either be molten diamond (not even possible I believe)
It's possible. 3500°K I would say though. So it wouldn't really benefic though ^^.
Posts by MatLaPatate
-
-
. There should be upgradable chainsaw that you could upgrade like drill from Tier 1 (Simple chainsaw) to Tier 2 (Diamond chainsaw) or even Tier 3 (Iridium chainsaw).
Why not, but I'm not sure 3 Tiers are needed, because cutting wood isn't a major task. Unlike mining, which would makes any Chainsaw that is too expensive pointless.
2. There should be diferent tipes of forge hammer like made from copper, tin, lead, steel (if you have installed Railcraft).
Copper, tin and lead ? XD. And why not gold, when you're about that ?
For steel you have GT
3. There should be diferent tipes of cutter like made from copper, tin, lead, steel (if you installed Railcraft).
See above. And it's "types", not "tipes".
4. We have Nanosuit Tier 2 and Quantum suit Tier 4, but we are missing Tier 1 and Tier 3 suits.
You're (partially) right. Tier 1 and 2 shouldn't have armors. So the NanoSuit should be Tier 3.
5. Diamond Drill should be Tier 2 tool not Tier 1.
Agreed, but then it would logically have more EU stored in it, while the current number is perfectly fine to me.
Edit for BillJoehoho:
5) Obviously to nerf it, to make Bronze useful and that kind of stuff. And because the best would be Fuel-powered drill for lower levels (but actualy still cool in endgame for being faster 
) -
I'm still not sure what that thing is, but it seems it is something i should delete, agreed?
How so ? It's just a Milk Spring!
-
Our latest build
And you're proud of it ? Or maybe I'm just wierd ... no I don't think so
-
--snip--
Most of them got suggested already, of which tons of me ^^.
But making such a list without describing anything isn't really useful you know ? Also, I doubt UV or Radiowave would be very useful -
Well, Alpha is considered as the most dangerous IRL ... not directly, but when radioactive stuff spread, alpha radiations are extremly dangerous (when you inhale these stuff mostly). And Alpha rad. are also more likely to generate some others radioactive nucleus
(and thus contaminating the medium). -
You mentioned molten salts as a type of possible coolant for your reactor idea, why not also a molten fluoride thorium fuel?
Isn't Fluoride a "salt" ? Then that kind of reactor in the category of MSR already ^^. Fluoride is just the more-likely-to-be "Salt" atm.
That said, some wouldn't like it because it requires learning new things they didn't need before.
Yup, that's an issue. However, not only it wouldn't be that different (even noobs would understand than 2 adjacent cells being more efficient than 2 isolated cells would still work), but moreover you wouldn't have Heat/EU separation anymore (which is useless and a bit less realistic than Heat=EU once cooled) and the cooling system would be easier, given you could just invest more to be sure you'd cool your reactor (up to a certain point though).
I mean, the only components would be Cooling Cells (several types, depending on their size [capacity] and the material they use [capacity and heat transfer/sec]), exchanging components aka direct coolant (those with the higest rate of Heat/sec transfered to the second circuit, but almost no thermal capacities), and maybe Pump/Vents that wouldn't cool normal reactor down but transfer Steam [Or Hydrogen if you're running a high-temperature reactor that makes water to dismutate ... not to mention it's one of the riskiest setup, but also one of the better for EU/t].So yeah, I did not speak about that, but IMO vent should be kept for primitive reactors with only 1 circuit, aka those were water is directly injected in the reactor ... can be much more powerful (those would have a better Steam/Heat ratio), but a lot riskier.
-
And yes, some of the ideas to the top I completely disagree with. Automation for example is a wonderful thing and you shouldn't be punished for being able to use it successfully.
I didn't said automation shouldn't work. I just said that, to keep the fun running your reactors yourself, that'd be cool if some mechanics were implemented to ENCOURAGE people to keep switching/surveilling their reactors themselves. As an example, a special Fuel that'd be extremly powerful but that would have react randomly would be cool. That's not that I found automation should be punished. I'm just thinking non-automation should be rewarded :). Hey, what am I useful for if no team need me to run their reactor with a good efficiency ? ^^. Also, one of the issue with automation is the CC's issue: some people may say it's nerfed by the need of skills, but anyone can copy the setup (or code for CC) and get the same result.
