Posts by Omicron

It's not officially rated for 1.6.4, though. Until the developers do so, it does not "support" 1.6.4, and the devs will probably have a good reason to make that distinction.

Whether it "should just work" or not is an entirely different question.

In classic IC2 they were 0.25 EU/t.

Quote from Speleomantes

Oddly, most of the complicated stuff works properly, it's basic stuff that seems to be glitched.

Not glitched... simply not (re-)implemented yet.

It's probably not yet implemented. Many things are getting reworked. For example, they only recently (Build #218.) added tin cans back in, but while you can now make them, you still can't actually fill them with food.

Feature updates have slowed down in the last two days, I assume they're looking into a 1.6.4 port before continuing to add stuff. Supporting 1.6.4 is kind of important, even if IC2 doesn't add any worldgen structures itself.

The question is more: with the removal of heating cells, how do you reliably heat your reactor up, and more importantly, keep it hot? That'll require some very detailed design work, and not all cell combinations will be made workable. You'll need a cell layout that can be exactly matched by a cooling system - you can't go over, and overclocked vents will be difficult to use (many good designs involve overclocked vents that only don't melt themselves because there is no more heat to draw from the hull when their processing turn comes around).

And the second question is how to test EU/t, because last I checked (two days ago), the EU-reader didn't work with the new e-net.

Quote from steelstiletto

I have no clue how you can reliably come up with GT designs without the Java planner, you have some kind of magical mojo.

It's more a matter of using what tools are available, and when something's missing, making your own tools.

I started by reverse-engineering all the power and heat values for the various cells using ingame test reactors and the computercube, as you can see in my spreadsheet.

Second, using those values, I can reliably compute how much heat and EU/t any given combination of cells outputs. For example, the 3x3 grid of quad thorium cells in my sink reactor example contains four cells with two neighbours (at 20 EU/t, 48 heat), four with three neighbours (at 24 EU/t, 67.2 heat) and one with four neighbours (at 28 EU/t, 89.6 heat). So I just do 4x20 + 4x24 + 28 = 204, and 4x48 + 4x67.2 + 89.6 = 550.4. It's just grade school math

Third, I pull up the online reactor planner, and insert a dummy configuration of cells that outputs as close to 551 heat as possible, while fitting into the 3x3 space that the quad thorium cells will later occupy. The dummy doesn't have to occupy all 9 slots, the only thing that matters is that the heat output matches. Around that 3x3 space, I design a cooling system capable of handling the minimum 551 heat output while being cost-effective.

Finally, I go back ingame, grab the computercube and/or a live reactor, and test the cooling system I designed on the actual 3x3 grid of quad thorium cells. This final step is technically necessary because even with identical heat output, the dummy may in rare cases behave differently than the real cell layout because of the way reactors process components in single steps, left to right, row by row. In almost all cases it works out just fine though, so if you feel confident you can skip this part and just keep an eye on your production reactor during its first cycle.

Looks like it doesn't obey the damage value. Any dye will probably result in ink sacs (and hilariously enough, I don't think you can even scan ink sacs at this point...)

EDIT: Thunderdark just fixed this in Build #220, it would seem.

Depends on whether the recompiled server version gets along with the normal client versions. You're not just modifying a value at runtime, you're hardcoding something different. Potentially it may work, but at bare minimum you're going to run into the issue that the client still thinks the cost hasn't changed. Therefore, it will tick up to 100% in the mass fab without outputting a piece of UU-matter, and then either resetting to 0 and counting up again, or counting up past 100% until your server-side value has been reached.

If you recompile IC2 then you need to redistribute IC2 to all players too. There's no difference, except that IC2's filesize is larger, and you're breaking rules about not modifying and distributing closed source mods.

That's not a MkI then, sounds more like a MkIII.

You could take a page out of GregTech, and just build a small mod that hooks into the IC2 API to add one single machine that produces UU-matter in exactly the same way as the native mass fab, except that yours comes with a config file.

Well, I've been washing a lot of ores, so I have about 16 full stacks of dust... (ran a quarry, still haven't touched even half of the results).

That would make a bit over 2.5 stacks of CF dust... the question of course being how much actual construction work you can do in the world. In classic IC2 it used to be two CF sprayer shots per unit of foam, resulting in around 20-25 blocks IIRC?

