I believe Reika said the other day that the problem is NEI not doing NBT data, which is also why you only see one or two conversion-type engines and not one of each tier in NEI.
Mod Feedback [By Request] RotaryCraft Suggestions
- Thread starter Reika
- 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
I believe Reika said the other day that the problem is NEI not doing NBT data, which is also why you only see one or two conversion-type engines and not one of each tier in NEI.
The problem is that it cannot tell one tree from another.
You cannot, and on top of that, the registry is not designed to handle leafless trees.
He's saying bigger = bigger range of possible random numbers. It could be used a couple ways, but chances are he probably did something like "roll the giant X-sided die every few minutes, and if its a zero, do meteors." So bigger args means less chance of meteors.
I'm not a java person, but specifically I'm guessing that if you put 100, you'll get a random number from 0-100. If you put 4, you'll get a random number from 0-4, which would be a 20% chance of meteors "per check."
Correct. And it checks once a tick. You can use a poisson distribution to calculate actual meteor statistics.
Now I'm thoroughly confused. I just calculated how many ticks there are in an hour, and it was the value it was at, meaning the config setting, as it was, should be making meteors at an average of one an hour. Yet somehow, I got meteors falling faster than I can mine them. Maybe it's just dumb luck?
Statistics. A 1/72000 chance 20 times a second does not mean that they will cleanly fall once an hour every hour.
how come lumber can? Well I guess they're using a less efficient algorithm
or the Geometric distribution if you want to know how long it'll take until it happens
Basically, you'll find that on average, they drop once an hour, but the actual times at which they drop are still random.
---> Geometric distribution. Very long intervals between impacts are more improbable.
Maybe, and I know that oak trees are bad because natural large oaks can have gaps in their branch structure, but if I chop a single thick trunk over here, and a huge canopy exists, does it really make sense to chop down that trunk 8 blocks away, or even keep chopping past that trunk to something like 40 blocks from me?
Yea, I know, trees can be as "wide" as a 7x7 base, or as uneven as a twilight forest oak where the tops look like a normal large oak on top of a wood base that isn't even directly above the ground blocks that you chop at the base, or much, much worse -- I'm remembering the old EBXL giants from 147 with horror-delight, and I've forgotten what the mystcraft channelwood giants look like.
Ohh ... I just realized, I have to test this: mystcraft wood tendrils <evil smile>
I actually thought of something that might make ReactorCraft more...interesting that has nothing to do at all with adding new reactors: tracking a player's exposure to radiation. Not just an insta-death effect if you overdose or a glorified potion effect, but an actual counter that changes depending on environmental factors with respect to time. Things like radiation shielding, both on armour and as a functional part of some blocks, would decrease how much radiation (in microsieverts, or µSv, in double-precision floating point format) a player receives from both the background and from their reactors. As time goes on the radiation levels in the player's body decreases, representing the body's absorbing said radiation, maybe with some medications that can allow radiation to be absorbed and passed more efficiently, until they reach normal background levels. As their exposure to radiation worsens, they begin to suffer ill effects such as poison (representing the vomiting), weakness, mining fatigue, and progressing to blindness, higher levels of poisoning, and eventually outright death. The effects of radiation poisoning would persist until the player's radiation levels decrease, maybe as a minute-by-minute check to keep performance impact low.
This could allow you to bring in a Geiger counter, allowing players to not only track their own radiation levels (by shift-right clicking), but also to check and see how much radiation their reactors are producing and maybe even using it to help them find uranium deposits by checking background radiation levels when they right-click air. This would encourage players to build their reactors intelligently, using radiation shielding and decentralization to make their bases safer, as well as further encouraging the creation of hazmat suits as well as automating their reactors and properly disposing of their waste, assuming they don't just void it.
This could allow you to bring in a Geiger counter, allowing players to not only track their own radiation levels (by shift-right clicking), but also to check and see how much radiation their reactors are producing and maybe even using it to help them find uranium deposits by checking background radiation levels when they right-click air. This would encourage players to build their reactors intelligently, using radiation shielding and decentralization to make their bases safer, as well as further encouraging the creation of hazmat suits as well as automating their reactors and properly disposing of their waste, assuming they don't just void it.
If we are going to track exposure to radiation, can we get a chance of a super hero mutation?
This. This is perfect. I have always wanted a reactor mod to do this, instead of just, "Oh, you are dead now."
I like it. I really like it. I haven't played with ReactorCraft yet, but I like the idea of it. As long as there's a way to counter it, I'd really like to see this implemented.
Regarding ReactorCraft, I'm still on 25z, and I noticed that the Spent Fuel Container does not cool down if you remove all the waste.
I know the expectation is to cool them with water source blocks, but would you consider other methods for cooling in future versions? The idea of using a boiler, heat exchangers, or cooling fins to pull heat out of them is very appealing for getting extra energy from the equation.
If that's a balance breaker, could we change them to use water that is piped in instead of environmental water? Yes I'm trying to make this work on a finite water world, and so far I can only use a Buildcraft Floodgate to replace the water. If we could use other coolants that would be great, thus having the option to spend energy to chill the spent fuel.
I know the expectation is to cool them with water source blocks, but would you consider other methods for cooling in future versions? The idea of using a boiler, heat exchangers, or cooling fins to pull heat out of them is very appealing for getting extra energy from the equation.
If that's a balance breaker, could we change them to use water that is piped in instead of environmental water? Yes I'm trying to make this work on a finite water world, and so far I can only use a Buildcraft Floodgate to replace the water. If we could use other coolants that would be great, thus having the option to spend energy to chill the spent fuel.
True. I did expect the container to cool down rapidly once the fuel was removed though.
To the finite water issue, I found some success in using several Buildcraft Flood Gates to keep the pool filled, but you have to send them a redstone signal at least once a second. They sleep up to 16 seconds if there is no place to add water, and I need to checked more frequently.