Posts by Pyure

Quote from SpwnX

Those unhappy with the defaults can always use the config though.

The default should cater to the majority (semi-hardcore players) that would like pollution to affect things, but not drastically and any consequences should be remediable with a cost.

I'm not convinced this helps bear at all. His point (and its valid) is that not everyone wants or is able to wade through configurations. Its not always 100% enough to say "you can just config it."

Generally speaking, its a good enough solution for me that that's exactly what I'd say, but if even the GT home crowd finds it lacking and there are plausible alternatives, I'm open to adding more user-friendly options.

In this case, I might ask a user to open a config and change the GLOBAL_POLLUTION_IMPACT from "LOW" to "MEDIUM" or "HIGH" or something, rather than tweaking a bunch of settings individually.

Quote from bear989

I have apologize again but what do you call hardcore? making everything as hard and miserable on yourself as possible? I see hardcore GT as using it as implomented by Greg or now Ya'll. not using other mods to bypass mechanics and nerfs, or exploiting vanilla mechanics, like iron and gold farms, un-maned spawner traps, and so on.

I feel the same way. In a lot of areas you just can't do much about it. Some exploits are just universal and we try to pretend they don't exist.

One thing I'm constantly monitoring is areas where greg wasn't 100% perfect (it happens believe it or not) and there are now in-mod exploits. Another thing is extremely common cross-mod exploits.

Do I care what GT + RotaryCraft exploits exist? Nope. (Everything+RotaryCraft is an exploit.)
Do I care about GT + Buildcraft? Yep, because these mods grew up together and their interactions happen an awful, awful lot. (And no, its not my overriding concern, just something I have to keep an eye on)

Quote from SpwnX

Balance would be having all energy sources (that apply) be affected equally by pollution and slightly inequally based on realism (for example a diesel generator being a bit more pollutant than a gas generator, but not that much more).
The heavy differences (nerfing lava to ground or left alone or even making a certain energy source pollution free) should be done by players (modpack makers) themselves via configs.

On paper that sounds lovely, in practice its open to a lot of speculation, and the result isn't necessarily going to make Bear happy.

Quote from willis936

Pyure: I'm getting exactly 60 B/s of SHS for 4.5 B/s HC. I don't remember your numbers but I was under the impression that "double" would be 60 B/s SHS for 6 B/s HC

Weird.
Going by the numbers I posted several pages ago, if I provide 4500 mb/s HC, I'd expect to get 4500 / 2 * 20 = 45000 mb/S of SHS.

I'll be home in 6 hours, I'll have to test it again. :\

How are you getting your numbers-per-second?
When you mouse-over the steam in the gui of the output hatch, what value do you see in the tooltip?

Quote from bear989

my only other request is to find a balanced way to implement it for the whole community, not just implementing it as a tool for modpack makes,

Explain "a balanced way to set things on or off" please? I'm not sure what you're requesting here.

The notion of making it configurable is the only way to make it balanced for a "whole community". Since the hardcore players want stuff like lava nerfed into the ground, and other players want it completely left alone. Is balance finding the middle ground, or trying to give everyone a truly positive experience?

For what its worth, I'm open to leaving it in an extremely friendly configuration by default, and letting people crank up the difficulty themselves if they want to.
I'm also open to looking into different overall mode packages, similar to Forestry, so that you can just change one thing to make a big swathe of changes. But that would be a later change.

Quote from SpwnX

Dirty water would be a different water fluid block, not regular water blocks. That way any mod can pump it.
Dirty water bucket and bottles would have to be added by GT too to prevent those problems.

There's fuzzy areas in my knowledge here, but I don't think these things are as simple (plausible) as they seem on the surface.

Bottles are weird, and relying on other mods to whitelist liquids for their pumps is sketchy.

Quote from SpwnX

Plasma is fusion tier tech, they shouldn't be affected by pollution and don't make sense to use oxygen either because plasma energy generation doesn't look like to be a chemical reaction in the first place. You're not burning plasma with oxygen to produce heat or anything of the sort

Ok so you're saying I can just ignore the plasma turbine because it won't be affected by pollution in the first place. Makes sense.

