KingLemming speaks!

[Pyure]

I missed this. Falling behind what or who, exactly?

Falling behind the Joneses.

Every time I do a build of something and I'm told I did it the stupid way because some guy made a mod that does it way more productively/efficiently/easily/whatever.

Obviously I don't care about the criticism if I like the way I'm doing a thing, but I still have to waste my time reading about it.

 

[midi_sec]

Falling behind the Joneses.

Every time I do a build of something and I'm told I did it the stupid way because some guy made a mod that does it way more productively/efficiently/easily/whatever.

Obviously I don't care about the criticism if I like the way I'm doing a thing, but I still have to waste my time reading about it.

This is getting into a whole other thing entirely though

Efficiency, sure, if you actually need the efficiency, if you are trying to do Railcraft with a vanilla furnace for example, yeah you should be laughed at. but if I were manually quarrying out a 64x64 area, I'd thank the guy profusely that tells me about the wondrous device.

But if they are talking smack just because you didn't hop on UberMod's bandwagon, even though the only thing they use the mod for is that block, I'd write their input straight to dev/null.

 

[rhn]

If you're worried about modpacks needing or not needing ore processing with efficiency like that, maybe we should be having a different conversation entirely? It's the pack makers that choose the mods to include. If they don't balance it, or have no need for that type of ore multiplication, that's that tryhard I was talking about last post.

That kinda was the point of the thread before the "dont nerf my RoC OPnes" kicked in.

If future modpack makers need to start choosing mods more and more on the basis of their "OP efficiency factor" (be that ore processing, power generation, crops, mining, whatever), and not on what mods are of high quality and fun. That would IMO be a step in the wrong direction and be bad for the overall user experience.

I know that every modder have the freedom to do whatever they want to. I am just saying: wouldn't it be amazing if all or most modders agreed to somewhat the same baseline, so that mods were somewhat balanced between each other. It would give pack makers the freedom to choose exactly the mod combinations they envision to give the best gameplay experiences. Without any common baseline we might end up with having to go with several "tiers" of modoacks. For example modpacks only featuring mods with 2-3x oreprocessing, another modpack with 3-5x, a third with 5-10 and so on. And then complicate matters even more by adding another layer of powergeneration "OPnes factor". And then it is just too bad if the best gameplay experience is achieved by having a mod from each modpack, you cant have it cause it wont be balanced.

 

[midi_sec]

For example modpacks only featuring mods with 2-3x oregen, another modpack with 3-5x, a third with 5-10 and so on.

That would lend itself to starvation because resource needs are cumulative.

If you have a pack with mods that all need 5-10x ore generation, you would need...who knows how many times multiplied in order to provide enough metal to play the pack mods as intended.

 

[rhn]

That would lend itself to starvation because resource needs are cumulative.

If you have a pack with mods that all need 5-10x ore generation, you would need...who knows how many times multiplied in order to provide enough metal to play the pack mods as intended.

Typo, meant oreprocessing.

 

[midi_sec]

Typo, meant oreprocessing.

that's what i meant too. i didn't even notice your typo and made the same one myself.

 

[rhn]

That would lend itself to starvation because resource needs are cumulative.

If you have a pack with mods that all need 5-10x ore generation, you would need...who knows how many times multiplied in order to provide enough metal to play the pack mods as intended.

that's what i meant too. i didn't even notice your typo and made the same one myself.

Ahh if so, then there would be no difference in having one modpack with 5x ore processing and requires x5 the metals, and then another pack with with 2x oreprocessing and x2 metal requirements. The supply of metals is multiplied to the same degree as the requirement of them.

Problem arises when mods with different values are in the same pack and can supply resources to each other, then you get balance issues.
Problems that you can no longer modify orespawns to fix as it would lead to starvation/over-abundance depending on which way you try and modify it.

 

[midi_sec]

Ahh if so, then there would be no difference in having one modpack with 5x ore processing and requires x5 the metals, and then another pack with with 2x oreprocessing and x2 metal requirements. The supply of metals is multiplied to the same degree as the requirement of them.

