IC2 cabels and covers

[Aron1973]

Hi all! I just wana ask if there are anny plans to get IC2 cabels compadible with covers or facades.
The Cables seem to take an entire block space now so the covers gets "bumped" out abit from the main wall

 

[Henry Link]

Yep.. IC2 can't be covered just buried. That is the way it has always been.

 

[Loufmier]

i, personally, don't think it's gonna happen. you may bug IC2 exp devs about that, but the again i doubt it's gonna happen.

 

[Aron1973]

Well I just need to use my fantasy and I Think the FTB team allready have a gread mode pack going so I would hate to bug them about sutch a mudane thing.
Besides i'm not the kind of person that bugs people exept for my sisster but on the other hand who doesent bug there kid sister/brother hehe

 

[Celestialphoenix]

Apparently it'll involve a significant restructure of the power system again.

Beside- there's better things to work on than appeasing a small majority of inane whining on a public forum.​

 

[thephoenixlodge]

IC2 actually has it's own cover system (as it has for quite some time) where you can cover a cable in construction foam to hide it. The recent addition of the obscurator then allows choice of texture on the cfoam

 

[Henry Link]

IC2 actually has it's own cover system (as it has for quite some time) where you can cover a cable in construction foam to hide it. The recent addition of the obscurator then allows choice of texture on the cfoam

Not an option if you ask me. I've never seen such a PITA system to make a way to cover cables.

 

[Celestialphoenix]

Not an option if you ask me. I've never seen such a PITA system to make a way to cover cables.

Vs being a PITA for the mod devs to integrate microparts?

 

[Lathanael]

Vs being a PITA for the mod devs to integrate microparts?

^This, soooooo much!

Why must every mod implement FMP if they already got a "Cover" like system? Also why should IC2 make itself dependent on FMP?
I get it that FMP is a nice addition. But why people keep bugging devs to implement it while they don't like it or it even duplicates functionality already in the mod is beyond me..

 

[Celestialphoenix]

Actually (myself- or anyone) need to test Gtech plates- will they cover pipes/cables as well as machines?

 

[Eyamaz]

^This, soooooo much!

Why must every mod implement FMP if they already got a "Cover" like system? Also why should IC2 make itself dependent on FMP?
I get it that FMP is a nice addition. But why people keep bugging devs to implement it while they don't like it or it even duplicates functionality already in the mod is beyond me..

Cross mod compatibility? Hell, if implemented correctly, you could even run fluiducts and itemducts in the same space, or IC2 wires along side BC pipes. Sure, a bit of work and a required dependency, but the payoff...

 

[Lathanael]

Cross mod compatibility? Hell, if implemented correctly, you could even run fluiducts and itemducts in the same space, or IC2 wires along side BC pipes. Sure, a bit of work and a required dependency, but the payoff...

...isn't worth it considering one would have to replace an entire existing infrastructure(code). This ofc changes if a mod gets a complete rewrite(i.e. TE3). While cross mod compatibility is nice it doesn't warrant a hard dependency on another mod imo. Because such a mod could cease to be updated (unlikely with FMP but still a valid concern).
I rather have a mod with its own system (which btw is older than RP2 covers for both BC and IC2 iirc) than a dependency on yet another mod.
Just my personal 2cc on this matter

 

[Celestialphoenix]

I agree with Lathaneal
- code base aside, being able to place everything in the same space will kill a lot of the gameplay and base design.
Adding something to the same block for aesthetics (covers/siding) is pretty neat, but adding multiple functionality (solids/liquids/power) though the same block is a whole different concept.

 

[Eyamaz]

...isn't worth it considering one would have to replace an entire existing infrastructure(code). This ofc changes if a mod gets a complete rewrite(i.e. TE3). While cross mod compatibility is nice it doesn't warrant a hard dependency on another mod imo. Because such a mod could cease to be updated (unlikely with FMP but still a valid concern).
I rather have a mod with its own system (which btw is older than RP2 covers for both BC and IC2 iirc) than a dependency on yet another mod.
Just my personal 2cc on this matter

I agree with Lathaneal
- code base aside, being able to place everything in the same space will kill a lot of the gameplay and base design.
Adding something to the same block for aesthetics (covers/siding) is pretty neat, but adding multiple functionality (solids/liquids/power) though the same block is a whole different concept.

Oh I understand the need for a rerwite to do this, but isn't that what IC2E is pretty much doing?
As far as the multiple functionality, it's conceptual at this point. No one has tried it yet.

 

[thephoenixlodge]

Oh I understand the need for a rerwite to do this, but isn't that what IC2E is pretty much doing?
As far as the multiple functionality, it's conceptual at this point. No one has tried it yet.

It is, but honestly, at the rate they've been doing the actual rewrite aspect of IC2e, adding FMP compat to the list of stuff they still have to finish/do seems like it would be outright encouraging the mod to stay experimental and unstable for unnecessarily long

 

[Aron1973]

IC2 actually has it's own cover system (as it has for quite some time) where you can cover a cable in construction foam to hide it. The recent addition of the obscurator then allows choice of texture on the cfoam

Well sorry I had no idea construction foam did cover IC2 cabels. mainly because I newer used it.
Ill take a look at it and thx for the tip