Posts by Viper8797

    HI EVERYBODY! (Hello doctor Nick)


    I'll just go straight to the point. When you use thermal expansion pulverizer, there is a small chance for a by-product, a dust of other ore.


    My question is: Does this happen with the macerator as-well?

    I'd rather have someone else helping me out without the rude attitude. All I need is guides on how to make the basics, and to help me understand the basics so I can get started with this mod, and then a few guides to help me make a few basic starting IC2 items.

    Dude. He wasn't rude, its true. You may see Electricity as "super cool stuff" while he doest.


    Check direwolf20 mod review, that should give you a basic grasp, check the wiki too.

    When trying to dismantle a few machines in my old base, to move them to a new one, I encountered issues with wrenching machines to retrieve them. Some of them were turned to machine blocks, and all of that stuff in them was wasted. And with GregTech, it seems to ''boost'' that loss chance very high, making it nearly impossible to move to a new base without making all of the machines again.
    So, I have an idea. I think that there should be a config file option for machine wrench loss (enabled, true or false) and an option for the loss chance value (only applies if machine wrench loss = true). This would solve the issue for many, and server owners can customize it to give players more freedom for moving machines with a low loss rate, or to make it more complex and require players to be careful with machines and have a high loss rate.
    Any support?

    Or use a electric wrench.


    Done

    SEE! IS this kind of machine i want to see in IC2! Not a block, with a crappy excuse that it lags (so many mods add multi blocks, even greg-tech and railcraft) The most expensive part in a machine is not usually the machine, but the infrastructure and maintenance)

    I don't think so. Because of the lack of C combined with the fact the combustion of carbon isn't "natural", because it needs more energy than 20°C (because temperature =kinetic energy of particles and each reaction need a minimum amount of kinetic (mostly) to ignite.
    Fun fact: Game-related forums probably belong to the rares one where you can speak about Science without boring anyone ^^ (Ok, almost everyone is bored there, but we're like 3 continuing argueing on it ^^)

    What I meant was that if Earth's atmosphere were 100% Oxygen, lighting a match would suffice to set it all on fire. :thumbup:


    Heck, Lightning makes plasma.
    On the subject of Insane amounts of energy, instead of some crazy machine making UU matter, how about a complicated multiblock structure that uses EU to make Electrons, protons and Nuetrons, then combines them into what ever element you want, the Denser the more energy required? (Although it would need some balancing since gold is heavier then iridium >.> ) Much better then crappy UU matter.

    Sounds good, tough, as UUM is so developed in IC and given a lot of people already have build the machines, I guess its a No, and i would rather having the devs working on something else (watermills producing energy with flowing water and not with still water for example :| )

    Xray can cause cancer over time.


    Gamma radiation is dangerous as fuck, because its wavelenght is so small, it can actually "swim" trough your cells and alter your DNA. Having cells in your brain suddently wanting to do a different task is not a good thing.


    Free radicals are also dangerous, because they are highly interactive particles, so they littrally change what you are made from. Not good either.


    Ionizing radiations can split molecules, and charge particles that should be elletrically neutral. Not good either.


    In short: Particles and Radiations with high energy = Not good.



    Are you sure Gamma is Ionizing? I mean, it's pure Energy and not consisting of Electrons or Protons.

    Yes it is. A simple googling will thell you that, Gamma, Xray, ALpha and beta are the main ionizing radiations, actually able to split molecules.


    Also, this famous logo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Radioactive.svg doesnt mean "nuclear". It means ionizing radiation.


    Fun fact: You get more radioactivity if you eat a banana a day than if you live within 10 miles of a Nuclear Power plant.



    EDIT: FUCK! DOUBLE NINJA'D!

    The Current reactor is a Conventional reactor but without steam. Replace the current one with a Conventional steam powered reactor, and if you want Pure EU use the RITEG, which doesnt make that much power (10 eu/t per Quad Uranium?) but lasts alot longer. Also has no risk of Exploding, but does emit Radiation, hurting all things nearby.

    IMO, both reactors should have a radioactivity effect, not because realism, but because HAYO. (I'm portraying my nuclear power plant, with a HAZMAT suit on a armor stand next to a sign "ALL employees must wear HAZMAT gear prior to entering reactor room). Tough RITEG should have a bit more... larger area of effect and/or stronger effects.


    I also think that any reactor you build will be conventional by defaul, attack a cable onto it, and it automatically becomes a RITEG.


    This is my suggestion on radioactivity:


    -You will get small effects if you are holding nuclear cells without a full hazmat gear, or quantum or nano armor. Like hunger, nausea e.t.c. Temporary effects.


    -Get into a room with a reactor without a Hazmat or quantum armor and you will get moderate effects, like withering, no health regeneration, e.t.c, however, if you stay too long next to a reactor, the effect becomes permanent. How can you heal yourself? build a decontamination chamber, supply it with EU and right click. You will enter it and see a progress bar. Once its is done, tadaaa. You are good to go.


    -Nuclear Explosions have a massive amount of radiation, killing everything in its radius in a short time. You have to be extra fast not to die, and you will likelly get permanent effects.

