Suggestion: machines break\explode if they are power cycled to quickly

1st Official Post

    As the title says: machines break\explode if they are power cycled to quickly


    When ever I start a new world I know for the first bit of time I am scraping together my resources so I do not always have the ability to create a power grid that provides excess energy. This means that when I run some of my machines they quickly turn off and on as they use up the energy provided in one tick before the next tick provides more energy. You can see\hear this especially with Macerators. Just like in real life, if I quickly turn off and on an electric machine over a long period of time, say a blender I have in my kitchen, that blender is going to quickly give up on life and cease to answer my whimsical 'will it blend' questions.


    I am not certain how this quick power cycling would be tracked, but I think it would be more true to electric machines that if power to the machine is cycled on and off quickly the machine would either be destroyed and drop a Machine block or, if the machine is of a higher tier, maybe explode? That last part may be a bit evil as I can picture the lowly crafter just getting to use his first ever mining machine and maybe does not have enough power to keep it fully running. How sad would it be to see that thing explode knowing the amount time, blood, sweat, tears, etc... that went it to getting all the resources for that machine. On the other hand, that's life...


    Thank you for your consideration.


    Baja

    I'm not sure why you'd want this "fix", especially considering that you mentioned your lack of resources. What you're saying is: You don't have the means to build a robust power grid, so you want to be punished further by having your machines break too? Will that somehow make the game more enjoyable for you? (If so, do you honestly think others share that view?)


    I'm still baffled by the people I see in every game that suggest things that will only result in more misery and inconvenience. As for me, I play to have fun. If I wanted a game that felt like a job, I'd play EVE Online. If I wanted a game that was an exercise in despair, there's Star Wars Galaxies. 8o

    Quote from HeadHunter67

    I'm still baffled by the people I see in every game that suggest things that will only result in more misery and inconvenience. As for me, I play to have fun. If I wanted a game that felt like a job, I'd play EVE Online. If I wanted a game that was an exercise in despair, there's Star Wars Galaxies. 8o

    Thank you for the reply. Yes, this could be seen as adding more misery, but I believe it would also make IC2 a bit more realistic and would fit into the survival side of Minecraft nicely. Part of the game it to plan our your next move and take risks. Sometimes that means pushing machines to their limits and having the hope that you can just make it by until you get a bigger pile or resources.

    Fair enough - that's an honest way of looking at it. I guess we just see it differently. Personally, I find the existing system to be self-regulating for the most part.


    I noticed the flaws in my previous power grid when I turned on a pair of Rotary Macerators at the same time my Induction Furnace was running. They began rapidly power-cycling, but the fact that it was taking longer to finish the tasks was all the encouragement I needed to make a change. All it took was a little rearrangement of the existing wiring system - instead of transforming down near the MFSU, I did it just before the primary wire trunk for the machines, and put a batbox on either side of the LVT. Now everything runs happily again.


    If my machines blew up, I'd probably just be motivated to revert to an older save.

    Personally I think it ought to just fix the sound (add a lower volume constant sound when it is cycling), or take the same method it used to have in IC1, where it waited for enough power to do a whole cycle (One item processed) before starting) which I imagine would not do a good job deafening people. (I might actually reenable sounds then, and not smell burning rubber SCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEECCCHH)

    • Official Post
    Quote from Ranakastrasz

    Personally I think it ought to just fix the sound (add a lower volume constant sound when it is cycling), or take the same method it used to have in IC1, where it waited for enough power to do a whole cycle (One item processed) before starting) which I imagine would not do a good job deafening people. (I might actually reenable sounds then, and not smell burning rubber SCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEECCCHH)


    Uhm, in IC1 it worked the same way, just more unoptimized.

    Quote from HeadHunter67

    I agree that machines should wait until they have enough power to perform an individual operation before beginning.

    Agreed!! this is someting i would love to have changed... flickering is ok.. but I think it would be better if it waited till it had a full cycle of power first before starting up.

    transformators allow you to sent same energy into lesser packets, if you machines run too slow - use more EU and protect machines with transformators.


    max energy is 512 (MSFU) it enough for hurge amount of t1 (all machines expect few are t1)

    That's essentially what I wound up doing - it gets the same amount of power to more machines at once - and at a more even flow.