Now, a thinking I had in a physic class (yup, it's hard to me to pay attention in class ^^):
The number I put for Pu/Ura/others were completly wrong ^^. I just made a bit of maths (ya know, suits, recurrency, differential equations and such ...), and found out that even the 4 Th 1 Thorium I took for the example would have exponetials N(t) and H(t) (functions of number of Neutrons and Heat ofc) ...
So this should really have a rework about the numbers ^^.As an example, Pu should be like:
[HD]=2, [ND]=0.1, [HF]=10, [NF]=0.75U235: [HD]=0.5, [ND]=0.01, [HF]=8, [NF]=0.3
U238: [HD]=0.5, [ND]=0.01, [HF]=none, [NF]=none (breeding into Pu239)
Th: [HD]=0.1, [ND]=0.0025, [HF]=6, [NF]=0.1So basically Th wouldn't run in "normal" reactors (or you could using Pu but it'd be better using something else with Pu for the gain in efficiency would be much higher), but could if you increase the capture rate of Neutrons from Nucleus (aka using Molten Salts for instance), given you trigger it with Pu.
Also, from a scientist point of view, I think efficiency shouldn't be "the more Heat/tick, the higher the efficiency". I mean, IRL you look for high neutron emission per sec because Neutrons emitter are kinda rarer, because you want a high output and because it increase a bit efficiency, but not that much.
So I think eff should be: sqrt(numberOfFissionperSec).
Which basically means that Fuel will also deplete faster if you use it in a more effective way ... but in the same way, not only it will last forever (like in a RTG) if you do only use radioactivity, which means all your cells are isolated (which isn't that cool given it would generate very few amounts of EU ^^), but also that the speed of breeding will depends on the Neutron/sec received by the cell (and breeding is also Transmutation!). And with my system, breeding would be much easier, since Depleted cells wouldn't emit heat when receiving Neutrons!However, cells with to-breed-fuels as well as usable fuels in it would last longer, assuming the Neutrons would both generate Fissions and generate Transmutations! Which means that stuff such as Ura235/238 would, depending on the % of each isotope, generate EU up to U325 lack, but then would turn into U238 cells, PARTIALLY BREEDED ALREADY (and that you could breed again).
Also, I think some Sci-Fi upgrades would be cool: what about a "Neutron Collector" Upgrade that you'd put on top of your reactor, and that would send Neutrons to the cells in your GUI ? Of course this would send very few amounts of Neutrons, but they would be "free" ^^. And ofc, the amounts of Neutron they would generate would depend on the size of the MultiBlock Collector/The amounts of collector if this isn't MB, but also on the Biome ... *Hint* End probably has lots of Neutrons flowing in it, isn't it the End of the Universe, aka the area with all those dead stars ?
*Hint*Last but not least: what about unifying Heat-based generators into a Nuclear-like thingy ? I mean, it could be a good way to upgrade normal Generators or Geothermal Generator, wouldn't it be ? The difference would be the size of the GUI:
Some few ideas about how a GUI for all generators could be useful:
Balance mechanic could include cooling components, oxygenating components (to increase fuel efficiency, but would take a bit of room, aka less potential output from the generator), recycling components (that would recycle what Lava and Fuels are leaving while generating energy, which means impurities for fuels, Obsidian for Lava) and that kind of stuff ...Make no mistake though: to me, the most needed is clearly a "realistic" overhaul of Nuclear Reactors: Sci-fi upgrades and GUIs for every generators are just features I would find really cool, but I do not NEED them.
-
Lava + GT thermal boiler + Lava filter = Obsidian + Steam (get back most if not all EU) + tin + copper + electrum
Obsidian dust + Electrolyzer -> Iron + Magnesium + SiliconOh, this one. I thought you talked about direct Lava to Mg/Iron/Silicon conversion.