And thanks a lot for the tip with just adding another foam dust to the canning machine, it drained all the tanked foam liquid into the sprayer.

Daaaamn why is that first 1-chamber not on the frontpage. It exploits a rarely-used feature (direct heat transfer from fuel rods to cooling units) in a way that allows you to get away with much less components than commonly needed.

The second though isn't really that good considering we have this for a 0-chamber: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…d83b78y8enonfoolys5g23280

You know, there's also the possibility that RTGs aren't meant to be the end-all of energy generation Maybe they're just meant as an option for you to stash away your nuclear waste. They don't need to be excellent, they just need to be decent.

IC2 already has too powerful and cheap passive energy input from too many sources. With the increased energy draw from machines in the experimental branch and the (admittedly needed) nerf to geothermals, it's getting to the point where any non-passive energy source except for nuclear is borderline incapable of powering anything at all, and you're forced to go with solar, wind and water as your only hope to keep a decent power income. Bit like GregTech, really, which had this huge cost for UU-matter but for a long time didn't add any useful power generation options, so you couldn't even make UU-matter without other mod's tools or spamming solar/wind. Nowadays with the big multiblock generators that's much improved.

I'm currently playing in a world that for the longest time has had only IC2, so I could focus on testing the mod (I later added in Buildcraft and Forestry and Railcraft). That meant no means whatsoever to teleport lava in from the nether, and no auto-treefarms to spam charcoal for generators. I was basically forced to choose between either not using the thermal centrifuge at all, or spending 90% of my playtime on running back and forth between the base and the nether with an inventory full of batteries. I opted for the former until I had a nuclear reactor setup (30,000 EU for a 11% yield boost is a pure luxury proposition anyway, if you already have a machine that does 100% boost for 800 EU).

Point is, I'd sooner see a more sensible solution / progression option for midgame conventional power (that doesn't rely on an external mod) than buffing existing passive generators even more.

Unless, of course, IC2 is now developed and balanced for the assumption that certain other mods are always present. That would be a very strange approach, though.

Depends on how the compact solars send their power. The LV arrays might for example send one bundle of 32 EU every 4 ticks instead of 8 EU every tick, to reduce load. And it makes sense too, considering it is built with a LV transformer that natively outputs 32 EU.

So if you have 7 of them you might end up with up to 224 EU going down the line in one tick, which will definitely overload a CESU.

1.6.3 failed and also breaks worlds (or rather, fails to prevent the breaking of worlds). Don't update to 1.6.3.

Mojang have already released 1.6.4, and Forge updated for it as well. Mods that add custom structures (Twilight Forest etc.) will need to update for 1.6.4.

Then you need to re-explore. A structure will only be saved once the chunk it is in has been loaded at least once in 1.6.4.

After you've visited all the structures you want to keep, THEN you can migrate your world to 1.7. Potentially. We still haven't seen how Forge and mods in general, and by extension the modpacks, will deal with the complete removal of item IDs and the complete rewriting of the core definition of what a block is and how it is checked...

The metal former recipes have been added to NEI recently, but nothing shows up for the tin cans. I can make tin cells with the metalformer, but those are not the ones I need.

Another question: I have two buckets worth of construction foam liquid in the right side tank of a canning machine. How do I get that into my CF sprayer? None of the modes seems to want to fill it.

Anybody figured out how to craft the tin cans for canning food in the canning machine? Or is that not yet (re-)implemented?

I'll be toying with MOX fuel as soon as I can get a reactor set up to produce some in my 1.6 world... unfortunately I don't have as much time to play as I'd like.

Okay so, MOX fuel.

Previously we noticed that through the normal uranium usage and recycling process, you get an ever-increasing pile of seemingly useless U-238.

However, MOX fuel consumes 3 plutonium and 6 U-238, and when recycled returns 3 plutonium back... plus 1 small plutonium. Meaning that MOX fuel never consumes any plutonium at all, but rather over time converts 54 U-238 into one plutonium.

So at the end of the uranium lifecycle you are left with no uranium at all and 100% pure plutonium, which goes into retirement in radioisotope generators. Neat.