Physics doesn't apply to Minecraft. It never has, and it never will. If that's your gripe, there's a lot more to worry about than just PC.
IC2 is slowly dying out ?
- Thread starter StreetKing
- 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
Physics doesn't apply to Minecraft. It never has, and it never will. If that's your gripe, there's a lot more to worry about than just PC.
Nah, he had a lightning rod for all his UU matter generation needs. Which also left a glaring security hole into his otherwise secure matterfab room...
Wasn't intended to be "secure" was supposed to stop accidents.
No, that's not ONLY the physics, but physics too.
Steam production is good as it is in railcraft.The good solution to convert power using steam is
1) Add a good IC2 generator, or allow existing one output more than pathetic 100 Eu/t
2) Make boilers that can be heated by different energy networks.
TADAM!
Steam usage is also a bit dumb... We have a FURNACE that runs on steam, but rock crusher runs on MJ...
Steam production is good as it is in railcraft.The good solution to convert power using steam is
1) Add a good IC2 generator, or allow existing one output more than pathetic 100 Eu/t
2) Make boilers that can be heated by different energy networks.
TADAM!
Steam usage is also a bit dumb... We have a FURNACE that runs on steam, but rock crusher runs on MJ...
I would actually be fine if steam could only be consumed, and not produced. I think that's a little whonky, and kind of pointless, to be honest.
This is as good a solution as we're getting in the foreseeable future, however. Like it or not, I don't see the IC2 team as being overly invested in making their mod mesh with other popular mods. I'd LIKE to think that Greg would do something with it, but I certainly wouldn't put all of my eggs in that basket.
PC provided an alternative to steam turbines. Frankly, I'm happy it's there. I'd rather have it than not. Speculating on what might be better only gets us so far, and it certainly doesn't do anything productive.
Depends what version you're using the 1.4.7 ultimate 1.0.2 and 1.1.0 have the newer version of gregtech with restricted matter fab, not sure about mindcrack.
I disagree. Balance can make the difference between a game being challenging and fun, and being boring because it's effectively like creative mode. Having diamonds and redstone down near the lava lakes is a good example, if diamonds grew on trees and redstone was just under the dirt then there would be no thrill of achievement. I still go to the End to farm pearls, even though I've got a dozen stacks of iron blocks that I could get pearls from, because I feel the EE3 conversion is cheaty. Of course trying to achieve "balance" that everyone agrees on is like nailing jelly to a tree.
I think that converters shouldn't touch steam at all. I mean... It's like adding fuel as possible "power network". Generating power out of steam - that's generator's job.
Maybe it's OK when you make MJ out of steam using steam engines and THEN convert it to EU. That's... A bit better for my taste.
Also about inter-mod compatibility, Greg is adding native UE support, as I mentioned before, and an option to run his machines on steam.
So you basically don't like the converters because they don't make sense ? Well, I gotta tell you that this is a game. It's supposed to intentionally break the laws of science to make it fun for you. For example you don't mind a tree growing in 1 or 2 days(or sometimes instantly) yet you say that converters are not reasonable. They share one thing in common and that is they break the laws of science. Why ? Simply, to make things easier for you so you can have fun. Maybe there's a difference that I don't see here. I am just trying to understand your point of view.
I dunno. I understand that conceptually it doesn't make any sense, but neither do half the things we use in Minecraft.
Tesseracts? How the hell do those things work? Joules traveling through conduits? None of it makes a lick of sense. There's no point in criticizing one mechanic due to its realistic inconsistencies if you're not willing to do the same for ALL mechanics.
I don't like converters because they act as generators why they shouldn't. All the generators have limited output and limited input. Converters do not. So basically for making any type of energy out of steam the converters are far better than any steam generator. As I said, it is kinda OK for me to convert power back and forth (even though some loss would be nice for it), but it's like if the Diesel Generator from GT was outputting up to 9001 Eu/t with fixed ratio of fuel/eu.[DOUBLEPOST=1368530518][/DOUBLEPOST]
It's not "Doesn't make IRL sence" it's "violating the game rules". Generators shouldn't have unlimited outputs.
Oh If that is the case then I completely agree with you. They can be a little bit op.
I've got an idea! Limited resources for (nearly) unlimited power generation!
Imagine an oil block, which appears near bedrock, it's flow spreads up instead of down, similar to glowstone, but the source block itself doesn't move, nor can it be moved by any means at all. (clicking with a bucket for example will give you a bucket of oil but doesn't scoop up the source, flowing oil can be scooped up similarily). You can keep pumping it for oil but you only get a reasonable amount. It flows up to the first free air space + a bit extra depending on how strong the source is, spreads sideways and from it there it behaves like water again, this would require three block ID's, but damn would it be nice. It'd however require a much more complicated refining process to be of any use. And a lot of energy to begin with.
Same for steam geysers. For something a bit more accessible. Just gotta place turbines on top.
Imagine an oil block, which appears near bedrock, it's flow spreads up instead of down, similar to glowstone, but the source block itself doesn't move, nor can it be moved by any means at all. (clicking with a bucket for example will give you a bucket of oil but doesn't scoop up the source, flowing oil can be scooped up similarily). You can keep pumping it for oil but you only get a reasonable amount. It flows up to the first free air space + a bit extra depending on how strong the source is, spreads sideways and from it there it behaves like water again, this would require three block ID's, but damn would it be nice. It'd however require a much more complicated refining process to be of any use. And a lot of energy to begin with.
Same for steam geysers. For something a bit more accessible. Just gotta place turbines on top.
The limit is how much steam you can stuff into it.
But, I'll agree with you on that. There should be a hard limit per energy bridge. Just out of curiosity, what is the highest mb/t you've seen enter a single power converter?
the limit is 1000mb/t per steam consumer.
the solution i`ve found, to avoid this limit and reduce energy loss is: 1 steam consumer, bridge, and hv eu producer per 1 steam boiler. then connect it to your network with glass fibre
Huh. Whaddya know. That's already what I do.
I thought there might have been a limit... but I actually wasn't sure. Are you sure it's 1,000 mb/t?