Actually, I'll create an IC2 <--> TC crossover mod one day..
A magic techy mod would be cool. But don't forget: the more E-net you have, the cooler it is! It just need to be balanced
(unlike BC or UE ...). Thaumium Drill that can be enchanted ? ^^. Not like enchants are OP enough to make drills useless though. -
And, you can sa then almost EVERY mod is OP, you know. Because every automatizatio is OP. Every doubling ores(macerator) is OP
Yeah, but what I said is that I hate thing generating ressources without you doing anything, aka Quarries (miner doesn't count as it need to be dismantled so often that it's almost not worth mining by hand ^^), Bees (once you get a proper automated system and once you breeded them all), Forestry Farms ... apart from that are also things I find UNbalanced compared to some other mods (as an example, ExtraBees&Trees isn't OP to me, but ruin my fun because it keep generating stuff without your intervention, while Myscraft, Forestry, TiC or CC are OP because they provide solution that are way cheaper than other the way you have with other mods, and so make them useless (which is sad when I prefer the other mod ^^): Enchants from TiC, Forestry way of making energy that is clearly OP, CC turtles ...)
But the Gravel/Clay thingy for the smeltery is cool. I wish GT had a bloomery made with similar materials which you would need to smelt any Metal at the beggining
(Or at least Iron, because I can assume Copper and Tin can be smelted in the basic furnace). -
How do you have the patience to use Gregtech but nearly no other convenience mod on single player? How long do you AFK?
I don't play that much on SSP. And the mod I use are the one that fit with what I find entertaining in MC, aka mine/craft/mess for rewards. But NO, absolutely NO "free stuff over time". I mean, I wouldn't care if Bees&Trees giving cells, torches or that kind of utility products. But what I dislike is how you can reach a point where you don't have to mine/craft/those kind of things anymore. I even dislike AE for that! (but I have to deal with AE, because most people like it).
So my mods are:
IC²+GT+maybe on next time I'll play (cause I play a lot for short period then stop for months ^^. But a lot is, to me, 12 hours a day ^^) an addon of IC² if I find it balanced enough.
BC because Oil (Honestly, I would give it up if I had an Oil replacement, because everything in it is OP but automation, which is crappy ^^. And I especially hate quarries), TE only because Liquid Transposers (GT one is a bit more expensive ^^), RC because Boiler and because Steam can be fun at the beginning.
TC3 because I love its research system, even though I use nothing (or almost) in it ^^.
AE because everyone want it.And I do never stay AFK.
-
That's for others. I personally turn false every OP pages in Myst config as Dense Ores, Tendrils etc.
I personnally don't use every OP mods, like Mystcraft. And TiC, and ... TONS of mods, even Forestry is OP to me.
-
Still confused after the 106 reactor changes in parts, changing it again is just mean.
Lol. What was it, CASUC removal right ?
The changes you suggest seem to get better as you go down there page
Which means the top is crappy ?
I think this would sum up what is cool (IMO) with the Chain Reaction system:
You're bad at Nuclear Reactors, you are a so-called "noob" ? Just don't use a chain-reaction config, just use Fuel in a non-efficient (but easy to cool at least ^^) way which makes efficiency tends to a limit.
You're good ? Use the chain-reaction system to get an extremly high efficiency, but when you get your efficiency and extremly high output STABILIZE your reactor, otherwhise the reactor won't have any limit of efficiency ... but will explode
Which means that stuff like Pu would be used to increase a lot the amount of fission per sec per cells, and used with a stable config that send 1 Neutron for 1 received, you could get an extremly high efficiency then you would replace the Pu per the Fuel you used for the rest of the config
(For those who want Maths, it's a mathemathical suits story: during the chain-reaction phase the efficiency/output would be like U[n+1]=XU[n] --> U[n]=U[0]^n, and during the running phase, you would just replace the Pu to get X at one, making the thing stable).
In the same way, C14 or Radioactive wastes would be used to trigger reactions that would normally not work. -
Or at least make the generation of iron/magnesium/silicon (tin/copper/electrum) using very few EU possible.
