# Overclockers OP

• I don't see it as "silly" at all. Mind explaining?

Any time a machine needs 64 of something to run better... it probably should just have fewer of something more powerful.
Care to explain why adding 64 of a particular upgrade is more sensible?

• Official Post

bare in mind we have unlimited item ids

- Overclocker board

:Alloy: )copper = bronze (middle = adv alloy) ( = 1 overclocker CPU)

so with a combination of adv circuits norm circuits and the 2 items above, are u sure this wouldnt be to "cheap"? i think not...

P.S. u guys are worse than the MC forums people complaining about bloody everything

• Official Post

Any time a machine needs 64 of something to run better... it probably should just have fewer of something more powerful.
Care to explain why adding 64 of a particular upgrade is more sensible?

Have you even tried putting a stack in? It is about the least sensible thing in the world!

NOTE: The following statistics are based off of the Macerator, which has a 400 tick default operation length, and 2 eu/t default.

1. Anything above 32 clockers is completely useless as the code just sets the rate to 32 when its anything above 32
2. With 32 clockers the energy consumtion per tick is equal to about 862,880 EU/t
3. With 32 clockers the tick rate is about 1/250th of a tick, which gets set to 1 tick obviously, so even for the Macerator which has a very long operation length, the max effective overclockers is 17
4. Get the idea here?

EDIT: Also in the Macerator, with those 17 clockers in it you will need 1971 eu/t or operation and it will do one operation per tick.

Lesson 1: Watch over your crops....

• Since when do we compare the real world with Minecraft xD

IC2 seems to walk along the line of comparing real world with Minecraft.

A lot of the ideas such as a mass fab are impossible today but if they where possible they would require an obseen amount of power like the do in IC2. That is an example of making something Unrealistic semi-realistic in a game ;P

I agree with the previous statements that these machine should become more efficient (Eu) but They also should be balanced with more expensive recipes, I feel like the original idea of the IC tiers was to create better, more efficient machines with each level of tiers.

With that being said I don't think you guys had a bad idea I just don't like that having anymore than 8 Overclockers is complete nonsense (Eu wise anyway.

• Official Post

This would not be changed even if we did have tiered overclockers, they are specifically designed to be very EU inefficient, end of story. Also if we are comparing to the real world, this is very realistic, the faster you go, the more power it takes to go faster, as in exponential differences in power to gain a fixed amount of speed.

Also what you said on 8 Overclockers is simply more support for what I said earlier, see it is useless to put in a stack of clockers xD

Lesson 1: Watch over your crops....

• Since when do we compare the real world with Minecraft xD

We said it sounded silly, and thats the reason why. Otherwise i dunno when you people ninjaed a black hole motherboard to implement those 64 stacks upgrades XD. (Btw i didnt had classes today, so when i finish writing the alternatives ill post them (I got 3 in mind, 1 more crazy than the last one))

A way to make it sound less silly would be to make the overclocker module tiered, Single Core Overclock, Dual, Quad, Octo. (If you want to go to 16 well...). If you follow the logic single cores dont stack, dual cores stack up to 2 and so on. Of course making dual core transformers/storage module its just plain silly >.> Simple tiered (LV/MV/HV for transformers 1k/10k/100k for storage f.e) non stackable should work.

DISCLAIMER: IM NOT COMPLAINING *Ejem excuse me* that Overclockers are a waste of energy (Even though they are XD), im just saying that module stacking its silly.

• Official Post

Ok, so stacking is stupid....

Each of your inventory slots can now only hold one item/block, no stacking...

You can kiss all modern games goodbye, because now we have single core GPU's and single core CPU's...

You can kiss that digital camera goodbye too, because it's cores are also stacked...

Stacking is good, it isn't stupid at all, embrace the future, don't fight it!

Lesson 1: Watch over your crops....

• Official Post

i dont know how he can come back from that, he just got brutally owned

• Stacking beyond a certain limit its stupid! Otherwise i call shenanigans of Games where i could not stack Rocket Launchers one above the other to shoot them at the same time!!! or that you cant stack Cooling Cells in the nuclear generators!!!

