I actually prefer the idea of a total reactor overhaul.
The 'core' chamber for the fuel, a series of blocks that form a thermal conductance loop; a steam generator and a 'cooling' block of somekind (which 'pumps' heat from one side to the other). Steam-power would be the 'pressure' differential in heat from hot side to cold side of a component. Insert that other proposal's different steam generator rankings here.
Actually why not just use 'machine blocks' as the conductance line?
Yeah, I'm not sure how realistic that would be... seems like it might /just/ be possible... I can see those requiring power (without converters bluetricity from RP2 solar panels; requires 8 brick blocks for the alloy furnace), but am unsure how much or what recipes would be involved for the components.
Nope, transposers/fillers treat the obsidian pipe as a solid block and won't output into it.
You /can/ however use the feature of tubes that treat abrupt endpoints as 'destinations' to have them spit out their load directly on to an obsidian pipe. Just set up a little enclosed drop area and you'll be fine.
Wow, it's /really/ hard to tell that the luminators are lighting things up when they're near torches. I suggest a texture fix for the next version that has a darker line inside representing the non-opaque tube/filament.
After reloading, I too observe the following bugs in 1.337 as released:
1) Solar panels generate nothing at any time; even freshly placed ones (no sun icon in solar panel dialog)
2) Luminators place, but do not seem to do anything except absorb power.
3) That generator recipe someone else noticed.
I can confirm that. Thank you for filing /this/ bug. I discovered an error I made this morning (forgetting to update symlinks after staying up -way- too late waiting for release).
I've updated the server's version of IC2, however I removed all the addons until they've been cleared for 1.337.
IC2.cfg currently has general.explosionPowerNuke and general.explosionPowerReactorMax, why not also add general.wrenchRate and general.wrenchElectricRate which accept a float between 0.0 and 1.0 to indicate the chance of success?
My plans to build a reactor are still delayed on RP2's next release, but I do wonder how much the cooling of a bucket has been changed... if buckets only do 100 now that could make things /drastic/.
Great work! Just make it super special and people will take this over RP2's frames any day.
And i too agree that RP2 is a bit too cheap. Eloraam should make an optional IC2 module that makes all RP2 stuff require EU's to operate. Even the circuitry! (At 1 EU/minute per item or something)
Sort of like how redstone engines are a bit too cheap in buildcraft? You're only seeing very basic ground work tools. The things that operate on a physics level like your toilet flushing, or spring loaded safety systems that kick in without any command; or with just the most basic commands (filters/retrievers?). You might have noticed, if you use the items, that progressively more useful components require more energy to operate. The sorting machine that tags the items for various colored pipe destinations is said to use blutricity (IIRC). In buildcraft diamond pipes, gold pipes, etc operate for free.
Yeah. You can step up directly from combined generator feeds I don't know how that works if the link cable has loss; I've never built lossful links for transmission since my first flirtations with HV cable, an MFSU and a single remote miner. Did -not- go well, packet wastage.
Gold pretty much has a loss one every 3 blocks so ~20eU/t out of 128 would be the estimate for that distance. However if you went to glass fibre wire not only could you use much longer distances and bigger packets (1 loss across the whole length out of 512) you could /also/ carry more or for the low cost of a single MVTF pair completely regenerate the signal for zero loss (but fixing your transmission volume at the capacity of 2048 eU/t unless you add additional transformers)
I'm not sure about how /low/ tech it will be... but maybe the frames that RP2 ( http://www.eloraam.com/ ) will be releasing in the next version (next day or two is the current expectation for release, might be longer) could be used to create a bridge that /moves/ from one area to another.
OVs make 9x9 holes (centered block + 4 out on each side in a square). You aren't assured a diamond every hole, but the average does work out to somewhere around like 0.5 to 1 diamond per hole if you methodically punch out an entire field. Or at least that's an offhand number; it could be higher...
grammarnazi attack or what?
your demonstrated complete lack of intellect with insults and gramma appeals, just stfu.
to transport 60eu over 32 cable you need only single LV transformator every 19 blocks and nothing more, since it support up to 128eu per frame.
you dont need HV or glass or gold or fiber, just single lv every 19 blocks.
Actually that isn't true in several ways. First you need a /pair/ of transformers to regenerate/re-boost the signal. Second copper's lossless distance is 4, not 19 (Nothing is only lossless up to 19 actually; both tin and glass cable go 39 w/o loss). Third the limit over copper IS 32eU/t packets, due to the cable length limit of 4 the /practical/ limit of power across copper is actually 512 (you can encase the endpoints of each 4 length segment with transformers in stepup/stepdown pairs and each /pair/ of up/down TFs can shoot 4x32 packets; 4 of /that/ is 512). However /still/ by the time you reach the practical limit of point 3 you /really/ will have wanted to start spending diamonds /anyway/ since the materials used to build out your system would have easily required enough mining to /make the bloody cable/ or produced more than enough material to synthesize industrial diamonds.
It depends on the resources you're extracting. I'm going after the basalt and marble added by RP2 which easily doubles total power consumption and recovered resource volume. However a single miner back in IC2 only times would consume around 1M eU on average (note, sometimes it was very rich in minerals and that was higher, sometimes it was worse and lower). Generally with a quad miner you'll want 4 lapotronics for fully equipped miners. The H / I configuration for wiring is also about the most effective (any more miners and it becomes too much of a pain, plus you can no longer fit the mining op in to a single container)
However I'll probably switch to a line of RP2 frame for future mining. I think 8 miners across sounds about right and that will be around 192eU/t. At 72x9 blocks of mining it should also be fairly effective. More so with the spider-web fixes.
I'd like to see your math demonstrating how you'll have less loss via copper across a 60m vertical wire when attempting to transmit the output down a 60m vertical line.
I think Xaiier understands what I was trying to say before.
It's easier than you'd think. You send /multiple/ 32eU/t packets at the same instant. There are limits, each TF pair for a reboost can only support 4x the underlying wire maximum packet size. This means you'll need more pairs of transformers. Above a given point it's just cheaper to go to glass if for no other reason than your sanity (actually the fact that you'd more or less be making multiple cables the other way is why)
i've got a tendency of powering miners with MFSU's and lapotron crystals when I do use them. Course I really don't use them much at all with BC quarries, just once in a while when i'm running low on something and don't want to wait for the quarry to find more.
I don't know about anyone else but I use a *lot* more tin than I do copper. Got lots of copper lying around (like 4 rows of a diamond chest) and only a little tin.
Yes, but I tend to go directly from single miner to quad-miner + MFSU at the same time.
I really hope that, like the reactor thermometer addon between the last two versions, this works with the next.
I can live without reactor thermometer for a bit, but a non 100% electric wrench rate actually introduces a mental transaction cost for any machine placement, movement, and re-arrangement.
First, try disabling sounds in your .minecarft/config/IC2.c... whatever it was file.
Second, in more general terms, check that you have the latest versions that will work with 1.8.1 of everything.
Third, from what I hear (on www.industrial-craft.net ) IC 1.337 is almost out...
