[GregTech-6][1.7.10] Moved to Website

  • I meant more something that will say "There are traces of iron, bauxite and gold" or even the elements which make them up. Ov scanners arent the best, and knowing how gregtech does it, itll be oredictionary working and amazing :D


    I think that it will be too easy to mine... too overpowered for a nice gameplay. My opinion.

  • Hey, Greg would you consider making a silktouch BuildCraft quarry? If not, anyone know a modder who likes to do random stuff like that?

    More like an Advanced Miner. And my suggestion, even if I tried to balanced them, were denied/ignored.


    On a related note, could you make the rockcutter be usable in miners, giving a 50% increase in EU usage, but silktouch? (maybe not 50%, but definitely a decent increase) It would be very helpful for some people.

    Already suggested, denied or ignored. I guess denied, because it Rockcutter is meant to benefit Handy-mining, so ...


    Soon with Molten Salt Reactors, right ? :D
    NERF THA FUSION REACTOR!

  • Yeah thats why it would have to be very expensive to use and make. By the time that you can make it you'll already have quarries, mass amoutns of resources, etc. Once you hit a certain point, theres not much need for mining, so end game mining should be more able to go after specific ores and such that takes more precise work than a quarry or anything could do. So instead of blindly mining with your high tech mining tools, you could instead look for specific things that you may need. It would be WAY overpowered if you could get it low tech, but I'm talking about something that will drain more eu than you would usually use at lower levels and would cost mostly the highest tier stuff that gregtech adds.


    EDIT: Also is the industrial electrolyzer supposed to be taking energy when theres nothing in it? >.>

  • I think that no equipment is too expensive. If you can create it to mine, is cheap. The only expensive thing here is TIME. Mining time is expensive. BC quarrys or IC2 automining machines are more than enough to "unbalance" the gameplay.. minecraft. So machines->automatic mine = good and cheap investment always.

  • Yeah thats why it would have to be very expensive to use and make. By the time that you can make it you'll already have quarries, mass amoutns of resources, etc. Once you hit a certain point, theres not much need for mining, so end game mining should be more able to go after specific ores and such that takes more precise work than a quarry or anything could do. So instead of blindly mining with your high tech mining tools, you could instead look for specific things that you may need. It would be WAY overpowered if you could get it low tech, but I'm talking about something that will drain more eu than you would usually use at lower levels and would cost mostly the highest tier stuff that gregtech adds.


    EDIT: Also is the industrial electrolyzer supposed to be taking energy when theres nothing in it? >.>

    nope, it shouldn't take any energy if there's nothing inside to process, but it has some internal eu storage; so it might be because of that...

  • The side with the dot is the output..



    Btw, you don't need the supercondensator for fusion reactor, just connect superconductor wires directly from the output of the fusion reactor and then connect your superconductor wires to 16 HV transformers and then to glass fibres and lastly to your storage unit (better try it in creative :D)

    Something's fishy here. I though the way it was supposed to work was that you need the supercondensor (unless you're using an old verison of GregTech). The reactor puts out 32768 EU/t, but in the form of 1000000 EU/p. The superconductor converts that to 8192 EU/t (so you need 4 to convert all 32768 EU). You need 4 HV transformers for each supercondensor to safely absorb all that power (each HV transformer converts 2048 EU/t to 512 EU/t). I set mine up using superconducting wire from the reactor to a 4-way split, then each branch goes to a supercondensor, then more superconducting wire, then 4 HV transformers per branch, for a total of 16 HV transformers.


    Is this a bug, Greg? Or did you change the reactor mechanics, again?


    On a side note, scientists have discovered a way to convert thorium to weapons-grade Uranium-233 using standard lab equipment. It takes 1.6 metric tons of thorium to make 8 kg of U-233, but it might be something to incorporate into GregTech in some way. (http://phys.org/news/2012-12-t…-nuclear-wonder-fuel.html)

  • Khalamov I think it's not a bug, the superconductor can hold any voltage (any eu/t?) and send it as a packet of 1,000,000 so it will be evenly divided to 16 hv transformers?.... The thing is that supercondensator only convert to 8192 eu/t while hv transfomers can only withstand maximum of 2048 eu/t right? if the hv transformers are not exploding that means the superconductor wires that connect supercondensator to hv transformers somehow convert 8192 to 2048 (via eu/p)?

    The post was edited 2 times, last by noskk ().

  • Its easy.
    Fusion Reactor outputs 1000000EU/p, it then sends those every few Ticks into HV-Transformers.


    I dont know if a HV-Transformer can store 1000000EU internally, so it COULD be, that all the EU is wasted, when using pure HV-Transformers, without any Supercondensators.

  • Its easy.
    Fusion Reactor outputs 1000000EU/p, it then sends those every few Ticks into HV-Transformers.