Its time for the Anti-Stacking Revolution my Comrades!!!

Btw Cores arent "Stacked" per se, they are placed one next to each other with proper comunication paths to multiply the processing power!

Also my inventory slots doesnt stacks! they are neatly arranged one after the other but that silly game say they are stacked D:

• Official Post

Stacking beyond a certain limit its stupid! Otherwise i call shenanigans of Games where i could not stack Rocket Launchers one above the other to shoot them at the same time!!! or that you cant stack Cooling Cells in the nuclear generators!!!

Its time for the Anti-Stacking Revolution my Comrades!!!

Btw Cores arent "Stacked" per se, they are placed one next to each other with proper comunication paths to multiply the processing power!

Call it what you want, it doesn't really matter. Did you know that there are TONS of stacks in your computer? Many buffers are called stacks, and for good reason, because they "stack" data ontop of other data, and as far as rocket launchers, why not stack them? Havn't you seen the big rectangular rocket housings, that hold tons of rockets? As far as cooling cells don't blame us, blame Notch, that is a MC Engine limitation. Here's the deal, if you don't like it, your not being forced into using it.

EDIT: And as far as slots go, you stack the material inside a single slot

Lesson 1: Watch over your crops....

• Anything above 32 clockers is completely useless as the code just sets the rate to 32 when its anything above 32
With 32 clockers the tick rate is about 1/250th of a tick, which gets set to 1 tick obviously, so even for the Macerator which has a very long operation length, the max effective overclockers is 17
Also in the Macerator, with those 17 clockers in it you will need 1971 eu/t or operation and it will do one operation per tick
Get the idea here?

Yes, thank you for providing some data to support my comment that it's ridiculous to allow large stacks. I didn't have the numbers, but if more than 32 is useless and there's no real gain past 17... why, pray tell, did you set the stack size to 64 instead of 16?

Seems to me that it would have been a more sensible choice.

• Woot, writing the second module system as proven to be a fun task, i had some ideas for the 3rd system but it would be way too ambitious and more of a coding challange since it will most likely include things that no other mod (including IC2) has done so far. will soon post this, i would love to have feedback from the devteam on what things are possible or not when i post those "sketchs" (I dont have much idea on Minecraft code, but i can probably understand the limits if someone told me about them)

• Official Post

Yes, thank you for providing some data to support my comment that it's ridiculous to allow large stacks. I didn't have the numbers, but if more than 32 is useless and there's no real gain past 17... why, pray tell, did you set the stack size to 64 instead of 16?

Seems to me that it would have been a more sensible choice.

FYI we can't limit the stacksize per slot, because of unlimited* storage upgrades, thus this would be really stupid to limit that.

* Within MC limits and slot limits.

Also what the heck do we care if people don't look up what the useful limits are, their loss xD

Lesson 1: Watch over your crops....

• FYI we can't limit the stacksize per slot, because of unlimited* storage upgrades, thus this would be really stupid to limit that.

* Within MC limits and slot limits.

Also what the heck do we care if people don't look up what the useful limits are, their loss xD

Care to explain a little more? Not sure i totally understood.

• Official Post

Care to explain a little more? Not sure i totally understood.

1. Storage upgrades are not limited like overclockers or transformers, so why put a limit on things
2. Its fun making people who don't care to look it up think that all upgrades are limitless

Lesson 1: Watch over your crops....

• 1. Storage upgrades are not limited like overclockers or transformers, so why put a limit on things
2. Its fun making people who don't care to look it up think that all upgrades are limitless

1. Because logic!
2. Oh you.

Oh well i made my points, sad that they didnt stick. Someday i will return with teh anti stack revolution, but for now im going to sleep >.>

• Official Post

lol

Lesson 1: Watch over your crops....

• I'll have to take your word on it Alex, because I'm not a programmer. I simply can't help but feel that this could have been done in a more elegant fashion - and if I knew what, exactly, that entailed, I'd be glad to elaborate.

• Kinda would make sense that they're not stackable, so with the 4 or 5 slots you have available, you have to decide what you want, there'll have to be a trade off somewhere between the 3 choices available to get what you want instead of going full force and having everything.

Just a thought ..