Hello, I'd like to share with you all how storing energy in BuildCraft works.

  • FTB will be shutting down this forum by the end of July. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord

Hoff

Tech Support
Oct 30, 2012
2,901
1,502
218
This thread is fairly pointless. For most that began to again use BC(And it's addons bar TE) because of thermal expansion back in 1.4.7 never wanted the MJ paradigm to begin with. They wanted whatever the TE energy paradigm was. This was portrayed as MJ because KL wanted BC to regain it's former glory. With the separation people will follow whatever it was they originally wanted or enjoyed. Trying to tell people(That don't already use BC or it's energy paradigm at the least) that BC is different is bordering stupidity. They know that; that's why they don't use it.

Those that want the BC to follow the TE energy paradigm do so because they enjoyed everything else BC had to offer. The devs have chosen, and I personally find no fault with this as it is their decision to make, to follow what is instead their vision rather than what most people have voiced that they want. I personally find fault with those that try to convince people that the opposite is true or try to justify why it is the way it is. It's like a car salesman trying to tell someone who has no idea how to drive a clutch and doesn't want a car with a clutch that really it's basically the same thing, it just seems different. It's not. When you try to mask the true idea of the mod behind terms people commonly use to describe something what you're presenting is not; you're wrong. Plainly and simply. You knew when you wrote the post and made the title it was a ploy to try and tell people that they're the same as other things we commonly refer to as energy storage. They're not and we all know it. Trying to mask what the mod is trying to achieve through calling it something people commonly understand as something fundamentally different demeans the mod's goal and vision.
 

Pyure

Not Totally Useless
Aug 14, 2013
8,334
7,191
383
Waterloo, Ontario
Right now Buildcraft alone fails in this task.
I'll propose "fails the wishes of many players in this task", since the lack appears to be what the developers themselves prefer, and presumably a large segment of their users as well.

That said, totally agree. I understand that I'm trading "phantom lossiness" for "magical storage", but its more appealing to my own style of play: If my suite of machines requires 20 units of energy, I want to produce just that 20 units and not guess at how much extra I need to cover loss*

*This is less of an issue for me in a system where the lossiness is extremely predictable and calculable.
 

Pyure

Not Totally Useless
Aug 14, 2013
8,334
7,191
383
Waterloo, Ontario
This thread is fairly pointless.
The OP was reasonable; we can store energy in BC, differences from a "redstone energy cell" notwithstanding. I do it all the time and think I do think of it as energy, similar to the liquid in a battery.

Its just annoying and slow and not at all like a battery, which is what I'd prefer from a system.

The pursuant debate about energy forms on the other hand was silly.
 

Hoff

Tech Support
Oct 30, 2012
2,901
1,502
218
The OP was reasonable; we can store energy in BC, differences from a "redstone energy cell" notwithstanding. I do it all the time and think I do think of it as energy, similar to the liquid in a battery.

Its just annoying and slow and not at all like a battery, which is what I'd prefer from a system.

The pursuant debate about energy forms on the other hand was silly.

The OP was made to be deceptive. The truth it contains is real world in nature and does not apply to the general mindset of modded minecraft.
 

Pyure

Not Totally Useless
Aug 14, 2013
8,334
7,191
383
Waterloo, Ontario
Disagree (in friendly manner and as a devil's advocate). The OP seems to be poking a bit of fun at the community but isn't dishonest: you can create an energy repository to draw upon at need (at n-steps away from where you need the energy of course). If anything, I'd say it was simply "obvious" and annoying as a result. Nobody's deceived since nobody's going to "try" storing energy as a liquid as a result of this post: everyone does it already anyway.

There's really a nugget of benefit to the whole idea: if you try to think of a fuel as an energy storage repository, it makes the annoying lack of a magical battery somewhat less annoying. Essentially: X units of fuel on hand means I have the ability to run my machines for Y amount of time (if I have the means to use that fuel, which is everyone's gripe) Make any sense?
 

SynfulChaot

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
599
0
0
There's really a nugget of benefit to the whole idea: if you try to think of a fuel as an energy storage repository, it makes the annoying lack of a magical battery somewhat less annoying. Essentially: X units of fuel on hand means I have the ability to run my machines for Y amount of time (if I have the means to use that fuel, which is everyone's gripe) Make any sense?

Here's the thing. We all already know this. We all already do that. He was simply trying to get us to redefine what we call energy storage under the guise of 'teaching'.

