Ahahaha I have an efficiency 20, 800 EU/t reactor... the fact that this actually works is hilarious.
I think that particular trick's gonna stay my personal trade secret for at least a little while though 
P.S.: Nuclear Control works flawlessly now, you can use it without worries.
I have been playing around with MOX for awhile now, after the hotfixes, reactor designs are more interesting (unlike the 3 sets of 2 single cells on the top row with advanced vents below and filled with reactor heat plating 6 chamber reactor producing 1.9kEU/t I was using).
This is the current reactor i'm using:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…h0ehl4wr0lqfvm16zlof6ihog
Produces up to 700EU/t from 8 single cells, so no iron/copper requirements to keep it running (got mine encased in reinforced stone running 14 heat below max so fire's aren't really an issue).
Bonus is it can be upgraded without much config as more plutonium is produced for more cells from:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…eyuqma2pcxo66o4wyncj3nivm
And even:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…77fwq0nvkqj2eowapv0hm3z8e
Another design to produce 160 EU/t at 0 heat would be:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…uxt3gniv6kd8xfon7zg879uyo
As of build 297 I don't see much (if any) affect by heat plating anymore, but since I have a load of it anyway I use it for spacing for automatic refilling from AE, all these designs can be run in 5 chamber reactors too. So here is a 6 chamber design for a 180EU/t baseline (so up to 900EU/t) 10x single cell reactor I might start using instead:
Produces up to 700EU/t from 8 single cells, so no iron/copper requirements to keep it running
Dual and quad cells return all the iron used in crafting them when you centrifuge the depleted parts... so only quad cells should have a running cost in IC2 experimental, and only one copper plate per quad cell (down from 40 in classic IC2 or 8 in GregTech). A much-needed improvement!
I really like your upgradable reactor path! The four single-cell ones can all be converted from one to the next larger, without having any components left over. They're very diamond-heavy, but you don't have to spend them all at once - the cost is mitigated by allowing you a lot of time in between upgrades to procure more. Decently efficient, too; I haven't really found any good designs that go much beyond base 4, due to troubles spreading the heat fast and far enough (kind of similar to the "not enough sides to a block" issue you often have ingame). So up to 3.6 isn't half bad.
I suppose a reactor using core transfer as described in the opening post could achieve higher efficiency but would have usability drawbacks because it couldn't maintain its heat level while switched off or out of fuel.
Dual and quad cells return all the iron used in crafting them when you centrifuge the depleted parts... so only quad cells should have a running cost in IC2 experimental, and only one copper plate per quad cell (down from 40 in classic IC2 or 8 in GregTech). A much-needed improvement!
I really like your upgradable reactor path! The four single-cell ones can all be converted from one to the next larger, without having any components left over. They're very diamond-heavy, but you don't have to spend them all at once - the cost is mitigated by allowing you a lot of time in between upgrades to procure more. Decently efficient, too; I haven't really found any good designs that go much beyond base 4, due to troubles spreading the heat fast and far enough (kind of similar to the "not enough sides to a block" issue you often have ingame). So up to 3.6 isn't half bad.
I suppose a reactor using core transfer as described in the opening post could achieve higher efficiency but would have usability drawbacks because it couldn't maintain its heat level while switched off or out of fuel.
Oops, completely forgot about the centrifuge giving the iron back!
So after some more testing, reactor plating has no effect on boosting EU/t any more, it seems to be all % of max heat now. I have now upgraded to the last reactor I listed, running on the dangerous side of 9995/10000 heat, outputting a nice 900EU/t. External cooling or hull transfer reactors could probably easily output more, but this is pretty maintenance-free, although diamond heavy (but by the time you've spent ~40 diamonds on an MFSU I doubt another 24 is going to be a huge problem).
Don't say that too loud, or we'll soon build advanced heat vents with energium dust instead... 
Don't say that too loud, or we'll soon build advanced heat vents with energium dust instead...
thanks for the idea 
thanks for the idea
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Reactor Plating (Higher max heat) doesn't give any more advantage anymore, right?
So sorry to go alittle off-topic here, but does anyone know what the tritium fuel rods are for? From what I gather, when lithium fuel rods are placed next to an active fission fuel rod, they instantly convert to tritium, but I cannot find any uses for them in NEI.
So I tried to make a beast of a CRCS Mox Reactor design...one that when I got up to heat the interface said I was outputting 17k eu/t.
Back before experimental, as far as I knew, the EV Transformer could take -any- amount of eu and step it down to HV. Not so with Experimental...the new EV Tranformers blow at anything over the listed 8k(ish) eu/t. So much for that design.
And what really sucks is I came up with a design at the heat level I was on was outputting 8195eu/t, 3 more than the transformers could handle 
EV Tranformers blow at anything over the listed 8k(ish) eu/t
8192EU/t. Multiple ones with one power line out not work?
I had a glass fibre cable in a straight line off my reactor, with transformers spaced every other block along it...and maybe I found something wrong...I may have forgot to set them to fixed step-down. Did that, and tried again and they all survived at 8195eu/t...so I tried putting all my fuel rods again to reach 17k and they blew...trying to slowly add them and here's what I got:
10926 = good - lasted at least a minute before bumping up to a higher eu rate.