True. Mg/Si ? Is that new ? Mn is missing! and Al! and ... wait, Lava contains tons of other things
-
GOOD! GT HAS EVERYTHING I THINK OF!
Look at his Suggestion Thread, he has TONS of suggestions he did not implement!
I'm done with LavaFabricators, now I'm adding Combustible Generators.
It's going to be a generator that is fuelled by either Oil or Fuel or Lava or Biofuel, etc.So ... Lava can burn ? Theoretically some part of it can, but that generate nothing compared to its Thermal energy
(because metals can be oxyded ...)There's nothing wrong with cheaper versions of Greg's stuff
Balance issues and OP-ness ? Configurable. Then there's nothing wrong with it, true.
-
What a whole lot of changes that I bet half of IC uses wouldn't appreciate It's a nice idea but can't see people like Direwolf20 liking it.
How so ? If you use "stable" configs, it wouldn't be that different from the current system ...
Although, I did not mention it, but I think with such a system Coolant Components should have a "range", which means they would cool down up to 20 slots arround (so you could have setup with some Fuel cells not adjacent to a Coolant Component without using Reactor Heat Vent/Exchanger/Overclocked Heat Vent or any kind of stuff allowing what I would call "delocation" (^^) which should in my opinion be removed or COMPLETLY nerfed.
And "noobs" could like it as well, as this system would allow stable MkI reactors producing decent amounts of EU, given you provide the ressources for the components ... because basically you would also have muc better components, much more expensive as well ofc.
Then the "rewarding-for-good-players" part would be the fact that you can get EXTREMLY HIGH outputs with the chain reaction principle, but you won't ever succeed making those reactors MkI or even MkII. Thus the balancing risk wouldn't only be heat but the chain reaction thingy, which would be very hard to control.Also, I think components such as "Coolant Cells" (which would be reworked to be much more efficient, as the rest) would be (more expensive as well, as the rest) completly different.
I mean, currently they are just single-use coolants, which you can cool down using others components. With my system, they would STORE heat (Molten Salts would be very efficient for that, wouldn't they ? ^^), which mean they would still be "buffers" as they currently are, but that mean using some with "normal" Coolant Components (since good tiers of components would have "ranges", OR maybe because they could cool themselves down slowly, thus generating energy), you could make a Mk I (if you have enough Coolant Components for each High Thermal Capacity Cell [sounds like a good name]) or a MkII/III that would CONTINUOUSLY GENERATE ENERGY! How so ? Because with my system, storing Heat to cool it down during Cooldown time would generate energy during those cooldown time as well, if you read it well -
And so would ruin the point of your Reactor, aka generating energy. I'm pretty sure the Vacuum freezer would consume more energy than it would allo to generate.
-
Not to mention that IRL the half life of plutonium 238 is 87.7 years, or 1.21 years of continuously playing in 1 minecraft world to equal that many years ingame.
Why do all of you keep saying that ? Do you think IRL the life of Pu in a reactor is 2h47 ?
It's more like a year ... (maybe less, I would say half a year) -
As the Nuclear system is being overhauled, I thought it would be the right moment to suggest the way it should IMO work.
I know it's partially done already, but I don't want it to go (IMO) in the wrong direction again.I mean, the Reactor system is really awesome, and I've been hooked for hours, and even nights on my breeders and others Mk IV but ... I've 3 main thing to mention:
1) I kinda dislike the way it used to be exploitable. I mean, breeding depending on heat was a bad Idea, because you just had to keep the heat constant and you were good. In the other hand, I do understand the point of increasing risk to increase gain, but that, IMO, should be the thing that encourage player to keep surveilling his reactor, and not to automate it. Which leads me to my second point.
2) I'm not against automation. I know some will always find boring to have to replace manually components or anything, but ... to keep the fun of switching yourself components and watching it almost constantly running (^^), it should be more attractive, more efficient than doing it in an automated way, as sophisticated your system may be.
