[Suggestion] Machine wear/breakdown mechanic

  • the word rust would imply a wearing effect that would occur regardless of the activity of the item. i can't think of any material that only oxidizes when in use so i thought you were proposing a rust mechanic be added in addition to wear

    true balance is impossible in video games the best one can hope for is to make it really hard to guess which of 2 choices are better.
    and remember kids "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF JOKES!"

  • 100% wear resistance is fine with UNSTACKING lubricants that adsorb this wear damage and eventually run out.


    This will allow longer maintance cycles, but shoud have side effects, like empty lubricant in slot increase wear speed by 25-50%, this will make such options much more harder to maintain and be "balanced"

  • Shouldn't you guys be making your own threads? The OP suggestion was simply to allow an optional and configurable wear mechanic to IC2 machines similar to the breakdown of tools, with the slight difference that the breakdown be partially random rather than guaranteed to work perfectly until breaking after a fixed amount of uses.\


    Making this mechanic mandatory for all users of IC2 was never part of the suggestion, and the Reactor-style module system and Oil/Lubricant upgrades are original ideas that should be put in their own threads, not cluttering up this thread and pulling discussion away from the OP.


    continuing with the thread's OP, I was undecided on whether or not to include a repair mechanic the same as tools work, where the health of both machines is combined into a single machine plus a bonus 10% health reward for repairing. I think the repair mechanic should NOT be included for machines as it would limit player interaction (people would just repair their own machines and hermit rather than selling and trading hand-me-down machines), and it would also weaken the main concept of machines steadily loosing value as their wear accumulates. Finally, the machine block left behind when a machine does break down creates a source of scrap iron that can be sold or reused to offset some of the cost of rebuilding machines.


    Let's hear what you guys think about including/not including a repair mechanic, and why you think so.

  • tl;dr i would rather people hijack remotely similar threads rather than flood the front page with threads about slight variations

    true balance is impossible in video games the best one can hope for is to make it really hard to guess which of 2 choices are better.
    and remember kids "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF JOKES!"

  • tl;dr i would rather people hijack remotely similar threads rather than flood the front page with threads about slight variations


    I rather have all suggestion in each own thread, rather than have a massively clusterfucked megathread of some sort. I only have so much patience to read something.


    And as a added bonus you could probably see the differences with the thread title alone.

  • i dont hate the idea of breakdown but i also dont like it. when it really would be implemented then PLEASE with a config.
    but the idea that you have your machine block with the reactor-like gui to put things ( for example 2 gears and one pickaxe ) in this gui to make a macerator is cool. especially if you could make higher efficency with a special order of the components ( like in the nuclear reactor)

  • i dont hate the idea of breakdown but i also dont like it. when it really would be implemented then PLEASE with a config.
    but the idea that you have your machine block with the reactor-like gui to put things ( for example 2 gears and one pickaxe ) in this gui to make a macerator is cool. especially if you could make higher efficency with a special order of the components ( like in the nuclear reactor)

    In the future, please check the dates, this thread is almost 2 months old and the developer response was basically a maybe for when IC3 comes out

    Is the answer to this question no?


    Quote

    Hey don't take it so hard. Ignorance is part of this generation it seems. -the wise words of XFmax-o-l

  • Welp, I stand corrected,

    Quote

    Current TODO:
    ...
    Machine rework, including: Weardow/Breaking

    Will this be a config option or a hard rework though?

    Is the answer to this question no?


    Quote

    Hey don't take it so hard. Ignorance is part of this generation it seems. -the wise words of XFmax-o-l

  • I like the idea it would really finally put an end to players make unlimited resource factories. those who protest this kind of thing well your just lazy and clearly don't like challenges. if the game was easy no one would play there wouldn't be any fun to it. heck when i had a server back a while ago i started with rp2/ic2/bc then when red-power frames came out and building a real quarry came true i removed build-craft i refunded the quarry's items but 90% of the server raged and quit because it wasn't easy any more. I say add it and dont listen to the lazy people.
    * notice dont bother trying to flame my post. i most likely will never read this post of mine again just for this reason :P *

  • * notice dont bother trying to flame my post. i most likely will never read this post of mine again just for this reason :P *

    Well I'm at least going to respond to it


    Quote

    your just lazy and clearly don't like challenges

    ummm, no. I don't think it's lazy to build something like the GregTower or SpwnX's windmill powered factories general stuff, just take one look at the Frame Engineering Challenge, there's practically genuine science to this, the ships built there are meant to be used as fully automatic mobile mining bases or practically impossible infinitely repeating solar arrays, in my experiences, frame ships can get to be quite complex and I see all of these as the direct opposite of "don't like challenges" as well as "lazy"

    Is the answer to this question no?


