The difference being that right now there is no limit to the amount of EU/t the matter fab can receive, that will change to a maximum limit of 8192 EU/t IIRC.
Scrap Vs Scrap Box for Matter Fabricator?
- Thread starter Spikerbond
- 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 like a MFSU right? like if I put 2 HV solar pannels to 1 MFSU it fills from both with no problems but if I add something that recharges it with 513 then is blows up.
No like if you put 2 HV solar panels next to your MFSU it will blow up, or it will not take EUs from one of the panels.
Wrong on both counts.
A MFSU can receive an infinite (well, probably 2 billion) amount of EUs per tick so long as each packet is 512 or less. You can safely put HV Solar arrays on five sides of the MFSU and it will use all five to charge up, but you will only be able to pull out 512EU/t
The change to the matter fab is different than how a MFSU works however. EU works on a request-supply basis, and right now it requests 2 billion EU per tick. That is being changed to 8192EU/t.
Right now, you can supply that 2 billion EU, so long as you do so in packets of 8192EU or less each. After the change, it will only ingest 8192 per tick.
Yeah I know, I was simply using the MFSU as an example of how the change would be like.
It just means that instead of running a single matter fab at 32,768EU/t, you'll run 4 matter fabs at 8192EU/t. You'll still need the same amount of amplifier. The only real difference is you need more matter fabs. Since they are just about the cheapest thing in the game that requires iridium, I don't see any real problem.
Question for someone who like playing with the numbers: which is faster; fusion reactor running 4 matter fabricators producing 7 uu matter (1 iridium) or fusion reactor using iridium producing 1 iridium?
Well, with default settings in Ultimate the fusion reactor produces 32,768EU/t (in 1 million EU packets), so that would take 509 ticks or ~25.4 secs. The fusion reactor takes 1024 ticks (51.2 secs) to produce iridium, so about twice as long. However, producing iridium with a fusion reactor only takes a little over 2 million EU instead of ~16.7 million and doesn't rely on scrap.
The iridium fusion reactor recipe is faster when you take into account that iridium requires 7 UU matter, not 1. It's also much cheaper, if you do it enough to render the startup cost less painful. However, lithium and wolframium are much harder to come by than water. It may not be worth switching to the iridium reaction and back every time you want iridium.
As long as the reactor is running you can switch cells and it will continue, so you can use deuterium/helium3 to kickstart the process then your first lithium/wolframium cells go in with the reactor holding its max eu, it will then run as long as you have cells if you keep it powered from 1. idsu.
Wow it's true, even if your reactor isn't running you can save 83m EU just by throwing a deuterium and tritium in there first (lithium+wolframium startup is 90m - 7m that you lose if only running the tritium+deuterium reaction only once). I bet Greg will nerf it though.
Seems pointless to have higher startup cost for those if easy to get materials let you use the cheaper startup cost anyway.
Does the reactor really work like that? Seems silly. Swapping a cell combo once it's ignited making you not have to spend that extra EU seems insanely broken. I would almost assume that doing this causes it to consume power from the energy buffer it stores for starting cold.
I wouldn't call that a Nerf. I would call that a bug fix, because that's a glaring bug(rather a circumstance which is exploitable by virtue of having a hole in the logic).
I wouldn't call that a Nerf. I would call that a bug fix, because that's a glaring bug(rather a circumstance which is exploitable by virtue of having a hole in the logic).