    I dont know if a HV-Transformer can store 1000000EU internally, so it COULD be, that all the EU is wasted, when using pure HV-Transformers, without any Supercondensators.

    Make HV trans blow up when they receive that amount of EU/p , so people must use your super condensator / avoid lossy setups with hv-trans.

  • I'm curious, is Gregtech responsible for cable not connecting to the my nuclear reactor? Though it could just be purely visual, it isn't outputting any EU despite continuing to drain the durability of the uranium cells.

  • Can you make something to protect yourself from being electrocuted by a fusion reactor?
    Sometimes I have to babysit mine so I got electrocuted and my Quantum Body piece got fully emptied.

    Fusion Power Engineering Industries® Making Fusion™ Automation Chamber© is DONE!!!!!!!! HAYO!!!



    Hint: Click the Automation Chamber text to see how it looks :D

  • Make HV trans blow up when they receive that amount of EU/p , so people must use your super condensator / avoid lossy setups with hv-trans.


    Its easy.
    Fusion Reactor outputs 1000000EU/p, it then sends those every few Ticks into HV-Transformers.


    I dont know if a HV-Transformer can store 1000000EU internally, so it COULD be, that all the EU is wasted, when using pure HV-Transformers, without any Supercondensators.

    This might be a silly request, but is it possible to make the superconducting cable a little bit smaller than full block size? Like how the 4xHV cable has large diameter, but doesn't take up the full block space. It makes it look a bit more like a "wire" than a machine that way.

  • This might be a silly request, but is it possible to make the superconducting cable a little bit smaller than full block size? Like how the 4xHV cable has large diameter, but doesn't take up the full block space. It makes it look a bit more like a "wire" than a machine that way.

    Greg already said no to me :(

    Fusion Power Engineering Industries® Making Fusion™ Automation Chamber© is DONE!!!!!!!! HAYO!!!



    Hint: Click the Automation Chamber text to see how it looks :D


  • yep steam reactors disable electrical cable hookup to reactors.


    Unless you got a small reactor set up steam reactors are very inefficient for larger set ups.

    I am hoping railcraft introduces a more advanced version of its turbine, that uses more steam, but produces more EU/t, as i really like the steam setup for the reactors.


    Edit: idea for GregTech:


    Introduce a turbine like the railcraft ones, that uses steam (lots and lots of steam), and have the fusion reactor be able to produce an absurdly large amount of steam. This would allow for the fusion reactor to operate in a more realistic manner.


    You could have the steam turbine use different types of rotor, where each rotor changes the EU/t and EU/p output, and requires differing amounts of steam.


    Also: move the wolfram + lithium -> iridium recipe over to a particle accelerator.

  • Also: move the wolfram + lithium -> iridium recipe over to a particle accelerator.

    It's not implemented yet. And I think fusion is more appropriate to create Nucleus from smaller nucleus. Particle accelerator is meant to "destroy" particle in order to see what can happen, i.e to discover(or produce for gregtech ^^) new things. Particle accelerator is already planned (but not before months ^^) and would probably create Antimatter.


    Soon with Molten Salt Reactors, right ? :D
    NERF THA FUSION REACTOR!

  • It's not implemented yet. And I think fusion is more appropriate to create Nucleus from smaller nucleus. Particle accelerator is meant to "destroy" particle in order to see what can happen, i.e to discover(or produce for gregtech ^^) new things. Particle accelerator is already planned (but not before months ^^) and would probably create Antimatter.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesis_of_precious_metals


    if you are doing this the normal way, then it would use neutron bombardment produced from the normal operation of the fission or fusion reactors. This method does not require the use of the lithium. If you are using lithium, then it would probably be more efficient to do controlled bombardment of tungsten with lithium in a particle accelerator, rather than uncontrolled thermal bombardments which would occur in the fusion reactor (the uncontrolled thermal collisions will more likely destroy the iridium as create it, as splitting a tungsten atom in half would result in a more stable isotope, after undergoing beta decay)


    edit reason why the tungsten would most likely split:


    the atomic mass of tungsten is about 180, the most stable elements are mass 56, where any smaller or bigger is less stable. therefore under high energy bombardment the tungsten is more likely to undergo fission than fusion. Using a particle accelerator, the energy of the incoming beam can be set such that you maximize the probability of fusion, and minimize that of fission. In a magnetically confined thermal fusion reactor, the energy of the particles involved has a much wider distribution, so it would be much much more difficult to set up an efficient method for the production of heavy elements.


    edit: why it works in supernovae to produce heavy elements:


    there will always be a very small portion of the low probability fusion occurring. in the case of a super nova, you have so much matter involved that an apreiciable amount is produced, relative to humans. relative to the star, there are practically no elements heavier than iron produced.