Problem arises when mods with different values are in the same pack and can supply resources to each other, then you get balance issues.
Problems that you can no longer modify orespawns to fix as it would lead to starvation/over-abundance depending on which way you try and modify it.

But is it really a balance issue if you have exactly the amount of ore to play the pack as it's designed?

The modpack builder's job is to give you the amount of ore processing efficiency that is appropriate for the pack, whatever number it may be. The pack can be a mixture of 2x, 5x, 40x mods, but at the end of the day you have exactly the amount of ingots you need in order to play the pack as intended.

If you take individual mods out of context, sure, not balanced. In the world of modpacks, these days you can't do that. You take the pack as a whole, or you remove the offending content and speak nothing of the bones.

edit: Keep in mind, in a pack of mods that all contain 5x processing, your ingot need is no longer 5x, It is much higher because resource requirements between mods are cumulative. This is ore starvation that I was talking about.

 

[Vasa]

at the point when i have 3x ore processing from mekanism, i already have ae2 storage and me drive filled with 1k disks, all of te4 machines and cobalt hammer. it means that i must get into early mid game to get somethig better that 2x or pure ore smelting, which is in my opinion allright.same story for roc extractor.you cant get into these machines after surviving 3-4 nights.
long story short i like ore processing no matter how big multiplier is .

 

[dothrom]

So, rhn, what you're effectively saying is that either every mod needs to keep itself balanced with other mods. Something that has pretty much been agreed to be near impossible. Or that mods should only change *how* you do something, not the extent of the result.
Analogy: Everyone turns a wheel. Everyone's allowed to turn it a different way, but nobody's allowed to turn it faster than the others.

It feels to me as if you're either arguing that every mod needs to fit into various rules, and be effectively the same.

or

You are arguing that the newer mods are "one upping" the older mods as if it is all a direct competition. And you're concerned about the older playstyles or mods being pushed out.

Perhaps I totally misread your posts. But to me, this is really how your argument feels.

 

[malicious_bloke]

It is definitely a concern but it's really something for pack creators rather than modders.

If i'm making a pack where most of the tech mods have 2-5x ore processing, with the higher end being exponentially harder to get to and run effectively, that's pretty balanced.

If a new mod comes along with 20x ore processing at a ludicrously low barrier to entry, i'm not putting it in the same pack as the others. Simple as that. If it skews the balance of the pack completely, it's not getting in.

 

[dothrom]

It is definitely a concern but it's really something for pack creators rather than modders.

If i'm making a pack where most of the tech mods have 2-5x ore processing, with the higher end being exponentially harder to get to and run effectively, that's pretty balanced.

If a new mod comes along with 20x ore processing at a ludicrously low barrier to entry, i'm not putting it in the same pack as the others. Simple as that. If it skews the balance of the pack completely, it's not getting in.

This! Very much this!

 

[Pyure]

I know that every modder have the freedom to do whatever they want to. I am just saying: wouldn't it be amazing if all or most modders agreed to somewhat the same baseline, so that mods were somewhat balanced between each other.

All the major modders already do this. But to some degree a lot of them are going to still instinctively be the "best".

Remember just a few years ago, all the rage was about how you should use a Pulverizer instead of a Macerator because the pulverizer was 10% better (giving potential byproducts).

This is just a natural progression from that war. These days the macerator is just one in a long chain of an ore-doubling mechanism which out-produces the pulverizer.

RoC does jump outside of this a bit, which is why its so much harder to fit into a pack. E.g:

If a new mod comes along with 20x ore processing at a ludicrously low barrier to entry, i'm not putting it in the same pack as the others. Simple as that. If it skews the balance of the pack completely, it's not getting in.

Why I've always belonged to this religion.

 

[rhn]

But is it really a balance issue if you have exactly the amount of ore to play the pack as it's designed?

The modpack builder's job is to give you the amount of ore processing efficiency that is appropriate for the pack, whatever number it may be. The pack can be a mixture of 2x, 5x, 40x mods, but at the end of the day you have exactly the amount of ingots you need in order to play the pack as intended.

