[1.5.1/1.5.2] Modular Forcefield System v2 Classic 2.3.0.1.15

  • So what are your opinions, would it be better to create more effective ways to store large amounts of Forcicium/Monazit or should the requirement be optional (a config file setting)? Keep in mind that we try to keep it as compatible with Thunderdarks version as possible.

    Focicium could act like an amplifier like scrap does for the Mass Fab. Force fields could be generated without forcicium at a much greater energy cost. That way, players can choose between the item processing infrastructure or a greater energy production infrastructure.

  • Focicium could act like an amplifier like scrap does for the Mass Fab.


    Already does. :p


    Force fields could be generated without forcicium at a much greater energy cost. That way, players can choose between the item processing infrastructure or a greater energy production infrastructure.


    Sounds like a fairly decent balance to me, honestly. Searge and I would have to play around with the balance of it first, if we choose to go this route, but this would let us satisfy both groups IMO.

  • I know one can use Forcium in a Mass Fab and I constantly wonder why one would want to(I mean, it's as good as scrap but way more valuable).
    At least that's how it was in ThunderDark's last version.


    Basically I am in the same boat; you should get roughly the same amount of energy saved by using forcium in a extractor to power a field as you would using it in a mass fab. Thus it's just a straight link between the amplifier bonus and the new field generation bonus in my eyes. Of course, this does mean you should boost the value of Forcium in a mass fab as well.


    Anyway, the constant toll of "ZOMG NEW FEATURES" is wearing on me with Cal's version. You know you are using a mod by him when you download the latest build, make tea, open minecraft and find out there's a new build with a new feature waiting for testing. I haven't even had a chance to play really today what with all the hell I've put myself through to get my Complete Bullshit 2.0: More Bullshit install working. What little I did play I was chasing pigs with a battle sign to steal their hats. Eventually upgraded to a rapier simply for the lower invulnerability time for them so I could murder them faster.
    Long story short Hats is awesome. And I'm tempted to make a straw and drink that brown lake because that might clean it up a bit, even if I'm liable to die in the process.

    Apprentice Redstoner, Professional Slacker

  • Focicium could act like an amplifier like scrap does for the Mass Fab. Force fields could be generated without forcicium at a much greater energy cost. That way, players can choose between the item processing infrastructure or a greater energy production infrastructure.


    LOL! That's exactly what MFFS v3 does except I use lapis as amplifier hehe. I agree with you. Both MFFS should provide ways of generating without resource.

  • The question is, what is the main problem with Forcicium? I personally like the idea that a resource is required to keep the force fields running, not just energy. But I would agree if you complain about Forcicium spamming storage and chests unnecessary. I'll check if there are more effective ways of storing Monazit and Forcicium.


    Forcicium requirement and Monazit worldgen could be an option in the config file, but we'll discuss it internally first before a decision can be made about adding this kind of option.


    So what are your opinions, would it be better to create more effective ways to store large amounts of Forcicium/Monazit or should the requirement be optional (a config file setting)? Keep in mind that we try to keep it as compatible with Thunderdarks version as possible.


    This actually links to an idea that I posted before. A tier 1 form of the force field generator that is cheaper, does not need forcicium or any form of amplifier. but is weaker, cannot extend as far and can be pierced by items like the portable hole. Tier 2 would need forcicium, have a more expensive recipe but be able to extend further, use upgrades like the camoflarge inside and cannot be opened by items like the portable hole. Tier 3 can link to items like the Security station, would need more Forcicium and can be able to kill mobs, players and NPC's.


    As for storage, I will admit that it does become a storage hog early in the game, but I use mods like Factorisation, Greg Tech and Condensed Blocks which helps with the storage (Condensed blocks, not so much for Forcicium), but an ability to condense them further would be much appreciated. Block of Forcicium, A chest like the Indexer from Extra Bees dedicated to Force Energy Crystals?



    Also Cal. it is still very much overkill

  • While I certainly like your idea Blaster, it causes problems with one of our key goals: we want to keep MFFS2 as backward-compatible as possible. Implementing a tiered system would take require us to redevelop large portions of the mod and would take an absolutely massive amount of re-balancing. Perhaps in the future we can look into something like this, but for now and with this version of MFFS, I think we'll look more into options along the line of what stretchydeath suggested.

  • While I certainly like your idea Blaster, it causes problems with one of our key goals: we want to keep MFFS2 as backward-compatible as possible. Implementing a tiered system would take require us to redevelop large portions of the mod and would take an absolutely massive amount of re-balancing. Perhaps in the future we can look into something like this, but for now and with this version of MFFS, I think we'll look more into options along the line of what stretchydeath suggested.


    Fair enough

  • Using the latest 304, can someone confirm if Monazit is spawning. I see it in NEI and I'm not seeing any errors. Using just IC and MFFS for testing and I'm not seeing it when I mine under y 50.

  • Just updated whole bunch of mods and noticed these in the forge logs.

    Quote

    2013-04-27 11:02:48 [FINEST] [ModularForceFieldSystem] Sending event FMLPostInitializationEvent to mod ModularForceFieldSystem
    2013-04-27 11:02:48 [INFO] [STDERR] WARNING: A Mod attempted to register ForciciumItem very late at the OreDict! Some Functionality may not work as expected!
    2013-04-27 11:02:48 [INFO] [STDERR] WARNING: A Mod attempted to register MonazitOre very late at the OreDict! Some Functionality may not work as expected!
    2013-04-27 11:02:48 [INFO] [STDERR] WARNING: A Mod attempted to register oreMonazit very late at the OreDict! Some Functionality may not work as expected!

  • Using the latest 304, can someone confirm if Monazit is spawning. I see it in NEI and I'm not seeing any errors. Using just IC and MFFS for testing and I'm not seeing it when I mine under y 50.


    I haven't found any either so it's either really rare now or doesn't exist.

  • Guys, can you make both versions of MFFS compatible?


    Thankfully it's a simple fix too. Rename the internal name for the mod. I don't think it can be done without actually editing the code though, but I could be (and likely am) wrong.

    Apprentice Redstoner, Professional Slacker


  • Thankfully it's a simple fix too. Rename the internal name for the mod. I don't think it can be done without actually editing the code though, but I could be (and likely am) wrong.


    You have to go into code and edit it.


    My question is, why do you need two different versions of the same mod?

    Would anyone like to try a Slowpoke Tail?! Only 1 Million Yen!


    Quote

    this isn't about arrogance or ego, I have a block that I put a lot of freaking work into


    Every Mod Author, in existence. And yet, you STILL say otherwise.

  • You have to go into code and edit it.


    My question is, why do you need two different versions of the same mod?

    Its not same mod - Cal's version have some improvements to original MFFS, but i also want classic things like protected chests. And renaming mod file dont fix anything, it depends on mod code.

  • I've found the problem with world gen. Apparently the WorldGenMinable (used to add Minable ore features in world gen) had its constructors updated - so instead of passing 0 as the metadata for the worldgen block, it was passing 0 for the amount. I'll be uploading a fix shortly.

  • Dont forget to insert the Block you want to replace into the Function, which declares the replaced Material (Block.stone in this case). Otherwise it can't generate in UndergroundBiomes.

  • Dont forget to insert the Block you want to replace into the Function, which declares the replaced Material (Block.stone in this case). Otherwise it can't generate in UndergroundBiomes.


    Yep, that's the overloaded constructor I switched it to. Also, I've moved the Ore Dictionary registrations for Monazit and Forcicium into load, so the warnings you said were because of GT should be away with this fresh build.