12487 = good for about 5 seconds before blowing.
Doesn't quite make sense to me.
Oh, and I have 6 transformers on the same line.
New e-net doesn't make sense to start with. 32EU/t machines magically taking 128EU/t with no upgrades for example. 6 transformers though, that's just overkill. Try putting like 8 transformer upgrades is a Macerator and try using it connected to your reactor.
Display MoreI had a glass fibre cable in a straight line off my reactor, with transformers spaced every other block along it...and maybe I found something wrong...I may have forgot to set them to fixed step-down. Did that, and tried again and they all survived at 8195eu/t...so I tried putting all my fuel rods again to reach 17k and they blew...trying to slowly add them and here's what I got:
10926 = good - lasted at least a minute before bumping up to a higher eu rate.
12487 = good for about 5 seconds before blowing.
Doesn't quite make sense to me.
Oh, and I have 6 transformers on the same line.
You need to go over your studies on how the new e-net works again
An EV transformer may be able to accept 8192 EU/t, true. But it only outputs 2048 EU/t, because it is stepping down. "But doesn't a transformer output the same EU/t it takes in, just in four smaller packets?" It used to, but it no longer does, because there are no more packets. All power on one line is summed up each tick. If the transformer output 4x 2048 EU/t, it would simply get instantly summed back up to 8192 EU/t, meaning there was no step down performed at all. As a result, under the current e-net implementation, the EV transformer only lets 2048 EU/t pass through it in step-down mode, even though it will not explode if four times that much is available.
Now you say that 10,926 EU/t does not blow up your six transformers, but 12,487 EU/t does. How does that work? Here's how:
Your six transformers can handle 6x 2048 = 12,288 EU/t throuput. Which is less than the 12,487 EU/t you're trying to put through them. Meaning, very soon after starting, one or more of the six transformers will have its internal buffer so full that there is no need to accept more energy for one tick. Thus the energy does not get split between all six transformers anymore. And if by unlucky chance it so happens that five out of six transformers do no accept more energy during the current tick but one does, that one gets the entire power pulse for itself. Which is greater than 8192 EU/t. BOOM!
TL;DR: you need 9 parallel EV transformers for your 17k EU/t reactor. And a very brave disposition, because the moment a MFSU fills up down the line and even one fo the 9 no longer has a place to send energy to...
Display MoreYou need to go over your studies on how the new e-net works again
An EV transformer may be able to accept 8192 EU/t, true. But it only outputs 2048 EU/t, because it is stepping down. "But doesn't a transformer output the same EU/t it takes in, just in four smaller packets?" It used to, but it no longer does, because there are no more packets. All power on one line is summed up each tick. If the transformer output 4x 2048 EU/t, it would simply get instantly summed back up to 8192 EU/t, meaning there was no step down performed at all. As a result, under the current e-net implementation, the EV transformer only lets 2048 EU/t pass through it in step-down mode, even though it will not explode if four times that much is available.
Now you say that 10,926 EU/t does not blow up your six transformers, but 12,487 EU/t does. How does that work? Here's how:
Your six transformers can handle 6x 2048 = 12,288 EU/t throuput. Which is less than the 12,487 EU/t you're trying to put through them. Meaning, very soon after starting, one or more of the six transformers will have its internal buffer so full that there is no need to accept more energy for one tick. Thus the energy does not get split between all six transformers anymore. And if by unlucky chance it so happens that five out of six transformers do no accept more energy during the current tick but one does, that one gets the entire power pulse for itself. Which is greater than 8192 EU/t. BOOM!
TL;DR: you need 9 parallel EV transformers for your 17k EU/t reactor. And a very brave disposition, because the moment a MFSU fills up down the line and even one fo the 9 no longer has a place to send energy to...
OH...I think I got my math down. Transformers output their full voltage on each side...so an EV Transformer can input "8192eu/t" on one side, then can output 2048 on the other 5 sides, for a total of 10,240eu/t...much more than it can supposedly take as input.
I may have had 6 EV transformers in parallel, but each of those transformers had 2 MFSUs attached to them. Doing the math on that, and they could handle 24,576eu/t...approximately what I first estimated my reactor would be making at top heat values when I read about everyone else getting 7x the 0 heat eu/t at high reactor temperatures. Maybe I misread them, because I wasn't able to get close to 7x. BTW, here was my reactor design: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…n491iq2uty3sltnejjbbd6j2l for those that might be curious.
For the same reason, you can ditch all your heat plating and just stuff your fuel rods into a 0-chamber reactor - it makes no difference anymore in your case.
Except the higher reactor heats are easier to maintain with more heat plating...when a reactor has a max heat of 10,000, and produces 2300 heat per tick, it can only reach about 75% heat and still maintain a one-tick safety margin (for micro-managing control systems). When you up that reactor max heat to 79k, you can get it up to 96% with the same safety margin.
