[GregTech-5][1.7.10-FORGE-1355+][Unofficial but approved Port][Stable] Even GT5 Experimental is slowly getting stable.

Quote from Blood Asp

The reason why i will not do that? Because it would invalidate a huge part of GT, namely all transforming beween different voltage tiers... If higher tiers would be the same or better efficiency, you would only build the highest tier machines and remove the low tier ones. The whole base would become one, at best two voltage tier/s and that would be simply booring...

Devil's advocate: fwiw, even Greg's thinking twice about this :p

It doesn't really make a lot of sense to keep ancient technology kicking around in your base just for diversity. If I make a better toaster, I should just recycle the old toaster's parts and move on.

Our mission, if we choose to accept it, is to ensure even with just a couple tiers that its NOT boring!

Blood Asp Hear hear!

Quote from Pyure

Weird.
Going by the numbers I posted several pages ago, if I provide 4500 mb/s HC, I'd expect to get 4500 / 2 * 20 = 45000 mb/S of SHS.

I'll be home in 6 hours, I'll have to test it again. :\

How are you getting your numbers-per-second?
When you mouse-over the steam in the gui of the output hatch, what value do you see in the tooltip?

I'm using fluid regulators on the LHE HC input and steam outputs. I'm monitoring by liking at the hatch capacity or fluid regulator capacity while pulling a constant amount of steam.

Quote from Blood Asp

but less than 30-50% per tier is something i never would do

i'm agree with 50%
So LV recipe on HV machine will be 4x faster and require 2.25x more energy per item. It would be the reason to upgrade everything, except ore processing arrays.

Quote from willis936

I'm using fluid regulators on the LHE HC input and steam outputs. I'm monitoring by liking at the hatch capacity or fluid regulator capacity while pulling a constant amount of steam.

Can you answer the second part of my question about the value in the tooltip please?

Quote from Blood Asp

The reason why i will not do that? Because it would invalidate a huge part of GT, namely all transforming beween different voltage tiers... If higher tiers would be the same or better efficiency, you would only build the highest tier machines and remove the low tier ones. The whole base would become one, at best two voltage tier/s and that would be simply booring...

What? How is that a bad thing?
Shouldn't we be playing to progress in the game? If I can afford to change all my machines to the highest tier, I should be able to.
The transformers are still needed while you're progressing, but to downgrade and spam multiple lv machines in name of efficiency, is what I find extremely boring...

is it inappropriate to ask for the gravel, and sand small ores in GT6 be added to GT5u? combing the desert for tiny amounts would be better than nothing at all. Tin can just be such a pain in the ass early on, or even adding the option to use zinc wires in LV machine recipes. I have played GT5 through to HV+ at least 5 times, and except for getting lucky once, I always fight for tin early on.

If I am just a unlucky minority then, ignore this request.

Quote from Pyure

Can you answer the second part of my question about the value in the tooltip please?

I can't right now because I'm at work but I'm not exactly sure what you're asking for. I lower the HC input until I see the SHS output hatches dropping in capacity then I increase grew HC input until the SHS output hatch stays at the same capacity (meaning exactly 60 B/s are being produced).

Quote from bear989

is it inappropriate to ask for the gravel, and sand small ores in GT6 be added to GT5u? combing the desert for tiny amounts would be better than nothing at all. Tin can just be such a pain in the ass early on, or even adding the option to use zinc wires in LV machine recipes. I have played GT5 through to HV+ at least 5 times, and except for getting lucky once, I always fight for tin early on.

If I am just a unlucky minority then, ignore this request.

Yes, I know how you feel.
I started to play with Thaumcraft because how hard was to find tin.
But then, I ended find a lot before even getting into alchemy.
On my world, there's a huge vein even on the END, just to annoy me...

Quote from willis936

I can't right now because I'm at work but I'm not exactly sure what you're asking for. I lower the HC input until I see the SHS output hatches dropping in capacity then I increase grew HC input until the SHS output hatch stays at the same capacity (meaning exactly 60 B/s are being produced).

Oh, got it dude, me too.

Lemme clarify: if you open the output hatch of the LHE (where steam comes out) you can mouseover the pretty steam texture on the black screen. While its running you don't usually see the steam itself (unless the hatch is backed up) but you can still mouseover where its supposed to be.

You'll see a number in the tooltip: that number is the steam output per tick. When you have a moment, as a troubleshooting measure, I'd love to know what that number is.

Quote from Drawfox

On my world, there's a huge vein even on the END, just to annoy me...

In every world I've played, for some reason the End is always absolutely filthy with Tin. Its everywhere. If there's 5 oreveins on the main island, 4 of them will be made of Tin.

Infitech2 though, with mods that modify the end: YMMV.

