(Redstone Energy Conduit) Can someone explain the 5% loss?

  • 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
V

Vaygrim

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
533
0
0
http://ftbwiki.org/Redstone_Energy_Conduit
Redstone Energy Conduits lose 5 percent of their carried power regardless of distance. The loss occurs at each point the conduit is connected to an object that pulls power (e.g. machines or Redstone Energy Cells).
Click to expand...


So.. does this mean 5% at EACH point along a line of conduit, cumulative effect? Or just a simple.. whatever you plug into it sees a flat 5% reduction in max power drawn?

I do not know if this means I should limit the number of machines I have plugged into a line of Redstone Energy Conduit between energy cells, or if it doesn't really matter. Help?
 
W

Whovian

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,181
0
1
It's just a flat. So if you put 20 MJ into the Conduit system and the only thing hooked up is a Redstone Energy Cell, that cell will have 19 MJ regardless of if it's 1 block away or Graham's Number blocks away. Just ignore the fact that Minecraft worlds are finite and you can't have Graham's Number blocks between two points. And the fact that the theoretical limit for the RAM of a supercomputer that takes up the entire observable universe, even with absurdly futuristic technology, is an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to Graham's Number.

Notice that I left out a number of "compared to an insignificant speck's" mind-numbingly greater than 10 to the number of hypercubic planck lengths in the history of the observable Universe. And even with that said, I've still understated the size of Graham's Number more severely than a billion Withers would pwn a player with no armour.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ApSciLiara, SkyBoy96 and Vaygrim
V

Vaygrim

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
533
0
0
Whovian said:
It's just a flat. So if you put 20 MJ into the Conduit system and the only thing hooked up is a Redstone Energy Cell, that cell will have 19 MJ regardless of if it's 1 block away or Graham's Number blocks away. Just ignore the fact that Minecraft worlds are finite and you can't have Graham's Number blocks between two points. And the fact that the theoretical limit for the RAM of a supercomputer that takes up the entire observable universe, even with absurdly futuristic technology, is an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to an insignificant speck compared to Graham's Number.

Notice that I left out a number of "compared to an insignificant speck's" mind-numbingly greater than 10 to the number of hypercubic planck lengths in the history of the observable Universe. And even with that said, I've still understated the size of Graham's Number more severely than a billion Withers would pwn a player with no armour.
Click to expand...

Whovian, I think you are the only person you know that can make my brain hurt .. yet still make total sense.

So.. if I have 9 machines (say Thermal Expansion machines) hooked up to a length of Redstone Conduit and they are being fed from a Redstone Energy Cell... they all just suffer a flat 5% penalty.. NON-CUMULATIVE?

If this is the case, thank you for clearing it up!
 
W

Whovian

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,181
0
1
Vaygrim said:
So.. if I have 9 machines (say Thermal Expansion machines) hooked up to a length of Redstone Conduit and they are being fed from a Redstone Energy Cell... they all just suffer a flat 5% penalty.. NON-CUMULATIVE?
Click to expand...

Should be. Any weighted mean of any finite number of 5%'s is still 5%.

So yes. They all suffer a flat 5% penalty
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vaygrim
B

budge

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
273
0
0
Keep in mind another 5% loss is accumulated every time the energy enters a new conduit network. So if you have a row of engines producing 100 MJ/t plugged into a conduit, a cell on the receiving end gets 95 MJ/t, and then a new conduit network pulling from the cell receives up to 90.25 MJ/t, and if you have a third conduit network after that, 85.74 MJ/t. So try not to have too many energy cells interrupting the conduits between your engines and your machines.
 
M

Maldroth

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
169
0
0
Another way to think about it is that Redstone Energy Conduit is a multi block structure. Each multi block structure takes 5% off the top for operating costs. If you have two multi block structures that are close, think about combining them to get some savings.
 
V

Vaygrim

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
533
0
0
Maldroth said:
Another way to think about it is that Redstone Energy Conduit is a multi block structure. Each multi block structure takes 5% off the top for operating costs. If you have two multi block structures that are close, think about combining them to get some savings.
Click to expand...

So what I am now learning from this conversation.. is that I need to stop putting so many Redstone Energy Cells midway along my redstone conduit lengths. While we are discussing Redstone Energy Conduits, is it true that you can pull more power out of an Energy Cell by connecting conduit to multiple faces of the cell at once? Does this actually bypass the 100MJ limit of energy cells?

I guess another way to ask this .. is there an actual maximum amount of MJ/T that you can funnel through Redstone Energy Conduit ?
 
M

Maldroth

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
169
0
0
Vaygrim said:
So what I am now learning from this conversation.. is that I need to stop putting so many Redstone Energy Cells midway along my redstone conduit lengths. While we are discussing Redstone Energy Conduits, is it true that you can pull more power out of an Energy Cell by connecting conduit to multiple faces of the cell at once? Does this actually bypass the 100MJ limit of energy cells?

I guess another way to ask this .. is there an actual maximum amount of MJ/T that you can funnel through Redstone Energy Conduit ?
Click to expand...

I think the max is 1000 MJ/tick that is the full saturation point of Redstone Energy Conduit. I am unsure about the different faces of the Redstone Energy Cells. You will have to hook one up to something that will draw that much MJ and then use the tester that was added to Thermal Expansion to test how many MJs are traveling in the line.
 
K

King Lemming

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
664
0
0
budge said:
Keep in mind another 5% loss is accumulated every time the energy enters a new conduit network. So if you have a row of engines producing 100 MJ/t plugged into a conduit, a cell on the receiving end gets 95 MJ/t, and then a new conduit network pulling from the cell receives up to 90.25 MJ/t, and if you have a third conduit network after that, 85.74 MJ/t. So try not to have too many energy cells interrupting the conduits between your engines and your machines.
Click to expand...

This is changing in the near future. :) You'll be able to inline cells and not incur additional loss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saice, Summit, neofrost01 and 8 others
N

noobbyte

Active Member
Jul 29, 2019
37
0
26
while on the topic of RECs: will adjacent RECs finally eject to each other so we don't need two pieces of conduit between every inline REC?
 
H

Harvest88

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,365
-1
0
noobbyte said:
while on the topic of RECs: will adjacent RECs finally eject to each other so we don't need two pieces of conduit between every inline REC?
Click to expand...
I highly doubt that since I know what's your up to. (using them as lossless MJ transferring via connecting a bunch of RECs)
 
N

noobbyte

Active Member
Jul 29, 2019
37
0
26
Harvest88 said:
I highly doubt that since I know what's your up to. (using them as lossless MJ transferring via connecting a bunch of RECs)
Click to expand...
actually i want compact storage of MJ while being able to check every single cell. i'm trying to get at the MFSU-lining-up thing that everyone used to do with IC2 where the output of one was connected to another without cables, so you just had a row of MFSUs that looked nice and you could check the storage on all of them. one drained into another, essentially making a "tank" of energy, if you will.
 
H

Harvest88

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,365
-1
0
Ahh I get it now and yea that's would be awesome because I also want that loss less mj transferring too.
 
N

noobbyte

Active Member
Jul 29, 2019
37
0
26
meh i really don't care about the loss, it's just the stacking of the cells that i really want. I can run an input line into one side of a cell chain and run an output conduit out the other and have loss, but i just want that shared storage.
 
H

Harvest88

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,365
-1
0
Well someone said the modder will have eventually down the road upgraded sets like the Batbox to MFE then a MFE to a MFSU but not any time soon as I heard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom