Would it make everyone happy if I renamed the thread from The Perfect Energy System to "Energy System That Doesn't Make You Froth At The Mouth With Unsuppressed Rage Every Time A Combustion Engine Makes Your Macerator Blow Up" ? Jeez, people.
The Perfect Energy System
- Thread starter SpitefulFox
- 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
I just pointed out that whatever system anyone come up with, would never really be perfect.
I'll have to step in here and tell you that IC2 was a resource hog. The newer versions (after player optimized much of the e-net) is quite good for what it does. And player is rewriting the whole E-Net right now which means we'll see a new system which will be a lot better compared to the old one.
I hate it when people start "bashing" mods based on old information which isn't true anymore. (No offence intented here Brilliance
)@alan: that brings up an interesting point.- more realistic rivers/water that have dammable valleys.
especially when you couple it with higher worldgen, you can slope everything back from a central point of a continent, have the river run down to a ocean.
on the subject on a per-update energy system: what follows is my expansion and thoughts on the subject.
im thinking a node-based system that only checks power loss/cable capacity/usage reqs when the network is updated*adding a to-nowhere cable does not update*
only calculations are done when you place a machine to see if the network can handle it. if it can, it lets things run. if not, it does a few other calculations on a per-tick basis.
let A be a producer for 500units(u)
a cable(-) can support 750 units, cable (=) 1000
each machine (B,C) each uses 400.
A-B
machine needs 400, so producer throttles down and produces 400.
this is a stable network. the machine is told to run.
lets update
A*-A-B-C (the lines just mean that the machines are connected on the same line, not necissarilly that A* plugs into A.
we now need two producers, A* produces 300, A 500. the A-B cable is overloaded by 50 and starts heating up- this will be the only calculation performed on a per-tick basis. after some time the cable breaks/melts, everything stops. before that, throughput for cable capped to 750. machine runs at 50% effeciency (this can be variable depending on the machine- a crusher doesnt care too much. a chip-production machine cares a lot)
upgrade cable or add another (which splits the power) to fix the issue.
A*-A=B-C
this is stable. machines told to run.
A*-A-B.
B needs 400.
either both As will produce 200, something will shut down, or B will blow up.
two units may be needed.
voltage: the in/out of each machine. only used to determine network compatibility. too low of a voltage, nothing happens, too high, you lose the machine/cable.
amperage. actual work value, the units in the examples above. machines only draw what they need, having a >500 (or whatever) difference between the total possible production and consumption will start turning machines off. producers throttle accordingly, depending on what producer youre using.
both voltage and amperage need to be in the right range.
tiers:
1: solar, wind, water. copper cable.
2: improved wind, steam/combustion.
3: fission, advanced steam.
4: fusion. superconducting cables
transformers can change between voltages/amperages.
batteries store energy.
converters swap between DC for usage and AC for transport. (cables will have a higher transmission value for AC.) some machines will need AC, or dont care.
im also thinking cables that you can fit multiple ones into one block. so in a given space, you can have two LV lines, one looping, other a dedicated feeder, a MV line running to a transformer. each tier is bigger. superconducter (HV, EV) takes up a full block.
especially when you couple it with higher worldgen, you can slope everything back from a central point of a continent, have the river run down to a ocean.
on the subject on a per-update energy system: what follows is my expansion and thoughts on the subject.
im thinking a node-based system that only checks power loss/cable capacity/usage reqs when the network is updated*adding a to-nowhere cable does not update*
only calculations are done when you place a machine to see if the network can handle it. if it can, it lets things run. if not, it does a few other calculations on a per-tick basis.
let A be a producer for 500units(u)
a cable(-) can support 750 units, cable (=) 1000
each machine (B,C) each uses 400.
A-B
machine needs 400, so producer throttles down and produces 400.
this is a stable network. the machine is told to run.
lets update
A*-A-B-C (the lines just mean that the machines are connected on the same line, not necissarilly that A* plugs into A.
we now need two producers, A* produces 300, A 500. the A-B cable is overloaded by 50 and starts heating up- this will be the only calculation performed on a per-tick basis. after some time the cable breaks/melts, everything stops. before that, throughput for cable capped to 750. machine runs at 50% effeciency (this can be variable depending on the machine- a crusher doesnt care too much. a chip-production machine cares a lot)
upgrade cable or add another (which splits the power) to fix the issue.