3) For the sake of realism, and also to have a nice balance between fuels, I think the way fuels emit energy should be reworked.
So there are my suggestions on how it should work in my opinion.
I: No difference between Heat and EU generated:
The heat generated by the fuel shouldn't just be a "risk", but works as described instead:
a) When Heat is generated, it can be cooled down by the primary circuit, which would transfer the heat to the secondary circuit, and then generate energy. Which means that each Cooling components would basically be a part of the primary circuit, defined by its thermal capacity as it is currently, and its max heat/tick transmission (to the 2nd circuit). THE STEAM GENERATED PER TICK WOULD BE THE SUM OF ALL THE HEAT TRANSMITTED PER TICK FROM THE COOLING COMP. TO THE REACTOR, which means that not only a not safe reactor would explode, but it would waste energy as well. However, they'd have really high max H/t.
The secondary circuit would only be symbolized by the fact that you put water in your structure, get steam from it and then put it your water back.
WATER COULD BE INSERTED DIRECTLY IN THE CORE TO COOL IT DOWN, BUT IT MAY INVOLVES MORE RISK (see below) and less potential efficiency since it would be risky to run it at the same temperature you would run a "normal" reactor)
b) Keeping a reactor hot would still be useful: it wouldn't increase breeding speed, but EFFICIENCY IN THE HEAT/STEAM CONVERSION. If you ask why, google efficiency of thermal machines I guess ^^. [(T(hot)-T(cold))/T(hot)=1-T(cold)/T(hot), with T(cold) and T(hot) being about 293°K and something between 393 and 1500/2000K).
BUT, keeping a reactor hot would mean "producing as much Heat as you consume it by Water", (Idea to discuss: Heat decreasing by itself faster and faster when above 1200K ?)
II: Pulsing = generating Heat and sending others neutrons (aka pulses triggers) arround.
a) To calculate the generated heat, the reactor should work as well:
Each fuel would have its own properties: Heat per radioactive decay/time [HD] , Neutrons per radioactive decay/time [ND] , Heat per Fission [HF] , Neutron per Fission [NF], durability.First sec: Every single cell has a radioactive decay. Which, depending on the fuel, generates more or less Heat and send more or less Neutrons.
Second Sec: Every single cell has a radioactive decay as well, BUT, those with adjacent cells also have fissions. (and why not something based on "distance" between slots, instead of just adjacent cells ? I know it would be laggier, but the system I'm suggesting would be much more efficient, involving less GUIs for the same energy). So the amount of fissions of a cell would depend on the amount of neutron it would recieve, and so would depend the breeding speed of depleted fuels.
Third sec: same thing, but may (depending on the fuels used and their position) be way more Heat and Neutron generating.
Let's do an example:
: [HD]=2, [ND]=0.75, [HF]=10, [NF]=3 (I didn't tested the values, so it's kinda random, but that would be typically Plutonium). ND and NF are the numbers of neutrons sent PER SIDE. (with distance to other cells in the GUI instead of just adjacent, it would be a number/R², R being that distance)
: [HD]=1, [ND]=0.5, [HF]=8, [NF]=1 (Typically Ura)
: [HD]=0.25, [ND]=0.125, [HF]=6, [NF]=1 (Typically Thorium, with GT)
: [HD]=0.05, [ND]=1, [HFusion]=5, [NF]=0 (Typically, C14, but with a huge concentration)
: [HD]=1, [ND]=1, [HF]=0 [breeding instead], [NF]=0 (Wastes, that may be breeded or used as triggers, even though several wastes/depleted fuel may exist)
[1 surrounded by 4 , because screw the forum to make things looks like GUIs ^^]--> First sec, 2+4*025 Heat generated, Pu send 0.75 Neutron to each Thorium Cell, each Thorium cell send 0.125 Neutron (0.5 in all) to the Pu. Which is still not enough to get one fission, so the secondsecond (^^) happens similary. But then at the 3rd one, Pu got 1 Neutron at the end of the 2nd second, and each Th cells got 1.5 Neutrons. So each of these fuel has one fission, which emit 3 Neutron for each Th and 4 neutrons for the Pu, PLUS the radioactivity. Fissions releases alot more heat than radioactive decay, and from this test I get that those numbers should be lowered, or be the one for the highest concentration, because even this small setup would be pretty unstable
(The Heat Generated would *almost* grow exponentially ... WHICH is the phenomenom called "chain reaction" and which is used in Nuclear Bombs.