Oh wow I've never noticed that. I'll get back to you in about 4 hours.

Its handy, yep.

I should clarify: technically its the "amount of liquid in the hatch" you're seeing, but since the hatch gets emptied every tick, unless its backed up, it amounts to the same thing.

Oh I've seen the amount in the hatch. That's what I've been monitoring. Usually it's almost full when there's a SHS surplus and empty when there's a defecit. I use fluid regulators to pull 750 mB/t from each of 4 output hatches to total 60 B/s. I lower the HC input until I see the output hatch values decrease from max (implying a SHS defecit) then raise the HC input slowly until the output hatch's internal storage doesn't move. If I increase the HC input the output hatch will start to fill. If I lower it the output hatch will empty. This is why I'm confident in my observation.

I don't go to the End Till I need iridium later in the game, it is my way of nerfing flight, I don't make a jetpack till I go to the end.

Quote from willis936

Oh I've seen the amount in the hatch. That's what I've been monitoring. Usually it's almost full when there's a SHS surplus and empty when there's a defecit. I use fluid regulators to pull 750 mB/t from each of 4 output hatches to total 60 B/s. I lower the HC input until I see the output hatch values decrease from max (implying a SHS defecit) then raise the HC input slowly until the output hatch's internal storage doesn't move. If I increase the HC input the output hatch will start to fill. If I lower it the output hatch will empty. This is why I'm confident in my observation.

Yep, that's the spot.

When you mouseover it while its "empty" though you'll see a value (so long as its generating steam). I'm confident in your observation too, I just want more observations. It may provide me information I can use to identify an issue.

Ah that's what I didn't know: the rate is exposed when empty.

Quote from Blood Asp

In GT5 it is just too deep in the core to be simply changed by a config or even making sure it would not break anything.

I know

I've attacked this problem a number of times. Every time I think I have a simple solution, something comes up and bites me in the ass and breaks it.

GT5 really was constructed solidly on the overclocked tiers thing.

Quote from Pyure

GT5 really was constructed solidly on the overclocked tiers thing.

Its sadly, but we should leave with that.

Quote from Pyure

Explain "a balanced way to set things on or off" please? I'm not sure what you're requesting here.

The notion of making it configurable is the only way to make it balanced for a "whole community". Since the hardcore players want stuff like lava nerfed into the ground, and other players want it completely left alone. Is balance finding the middle ground, or trying to give everyone a truly positive experience?

For what its worth, I'm open to leaving it in an extremely friendly configuration by default, and letting people crank up the difficulty themselves if they want to.
I'm also open to looking into different overall mode packages, similar to Forestry, so that you can just change one thing to make a big swathe of changes. But that would be a later change.

Now that is closer to what I would like to see. I disagree with bear on this. I know he hates configuring stuff but, as an operator of two servers, configs are god to me. The ability to configure and toggle even tiny details is integral to managing balance and inter-mod compatability, so whatever is implemented should be highly configureable.

Now as far as the 'detailed' interaction or Tier 2 or whatever we're calling it, i'd like to open a bit of discussion on how to implement each 'piece' of the overarching pollution to do what I suggested in an implementable way, if you'd be willing. I would suggest a logistical flow of how to do them, then you would let me know if that's actually possible or not based on how the code does or doesn't work. Sort of bridge the gap between coder and idea-guy to find what the working compromise is. You've already ellaborated a bit (especially SpawnX) on why Pwater would be problematic to implement, so i'm throwing that back to the drawing board, but I don't see why the other ideas would be difficult if a simple check was added to pollution affected machine. Say, let's isolate one aspect- reduced EU output on oxygen-users when polluted. I can't imagine it to be too difficult to periodically check, say every 1200 ticks, to see if the pollution level is above certain levels and, if so, it sets a flag of 0-5, each 1 being a 20% reduction in EU output. That would be it for solar. For boilers, diesel engines, and small gas turbines, it would divide by 2 so they can still have some useability even in the worst pollution, but still badly effected. I don't see that as being terribly laggy or difficult to implement? Just add a string to check and limit if there, and just on the machines affected by such.
That's one idea, and seems similar to- but more flavorful and machine-specific than- the overarching pollution variable you originally proposed. If you can work that out then i'll continue and we'll see if we can't come up with a way to make it both easy to code and implement as well as nitty-gritty.

Alternative idea:
Toggleable value of 'Pollution Implementation' that can be set to 'Standard' or 'Dynamic', and if dynamic it will use all the configureable 'module' parts of the pollution impacts, such as machine-specific stuff, the water thing when we find a solution we can all agree on, environmental hazards, etc.
This way you can implement the simplified pollution-variable-nerfs-everything originally proposed and have it in and working, then add the dynamic modules and test as they come.