Quote from SpwnX

Do both then. Dirty water on environment that poisons (or even kills if the water is too polluted) any entity that comes in contact with and blockage of "regular" water on recipes.

Ok but its the other half I can't think of a way to do. Can you imagine if your lake was full of dirty water blocks, and you tried to pick them up with a BC pump? An enderio pump? A simple bucket or bottle?
(the bottle would almost certainly just transform it into pure water btw)

I could probably make the GT pump work with it, but that is a nasty, nasty, horrible hack.

Quote from bear989

in ability to reverse the pollution, and to stay at a particular age if you choose to.

Ok good I can work with this.

One thing I have emphasized from the start is that the numbers have to be configurable by players/modpack makers. If you think only coal burners should emit pollution, do that. If lava should emit pollution, and twenty times as much, do that. If LV machines should, add them in. I don't really care which machines should generate pollution and to which degrees, I just need to provide the scaffolding and coinflip some defaults.

Ultimately we're targeting modpack designers here, and we want flexible tools in their hands so that the mechanics work for both hardcore and casual scenarios.

Another thing I mentioned is that there's no reason we can't have a pollution cleaner which is ALSO configurable. I personally wouldn't use it, but there's no reason it can't exist. I forget who raised this: if it was Axle, he already successfully convinced me it was a positive contribution.

It would be a SECOND phase addition because it is not, in and of itself, a CORE mechanic. But it WILL be there.

Quote from willis936

Pyure: I'm getting exactly 60 B/s of SHS for 4.5 B/s HC. I don't remember your numbers but I was under the impression that "double" would be 60 B/s SHS for 6 B/s HC

Latest version?
Any integrated circuits?

Quote from bear989

+I am not attacking anyone especially you Pyure, I am just trying to have a sane discussion on the implementation of pollution. the main difference as I see it between your ideas and Axles is forced progression, and game play, rather than an obstetrical to over come that will encourage progression. I also never said that everything needed to be perfectly coded on roll out. no one has that I have seen, we are stating over all vision. If any of what we hope for is impossible to implement then fine, but that should make a reason for electrical machines to create pollution, rather than burners of carbon based fuels. I have stated many times here and in my videos that I can't code and those of you that do I admire for the ability. that being said making things for the whole community rather than just a small group should be, in my opinion, the best way to do things. unless making a separate addon, witch is then optional rather than hard coded in. one last thing, the only difference between an argument and a discussion is the inability to listen to other opinions.

Let me attack this from a different angle mate.

Can you explain in two sentences or less why you think the design as described above would force you to do anything, more so than the "stopping and hindering" you mentioned with respect to axle's grand scheme?

Quote from Drawfox

And guys, I don't want to touch this again, but if pollution is a way to encourage less machine spamming, the 2xEU/tier consumption (and the decreased generators efficiency) encourage us to spam;
Will we have to choose between pollution and efficiency or cleanness and inefficiency? Or all that will have an overhaul as well?

That said, as a regular (solo) player, the only machine I needed to spam was 16LV generators, before I built my large Turbine, because GT kinda forced me to do it. I love how the Large turbine is more efficient than those LV ones, really felt like an upgrade. Would be better if I was encouraged to change LV turbines to MV, and MV to HV before going to the Large Turbine (hint: change turbines ef. from (85,75,66) to (66, 75 and 85) ). I would feel more like I am progressing.

The only other thing that might force me to spam machines again, it is the fusion reactor, because Deuterium and tritium REQUIRES LV machines to process having a positive gain EU gain. And I hate this design.
Give me a efficient Multiblock machine to process those, and I will fell like I'm progressing (the processing array is still spam machine to me).

100% agree in every respect.

Quote from SpwnX

I'm just discussing ideas, if they're implementable, nice. If not, detail a bit why they can't.
I don't want you or anyone to fully implement the dreams or whatever of everyone in one go. You're human and you can only do so much with your time on your hands.
By now I am far too used to how "slow" is GT and IC2 development are, I don't expect you to be any faster, not at all. Afaik you also have a job too, so even less time.