And no. Knowing we can store fuel, which even a player new to FTB and modded Minecraft can figure out within seconds, doesn't make the lack of an actual battery no longer necessary for how some of us build. And if your solution is to build differently then my counter-solution is to use mods that allow my preferred energy paradigm instead.
 

Pyure

Not Totally Useless
Aug 14, 2013
8,334
7,191
383
Waterloo, Ontario
doesn't make the lack of an actual battery no longer necessary for how some of us build.
...bearing in mind I already agree with this and use modded batteries for that reason.

No solution is provided, just a different perspective and mindset. If I couldn't mod in a battery, then at the very least I could more or less get by. Grumbling.
 

SandGrainOne

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
129
0
1
My end-goal in any mod, in regards to the power system, is a modular on-demand system with a healthy buffer and no persistent phantom power loss. And by power system I mean after the engines/dynamos/generators. Not before. Right now Buildcraft alone fails in this task.
Is it better with power loss at the engines? TE dynamos will continue to use fuel even if there are no machines requesting power. They are heavily throttled, but if you want to stop them completely, you would still need some kind of signal line between the machines (or battery) and the dynamos. I would think BuildCraft pipes with easily attachable gates and wires would be best suited for such a mechanism.
 

SynfulChaot

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
599
0
0
Is it better with power loss at the engines? TE dynamos will continue to use fuel even if there are no machines requesting power. They are heavily throttled, but if you want to stop them completely, you would still need some kind of signal line between the machines (or battery) and the dynamos. I would think BuildCraft pipes with easily attachable gates and wires would be best suited for such a mechanism.

You can turn off dynamos with a redstone signal, which energy cells output based on their power level. No BuildCraft needed. Just a bit of vanilla redstone logic. Funny how people always conveniently forget about that...
 

Zenthon_127

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
837
0
0
Is it better with power loss at the engines?
Yes, because that actually does something beyond being annoying: it encourages you to stop the waste.

Actually, think about this for a second: if Buildcraft was used "as intended" with no power storage, would constant power drain even do anything?
 

SandGrainOne

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
129
0
1
You can turn off dynamos with a redstone signal, which energy cells output based on their power level. No BuildCraft needed. Just a bit of vanilla redstone logic. Funny how people always conveniently forget about that...
Sigh, sorry for being unclear. I was trying to say that regulating BuildCraft engines is more convenient than regulating Thermal Expansion Dynamos. BuildCraft comes with components made for this purpose, while Thermal Expansion must rely on external mechanisms. For example vanilla redstone.

Yes, because that actually does something beyond being annoying: it encourages you to stop the waste.

Actually, think about this for a second: if Buildcraft was used "as intended" with no power storage, would constant power drain even do anything?
BuildCraft already have makeshift storage in the pipes and might get actual buffering in the future, but I don't see how that has any bearing on power drain. BuildCraft currently forces you to have a mechanism that turns off the engines if there is no demand and will probably continue to do so even if a power buffer was added.
 

Zenthon_127

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
837
0
0
Sigh, sorry for being unclear. I was trying to say that regulating BuildCraft engines is more convenient than regulating Thermal Expansion Dynamos. BuildCraft comes with components made for this purpose, while Thermal Expansion must rely on external mechanisms. For example vanilla redstone.
How the hell is vanilla redstone an external mechanism?
 

SynfulChaot

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
599
0
0
Sigh, sorry for being unclear. I was trying to say that regulating BuildCraft engines is more convenient than regulating Thermal Expansion Dynamos. BuildCraft comes with components made for this purpose, while Thermal Expansion must rely on external mechanisms. For example vanilla redstone.

I disagree. I can make a full lossless TE system and still keep all the machines on the same 'mains', so to speak. All that require is for me to control the dynamos with a redstone signal conveniently provided by the energy cell. Yes, it requires vanilla redstone. So what? Everyone can rely on vanilla existing. Without vanilla there is no Minecraft at all!

If I wanted a lossless BC system I could not share the 'mains' due to perdition and the inability to turn anything but engines off. It'd require a gate per machine and to cordon off each and every machine into it's own tiny subsystem of machine, pipe gate, pipes, and engines. Yes, it's doable. No, it's not space-efficient, time-efficient, or materials-efficient. Aka, not worth it to me to bother with.

I find it amusing that you are nitpicking on tiny idiosyncrasies in my post instead of replying to the meaning, which of I'm sure you understood.

That's not a tiny idiosyncrasy. That's a glaring logical flaw.
 