    The Whole point of nuclear is that its hard to set up and requires a fair bit of time to do so, but the output is great. Some kind of Overly large Coolmodeled Turbine to fit above the reactor would be cool. I would generaly use the Steam reactor for mj and eu for things like my base, but i would much prefer a RITEG just to power my matter fab, due to that thing constantly needing EU, just feed in Decaying radioactive material and done!

    I fully support multiblock structures and structures with high infrastructure cost. The most expensive part in a nuclear reactor plant is not the reactor itself, but all the structure and building needed to keep it going.


    Maybe IC2 should add a steam turbine of its own, larger, but cheaper and weaker than railcraft ones, mainly for use in low power reactors or when you are low on steel. Tough the best, would be if Railcraft Turbines got cheaper and IC2 added a better and expensivier way to turn steam into EU also, visually cooler :D


    Also, reactors need water input to be fully HAYO. And honestly, radioactivity needs to be buffed. Hunger, seriously? The calclavia modpack (Universal Eletricity) adds a radioactivity that triggers if you get too close to a reactor, you get withered.

    Depending on Greg's answer, I'm maybe going to suggest even more than that ^^. But to GT, I guess, because its nuclear Stuff would allow more cool sytem ;) [Molten Salt Reactors based on Thorium anyone ?]

    Greg tech is the hallelujah for every real industrialist that loves a challenge. All i would like to remember, is that we must do this and balance the resource costs in a way that Nuclear - Steam - Turbine - EU is actually rent able and affordable. Right now, nuclear steam is much better as Nuclear - Steam - Engines - MJ due to lower infrastructure and maintenance costs

    I like it. Sorta. I always thought Nuclear was missing something, then i found the nuclear steam reactors, just awesome, need some tweaks tough.


    This could go well with Railcraft. If you want more power and have the Uranium, nuclear steam it is! However, as is, nuclear steam mode is not good for EU production, because of the cost of Turbines, and the fact that they need a rotor every now and then. It is much more rewarding turning that steam into MJ than into EU.


    If you do not need so much power and are low on Uranium, Use thing type instead!


    I fully support some GUI changes for nuclear reactor, like the need for water, e.t.c.

    This is still proof of concept stage, but some screenshots are attached.


    Three reactors inputting into the top valves of a 9x9x4 iron tank. There are liquiducts all around and below the tank (you shouldn't need this many, one valve per 50 EU/t) in active extraction mode to get the steam. These compress down into one long liquiduct (a liquiduct can only transfer 160 mb/t into or outof itself per face, but it can transfer 5000 mb/t through itself, this is why there's just the one pipe going to the turbines) and powering 15 turbines. I'm getting 1444 EU/t off the turbines, 8 less than expected, but the loss is tolerable.


    (note, you want power converters if you intend to build on this scale, I haven't installed it yet. This would take over 5000 steel for the turbines, plus a maintenance cost of even more steel every 62 hours)

    Wow. Thanks, never thought a single pipe would be better than more. 5000 steel does sound prohibitive (it there any chance to reduce the number of turbines? :P ) How much of them would 2 reactors need?


    And a proof of concept that raycasting based explosions means you can pipe shit to/from multiple reactors without worry about them destroying each other if something goes wrong.

    That is cool, tough i'm planning making my reactors stable and not willing to risk a boum


    . But what is that power converters mod about? Converting power between several electricity grids, or does it add something very usefull for the design?

    Tesseracts are a Thermal Expansion item (why SiriusKing is suggesting it when you already said you weren't using Thermal Expansion I don't know) transfer between themselves at unlimited distance and as far as I can tell, unlimited speed, there's three different kinds, one for items, one for liquid, one for energy.


    An Iron tank is a Railcraft multiblock structure, ranging in size from 3x3x4 to 9x9x8, you can store 10,000 buckets in the big one, but the advantage for our purpose is that it can accept steam from the reactor at unlimited speed, then output steam from up to 56 spaces for the biggest tank, allowing for all that steam to be piped away.

    Thanks for the info. I do now have thermal expansion (changed to ftb ultimate - EE3).


    There are a lot of gadgets and machines, its overwhelming.


    I'd like to place a challenge to everybody out there. I am looking for a way to have two nuclear reactors feeding the steam to a turbine room at a moderate distance, without clog-ups or turbines at 7% efficiency, in order to able to produce a good amount of EU at a decent speed.

    Guys, i like the amount of help im getting, but you are confusing the shit out me. Im mostly new to this mods and i have no idea about most of what you talk about, including tanks and tesseracts (whatever that may be).


    I'm still fooling a bit around with FTB (now i use FTB ultimate, without EE3) so i so now have liquidducts.


    Happy to see a good supportive community :D .

    Thanks for all the info guys, but im still a bit lost. If you are wondering, i play with feed the beast techs world mod pack, so no thermal expansion for me.


    One thing came trough my mind: What produces more power, a turbine at 50%output capacity, or two at 25% output? Also, are there any disadvantages of laying the turbines too far from the reactor or no?