Yeah but in the game you can still keep using the dry boiler no problem as long as long as you don't give it any more water which is not how they should work imo.
is there a benefit to turn biomass into biofuel?
- Thread starter Azurl
- 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
So he keeps duplicating other mods and just give better conversion ratio's to get people to use his mod. Wonderful.
Not really, the distillation tower is not for early-middle tier (need some chrome and titanium), by the time you can make one of this distillation tower, you will probably have reached the state where you can make quantum tanks for some of your important liquids (less lag ftw), it's more like an upgrade than duplication.. and no, the distillation tower is not better for everything; it's on par with refinery for oil-> fuel (2 million eu to convert 16 oil cell to 16 diesel cell+some sulfuric acid (fyi, you can make RE-battery or single used battery with this) )..
And we all know that he might nerf it at later time if it's too OP..
Off to build a still...
Not good with the maths. Layman's terms ftw.
Edit: And I have built my still. it can connect to Liquiducts and have power coming from a redstone conduit right?
That number is an estimate based on the performance profile of a 18LP boiler that I mapped out for my current project in which I examine boiler fuel efficiency. Once I've actually fitted a curve through my data points I'll be able to be more precise.
You can't just go and ignore the heatup phase; it has a larger effect on the overall fuel efficiency than many people think, and the "after heatup everything is golden" mantra is quite flawed. All boilers come out of their heatup phase at between 40% and 47% average fuel efficiency only, and the time to get up to for example 90% can vary from around 1.5 hours (hobbyist engine) to around 3.7 days (36HP).
Which is why I was guessing at where you got the number from as I wasn't sure. But yea, the smaller boilers look like they'd end up less efficient even at max temperature than combustion engines or the like.
And yea, just ran the quick numbers to see how efficient it would be at max temp for your example and it's only 3% more fuel efficient after it reaches max temp which is really rather sad.
True, you can't just ignore the heatup phase, but in the long term it becomes trivial compared to the fuel efficiency of the boilers when they reach max temperature. I'm fairly certain a good deal of the people pushing boilers realize that they're designed to be systems that you turn on once and keep running from then on, and as such are late tier power producers compared to even combustion engines. This is also why they're more effective on servers than in SMP for fuel conservation due to them being on and running constantly, not to mention you can have multiple people tapping the glorious amounts of MJ they produce.
Speaking of SMP, the new tesseracts open up some pretty interesting options for community power in that you can setup up a rather large community boiler system that people can tap using the new liquid/energy tesseracts. A simple 4x36HP boiler setup producing enough steam to make 576 mj/t should easily be able to support most people's normal MJ usage without having people pump the nether, and with liquid tesseracts you can make it so each person has to build their own engine rooms (mostly so you don't lose the 25% from energy tesseracts). This actually reminds me a bit of some server admins taking apart people's solar arrays and replacing them with nuclear reactors way back when people would build about 200 solar panels and lag the server.
Ah but I derail myself. But yes, factoring in fuel consumption is definitely important for the short term, but boilers really are a longer term thing.
And yea, just ran the quick numbers to see how efficient it would be at max temp for your example and it's only 3% more fuel efficient after it reaches max temp which is really rather sad.
True, you can't just ignore the heatup phase, but in the long term it becomes trivial compared to the fuel efficiency of the boilers when they reach max temperature. I'm fairly certain a good deal of the people pushing boilers realize that they're designed to be systems that you turn on once and keep running from then on, and as such are late tier power producers compared to even combustion engines. This is also why they're more effective on servers than in SMP for fuel conservation due to them being on and running constantly, not to mention you can have multiple people tapping the glorious amounts of MJ they produce.
Speaking of SMP, the new tesseracts open up some pretty interesting options for community power in that you can setup up a rather large community boiler system that people can tap using the new liquid/energy tesseracts. A simple 4x36HP boiler setup producing enough steam to make 576 mj/t should easily be able to support most people's normal MJ usage without having people pump the nether, and with liquid tesseracts you can make it so each person has to build their own engine rooms (mostly so you don't lose the 25% from energy tesseracts). This actually reminds me a bit of some server admins taking apart people's solar arrays and replacing them with nuclear reactors way back when people would build about 200 solar panels and lag the server.
Ah but I derail myself. But yes, factoring in fuel consumption is definitely important for the short term, but boilers really are a longer term thing.
You just need to visualize really how "long term" the investment is.
If you have a singleplayer world, and you play three hours a day, every day, then you will be playing for an entire month before a 36HP boiler will be at 90% overall. And then you're still not getting the advertised 290,909 MJ per bucket of biofuel, but rather an average 261,818, which is almost 30,000 less. Chances are that during that month, FTB updated the modpack twice and most people will have started at least one new world. So you actually have a funny situation where a world gets retired before the boiler gets anywhere close to maximum efficiency
Of course, SMP servers suffer less from that, although they face different problems... actually using the almost 250 million MJ per day that will be produced per 36HP boiler without wasting any while the owner is offline, for example. And the 856 buckets of biofuel consumption per day aren't exactly negligible either.