If you take individual mods out of context, sure, not balanced. In the world of modpacks, these days you can't do that. You take the pack as a whole, or you remove the offending content and speak nothing of the bones.

I suppose not if it is a small more narrow pack. But for larger packs with multiple parallel choices it can just be so wrecking IMO.

Take a server. Back when I used to play on servers in 1.4.7 I was really happy to see an immense diversity in how people built and handled things. There were really no major benefits to one thing over another, and so people did exactly what they thought was the most fun. Now if there is a x6 in the pack, do you really think a lot of people really choose the x2-3 solutions?

Or take my current Monster singleplayer world. I LOVE playing with lots of different parallel mods at the same time. And to that degree I have set up TE3, IC2E, EnderIO ore processing and actually have plans to do Factorization too. I LOVE the idea of RoC, but simply cannot see how I can justifying using it alongside the others. How can I justify putting some ores through the 5x and not others? Should I just scrap every other mod that I love because RoC is more OP?

So, rhn, what you're effectively saying is that either every mod needs to keep itself balanced with other mods. Something that has pretty much been agreed to be near impossible. Or that mods should only change *how* you do something, not the extent of the result.
Analogy: Everyone turns a wheel. Everyone's allowed to turn it a different way, but nobody's allowed to turn it faster than the others.

It feels to me as if you're either arguing that every mod needs to fit into various rules, and be effectively the same.

or

You are arguing that the newer mods are "one upping" the older mods as if it is all a direct competition. And you're concerned about the older playstyles or mods being pushed out.

Perhaps I totally misread your posts. But to me, this is really how your argument feels.

Lot of putting words into my mouth that I never said here, but at least this I can agree on somewhat:

You are arguing that the newer mods are "one upping" the older mods as if it is all a direct competition. And you're concerned about the older playstyles or mods being pushed out.

Yes, I am very concerned that it all turns into a battle of "My mod have 100000x this and that", and I think I stated that clearly MANY times now. I am concerned that one group of mods are going to keep increasing the OPness to compete, while another group of mods are going to stay behind keeping it at a sane balanced level. And that we will never be able to properly combine any of these two categories ever again.

I am NOT saying that every mod have to do everything the same way and be the same. And NOT saying anyone should enforce some rules upon anyone. So everyone calm down!

I am saying that I PERSONALLY think that our gameplay experiences would be improved(due to the reasons I have now explained so many times) if we could continue to have a slight resemblance of balance between mods. We used to have this in the past, we are starting to see it slipping away. I hope we can try and keep focus on it in the future.[DOUBLEPOST=1409172448][/DOUBLEPOST]

If a new mod comes along with 20x ore processing at a ludicrously low barrier to entry, i'm not putting it in the same pack as the others. Simple as that. If it skews the balance of the pack completely, it's not getting in.

But my entire point is:
What about the next mod that comes out that have a just as hard a progression line as RoC/IC2/Mekanism/whatever to reach this multiplier, but chooses to do x6? And couple of months later x7?

We have already kinda see it "gone to hell" on the RF front IMO. All the mods seem to want to make their mod the "best" and increasingly easier to make thousands/millions of RF/t, and it just keeps escalating.

 

[acker]

I simply don't understand the "balance" everyone says.

It all depends on the quantity you can dig and mine. With such things as Digi Miners, Quarry+ (and so on...), even the Tinkers Construct Craft-Fortune Pick isn't balanced on "Vanilla" terms.

Balance should only be applied on SMP servers, and you can block certains machines to be crafted, change crafting recipes and so on.

Let the modders express their creativity on their mods, pls.

 

[Pyure]

{stuff}

@rhn, the solution I generally push is not so much that all modders think along the same lines regarding balance, but that they provide flexibility in configs.

One of my absolute favorites for cross-mod friendliness is BigReactors: that mod fits into freaking everything simply because you can fine-tune it via power output multiplier, fuel consumption multiplier, and probably more that I don't know of. The modder doesn't care that people setting the output modifier to, say, 0.1 or 74.3 would totally mess with the in-game balance. That's their problem.

