Posts by X-Heiko

Sorry, but the only thing I can imagine that would be fun with antimatter is too useless to actually implement: a nuclear reactor component that is more potent and more heat-producing than regular uranium cells, so potent that you really need to know what you're doing... Imagine it'd blow a tremendous crater in the ground when you tried to put it in a reactor that's not cooled and pre-equipped with a few stacks of ice.

This sounds like something crazy, hardcore and fun to look at in Creative, but not something I'd consider worth using, thus not worth doing.

Apart from destroying bedrock, this suggestion only contains a machine that does "research". I've perceived the IC community as quite puristic when it comes to the principles of Minecraft, and there is no "research" for crafting recipes or special blocks there. After all, it's a design decision that the development team will have to take.

However, you do not suggest a single use for particle research apart from destroying bedrock. I've also perceived the IC community as very strict when it comes to suggesting a new machine and not giving a lot of uses for it. New machines and ores need loads of uses to even be considered. Had you thought of a biogas generator, the answer would be "no, make food burnable in regular generators instead" if the answer wasn't "go home, you n00b" anyway

Also, it's realistic to assume that a particle generator has few realistic applications, apart from letting us learn a lot about the universe. Making it a prerequisite for the Quantum Suit would not be a good idea, as we already have a machine that makes you need loads of energy before you can craft it.

Personally, I think we've reached a point where IC only needs an answer to new things that minecraft tosses at players. There's an answer to farming, potions, mining, machines... There's still none for enchanting, but generally, the amount of good ideas has really decreased lately. I think there's not much left to say for IC.

This sounds similar to windmills. Also, from what I've gathered, a neutrino trap is too "unrealistic" to fit the taste of this forum... IIRC, a huge water tank will only have enough neutrino collisions per week to generate a short flash of light that's not even visible with the naked eye.

Even if you change that: It's still "use this with space around it, and use it in heights", like with windmills.

However, personally, I like it.

This sounds like something the terraformer could do, no? I haven't found explicit mention of it in a wiki and I'm too lazy to test whether it's possible just for this post, but still, this could be one solution.

Also, I like the idea of an additional laser mode for that, but the laser is starting to get enough modes for its own GUI

Quote from GregoriusT

RUN A SEARCH BEFORE POSTING ALREADY MADE SUGGESTIONS!

Wait... you understood that? Could you translate that for me?

Tool modes are already implemented for wrenches and mining lasers, why not give the chainsaw an additional "no leaves" mode? It was nice plowing through them without filling up your inventory.

If I'm not mistaken, that'd be possible but very difficult.

Stairs and slabs alike!

I think an EU-powered minecart with a maximum speed that exceeds usual minecarts would fit better. Of course, you could just use both - a magnetizer and (specially crafted?) rails.

While it might be comfortable to use, it's a very special feature. If you add too many very special features into the mix, the mod will become un-overseeable. I don't think this machine would help much or even find very many people who use it in the first place - as implied before, most people who do IC2 are not too hesitant to do RP as well, if they want to automatize.

Generally, suggestions for "fix my particular" problems just add more blocks and items... in my opinion, at least.

Again, that's not what I'm saying or expecting. I am only and solely stating my opinion. I do not measure my opinion on how much I reap insults on it, but I also reject to measure my opinion on how much a single person agrees with it.

Entitlement? I am entitled to my opinion, and that's all I'm stating. If you think I'm assuming too much of a right to speak here (because I disagree with your master?)... Well, I'm not going to question your sense of democracy, but still: Calling an opinion less valuable than any other based on anything else than its logical value in argumentation, yes, that's dictatorial.

Disagreeing doesn't mean making it personal. I, for one, find it embarrassing that Alblaka's word may not be questioned or doubted. That's not what a mature culture of discussion is like. Again and again, all I'm saying is, that, unless provided with logical argumentation, saying "Alblaka's against it" is merely a reason for things to happen in IC2, but not an argument to justify them.

