar panels were OP because nuclear reactors were big risk with mediocre reward.
Now we've got energy options out the wazoo. I've been focusing the overwhelming majority of my energy infrastructure build time on MJ because it's more varied and interesting. There's a point where requiring constant maintenance on machines or systems becomes piss-poor design because you shouldn't need a big chunk of time every day just running around maintaining what you've got. Players should have the opportunity to liberate themselves from their machines so that they can continue to progress and develop the things that interest them. We have all kinds of options to do that, whether it's investing a ton of resources into solar panels or building automation systems around our machines or whatever option floats your boat. It would do my heart good if we suddenly saw a shift in perception where people stopped criticizing automated systems and machines and started exercising a bit of creativity and initiative so they didn't need to play the 'feed the machines' meta to feel like they were involved in the game.
In an ideal solution reactors should produce tons of steam rather than energy, But here comes the cost of steam turbine which is pretty high. It's OK with boilers, but reactor should produce much more steam than 36HP and I'd like to see a more powerful turbine to keep up with it. And setup should have a very powerfull pump to cool the reactor and supply it with water.
I know about lag, yes. And I didn't said "OP", I'm just saying why I don't like them. What do you want from me? You want me to use advanced solars? I doubt so. And I'm not forcing anyone to use nukes or boilers.
You are talking about the arguments forming the opinion. My opinion is based on following things:
1) I tired of solars.
2) There are other power generators that are more interesting for me.
3) I don't like the single block that produces more energy than a reactor.
You have some reasons to use them, I have reasons to not use them.
The other point you have is automated systems. And why do you think that I'm criticizing them? I think it's impossible to make something serious in FTB without automation.
His system will use quite a large chunk of the energy for UU production.
The running cost is 800 UU per cycle so the net energy production will be around 1300 EU/t with an efficiency of 3.55, which isn't bad but not the best you can get.
Considering the cost of the reactor and the high risk of it blowing up I wouldn't really consider this an efficient design.
Also in mindcrack and ultimate this design isn't possible.
You never ever had to relocate some stuff because of additions to your base? I have. An ultimate solar you can easily pick up and plop down somewhere else. A 512-block array takes up a lot more space.
Solar power is cheap but has the downside that if you want to generate a lot of it you need a lot of materials and a lot of space. Compact Solars does away with the space. Advanced solars does away with the lot fo materials and a lot of space, and just requires you to create a bit of UU matter as a 'cost'. I dislike them simply because they make no sense and are such an easy solution that people rather make ultimate solars than go into the effort of actually building a boiler (or even worse; nuclear reactor).
Players tend to take the path of the least resistance. The resistance of the "solar" path is to easy compared to the alternatives. That's why I dislike solars, only to add to the scientific part that it doesn't make sense that a single block can create that much power out of nothing. It's more or less a craftable quantum generator.
Nuclear isn't that weak, when you think about it, you just have to be creative. My nuclear setup used to produce 5760 eu/t with eff 6, with little maintenance required (that is until one of them blew up because of a glitch). I have a fusion reactor now, but the one i'm planning for my next world will give 7680 eu/t.
By the way: why won't DW20's reactor work in the ultimate pack? It has all of the DW pack mods doesn't it? Regardless, the cooling system I used has a startup cost comparable to DW20's condensators but with zero running cost.
On topic: I prefer ASP, mainly because they look cooler and they allow me to use my ultimate solar helmet. But also, I feel its better balanced. If they require UU matter to make, then you'd need a pretty beasty power setup to get them in the first place, especially with GT, so by then the whole free energy thing isn't quite as OP as it would be otherwise.
By the way: why won't DW20's reactor work in the ultimate pack? It has all of the DW pack mods doesn't it? Regardless, the cooling system I used has a startup cost comparable to DW20's condensators but with zero running cost.
On topic: I prefer ASP, mainly because they look cooler and they allow me to use my ultimate solar helmet. But also, I feel its better balanced. If they require UU matter to make, then you'd need a pretty beasty power setup to get them in the first place, especially with GT, so by then the whole free energy thing isn't quite as OP as it would be otherwise.
Again ignoring the lag issue. I think going forward I'm only going to respond to people demonstrating a grasp of the full issue, and not just cherry-picking the convenient points to argue.
Mostly, it just shows that base IC2 uumatter is too damn cheap. The 24hr graviton is another example.
Actually people claim a two hour graviton chest after server start on the IC forums.
You should probably put this in your guides thread, because it gives players consideration on which solar mod is better.
So I made my first two advanced solars, yay! but why do they have a maximum output of 32 EU/t but only generate 8? I had kinda hoped for more power, given the cost...
So I made my first two advanced solars, yay! but why do they have a maximum output of 32 EU/t but only generate 8? I had kinda hoped for more power, given the cost...
The 32 is to show they're outputting low voltage (in the ic2 usual form: 32, 128, 512), also if the internal storage gets full they'd then output at 32eu/t until the storage emptied.
You mean you're not going into a proper discussion because it hurts your brain too much. Fine with me. Buh-bye!
No, I meant what I said. You're not even addressing the lag caused by 512 solars trickling 1 EU each into a power grid. You're talking about people not willing to put in the 'effort' to make a boiler when a boiler is far, far cheaper to build and sustain than a single ultimate hybrid solar panel. There's no substance to your arguments because you are, as I said, cherry picking arguments. It's a bad way to debate. If you can't speak to the big picture, you can't really speak to anything. You're not speaking to the big picture, so save the smug for when you've earned it.
I'm not entirely certain, but I don't think the lag issue is to do with the generation of a large number of 2 eu/t packets. I recall reading on the IC2 forums that the lag is actually due to the fact that each solar panel has to constantly perform checks to ensure that it can see the sky. The IC2 EU-net normally quite efficient providing you don't have cable loops.
The point is that it's a vast number of machine blocks individually contributing an insignificant amount of energy to the grid. Where specifically the lag comes from is irrelevant. It's just like the water and wind mills...when they were implemented, nobody knew what kinds of things players would be aiming to do with them. Nobody could have foreseen players creating dozens/hundreds of them as an alternative to risky nuclear power. Some people get stuck on this idea of what they think 'should' be. Some people respond to what is. What was happening was large scale application of small scale power generators, which was causing resource issues. A solution was to combine the yield of the smaller devices. It's functional, it's viable, and it served the purpose it was intended to serve. It does so despite the demands of some who feel that nothing good should come without ridiculous restrictions or cost. And thus GregTech was born and we were ashamed.
And that, in a nutshell, is the history of modded MC. A bunch of people who think little and know less shaping a segment of the genre and we see how well their point of view is received by the community at large. All of a sudden the ham-fisted approach to 'balance' doesn't look so attractive.