On the other hand, the RoC extractor works by multiplying the "dusts" of each stage by an amount that works out to more than 5x ore multiplication at the end of the day. The "problem" we're discussing could be solved simply by making that number configurable (correct me if its configurable please)

Balance should only be applied on SMP servers, and you can block certains machines to be crafted, change crafting recipes and so on.

I'd still like my single player game to be balanced within itself please. This means no swords-of-three-thousand-damage, and that metaphor scales all the way down to ore multiplication and other facets of the game.

 

[zemerick]

What about the next mod that comes out that have a just as hard a progression line as RoC/IC2/Mekanism/whatever to reach this multiplier, but chooses to do x6? And couple of months later x7?

We have already kinda see it "gone to hell" on the RF front IMO. All the mods seem to want to make their mod the "best" and increasingly easier to make thousands/millions of RF/t, and it just keeps escalating.

I think you're forgetting that it still doesn't matter.

As of several YEARS ago, it was easy after just a short time to get out of resource scarcity. There are so many things out there that make INFINITE amounts of resources for free or even just less than the cost to produce them, that it really doesn't matter how much you can multiply ores.

 

[rhn]

I simply don't understand the "balance" everyone says.

It all depends on the quantity you can dig and mine. With such things as Digi Miners, Quarry+ (and so on...), even the Tinkers Construct Craft-Fortune Pick isn't balanced on "Vanilla" terms.

Balance should only be applied on SMP servers, and you can block certains machines to be crafted, change crafting recipes and so on.

If you read the thread, you would know we are debating balance between the mods. Not resource balances as such. How you can obtain so and so many resources it not really the issue, that is a debate for another day. Feeling forced to go with one mod over all the rest because it is more efficient is.

Let the modders express their creativity on their mods, pls.

And for crying out loud! No one is trying to enforce limitations on anyone. We are having a debate in an attempt to come to a conclusion if it might be a good idea for modders to voluntarily use some basic guidelines that they themselves set up! At least that was my proposal. And it was what worked in the past(be they unwritten guidelines or not, I was not part of making those mods or the inner circles of the modding community so I don't know). But the TE/BC/IC2/RP2/Forestry/etc. authors seems to understand this as they have for years kept their mods balanced with each other.

 

[Pyure]

I think you're forgetting that it still doesn't matter.

As of several YEARS ago, it was easy after just a short time to get out of resource scarcity. There are so many things out there that make INFINITE amounts of resources for free or even just less than the cost to produce them, that it really doesn't matter how much you can multiply ores.

I'm sure you'll agree that my time is a finite and valuable resource, and that some machines cost me more time than others

Again, using rhn's example, I strongly feel its solved with configuration options. Obviously the "defaults" for these configs are still going to suffer constant inflation, but so long as we can scale them back as necessary we reap the benefits of the creative mods without suffering the cost of cross-mod incompatibilities.

 

[rhn]

@rhn, the solution I generally push is not so much that all modders think along the same lines regarding balance, but that they provide flexibility in configs.

One of my absolute favorites for cross-mod friendliness is BigReactors: that mod fits into freaking everything simply because you can fine-tune it via power output multiplier, fuel consumption multiplier, and probably more that I don't know of. The modder doesn't care that people setting the output modifier to, say, 0.1 or 74.3 would totally mess with the in-game balance. That's their problem.

On the other hand, the RoC extractor works by multiplying the "dusts" of each stage by an amount that works out to more than 5x ore multiplication at the end of the day. The "problem" we're discussing could be solved simply by making that number configurable (correct me if its configurable please)

First of, I am not trying to attack RoC in any way. I was entirely talking about mod developments in general, but people keep brining up RoC as an example, and I agree it is a good example.

Yeah, this would help a lot. If the RoC Grinder and Extractor multipliers could be config'ed, it would be ok. You could integrate it into packs along with mods with x2-3 solutions just fine. If it was possible I would personally set the Grinder to x2 and Extractor to x3. I think that is very reasonable. But as far as I can see there are no such options, and from what we know of Reikas attitude to configs, there probably never will be