I was able to pipe water into the network using liquiducts in creative, grabbing fluid P2P tunnels. But the problem I realized is that the fluid tunnels don't seem to be available for crafting, only the ME tunnel which doesn't change based upon input. Only the "P2P Tunnel - ME" seems to have a crafting pattern.
Connecting Railcraft Tanks to AE2 ME Networks
- Thread starter ledzilla
- 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
Yeah that "exploit" is slightly dumb IMO. The addition of ME p2p tunnel in AE1 was simply intended to tunnel subnetworks around your main network I think(which is awesome!). But yeah it does open up for some rather OP stuff in AE2 I guess.
What. AE2 introduced channels and channel limits per cable and didn't introduce p2p tunnels (immediately)?
The channel system is silly enough...
I would guess it was more a matter of them adding the channels mechanic and then disabling the P2P tunnels because that would lead to exploits. The P2P mechanic is from all the way back in AE1.
Its that kind of thinking that drove Algorithm away from modding. I think the channel system is great and its funny to see disorganized people like Direwolf20 struggle with it. Its basically the only new feature in 1.7 mods that makes me not want to downgrade to 1.6.4
The only issue I'm really having is getting all of the mechanics involved with channels and P2P squared away. It really seems very powerful once you master it. But I get the feeling that it works best when you're not just slapping it into place on existing infrastructure and rather planning everything around it. Like I said previously, I feel so many parallels with my personal history in dealing with networking. If you plan it out and set up a good design, it can provide some great connectivity cleanly. You just really need to think it out instead of just tossing pieces together and hoping for the best.
I have a high tolerance for mods with difficult mechanics. I avoid ExU as it it cheesy in the extreme, am annoyed by my early game dependence on TiC. While there are conversion options in direwolf20 I generate EU and RF via their own mods.
Why am I annoyed by the AE2 channel system?
For a couple of reasons: Foremost is p2p. The channels imply a data limit restriction on the cables. And then p2p steps in and lets you tunnel channels over channels over channels to violate basic principals of physics. If operations over p2p tunnels took longer or had some other cost, that would make a lot more sense to me. As it is they just make no sense.
But, with P2P discarded, what left. Limited channels. With no mechanisim left to expand the capacity of the network. So channels force me to P2P, which I object to, so I object to channels.
And, as a software engineer, they look computationally expensive to implement. So we have a mechanisim ina mod that already has a reputation for hitting server tps hard, and it makes itself intentionally difficult and offers a computationally expensive way out that is unbound. Its just bad engineering. There had to be a better way to add depth to AE that doesn't encourage players to murder their servers tps.
What I look forward to when I eventually get around to giving AE2 a serious try in a proper environment, is using it a lot less for EVERYTHING and supplementing it a lot more with things like Logistics Pipes.
I love my completely interconnected 1.6 and 1.5 bases that does everything "intelligently". But it will be SO much more fun if I have to use more of an effort in combining methods etc. to do so.
Channels haven't bothered me at all. In part because I had been using small distributed AE systems for a long while.
p2p doesn't bother me, because I treat it as a separate network. Not unlike connecting two LAN's over the internet.
I also give the p2p net it's own controller, and color code the network connections. Red for Power, Blue for Fluids, Black for Items.
p2p doesn't bother me, because I treat it as a separate network. Not unlike connecting two LAN's over the internet.
I also give the p2p net it's own controller, and color code the network connections. Red for Power, Blue for Fluids, Black for Items.
Celestialphoenix
Too Much Free Time
-back on topic →alternate thinking time-
Set up something to right click buckets on the tank [such as an autonomous activator] and plug your ME network into that.
Set up something to right click buckets on the tank [such as an autonomous activator] and plug your ME network into that.
You are now transporting liquid as items.
This also works with energy if you plug into a battery charger.
This also works with energy if you plug into a battery charger.
Currently I use P2P mainly to cram more channels through a quantum link (128 instead of 32; in theory it can be expanded to 512). Otherwise I just run dense cables and try to group things such as my autocrafting in eights. In general I try to group things (e.g. storage, ore processing, autocrafting, IC2, magic stuff, etc.) and run a dense cable (or multiple if needed) from my controller to each group - rather than running a long line and branching it off to all my stuff (since you'll run out of channels on the line if you have more than a few things). I made my DSU storage a subnetwork to free up my controller block faces a bit. I still have a few things (such as my crafting CPUs) messily allocated on lines that have extra channels, but I'm hoping to clean that up.
I think I read something at one point about clicking P2P tunnels on certain items to change their type (I forgot whether it's right clicking objects with the tunnel in your hand or right clicking the tunnel with the object in your hand - probably the latter).
You could see the P2P as a compression step. The non-P2P channels are uncompressed data transfer and each cable has only so much bandwidth
The P2P tunnel compresses the incoming channels down to 1/32 = 3% (a bit of a stretch 16 or 8 per P2P would be more "realistic" but meh) but can't compress a channel that already contains compressed data (to explain not being able to nest tunnels).
Oh. You can't run a P2P tunnel over a segment that is, itself, a P2P tunnel? How does it know?
Two things...
1) I'm a fool and read the wiki wrong over and over again, and now actually understand how to set the tunnels. Seems so damned obvious now, but my brain must have kept skipping over the same set of text repeatedly.
2) Would I be correct in theorizing that you could join two ME networks together using P2P tunnels connected to each other (for example: cable - tunnel - tunnel - cable)? If so, I could imagine that if there was a central ME network, you could connect multiple "subnets" that handle specific purposes.
1) I'm a fool and read the wiki wrong over and over again, and now actually understand how to set the tunnels. Seems so damned obvious now, but my brain must have kept skipping over the same set of text repeatedly.
2) Would I be correct in theorizing that you could join two ME networks together using P2P tunnels connected to each other (for example: cable - tunnel - tunnel - cable)? If so, I could imagine that if there was a central ME network, you could connect multiple "subnets" that handle specific purposes.