Posts by Mostlydave

    Currently to gain rubber one must shove a treetap into the tree and pull it out again, and over doing this will render the tree infertile. Instead some sort of bucket with the tree tap should be hung onto the tree, it would be left over time and when the player would come back to the tree he would find more resin! My suggestion is not to turn the resin itself into a liquid. Maybe a system could be implemented were the more leaves or how tall the tree is the greater the production of resin this will allow for more selective growing and realistic tree treatment, i mean really... if you cut off all the leaves of a real rubber tree do you really think it will still produce sap? I know this is possible, just look at he new snapshot with cocoa plants growing on jungle tree! will it be too hard to do something like this with rubber trees?

    FYI, I don't think anyone that matters as far as getting anything implemented looks at these forums to often, what you will see if you look thru a few threads is FenixR going full tard on almost everyone that posts like he owns and maintains the mod. I think your idea is good and that this sight has piss poor moderation and some of worst forum users I have had the displeasure of communicating with (if you'd call it that)

    I like that idea. If it ever gets implemented, I can do the pixel art. Right now I'm considering whether or not I want to continue upgrading the textures for IC2.

    By the way, not included in the original post, but all above media may be used without permission for any non-commercial cause. :)

    You should definitely continue upgrading the textures! I love IC2 but coming from the painterly pack the stock minecraft and IC2 textures look bland and rushed IMHO! This looks great, keep up the good work!

    Jetpacks are crazy logically just like you think backpack reactors are, except portable nuclear reactors actually exist.

    Maybe you can just ignore this like you ignore the matter generator.

    They are lots of "better" ideas in this particular subforum, not exactly the best or even good ideas, but certainly better than this one.

    Like people have said, no plans of anything better than lappack its on the works or will be on the works for that matter, and a nuclear reactor as a backpack?

    yeah, almost as crazy as an electric jetpack or matter generator :rolleyes:

    And where exactly are you getting your info for what's planned for future updates?

    I think it's a cool idea! Don't worry, it's hardly possible to post any suggestion without everyone else bashing it! For some reason this is over powered or unbalanced but a the tread with ar teir 4 machine that automatically creates other machines gets rave reviews from the usual negative posters :rolleyes:

    Portable generators are a good idea in a game like MC where you'll be moving building and exploring a huge world!

    Yes, but I was trying to get my point across. Anyway, as he said, you could just use a LapPack in the Battery spot... It doesn't even take an inventory space.

    Is the wiki page incorrect? I know you need to enable lapatron in miner in the config file, I don't think the lappack works in it
    From the miner wiki page:
    Energy: From a cable or portable sources (NOT including Batpacks or Tier II or Tier III energy devices.)

    It should be like a regular battery but once it hits 0 it dissapears (Because of the amount of energy it has), should have an efficiency of 0.3-0.6 so people are more encouraged to use the nuclear reactor instead.

    This shouldn't be disposable, you should reload it with a uranium cell, check out the wiki link

    I think you're missing point, how are you running a miner all over the map with a reactor? Are you using a lapatron or setting up and moving a reactor?

    I like the idea of Nuclear batterys per se. The issue is, why would you want to use your Uranium on a battery, if you can use it in a well-setup reactor, given, for balance reasons, the battery would need to be MUCH more inefficient then a simple reactor.

    The nuclear battery is much easier to move with the miner setup, I setup and break down and move my miner setup over and over and do other things while it mines. I would rather use the nuclear battery instead of enabling the lapatron in miner. I also think it makes sense to build and use the nuclear battery to obtain the materials for a full blown reactor, and then use the reactor to power a mfsu/lapatron setup (use the miner to get all those diamonds). Maybe I'm not using the miner everyone else.

    Thanks for the backup! I also don't get how moving around a bunch of non stackable parts plus all the miner parts is easier!

    I personally, agree with Fenix on most things. Also, look at his post count. He is one of the five people (Two of which are devs) with a over 1000 post count. Also, he is not a troll, because if you just use his criticism as constructive, you will find it is super helpful. Anyway, about the actual topic, it sucks. All of it. Period. It's a dumb, and redundant idea

    i guess posting your opinion on almost every thread created on the forum makes you an expert :rolleyes:

    this scoring system is for repeat suggestions not brilliantly simple new ideas if you score high enough in these 3 categories then i would consider the suggestion worthy of resurrection and support it other wise its my opinion that the suggestion should be rejected for the same reason that the previous versions of the suggestion were rejected.

    also why not just craft a single chamber mk1 reactor on site?

    IRL you would not create an unmanned mk1 reactor on site to power anything. You would use an RTG to power remote unmanned things like space probes, light houses and Autominers :D

    This is a lot more portable (it's a new battery) than mk1 reactor and it's components and makes more sense for the application in my opinion.

    here is how i rate this suggestion
    thought out: 0/100, compressors only have one input how am i supposed to put a uranium cell and this battery in there at the same time? no hard numbers have been worked out at all.
    presentation: 10/100, you gave us your source of inspiration(+5), and a recipe(+5) everything else is lacking i have no urge to run out and build this
    unique spin: 0/100, this is either a nuke battery or a simplified reactor both of which have been rejected already. I don't see anything special about it.

    It could be recrafted with the Uranium Cell like the CF Sprayer then.

    A source of inspiration and a recipe is a lot more than most suggestions are posted with here, I also did ask for input at the end of my original post.

    This is a nuke battery no doubt about it, that's exactly what makes it special. I think it makes perfect sense, especially for an application like the miner. I would rather craft the RTG and use it rather than enable MFSU in miner in the config file.