I'm still against simplistic pollution though, its better if people have a more flavorful experience, even if that takes more time to be developed.

What the hell do you mean by "simplistic" pollution here? It really smacks of "I don't get all my ideas in, so its not good enough." Nothing here you're talking about runs against the grain. Its all simplistic.
From a coding perspective: You HAVE to start with vanilla. We add flavours iteratively. In industrial jargon, its the development life cycle.

Quote from SpwnX

charcoal,Lava,oil,gas issue: Make their generators burn less efficiently as pollution rises (lower oxygen quality).

Ok, done? Its already in the design.

Quote from SpwnX

LHE doesn't suffer from this,

Essentially already in the design? People have been asking for LHE+Lava to have some penalty. Who knows what degree it will be, it already emits pahoehoe as a byproduct after all. So, if there's a penalty, it will be negligible.

Quote from SpwnX

big boilers and large turbines can accept fluid oxygen to boost efficiency back to max

We can possibly do the oxygen thing if someone explains why it makes tons of sense, and why it adds gameplay value. I don't mind it as a pollution workaround because acquiring the oxygen generates its own problems.

The idea itself also has a minor design conflict that would need to be resolved: the plasma turbine accepts various chemical liquids for reactions. Currently Oxygen is NOT one of those inputs. If we implemented this, either
a) we could never use oxygen in a reaction, or
b) we would have to exclude the Plasma variant from the "large turbines that need liquid oxygen" scheme.
or c) we'd have to design a new hatch, or a method to flag a hatch as the oxygen hatch

(b) would be the best option, but "exceptions to the rule" should always be a last resort in game design.

Quote from SpwnX

Water-based recipes refuse to work if pollution is too high, requiring distilled water (there are alternate recipes that use them, you can add something to block the regular water recipe I believe?)

THIS is what I mean by a "can do" implementation of dirty water. It works. If there's a pollution factor nearby, machines can't use normal water anymore. Keep it on the board.

NEGATIVES: It totally lacks Axle's flavour. Its only 10% in the fun direction whereas I'd prefer to take it further: where real, dirty water is actually a thing.

Quote from Briareos81

@Blood

The visuals are secondary for me( but for and exloding reactor they are awesome:D). But i like how i works codewise. Basicly these are clouds of Entites which effect the enviroment like real "pollution"particles would do. My Idea would be that some machines in GT become Pollutionproviders which emit those clouds based on their workload. This would effect everything from Water to Air and Players etc....

Waterblocks get polluted -> machines wont get the right watertype

Airblocks get polluted -> Solars and other Machines loose efficiency

Crops die / grow slower

Display More

Good ideas Briareros.

Funny aside: "Clouds of entities": this is nearly identical to something Blood wants to do, and it bears a disturbing resemblance to the acid-clouds that we've discussed adding. There's absolutely no reason this can't happen. In fact Blood will probably thump me if I don't, and then he'll just do it himself.

Someone (Axle?) mentioned the affects of air pollution on solar in particular already: I think this is a really good idea. Its less effective on servers because people tend to skip generators that only work during the day, but that's not a big deal.

Negatives:
I'm not convinced we can do polluted water. I alluded to this previously, but there are some odd repurcussions if we try to do a different "type" of water. I am a huge fan of the idea but the cost/benefit analysis throws up some massive red flags. Once the core mechanics are in place I plan to revisit this and see if there's a "can do" implementation that makes sense.

Quote from bear989

I agree that there are many players that try to exploit certain mechanics, and should take the time to advance or work within the spirit of the game/mod. BUT again forcing someone to play a different way that we see as right is WRONG! making it harder to do such large scale setups make sense, but forcing it on them isn't in my opinion. personally I would do a TFC style no bone mealing of trees/plants myself, witch would stop most tree farming, other than the forestry and maybe a few others. and don't get me started on MFR, to me trying to play with it and GT is just bad form. so if someone is doing that, then there is really no helping them. also Axle's idea of pollution would defiantly help with stopping, or hindering this kind of game play with the air pollution caused from burning all that charcoal.