Boilers of this size are really only valid if you have an infinite fuel loop set up, and then, efficiency becomes completely meaningless and only output counts. It gets far more interesting in a limited resource environment, for example with "hard mode" config settings that nerf a lot of the common "spend 20 minutes building, have infinite energy forever" kind of loops. When in such a situation, choosing the proper boiler size for the amount of fuel you have stocked can be very rewarding, and that's what my charts are going to be about.
If you have a singleplayer world, and you play three hours a day, every day, then you will be playing for an entire month before a 36HP boiler will be at 90% overall. And then you're still not getting the advertised 290,909 MJ per bucket of biofuel, but rather an average 261,818, which is almost 30,000 less. Chances are that during that month, FTB updated the modpack twice and most people will have started at least one new world. So you actually have a funny situation where a world gets retired before the boiler gets anywhere close to maximum efficiency
Of course, SMP servers suffer less from that, although they face different problems... actually using the almost 250 million MJ per day that will be produced per 36HP boiler without wasting any while the owner is offline, for example. And the 856 buckets of biofuel consumption per day aren't exactly negligible either.Boilers of this size are really only valid if you have an infinite fuel loop set up, and then, efficiency becomes completely meaningless and only output counts. It gets far more interesting in a limited resource environment, for example with "hard mode" config settings that nerf a lot of the common "spend 20 minutes building, have infinite energy forever" kind of loops. When in such a situation, choosing the proper boiler size for the amount of fuel you have stocked can be very rewarding, and that's what my charts are going to be about.
If anyone is interested in my spreadsheet I built, feel free to use it.
Part of it gives fixed numbers (like how many fuelunits are used to get the boiler to max heat), other parts are calculated as a function of runtime (for people who can run their boilers only for a limited amount of time, mostly viable for solid fueled ones).
The numbers on the right half haven't been thoroughly tested, so they can be wrong, especially with greg always changing his stuff
Part of it gives fixed numbers (like how many fuelunits are used to get the boiler to max heat), other parts are calculated as a function of runtime (for people who can run their boilers only for a limited amount of time, mostly viable for solid fueled ones).
The numbers on the right half haven't been thoroughly tested, so they can be wrong, especially with greg always changing his stuff
Funny you should claim that, as TE started as "IC2 machines for MJ" but all had that extra bonus that makes them the obvious choice.
Furthermore "take can of liquid and output liquid and empty can" is a staggeringly obvious idea but requires a liquid infrastructure missing in early IC2 and only recently adopted by Forge.
Thing is most people will only run boilers within a system where you can produce infinite fuel for it. Even considering that though fuel efficiency is still fairly important as it helps reduce space needed to produce the fuel of your choice. And trust me, people will come up with ways to use all of the steam/MJ from boilers be it from automation, quarries, or making EU for UUM and recharging tools.
The TE machines traded time for the bonus you could get. GregTech seems to be about making his toys the coolest, and nerfing the core mechanics of other mods until you really want his toys. This is just my personal unsupported opinion of the mod. I actually enjoy the gameplay, tech tree, and difficulty arc that GregTech adds to the game. Except that first attempt to get to the end-game stuff, building and powering any sort of iridium-creation device is just pain.
Some people seem to play to build the best machines for each specific mod, then they're done, start over on a new world. Hard mode is for these types.
I play to build machines to allow me to build something awesome. I plan on keeping my world for a long time and building the machinery is not the fun part for me- the machines are tools to help me along the path of building. Because of that, I choose to go with easy mode for machinery.
They're both valid ways to play and I'm glad people can customize their games to play how they enjoy
This is the part that many people seem to be missing. There is no one true way to play. Even GregTech has easy-mode options, and they are just as valid as someone that chooses to play Survival on Peaceful or Hard with Mob Griefing disabled.They're both valid ways to play and I'm glad people can customize their games to play how they enjoy
No way man slowpoke says it's hard road or high road! If anything is stronger than a wooden pickaxe remove it!
I don't mean to offend slow but many of the devs are at fault of this as well. We all understand it is their work to do with as they please and add the strings they want to it but at the same time if they wish to actually be a good modder allowing for the most possible options of gameplay is what they should seek rather than what they consider to be the only way to play.
Again, funny you should claim that. The TE machines are universally faster than an un-upgraded Eu equivalent, and cost similarly in resources. They do use more power, but by the time you've upgraded a base IC2 to be as fast, its using far more equivalently, and dumped quite a bit of resources(mostly tin) into them. Enough to balance the cost of several MJ machines instead.
I know lots of people use the IC2 machines out of habit, but I have no such habit. FTB was my first modded minecraft. I'm also an old school minmaxer, and see no reason to use the IC2 machines copied by TE, they're better on every metric. So I just find the original comment absurd.
When TE was being designed, no one used the vanilla IC2 machines. There are add-ons called 'advanced machines' that add Induction Furnace analogues for the Compressor, Extractor, and Macerator. You would need multiple overclockers to match the speed of the machines, and they take less power per item than the defaults.
Maybe after your base is setup, etc. for "Steve's First Machines" you're making after a quick run underground you still are. Except the TE machines are better, by a huge margin.
I don't know about the others, but an upgraded electric furnace beats the output speed of the heated up induction furnace on a stack for stack race.
Correct, but at what cost? All the overclockers necessary, plus transformer and internal storage upgrades, plus the extra power costs, plus the fact that the induction furnace can smelt two stacks at once? the induction furnace has a clear advantage.