So safe reactors would tend to a Maximum Heat/t they would reach after a short time, while unstable could be used like MkV are currently: just for 2 sec and then wait for the whole thing to cooldown ^^.The risk would still be heat, but explosion wouldn't be the aftermaths all the time:
Nuclear Explosion would happen when the Heat goes over 5000 and when the H/T is over X/tick (dunno how big should X be).
"simple" Core Fusion would happen at 1500/2000/3000 depending on the Core material. See upgrades (below ^^)
Some others things I don't know, but Hydrogen Explosion and Pressure Explosion could happen as well.
(The first would be throwing water directly on a reactor to cool it down, which would create Hydrogen above 1000°K, and then explode when the amount of H2 is too high [BUT you could also pump it before it reach that level, and thus avoiding the explosion and gaining EVEN MORE ENERGY! The second would happen when you don't take the steam quick enough, in case of you put the water directly in. Converting Water into Steam AND H2+O2 would drastically reduce the Heat, making it a good urgency solution, but quite risky in some ways)
You'll say me: "then how could a reactor explode if it meltdown before ?" Because the reactor will "keep running", which just mean "keep producing heat" when it will have melt, unless you cooled it down and shut it down. Which means the Meltdown is the riskier event as it creates flowing Lava and may lead to a Nuclear Explosion.The point of that Fuel system would be to allow distinctions between fuels such as "trigger" (C14/other "renewable" radioactive isotopes or some wastes), "chain reaction maker" (Pu) "balanced fuel" (Ura) and "safe-and-cheap-but-has-to-be-helped-to-run-properly" (Th).
Upgrades:
The reactors could also have upgrades:
As the thing is going to be MultiBlocks, those upgrades should in my opinion be (apart from size upgrades, for Steam Turbine and Reactor Hull):
Heat-resistant [Alloy from Invar to Tungstensteel in GT, from Refined Iron to Iridium/I dunno what in IC²] Upgrade: Increases the max temperature before meltdown (and so potentially the efficiency)Carbon Moderator Upgrade: The higher the level, the higher the H/t it can stop. Basically, you can't stop a reactor running if you haven't the necessary tier of moderators, which means the higher the output you want, the higher the Tier of moderators you need, unless you don't care about stopping your reactor
(will stop itself without fuel ^^)Heat Exchanger Upgrade: an expensive thingy that would slightly increase the output, for no risk/consumption more, just the cost of the upgrade.
That's all (I think I didn't forget anything but I'm not sure ^^) for the system I wanted to suggest, but some thing may be awesome as well (but more likely to be in GT than in IC²):
More efficient than water fluid (Molten Salts for instance) that could (in the case of Molten Salts) multiply by something the Neutron Emitted per Fission (since in theory it increases the capture rate of Neutrons by Nucleus) or increase efficiency a lot (CO2).
NUCLEAR TRANSMUTATIONS! Turns materials into some others using the power of Nuclear Reactions!
That'd be an awesome GUI-game ^^.The final word: I know such a system would be kinda laggier, but as I already told, more efficient = less reactor = less lag as well ^^.
Also, did I mention already that for each Fuel, each properties has to be multiplied by its Concentration ? (so you can make 5% Pu cells or 50%, if you're a mad scientist ^^) -
And as for "abusing RTGs as your main power source", I think it would be much easier (not as easy with GregTech) to spam solars or windmills for your main power source then burning through enough nuclear fuel for that amount of Plutonium, not to mention that (like I said above) as long as you are not running a mass fab, that much fuel should supply enough power to run an average base for a while.
Which leads me to the following suggestion:
GREG, MAKE THEM FINITE!!! (config).