You're conflicting with yourself. Axle's idea is the same as mine. 100%.

I charted it out last night before I went to bed. They follow the exact same design path.

The differences? His is broader. Even in the target final phase, his is broader. He has ideas that cannot be implemented sanely because of either code limitations or design breakage. In every other respect, they're identical. They both have the exact same effect: nobody is forced to do anything, everyone is subtly nudged. You're saying I "force" people, but he only "stops and "hinders them". Screw anyone who thinks this is fair.

Some of the ideas being tossed around to address treefarm abuse are good but they've been considered and rejected for code limitation reasons.

Quote from willis936

Here is another fun fact:
it only takes 4.5 B/s of hot coolant to make 60 B/s of superheated steam in the LHE. Much like lava this input is lower than expected for the given output. I'm not complaining but in this case the difference is significant (25%).

How does this play against the numbers I posted earlier in the week? I pointed out that the LHE seems to be doing what its supposed to do, minus the x2 difference. Does your findings correspond? (Sorry, I can't triple check atm, I'm at work)

Quote from Sapient

Сoefficient can be 2x not 4x, or even 1.5x. Numbers does not matter. All tiers should have same amount of eU per item.

I agree, but iirc the machine works on energy-per-time. To make it the same amount of eU per item, either the energy needs to drop, or the speed needs to increase. Often we can't make the energy drop due to tiering reasons, which leaves us with increasing the speed.
Feel free to correct any misconceptions here, I haven't looked at this code.

Quote from Sapient

PS
I'm interested in idea of pollution, but it shouldn't be the way to force players to go to next tier. Next tier should be better by itself.

Good news: no pollution plans force anything on anyone. Forced tiering is heavily linear, lacks dynamicism, and constitutes what we called a "hard control." I only develop soft controls.

In this case, a player might notice a small decrease in industrial performance if the only way they generate power is lava, and if they try to produce two-to-three tiers above their current tier worth of lava power. So, trying to produce HV-type power during the steam age.

Since nobody needs to use lava to get anywhere, they're not forced to do anything. They can still use lots of lava. Or some. Or none. I personally use mostly filthy charcoal and a bit of solar during the bronze age. Creosote and coal coke if RC is present.

Quote from Blood Asp

Soo much text about pollution...

I discussed about that with pyure weeks ago and was more or less fine with the ideas. That treefarms are used as primary fuel production until fusion by most players is something i personally dislike and the pullution seems like a sensable way to change that.

My own fist idea was only using poison and stuff against entities and later adding some visuals once the base is done. But that has the downside that players tend to work around the effect and not going the intended way. Maybe they will simply place energy gen far enough from the player so the effect is not felt anymore?

Pyures idea about affecting also the machines is an easy and effective way to prevent players from going around the mechanic, so i'm not opposed. One main point i would like to see but not yet know how to programm is slowing down the growth of plants like trees, crops and anything else like that.

Display More

I feel like a character in the walking dead, standing on the roof of a van surrounded by zombies.

Quote from SpwnX

So the majority agrees that pollution hindering you tech wise is bad. It is unrealistic, too simplistic for GT gameplay and uninteresting, its flat out boring.
Does that simplistic pollution mechanism inspire you to improve?
Yes it does, but not in a good way, since it doesn't feel you're beating an actual obstacle but a mere game rule that you must follow or you'll be penalized.

Making pollution harm stuff and make environment hazardous is not pure flavor. It is an - interesting - obstacle that has serious consequences if not dealt properly.
Want to spam low tech lava boilers? Let people go crazy with it, however they'll face problems that will not stop most of his/her factory from running, but will definetely prevent him/her from living there.

