Posts by asiekierka

Quote from Speiger

1: True but then IC2 Could not run by itself. So that solution is invalid.
2: So a laggy way of doing it.
3: that convertion is fine to me but i would increase it and make it a double sided thing (so two differend convetion ratios)
4: Yeah partly true but still its not easy to do.. Also max Input can not be done by RF since it has no Transferlimit api...
5: I AM TALKIN ABOUT THE API NOT INTERNAL STUFF FROM BC AND BC STUFF IS NOT COMPATIBLE TO OTHER MODS. Also for every connection request it has to access the tileEntities and compare them. With a TileEntity Parameter (which could be provided with this) would it be much easier...
6: How much energy went through cables (average per tick, or average in total or average in a since active), Entity Damage, and burning all parts if to much energy sends through? Because even in the April version it exploded only the first part of the grid that had to much. In IC2 it burns all parts that the energy flows through and they are to weak...

Display More

1. So IC2 could make their own cables.
4. Of course it has a transferlimit API! It's called "simulate".
5. Sure it is! All RF mods care about is whether they get energy from itself, or to itself, or nothing. RF does not care what the cable is, it can even be an entity flying through the block (Geko's Lasers). Also, what connection request? BC caches everything.
6. The April version had a bug. In Complication, everything burns. Entity damage can be done very easily and "how much energy went through cables" is easy to do, as BuildCraft already calculates the average per tick for rendering.

Quote from Speiger

First Everyone who Says: RF is the Answer to all the problems. That would Save IC2 from being dead answer me these questions:
1: How does that solve the EnergyNet problem? IC2 Would merge the Broken Enet over to RF and then it would be there.
2: How does it work with the Old IC2 MultiBlock API?
3: How do we balance the Energy? And no 1EU - 4RF Balance is not enough because the original devs did not think of the time factor (intentionally or not but still they did not think of it)
4: How do we make Voltages? I mean yeah its possible with RF but still most of the weak RF Stuff would not work with the HV stuff since its capacty would be two low. And you guys would be annoyed.
5: How do we support the IC2 Color API? I know classic has that implemented only but still IC2 Cables can be split by using Colors on cables.. The Problem is the RF API is to simple to support something like that... How do we do that?
6: How do we support RF without losing any IC2 Feature? (EU Excluded)

I bet almost nobody of the RF Hypers (even modders will have trouble) can answer good on these questions...
And i do not want: A GOOD Answer... Not a hype answer...

Second: RF is not the Solution. For me RF is Equal To AOL the old program when you installed it you had to completly reinstall your pc to deinstall it...

Display More

I see you're putting yourself on a pedestal. It's not very wise to consider oneself the smartest who has beaten all other minds.

1. Easily. The Enet problem is only on the side of the cables - if another mod provides its own, working cables, IC2's issue is solved.
2. This would likely require a small tick handler, but it is doable.
3. 1EU - 10RF was what the April Fools version did. 1EU - 4RF was achieved in a rather easy way - by comparing energy generation output and making sure it's equal. The time factor was not taken into account for power conversion.
4. Have you watched Direwolf20's BC8 April Fools spotlight? This would be a bit more annoying with other RF mods (but can probably be solved on the pipe's side), but you can just use time as your second parameter. The amount of calls you can do to receiveEnergy() is not at all constrained.
5. Have you ever used a Paintbrush on a BuildCraft Kinesis Pipe since BuildCraft 6.1.5 released in November 2014?
6. Like what? Vague fearmongering "hype questions" are as bad as "hype answers".

You seem to combine the API with the mods which typically implement such API. This is a terrible mistake, and not one I would expect from a reasonably experienced modder - an API is usually just an interface, really.

Quote from Delet3r

It struck me as odd that if IC2 and BC were working together, why was BC taken by surprise by the announcement, and had to 'rush' their announcement? Sounds like a reason to explain why two big announcements would happen on the same day...

I thought IC2 was going to announce the RF thing later... we were preparing our own announcement, but then IC2 posted it too early and we had to figure something out. I guess I can blame the IC2 devs for wanting to steal all the hype, however it kind of backfired, didn't it?

Quote from CovertJaguar

This is only true because SpaceToad could not be trusted to manage any API ever and was bound and determined to destroy MJ's uniqueness and make it into a worse clone of RF. I didn't feel like going along for the ride so me and Railcraft got off the train.

Even then, over a year of damage was far too much to ever get MJ resurrected with BC continuing to stay relevant. It'd take another major event the scale of the RF move for MJ to come back. But maybe there's another way?

Quote from Speiger

No Asie. Buildcraft should have simply changed their EnergyAPI a bit and everyone would have supported it still..
The main reason why people left was because the API was simply: You have to do it our way and thats it...
If you wanted to make a converter you had to constantly drain the Energy out of the custom battery in the old system to make it work.
A simply IC2 API like thing: Receiver and Sender would have been enough... Switching to RF was the same solution but you got ride of what BC was worth for. Its own uniqe power system with Explosions...

Explosions were only removed in BC 6.3.0, 2 months after moving to RF.

As for "everyone": the BC 5.0 API (outdated for 6 months by the RF moving date) was supported by Forestry, RailCraft, Applied Energistics 2 and OpenComputers, not counting BC addons. The BC 6.0 API was supported by Applied Energistics 2 only.

Quote from Reika

You have said otherwise in the past.

https://www.reddit.com/r/feedt…_moving_buildcraft_to_rf/

Design-wise, sort of, but it was RF or death for us - our ecosystem is far smaller than IC2's.

Quote from Reika

Combine that with how asie said that ditching MJ was perhaps the biggest mistake in the history of BuildCraft, and I think you are making a very serious mistake if you care about IC2 as a mod defined by its playstyle and design rather than sheer popularity.

Ditching MJ was nowhere near the biggest mistake - it was actually a good decision in hindsight, as it means the mod still exists and can be enjoyed. One of the biggest mistakes was probably the lockdown of the MJ API by CovertJaguar, which is the single event that created RF in the first place and caused BuildCraft's downfall.