Electric blocks retain charge when removed

  • What about special wrench and special t3 batpack? (special wrench == electric one, there is no need to create one more item)

    If energy storage block dismouned by special wrench, it's entire charge go into special batpack instantly (if special batpack on player at current moment of time).

    Special t3 batpack shoud have unlimited capacity that decay over time, more energy stored - faster decay rate is, safe storage is 10kk. (this will allow to move single full MSFU around without losing any energy)

    Storing more then 10kk cause passive energy decay, moving batpack around, dropping it, storing it, or anything similar shoud punish player by instantly cuttting any energy over 10kk or cause explosion or something.

    If user place energy storage block when have special batpack on it - it automatically instantly charged to max (or as much as energy stored inside batpack).

    This will allow to:

    Move energy storage blocks around your base without any issues, in case of MSF - additionally in completely loseless mode.
    Keep energy storage block's item stackable since no NBT tags added.
    Implement dream of everyone - t3 batpack with large storage.
    Easy and fast setting mining outposts, get slpack on you, place MSF go next position.
    Also this shoud affect normal machines - placing them precharged, this will make HV lines for machines with transformator upgrade safe, since machineds wont sink any energy on placement and wont explode instantly.

  • I'm kinda 'meh' on it.
    If it were to be implemented there needs to be a good downside to it, like already described.


    Buildcraft – spilling items.™

  • I'm partially against it due to resource-usage.
    Imagine if 20 players where carrying 20 storageblocks.
    It's all extra CPU-cycles, all for a mechanic that's a little gimmicky.
    And even if I appear to be wrong, and load is a non-issue, then maybe.

    It is useful for miners or temporary remote locations, but it lowers the value of portable charging.

    It would be simpler to just make them lose 0.45 of total power.


    Buildcraft – spilling items.™

  • coding energy directly into energy blocks will make them unstackable...

    if you love clicking 999 times to perform some simple action - its fine, but not everyone like this.

    special batpack will allow to implement everything without side effects and much more simple codewise, in case of batpack we can attach data directly to player making tracking of batpack a lot easier.

  • I like that idea of making the charge of Storage units to decay to zer0 after a full minute. That should be annoying enough so people don't use Storage units as replacement for lap/energy/batteries.

    I don't see why some one would use a block to move energy BETWEEN grids. That would be wholly impractical. The same applies for storing energy in a permanent grid. The only use I really see for this is for moving temporary micro grids.

    A Rock Raider trained as an Engineer, among other things.

  • Second option confused me. Can you change it to this?

    Yes, all machines should store energy.
    Yes, but storage units should lose some/most energy
    Yes, but storage units should not store any energy
    No, Because f you. (Dis a joke)
    Doesn't affect me at all.

    Because in the end we agree machine storing energy its a good idea, but storage units keeping most of it can be bad for portable energy storage units.

  • I, like a number of other Minecraft players (I'm assuming), watch Direwolf20's videos, and I had an idea when I saw the 'recharging' mechanic of the Thaumcraft wands.

    My idea combines a few interesting thoughts I've seen floating around on this thread. Would it be possible to make the storage units act like RE-Batteries in the sense that they stack when COMPLETELY empty, but when the unit in wrenched, the player receives a "shock" from a configurable amount of EU lost from the unit (I'm thinking 5-15% at default and maybe 1.5 hearts of damage per 1000 lost?). The unit retains the remaining energy, but the amount of energy stored decays over time (I'm not sure about the decay rate, perhaps 1000 EU every second (20 ticks)? The EU loss could be configurable as well for the sake of server owners).

    The EU loss would be nullified for quick moves, especially if the player misplaced it, but would definitely discourage using the storage units as a completely OP form of EU transport.

    Could this work?

  • I see no reason to damage the player for wrenching an energy storage unit under any circumstances. This currently doesn't happen, and the fact that the unit might retain some of its energy instead of losing it makes that idea even more of a 'WTF'.

    However, acting like RE batteries in regards to stacking when empty would be excellent. All it needs to do is clear the 'stored energy' item tag if wrenched while power is lower than one packet's worth. (Because unless you're carrying around a not-fully-charged item with which to suck the last 5 EU out, it's hard to get a storage unit all the way down to zero EU.)

