Posts by LastRespawn

Quote from MatLaPatate

Already suggested. Search for addons/mods. I guess it's denied or in the TO-DO List.

whoops, I posted spontaneously while playing Black Mesa (I was excited >.>) and didn't bother checking the forums. after taking some time to actually look around, here's what I found:

Suggestion: Monorails

Suggestion: Transportation.

looks like there is something in the works similar to what I had in mind, but whatever it is it will be organized with the RailCraft team, meaning it might not be included in vanilla IndustrialCraft but rather as a part of RailCraft.

P.S. I don't think there's a way to quote from threads other than the one I'm posting in so I just used the permalinks.

Quote from koi

Redstone over E.Net - I'd use it.
Just like redstone tubes, but with cables.

I agree. there should be a way to create redstone power cables that would function exactly the same as redpower's redstone tubes. just combine 1 cable of your choice and 1 redstone to create them, and painted power cables would only attach to redpower insulated redstone cables of the same color. It's a simple, useful addition that can save space and complexity in project designs.

Fallen_Dead, instead of using snowballs, you could simply charge 1 extra coin and have the trade-o-mat give 1 coin back as change for the overpayment. that way you don't have to worry about finding snowballs (or any other "token" item) and the chest holds only coins, maximizing its available inventory space.

This seems to be a simple misunderstanding on the OP's part. First off, Alblaka and other minecraft mod developers are not selling their mods for profit to an adhesive customer base, so there is no motivation to sabotage the mod's usefulness to the player. When the developers make changes to their mods that 'nerf' them, such as adding optional fuel usage to ComputerCraft Turtles, they are tweaking the ratio of risk vs reward in an attempt to find the sweet spot that most players would consider fun. That sweet spot tends to be similar to limitations in reality, as that is what people are used to and comfortable with.

Developers of videogames have a special difficulty that real-life engineers don't: console access. In real life, the limitations of the laws of physics are hard-set, and engineers work to the best ability they can under those limitations. For developers creating a videogame, those limitations must be arbitrarily constructed. The OP is mistaking a decision to define the physical limits of the game universe as a decision to create a product that is intentionally underpowered. This is roughly equivalent to complaining that a microwave requires electricity to operate instead of exposure to sunlight, or that cars require gasoline fueled internal combustion engines to reach highway speeds instead of bicycle pedals. This is not a case of purposefully weak or ineffective designs, it is a case of redefined physical limitations.

I was playing Black Mesa recently, and when I got to the 'On a rail' chapter I was thinking about how the old-style railcars would fit perfectly into IndustrialCraft. I played around with the Trains and Zepplins mod on my server a bit, and their work shows that such an addition is achievable. I would recommend a single design that had space for a player in front and a single chest in the back. rightclick holding a RE battery to charge it up, rightclick again to hop in. use W and S keys for 3 speeds forwards and one speed back, rightclick again to hop out. Access the chest by rightclicking on it rather than the body of the railcar. EU-powered rails or an overhead line would be a nice plus but might prove more trouble to create than they are worth. the "charge and go" method would be sufficient to create a worthwhile addition to IndustrialCraft.

You guys have actually managed to give me a few ideas about how to improve my suggestion. It seems that my idea might be more appropriately implemented as an addon rather than a core feature of IndustrialCraft. that way only people who want the modifications enough to seek out the addon will end up having them. I had assumed previously that it would be added to the config with a default setting of 'disabled', so that people could turn on the wear mechanic if they so wished. I have no issue with autocrafting, in fact I think it is really interesting and complex, not lazy at all. I simply feel that no-player-required automation is within its own category that stands separately from "vanilla" survival, where most activities must be done by hand. I might create a post later with a revised description of my concept.

Shouldn't you guys be making your own threads? The OP suggestion was simply to allow an optional and configurable wear mechanic to IC2 machines similar to the breakdown of tools, with the slight difference that the breakdown be partially random rather than guaranteed to work perfectly until breaking after a fixed amount of uses.\

Making this mechanic mandatory for all users of IC2 was never part of the suggestion, and the Reactor-style module system and Oil/Lubricant upgrades are original ideas that should be put in their own threads, not cluttering up this thread and pulling discussion away from the OP.

continuing with the thread's OP, I was undecided on whether or not to include a repair mechanic the same as tools work, where the health of both machines is combined into a single machine plus a bonus 10% health reward for repairing. I think the repair mechanic should NOT be included for machines as it would limit player interaction (people would just repair their own machines and hermit rather than selling and trading hand-me-down machines), and it would also weaken the main concept of machines steadily loosing value as their wear accumulates. Finally, the machine block left behind when a machine does break down creates a source of scrap iron that can be sold or reused to offset some of the cost of rebuilding machines.

Let's hear what you guys think about including/not including a repair mechanic, and why you think so.

I would love to see a machine usage wear/eventual breakdown mechanic introduced to IC2 or included in an optional add-on or config setting. as they are now, once constructed, machines will last forever without wearing out or breaking down. This limits the economic market for buying/selling machines, since once a player has acquired a machine once, they never need to buy one again and have no reason to sell their old one.

My initial concept would be to introduce a 'health bar' to machines much like the health bar on tools. However, instead of having a fixed number of uses after which they are guaranteed to break as tools do, I would have machines carry a per-operation-completed chance of breakdown, the odds of which start at 0% at full health and slowly get worse as the machine accumulates usage wear. The effect of a breakdown would be the same as a failed wrench use. I would add the health bar of the machine to the right-click gui, as well as the inventory slot decal as with breakable tools. I would also add a number-of-completed-operations counter to the right click gui.

The developers can decide whether to have fixed or configurable settings for machine wear. My definitions are my suggestions, and can certainly be tweaked if it makes sense to do so. variables to define would be:

Total Uses (number of uses to go from 100% health to 0% health, I'd say 1562 as default [about 24.4 stacks])

Linear or Tired breakdown chance (linear is 0% chance from 100%-90% health, increasing linearly from 1% chance of breakdown per operation at 89% health to 20% chance of breakdown per operation at 0% health.)

Tiered would use config-defined tiers to determine chance of breakage. for example, 100%-90% health, 0% breakage chance. 89%-60%, 5% chance, 59%-30%, 10% chance, 29-10%, 15% chance, 9%-0%, 20% chance. If tiered setup is undefined, config would default to linear.

I feel that inclusion of this breakdown mechanic would add value and depth to gameplay and facilitate improved SMP player interaction and marketability of IC2 machines, HAYO!