Display More

On the other hand, the great news is that the majority agrees that the pollution scheme is interesting, inspires you to improve, and is flat out exciting. Everyone on this thread? Nope, there's a few really pissed off people who won't tolerate the fact that I can't code all their conflicting hopes and dreams on initial rollout.

Friendly reminder folks: People said they didn't want to discuss it here anymore. This is the last time I'm indulging in destructive criticism on this thread. If I say I can't do environment impacts during initial rollout and people lose their shit...screw em. There's a long lineup of genuinely good peeps who have constructive things to contribute. I code for them. There seems to be an unfortunate number of people here who prefer to use insults and destructive comments. Tearing peeps down is lame. You're no longer involved in my discussions on the topic.

Quote from bear989

If there is more to your ideas than already expressed, please share them. I am always willing to listen to other's ideas, even if they don't jive with my own. Even the three of us on Axle's server that have spoken up play very different ways, but we try to keep our way of playing from impacting others. Everything Forced by GT has had a reason for it with a benefit. less planks from logs forces you to make a saw or deal with the nerf. Then at higher tiers you get ways to get extra planks from the same logs. Circuits in GT5 is forced to get to the next tier, but at that next tier you get better, materials, more byproducts, and better speeds. you can stay at bronze age forever, if you choose, but there are benefits to get to the electrical age, and so on. I don't see as the pollution you are talking about fits into that style, that we all have come to expect from GT. In my opinion if you see this as a one sided idea why not make it as a addon rather than implementing straight into the game.

Read above. See where I outline my ideas, and see where I indicate strongly positive or fence-sitting opinions on various ideas. Anything I like, I'll add unless experience teaches me I can't add it despite liking it.

I have no concerns that its a one-sided idea. These are mechanics compiled after months of discussion. As a developer, I work iteratively: Get the core mechanic in place first. Then round it out. Blood asp has ideas about freaking pollution clouds that roam around causing shit. First things first though.

It makes sense to keep it disabled by default. Making it an addon is an idea I'm floating, but frankly I want to stay directly helping GT5u itself as much as possible.

Quote from bear989

I hope this will help you not to feel ganged up on, and not take your ball and go home.

I think I'll manage.

Seriously, I'm taking my pollution ball back to camp where people give a shit, but that's like 5% of the big picture. People care about fusion generation, chemical reaction recipes, logistics and stuff; pollution is pretty small game.

edit:
"Everything Forced by GT has had a reason for it with a benefit. less planks from logs forces you to make a saw or deal with the nerf. Then at higher tiers you get ways to get extra planks from the same logs. Circuits in GT5 is forced to get to the next tier, but at that next tier you get better, materials, more byproducts, and better speeds. you can stay at bronze age forever, if you choose, but there are benefits to get to the electrical age, and so on. I don't see as the pollution you are talking about fits into that style, that we all have come to expect from GT. In my opinion if you see this as a one sided idea why not make it as a addon rather than implementing straight into the game. "

I'm glad we share the same ideas of how progression should work, and how each step should both encourage you and instruct you to improve.

np.

If anyone here cares, I don't think I posted it here yet: This is what that fork + pull request amounts to:
http://imgur.com/gpEjAsY
(Applies to input/output bus/hatches, plus mufflers)

Next I need to look into math problems with the LHE and fusion mechanics.

Quote from axlegear

Unless i'm mistaken, this is Bloody Asp's thread? Wouldn't he be the one to decide to close it or not? Or decide how GT5U progresses? Or am I completely mistaken on who's developing it?

Sorry, my bad for lack of clarity.

The topic "What are you planning to do with pollution" someone asked me several pages ago is closed. Obviously I'm not trying to close this thread (on the contrary I need discussion on several github issues and this is one of the places I'd typically do it)

Blood Asp is the lead developer for GT5u. He's been trying to give me the same power (on the main branch) and I don't want it.
All I'm willing to do is submit pull requests. So I'll be going down the list of issues and trying to address what I can one by one.

As a learning opportunity: A "pull request" is when I write code, and ask the lead developer to "pull" it into the main codebase.

