Who needs torches when you have yourself a pick and the ability to make a 1x1 shaft way up to surface? - Gravel/sand can be safely avoided by using one torch on where you step.
or you just strip mine under the ocean with a quarry. 
IC2 Expermental Feature Discussion
-
-
The problem is that mobs will definitely spawn in the shaft if it isn't lighted up (unless you play on peaceful) and not many people wear full armor (especially early mid-game) just for mining.
-
The problem is that mobs will definitely spawn in the shaft if it isn't lighted up (unless you play on peaceful) and not many people wear full armor (especially early mid-game) just for mining.
I usually stripmine in the complete dark (or i could use the nightvisgoggles to help me identify ores), but i can agree when exploring caves, although the mobs are not a big problem if you are a skilled player.
-
Yeah I light my mines early on, but once I get the resources to build Nano armor, I stop worrying about most mobs. So long as I keep my health and food up, even the dreaded creeper can't one shot me (and I do play on hard).
-
I saw something called a bottling plant? It has no recipe, can someone elaborate what this machine will be used for?
-
screenshot or gtfo
-
screenshot or gtfo
-
Something to do with the canning machine I think, it apparently did too much for one machine
-
Yes, Thunderdark got the Idea to make Canning and Uncanning Machine. Why did I not get this great Idea! I should have done that in the first place with the GT Canner!
-
Why did I not get this great Idea! I should have done that in the first place with the GT Canner!
Beats me. A "liquid transposer" suggestion has been brought up dozens of times before
-
Beats me. A "liquid transposer" suggestion has been brought up dozens of times beforeYup, i remember myself suggesting it at least once, a year ago or something like.
Well, the only concern i would have is that the canning machine is awfully slow (if compared to TE liquid transposer). -
Tbh as long as the default can empty/fill a can/bucket in under 5s I'm happy. Rest can be achieved with overclockers
-
Tbh as long as the default can empty/fill a can/bucket in under 5s I'm happy. Rest can be achieved with overclockers
I also dislike the energy efficiency, because that would be annoying on large setups (fusion reactor), but whatever, i can use input/output hatches or material injector for that sake.
-
Liquid Transposer = 1 Machine doing both, not two seperate Machines.
-
I thought it was being seperated into the Liquid transposer (putting into cans and out of cans), the solid transposer (food/uranium) and the fluid enricher (cf foam and stuff)
-
Oh, that's awesome. Hope to get a recipe soon. If it requires energy I'd suppose it doesn't destroy your cells/cans/etc. ? Also which machine will do exactly what?
-
I've just updated my server to MCPC+ 1.6.4 (build 105 right now) and IC2-2.0 experimental build 274, and I'm seeing power behavior that appears to be wrong. (I assume this is the right place to ask about it.)
Here's the setup: I have (currently) four geothermal generators (the start of a planned bank of 12-16), feeding into four MFEs, to four MV transformers, to four LV transformers, to my 32 EU/p LV power rail. I've done basically similar power setups before with no trouble, and they have worked as expected. In the past, when I've added more generators, more MFEs, more MFSUs, more transformers in parallel, the LV rail is still LV, the MV rail is still MV, and the HV rail is still HV, just with more "current" available to power more machines simultaneously at that "voltage".
On MCPC+ 1.6.4 and IC2-2.0 build 274, what I'm seeing is that if I parallel-connect at any point, devices downstream of the connection act as though the voltage, not the current, has increased. Connect the output of the LV transformers in parallel, and my metal former explodes as though I'd connected it to MV. Connect the MV transformers in parallel, and LV transformers explode. Connect the MFEs in parallel, and MV transformers explode.
I cannot believe it's intended to be working this way. It would mean I would have to have completely separate storage, transformers, and power lines for each individual machine, and no two power lines even at the same voltage could ever be allowed to connect, which would be just completely insane.
Has anyone else experienced this behavior? Is there something I don't know about how the new power net works? Is it a bug in this build? Because this makes absolutely no sense.
(Footnote: Retesting with build 280 right now.)
-
@above : basically, IC² experimental changed e-net to work in "serial" instead of "parallel".
Kinda tough change, but it is a WIP feature, will change in the future.Edit : I mean, the energy network is going through an overhaul.
-
SpwnX — so at the moment it IS supposed to work this way? If parallel circuits now act as serial connections, how on earth are you supposed to have enough current on a circuit to fully power more than one machine, without blowing up machines?
I assume this is something to be fixed in the future ... right?
-
SpwnX — so at the moment it IS supposed to work this way? If parallel circuits now act as serial connections, how on earth are you supposed to have enough current on a circuit to fully power more than one machine, without blowing up machines?
I assume this is something to be fixed in the future ... right?
Transformers, tons of them, upgrades are a good idea.
I bet it is going to be "fixed", but i rather call "changed", the e-net is on progress and needs implementation of some other things rather than just EU/t (as it is, on serial).