I've heard enough "it's not gonna happen ur way" arguments and am willing to end this discussion. It leads nowhere.

However true that may be, that doesn't mean I have to agree with every single decision he makes. I can agree with the majority of his decisions and still play the mod. Any game designer is an artist who, sooner or later, has to listen to his audience. A good artist may be one who does their own thing, but after all, I am entitled to say "this or that decision is not artistic", as a consumer.

And all I'm saying is: "just because Alblaka doesn't like it" is not a logical argument - this, of course, is not linked to what's gonna happen and what not. Specifically, I'm saying that it'd fit IC much more if there was an industrial alternative to enchanting, instead of just saying "Al be no like, it be no happen".

Quote from MagusUnion

It is valid, because that IS his personal opinion on the matter that I asked about first hand. Also, he will not allow a config. option for such a thing due to the level of dis-balance it causes...

It is correct, but invalid in my opinion. Deifying Alblaka's idea of balance is not my favorite kind of argument, it means to me as much as "that guy from the forum said it'd be sucky". An argument is an argument, but imbalance is a different question than "Alblaka just doesn't like it". To me, at least.

Quote from GregoriusT

X-Heiko

Apply the underlined Basicrules to this:

And you understand, why we are all pissed off, and wanting this:

I see the motivation, but I am sure the execution could be more mature. After all, we're all good guys here, right?
Also, I don't think the 20 post limit will achieve much more than 20 posts of spam per user who wants to suggest something. Having a suggestion forum means Sturgeon's Law all over the place, but that's how developing an idea works.

For those who wonder: It's "90% of everything is crap."

Well, with upgrade modules, I suppose you can easily disable their effects if they aren't powered.

Quote from DoomFruit

How about a second circuit recipe using gold instead of refined iron? It would be a realistic use of gold (as FenixR noted above).

I suggest something similar: Use gold wire instead of insulated copper wire for the contacts. That way you could save on rubber. However, you'd usually have enough rubber by the time you found gold. Still, why do circuits need insulated wires? Batteries, too...

Just asking: Isn't the next update going to utilize the official modding API, as in "we don't need a Forge hook but a way the API gives"?

You guys are being unfriendly. Yes, that suggestion has been denied already, but in what way does that justify being mean? A simple "use the search function, this suggestion has been denied, thread closed" would've done the trick.

Also, to add to the discussion: It's possible to enchant electrical tools with inventory editors if you must. I personally like to do that, but on the server I play, enchantments are generally handled very, very differently.

Finally, there's one argument I find invalid. "Alblaka is not fond of magical stuff". He's made a great mod, but why not leave the enchanting question to the player? We have our own play styles and that's good. Minecraft is about what players make from the world, not what the developers want the players to make. In this spirit, I might add that I find the bookshelves-around-enchanting-tables-a-must regulation embarrasing and unneccesary.

As for electrical tools, though, I suggest(ed before? Don't remember) craftable modules to add to the tools. Want "Efficiency V" on your diamond drill? Build a tier 5 drill engine upgrade and see it eating up more EU per mining operation. (Names of upgrade module and enchantment not final)

Instead of just kicking something out, IndustrialCraft usually gives you an own version of it that is beneficial in usage but needs an industrial infrastructure (bronze tools!). Why not with enchantments, too? That way, the whole weapon question would be easily solveable: Give your mining laser a "no terrain damage" upgrade and a scope.

Back to the point, however: It seems to be the style of this forum to yell at people who suggest things with any kind of ever-so-slight mistakes. I really would like to know why that is. You're not going to make people more mature by being immature to a few of them.

Just wanted to add: I got this mail, too.

I like the idea, I also like the idea (you didn't explicitly mention) of replacing enchantment capabilities with better non-enchantable equipment, but a "Nano-Bow" sounds silly to me in style. I think I'd prefer a poison mini-crossbow like in Deus Ex or something like that.

But then again, that doesn't mean I'm against the idea.