Here's a list of stuff that needs attention:
https://github.com/Blood-Asp/GT5-Unofficial/issues

Note blood's name in the url. Anyone can have a "fork" of this code. For instance, I added a bunch of changes a couple nights ago:
https://github.com/pyure/GT5-Unofficial

(If you're curious: the input/output hatches are now more informative in their names and tooltips)

No worries. Understood, I suspect you really are trying. Topic closed.

Quote from axlegear

That's what i'd reccomend. It's pretty large, this camp that dislike your super-simplified polution variable. It really, truly, does not add to gameplay. I understand that you play GT for completely different reasons than everyone else, your points are made. However, I am trying to point out the larger community of GT players who play for realism and immersion and would be negatively impacted by a ham-handed pollution approach. I'd like to quote a PM from bear here:
"[8:43:56 PM] bear hamman: if pollution gets implemented the way pyre is talking I will disable it in my SP world. Forced progression is not right
[8:45:39 PM] bear hamman: we all play our own ways and there is enuff force progression in the curcuits. witch I don't mind. but this is just forcing players to play someone elses way"

Your way does not feel balanced (and whether it is or not is another argument entirely- one I also disagree with, but that's a digression)- it feels to players like a shoehorned requirement. This will feel aggressive and make players feel victimized. It's a discouragement, not an encouragement. A penalty, not a reward. A problem, not an obstacle. Does this make sense?

Yep, I'm convinced. I have a in-depth, well-streamlined and designed pollution mechanic that adds an awful lot to gameplay. Its a strong encouragement, let's players make informed decisions, providing risk/rewards that players enjoy. I can certainly see where you're misunderstanding the design and that's a shame, but we can't do much about that.

I understand my large crowd doesn't share the same values as your large crowd, and I'm happy to remove my crowd-sourcing on the topic from this forum, no worries. Consider it closed. For those who have voiced support and want to stay involved in the discussion, please pm me or hang around the infitech2 thread on the FTB forum. I strongly value all constructive opinions as always.

As a conciliation, phase 1 pollution will definitely be disabled by default. As another, once we start adding the secondary stuff, I'll probably mention it here so I can get an idea of whether it should be enabled by default or not.

Quote from axlegear

Also, ignoring your attempts to get me to argue or feel bad, i'll note that my comment about 'suggesting coding is insulting' is meant generally, not specifically. Anyone could have said that to me, or anyone could have said that to someone else, and it would be the same. Telling people 'Do it yourself, then' is bad taste. That's all. It's not a personal attack, it's just a factually bad idea to do.. Think of it in another context. Say, you go to a grocery store, and the checkout person tells you to bag your groceries yourself, because it's not company policy to bag for you. (Which is the case for almost all stores, actually! Certainly wal-mart and target). However, how does that make the customer feel to be told that so flippantly? Pretty bad. Whether or not it's your intention, what we get from that response is 'I'm lazy, do it yourself'.

Yep that would suck. Good news though.

I'm not your checkout person. I'm not your bagging person. I'm not the janitor. I'm not anyone with a legal, moral, ethical or traditional reason to bag your groceries. I'm a random guy who wandered by, helped an elderly lady with her groceries, and was told by several passersby that I don't do it the way they want me to.

I share these designs because people were interested. I'd still like to keep people involved as much as possible. But that doesn't make me a slave: I'll code what I like for a) myself, b) genuinely good peeps, and c) nobody else.

Period.

I'm starting to observe a trend where more and more peeps on the IC2 forum seems to be leaning more in favour of an aesthetic or realistic pollution theme. Its running counter to the previous discussions I've had. But when even peeps like Spankx start to speak against the balanced design its hard to ignore and I have little interest in pushing balance on a crowd that doesn't want it.

What I'm probably going to do is simply disable pollution by default so nobody gets affected by it unless they explicitly want to, at least until I can be talked around to incorporating some of the peripheral ideas.

Alternatively I may modularize it and let someone else code a distinct, more colorful version. There's zero reason my version needs to be the Only True Way. Blood in particular has said he might do a version one day.