    Quote

    Hey don't take it so hard. Ignorance is part of this generation it seems. -the wise words of XFmax-o-l

  • How about creative/adventure mode = No Weardown.
    Regular Survival play = Weardown increase depending on the difficulty level
    Hardcore Survival Play = Extreme weardown


    Also ability to spawn/change weardown of machines in Creative mode to make "Extra" challenges for adventure mode maps.

  • Weardown/breaking is sure nice.
    I just hope there will be a way to supply expendables or perform repairs via RP tubes or deployers. Well, I'm just too lazy to walk around the processing area checking for oil levels or something like that.

  • Weardown/breaking is sure nice.
    I just hope there will be a way to supply expendables or perform repairs via RP tubes or deployers. Well, I'm just too lazy to walk around the processing area checking for oil levels or something like that.


    You know, part of the reason im pushing this suggestion is to stop exactly that >.<


    ...Although i think i recently thought of 1 or 2 ways to (semi?)automate machine repairs even if Tubes/Deployer can't do this... But then again those 2 methods aren't has bad as the current situation...

  • You know, part of the reason im pushing this suggestion is to stop exactly that >.<


    What's wrong with making machines work on their own? I'm already using an almost-automatic mining vessel, and the only thing preventing me from using it in fully automatic mode is my inexperience with RP computers. Once I'm patient enough to run a task in background (so I can know if the miners have finished harvesting stuff), the ship will fly on its own.
    Designing and piloting a system like that is way more satisfying, than running around the factory like a grease-monkey.

  • I do not think that wear-down of machines add any value to the game. As I expect that wear means no immediate breaking after building it, you should be able to generate enough resources to produce another machine before the old one breaks. In fact a lot. Now all that this adds to the game is annoyance, as huge amount of resources means: you do not loose a thing, you just have to rebuild it.


    Just take the following situation: you come back from an hour or mining underground just to realize that your Macerator broke apart loosing 60 iron ore in the process because they despawned. You have enough resources to build 10 new Macerators in your pocket. So what is the game value here other than annoying the player?


    If this is ever added to the game without a config option to disable it, the only reason I can see to do it is to get players to upgrade their machines to more advanced ones, that do not break down. Otherwise see above.

  • So what is the game value here other than annoying the player?


    So what is the game value of:


    Monsters? They just look ugly and kill the players and are a annoying to the player.
    Darkness? It make things dark and shit, making the player falls into pitfalls and spawn mobs and its annoying to the player.
    Lava? Its way too dangerous, igniting the player and killing him and stuff and its annoying to the player.
    The End? Just another dark dimension full of slendermans and dragons and stuff that kill the player and deep void and its annoying to the player.
    Bad Status Effects? Stuff like poisoning and weakness thats just annoying to the player.
    Caverns? Just big holes in the ground full of pitfalls and depths and monsters and annoying to the player.
    EU? I mean Electrocuting the player with uncovered wires and ALWAYS running out and having to make more of it, its just annoying to the player.
    Materials? I mean, if they would magically appear when you need then that would be ok, but no you have to look for them leaving your cozy home, its simply annoying to the player.
    ...


    Should i continue or you catch my drift?

  • Those ad challenge to the game or have other uses while breakdown of machines is just crappy annoying shit that only consumes time. You cant implement this as this would break all our machines. Go make a addon for yourself because the rest of us here dont want this.

  • You cant implement this as this would break all our machines
    ...
    because the rest of us here dont want this


    The idea of machines requiring some extra attention is fine, it will add some realistic complexity. After all it's not fun to just repeat and polish one and only factory design. The only concern is the correct implementation that will not hinder the creation of new automated designs.
    Let me ask - why are you playing MC with IC2?