Last edited:

Zenthon_127

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
837
0
0
I find it amusing that you are nitpicking on tiny idiosyncrasies in my post instead of replying to the meaning, which of I'm sure you understood.
Oh yes, I understood it. That particular part was just so baffling I had to respond. Ironically, TE (and IC2, for that matter) can pull off, with basic vanilla redstone (god forbid I have Project Red or MFR), the same level of control BC can pull off with a gate per machine/engine (that's a whole laser setup!) and likely add-ons.
 

SandGrainOne

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
129
0
1
I disagree. I can make a full lossless TE system and still keep all the machines on the same 'mains', so to speak. All that require is for me to control the dynamos with a redstone signal conveniently provided by the energy cell. Yes, it requires vanilla redstone. So what? Everyone can rely on vanilla existing. Without vanilla there is no Minecraft at all!

If I wanted a lossless BC system I could not share the 'mains' due to perdition and the inability to turn anything but engines off. It'd require a gate per machine and to cordon off each and every machine into it's own tiny subsystem of machine, pipe gate, pipes, and engines. Yes, it's doable. No, it's not space-efficient, time-efficient, or materials-efficient. Aka, not worth it to me to bother with.

That's not a tiny idiosyncrasy. That's a glaring logical flaw.
With external mechanism I meant, not a part of Thermal Expansion conduits. Gates and wires can be placed on the pipes, taking no additional space. Bah, I'm tired..

Anyway, BuildCraft does indeed force you to think about what you build. There are pros and cons to weight. "does these machine need separate supply or can they take from my main line". "Should I turn these engines completely off or is it enough to throttle them". I don't think everything in TE is clear cut either, but it looks very plain at times.
 

kaovalin

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
782
0
0
I don't get it why do you keep on insisting a flywheel when thats definitely in Rotarycraft's (dur a device that stores rotational energy) territory or thermal expansion dynamos but we have energy cells for that and not gas/bellows/pumps which BC uses...

Just joined the thread so I dont think I keep doing anything :). Just making an observation. However, I would conceed if the engines were renamed as compressors. Until then they are kinetic in nature IMO. I could make an argument that its electrical as well if I wanted.
 

SynfulChaot

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
599
0
0
With external mechanism I meant, not a part of Thermal Expansion conduits. Gates and wires can be placed on the pipes, taking no additional space. Bah, I'm tired..

Anyway, BuildCraft does indeed force you to think about what you build. There are pros and cons to weight. "does these machine need separate supply or can they take from my main line". "Should I turn these engines completely off or is it enough to throttle them". I don't think everything in TE is clear cut either, but it looks very plain at times.

Fair enough. But. If as the MJ paradigm only allows for throttle or make a seperate sub-system per machine then I'm not interested. When I'm not using my equipment then the power drain will be zero. If that's not possible, or takes way too much space/time/materials as is the case with BuildCraft, then it's not a system that I'll use. It's that simple.

I know I can get BuildCraft to do what I want. But I'm not going to spend that much everything to do so when pretty much every single other tech mod out there can do it with more ease, even the recently much maligned IC2exp.
 

kaovalin

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
782
0
0
Fair enough. But. If as the MJ paradigm only allows for throttle or make a seperate sub-system per machine then I'm not interested. When I'm not using my equipment then the power drain will be zero. If that's not possible, or takes way too much space/time/materials as is the case with BuildCraft, then it's not a system that I'll use. It's that simple.

I know I can get BuildCraft to do what I want. But I'm not going to spend that much everything to do so when pretty much every single other tech mod out there can do it with more ease, even the recently much maligned IC2exp.

I think its a difference in playstyles too. Some people want to design their power system as the game they play. Some people want to set and forget their power system and go do something else. I prefer a set and forget kind of power system. I have more important things to concern myself with :).
 

casilleroatr

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,360
0
0
I wish there was a crafting recipe for the the lowest tier gates and iron tier gates (perhaps including the autarchic versions) as well as red pipe wire. I do really like buildcraft and play with it every now and again, however getting into buildcraft power systems requires me to stop whatever I am doing and build an assembly table set up (which is very expensive for early game). This usually means building a dedicated room, spending around a dozen diamonds, and worrying about powering it.

Even though buildcraft has many features which make it an ideal early game mod, I would still prefer to use TE early game because it is better at giving you a sample of its powerful mechanics in the early game (e.g. leadstone conduits) without requiring you to plan an advanced build (i.e. an assembly table).