    Due to the way Minecraft works, I think it would be difficult to make the item do something over time without it being possible to circumvent this process (and 'freeze' the energy storage), for example by placing it in an ender chest or any portable inventory space and only taking it out again when you're ready to place it.

    Losing a certain percentage of the stored EU would be fine, as long as it wasn't a huge amount. Even losing 10% of the stored EU would be sufficient to discourage its use as a portable recharging station - you'd lose a full lapotron's worth of energy the first time you picked it back up again. That seems like plenty of discouragement right there.

  • Thats one of the jokes that might explain why wrenching a energy filled MFSU lose part of its charge. (The damaging the player one)

    Still like that conditional that if the mfsu have been too long in a inventory (Any), it will lose any EU still in storage (Due to the MFSU not properly set-up/placed) + Losing that 10-20% Eu when wrenched (Either by mistake or intentional). That would allow partially filled mfsu to be moved without waiting for it to discharge, but not useful/abusive enough to replace lapotrons with a MFSU in your inventory.

    The shocking the player its just a "for the heck of it" thing for me.

    And just as a remainder, we should talk only about vainilla IC in here, because we all know that things like balance and sense will be thrown out of the window when another mod besides IC its mentioned.

    EDIT: To sum up my thoughts on this:

    -10-20% loss per disassemble to prevent the Place,Recharge,Remove portable msfu behavior.
    -Full discharge of the mfsu after X amount of time to prevent the Charge to full, remove, store in a box, place new mfsu, recharge,rinse and repeat behavior. (Yes you lose 10-20% EU per remove, but you are still left with 80-90% of the capacity to move it to a really far away base, which is also something lapotrons are made for). Batbox/MFE/MFSU are supposed to be STATIONARY Energy storage units.

  • Not possible. Only PlayerInventories and special Inventories are able to do so. You can eternally store anything in a regular Chest without any Timer ticking.

    Does it recognize when the item is placed/removed from a player inventory to a chest? If so this can be easily solved by removing all the charge without caring about the timer when the player tries to take it out of the chest. (Or removing the charge at the moment its placed in the chest would work too.)

  • And just as a remainder, we should talk only about vainilla IC in here, because we all know that things like balance and sense will be thrown out of the window when another mod besides IC its mentioned.

    While I understand that balance decisions can't take into account all the other mods in existence, IC2 does not exist in a vacuum. In the real world I think it's pretty rare to have IC2 as the only mod installed. Because of this, relying on a balancing technique that could be completely bypassed using quite a number of other mods seems rather foolish when methods that wouldn't be susceptible to that are also available.

    Energy loss while in item form would be a difficult feature to implement *and* it could be bypassed quite easily even without other mods installed. That's two marks in the 'cons' column and I can't see any in the 'pros' column. Energy loss that occurs when the block is wrenched would be simply a matter of adding one math operation to the assignment of the block's current stored EU to the item's retained EU, and it's a balancing technique that other mods couldn't bypass. That's two in the 'pros', and while I suppose some might consider it unsatisfactory or insufficient and place a mark in the 'cons' due to that, to me it seems fine. And I'd rather have IC2 releases not be delayed by additional dev time to implement or fix tricky and unnecessary features.

    As for adding that to Forge... Making all inventories capable of ticking items would require adding a lot of complexity to every entity with an inventory space, and that wouldn't even cover all means of storing items. Mods might need their inventory handling rewritten in order for it to work. The extra processing could put more load on servers and slow down SP games (A drop in the bucket perhaps, but every drop counts). Mods can already accomplish something like that in inventories they create, if desired, so the only reason to add a feature like that to Forge would be to enforce compliance on every mod. Just to let storage blocks' EU decay.

    tl;dr: I don't think it'll happen. Just sayin'.

  • Voted Yes, keep most,

    i would say maybe a 10% loss on the act of removal,

    using the same stacking mechanics of RE batterys (2 item IDs one for uncharged one for variable charge)

    if its found the power transport to be a balance issue you could also debuff players carrying MFE/MFSU (like chest transporters mod does) maybe a 30% slow and hunger debuff, maybe even a jump debuff.