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
Would it be feasible to do something like intake towers such as they have at dams, the tower detects its height at base (to avoid dropping it in the ocean) and how much water is within touchable range (like the pump currently does) and determines if there's enough? Then use liquid pipes to a spiller/s or something of that nature to drop the water onto the HKE. I know, dams use turbines rather than water wheels, but the general idea might work. Downside is it's an extra block(s)...
The thing is that
a) Reika is (in my experience) against making his mods dependant on other mods that are not his.
b) I like RoC, but I don't want to have to play it without infinite water.
This is somewhat like I suggested when myself Demosthenex and others were talking about it on irc. Have a block that on being above sea level, and shift right clicked with a screwdriver does a count of source blocks above itself, the "lake behind the dam" and works out a pressure from that, so that its not constantly checking for lag purposes. With hydro engines, being changed to act more like dam turbines, in that when placed in front of the "dam block" spin up generating shaft power, with the same mechanics of needing lube, based on the pressure of the "dam block".
That way we could make pretty dams using your concrete, that were also functional and whilst it would still be an infinite source, finding or making a big enough enclosed area above sea level and filling it with water, would place it slightly beyond the current "block up 64 blocks place bucket and have engine generate all your power" simplicity.
I have no idea how easy or viable in terms of code it would be, but as far as my own meager opinion runs, this seems like the only bridge point between Reikas realism meeting minecrafts unrealistic water and Demosthenex's request to have them nerfed.
They would still generate the same sort of power levels, but at much greater investment.
Perhaps even code the "dam block" to use the already established basic world edit code that must be in there some where, to periodically remove a layer of water, but that sounds lag intensive.
I like that. The sheer volume of water required and the expense of clear space to create a large dam to feed a good pressure or flow to a hydro would then been justified.
Also having a separate block as Dam Controller to evaluate the water level is nice at keeping down CPU intensive operations. My only concern is this is a big retrofit and new code. I'm just advocating changing the current values until a better system could be devised.
I like the term "greater investment".
From what he described it sounded like you'd need a sheer vertical concrete wall. I'd think a controller block up top, centered over a hydro at the bottom.
Controller inventories the volume of water behind the wall. The larger the volume, the greater the power output from the engine. Maybe a max range from the wall for size (ie: 3 chunks), but depth is more important.
Output at bottom where the hydro is, maybe it outputs a stream of water 1 block tall? Lube in that scales by amount of power.
If you're going all out on ideas, I like the material strength influencing the max power output. Steel can only go so high, diamond, etc.
Perhaps the max config is an ocean with a dam to bedrock, with a bedrock hydro at the bottom putting out a significant power in MW. I'm only familiar with that Wikipedia formula, but I think that you could play with the flow rate by volume and pressure and the efficiency to come up with some figures. I was playing with cube roots of the total volume earlier for power, it was a nice curve.
If the goal is to make it look like a dam, it could require air blocks of 1/3 the volume of the water blocks on the other side of the concrete to match. Only air can touch concrete, and then behind it must have a portion of total volume.
Still, I acknowledge that these are grandiose designs and multiblock structures. Could we just tweak what's there for the next release? ;]
Controller inventories the volume of water behind the wall. The larger the volume, the greater the power output from the engine. Maybe a max range from the wall for size (ie: 3 chunks), but depth is more important.
Output at bottom where the hydro is, maybe it outputs a stream of water 1 block tall? Lube in that scales by amount of power.
If you're going all out on ideas, I like the material strength influencing the max power output. Steel can only go so high, diamond, etc.
Perhaps the max config is an ocean with a dam to bedrock, with a bedrock hydro at the bottom putting out a significant power in MW. I'm only familiar with that Wikipedia formula, but I think that you could play with the flow rate by volume and pressure and the efficiency to come up with some figures. I was playing with cube roots of the total volume earlier for power, it was a nice curve.
If the goal is to make it look like a dam, it could require air blocks of 1/3 the volume of the water blocks on the other side of the concrete to match. Only air can touch concrete, and then behind it must have a portion of total volume.
Still, I acknowledge that these are grandiose designs and multiblock structures. Could we just tweak what's there for the next release? ;]
Well since breeders are designed to give plutonium as usable fission fuel, I don't really find anything helpful in this.
Use your plutonium to slowly convert your depleted uranium into usable fission fuel.
4 Depleted Uranium + 1 Plutonium= 2 Breeder Pellets.
2 Breeder Pellets + Neutrons + Time = 2 Plutonium
Therefore, 4 Depleted Uranium + Neutrons + Time = 1 Plutonium.
IMHO, it's a better use for depleted uranium than railgun shells.
4 Depleted Uranium + 1 Plutonium= 2 Breeder Pellets.
2 Breeder Pellets + Neutrons + Time = 2 Plutonium
Therefore, 4 Depleted Uranium + Neutrons + Time = 1 Plutonium.
IMHO, it's a better use for depleted uranium than railgun shells.
Last edited:
I probably will.
Ran into more RL delays; I'm not at home today or tomorrow, and will have at least one day of time spent dealing with customer service departments. Looks like I've got about 4 "puzzle ages" for the mystcraft section, and then the rotarycraft / rich mining age.
And I'm still trying to figure out how to manage a "get out of mystcraft stranded hell" card, without completely ruining one challenge completely. Sugar cane is a PAIN to find in random worlds. I'm not sure, but I think leather is easier, and part of this challenge is going to be a significantly nastier recipe for the book binder anyways. (I'd hate to just drop that challenge, but if I can't solve that in 7 more days, I won't be able to test/debug it in time).
This isn't that huge, but seemed really strange when looking at the Sludge recipes; Witchery saplings and leaves are equivalent to Vanilla saplings and leaves, but Twilight Forest saplings have a huge output. I'd think that they are on the same level in terms of sludge output, if not more, due to how it's moderately complicated to get the Witchery saplings, and requires most of a beginning setup. I really can't see myself or anyone else wasting those precious saplings on 1 or 2 sludge.
he is saying that it dosent make sense that witchery sapling/leaves output the same then vanilla ones while twilight forest one (Thaumcraft one too for that matter) output way more.
a single silverwood leave is 64 sludge... you don't play thaumccraft? well here you go, free sludge!
Both are able to be used, and since the output is so low I can't see anyone bothering to use it. The amount of effort required to make the trees doesn't match the output of sludge at all.
Reika has said no microparts, as they are buggy, IDK what the IC electric cable that you're talking about is, and see reason one for the RF cable.