A*-A=B-C
this is stable. machines told to run.
A*-A-B.
B needs 400.
either both As will produce 200, something will shut down, or B will blow up.
two units may be needed.
voltage: the in/out of each machine. only used to determine network compatibility. too low of a voltage, nothing happens, too high, you lose the machine/cable.
amperage. actual work value, the units in the examples above. machines only draw what they need, having a >500 (or whatever) difference between the total possible production and consumption will start turning machines off. producers throttle accordingly, depending on what producer youre using.
both voltage and amperage need to be in the right range.
tiers:
1: solar, wind, water. copper cable.
2: improved wind, steam/combustion.
3: fission, advanced steam.
4: fusion. superconducting cables
transformers can change between voltages/amperages.
batteries store energy.
converters swap between DC for usage and AC for transport. (cables will have a higher transmission value for AC.) some machines will need AC, or dont care.
im also thinking cables that you can fit multiple ones into one block. so in a given space, you can have two LV lines, one looping, other a dedicated feeder, a MV line running to a transformer. each tier is bigger. superconducter (HV, EV) takes up a full block.
I'm surprised nobody's ditched cables entirely and suggested something wireless or a method of transfer that doesn't involve wires.
It wouldn't be all that difficult, it just feels uninspired.
Could do something completely different. Maybe energy is transferred in packets... carried by golems!
Admittedly, that would probably be very resource intensive. <_<
Isn't Xycraft "working" on a wireless system of power? I'm not sure exactly what extent of working but in some DW20 vids it shows functionality.
I'll have to step in here and tell you that IC2 was a resource hog. The newer versions (after player optimized much of the e-net) is quite good for what it does. And player is rewriting the whole E-Net right now which means we'll see a new system which will be a lot better compared to the old one.
I hate it when people start "bashing" mods based on old information which isn't true anymore. (No offence intented here Brilliance
Oh really then why is the stupid "ductaped" system is so exploitative? From cables with no loss and doesn't melt to EV eu/t from watermils?
Now exploiting a system is another story and doesn't have to do anything with resource friendly code.
But IC2's didn't fix those exploits (sure you could just remenber not to use transformers on generation blocks to gain more power) But you know what I mean. The code is out right a "ductape" fix. GT in fact hate it too as well as a guy that make Frogcraft.
What annoys me is that power generation is only balanced by material cost and power output when in RL power gen is determined by so many other factors. If solar panels took up massive areas and needed to be in a desert biome to give any real power then they would be less OP in my opinion. I would also have watermills that took a source block above it and put it below. The player would then have to pump the water back to the start position and this would take more power than generated by the watermill. In RL hydro electricity loses power but produces it quickly for short bursts. I would make wind turbines have to be huge and placed in an ocean to produce large amounts of power.
If the real life downsides to power gen were introduced to MC then I think the power types would be more balanced and a player would be more inclined to combine power generators for different scenarios.
PS I realise I am only really talking about IC2 but other mods have similar problems.
If the real life downsides to power gen were introduced to MC then I think the power types would be more balanced and a player would be more inclined to combine power generators for different scenarios.
PS I realise I am only really talking about IC2 but other mods have similar problems.
Once again: What do gameplay exploits have to do with resource optimization?
This is a thread about good traits for an energy system. Go start your own "I HATE IC2 CUZ GREG TOLD ME TO" thread if you want to rant about unrelated things.
I'd personally like to see more interesting multiblock variations of power generators. A multiblock dam that requires it to be built in a river biome at a certain y-coordinate with water blocks on both sides of the multiblock. I'm not sure how practical it is as far as coding goes, but it would look a lot better than a block with a bad texture that just sits in water. Same thing with thermal generators. Instead of slapping lava inside of it, make thermal pipes that have water running through them traveling underground. I'm not saying make power expensive and difficult, just make structuring it a bit more flavorful. Instead of blocks to slap down, an actual system to set up and intergrate. I personally would find it much more interesting.
In real life, a large amount of power is lost before it can even be used because in real life there is no such thing as a MFSU and it's virtually impossible to store large amounts of power. The most effective thing we have right now are lithium batteries which take up a ton of space. Also, the larger they are the higher the possibility of energy leakage.
Celestialphoenix
Too Much Free Time
What about the XYcraft power system?
Totally untested by the masses, but it looks quite intuitive to set up and use.
Dont suppose anyone with experience would like to enlighten this thread?