Posts by TheBard

    You might want to take a clean & fresh minecraft.jar and recopy in the files for Forge.
    Maybe you copied a newer version of Forge into your minecraft.jar over a previous copy of Forge?

    When in doubt... make a copy of your bin folder, delete it, let Minecraft redownload it fresh.
    Then re-install Forge into the fresh minecraft.jar.

    It seems to me like there's little use in doing manual calculations to propose changes to something that is highly unlikely to be changed anyway.

    Just seems like we've traded a small set of "best nuclear setups" for another small set of "best nuclear setups" which is what I thought the redesign was supposed to avoid.

    Of course it will melt, but that's not the point. The point is that for raw cooling factor, the Overclocked Heat Vent is already so far above and beyond what the Advanced Heat Vent is or could be even at 72 cooling. Your 2*4 design could replace the Advanced Heat Vent with a regular Heat Vent and only lose 6 cooling. Is 6 cooling really worth 1 diamond? Considering 2 gold get you 20 total cooling, 1 diamond should get you more.

    There's really not much use for the Advanced Heat Vent with only 12 cooling. I still believe that it would need to be changed to have MORE cooling than 20 at a bare minimum... especially since it has 0 Core Transfer. Since the Reactor Heat Exchanger has a Core Transfer of 72 it seems logical to make the Advanced Heat Vent also have a cooling amount of 72.

    People can still use the Overclocked Heat Vent for more compact models... but the Advanced Heat Vent would require more space to use because not only do you have to add a component to extract heat from the reactor, but also a component to transfer it into the Advanced Heat Vent. The increased number of components required to use the Advanced Heat Vent to it's fullest if it had its cooling factor increased would help offset the more compactness of the Overclocked Heat Vent.

    Edit: It would be cool if the reactor planner had a config option somewhere in order to change the values of the various components so I could see what sort of designs I could create using a better Advanced Heat Vent. Plus the material cost problem with Overclocked Heat Vents that I reported still hasn't been fixed.

    as i would aggree to advanced heat vents and exchanger are underpowered.
    but 72 are way to much that would make everything else not worth anthing.
    something around 16-24 would be ok
    maybe make it cheaper so it would only use a half diamond

    Did you even look at my example? I actually calculated things wrong... a 2x2 arrangement of Overclocked Heat Vents actually cools 80! So a value of 72 for an Advanced Heat Vent might still not be enough to make it useful at all.

    Edit: What you seem to be forgetting is that the Advanced Heat Vent has NO Core Transfer rating. That means at a MINIMUM you need 1 additional component to put heat into it, unless you sit it next to a uranium cell. What makes the Overclocked Heat Vent so much more powerful is that it has a built-in Core Transfer. You don't need another component to put heat into it.

    Edit2: Also keep in mind that the Reactor Heat Exchanger is ALREADY coded to have a 72 Core Transfer rating.

    I still don't understand why the Advanced Heat Vent is so crappy compared to the Overclocked Heat Vent.
    With the material costs of the Advanced Heat Vent... it should really dissipate a lot more heat than just 12.

    Maybe it was a typo in the code?

    If for example, the Advanced Heat Vent could dissipate let's say 72 heat... but it still had a 0 core transfer.
    That would lead to designs where Reactor Heat Exchangers are used to pull heat out of the reactor at 72 units... and then that heat has to be transferred to the Advanced Heat Vents via Component Heat Exchangers. So 1 Reactor Heat Exchanger (pulls 72 heat) would be paired with 2 Component Heat Exchangers (side transfer of 36 heat each) and 1 Advanced Heat Exchanger (dissipates 72 heat). So 4 squares could dissipate 72 heat. Right now I think the best you can do in 4 squares is 60 80 heat dissipated with 4 Overclocked Heat Vents. So that's an improvement of 12 heat, or +3 heat dissipated per square used. So overall it still seems like a pretty puny improvement even at 72 heat dissipation. So that's actually a loss of 8 heat dissipated when using a 2x2 setup and if the Advanced Heat Vent had 72 heat dissipation.

    As it stands now, there are pretty much 0 useful reactor designs using Reactor Heat Exchangers and Advanced Heat Exchangers. I thought this new redesign was supposed to provide lots of different options instead of a small handful of cookie cutter approaches... but we sure seem to have an awful lot of similar sized nuclear cookies the way things stand now.

    Possible replacement for Reactor 2:
    Mark I EB (0 Chambers, 5 single uranium cells)
    Eu/tick: 75
    Efficiency: 3
    Cost: Iron 100, Copper 85, Tin 32, Gold 16

    or this variant which is -6 Iron, +11 Copper, -1 Tin:
    Mark I EB (0 Chambers, 5 single uranium cells)
    Eu/tick: 75
    Efficiency: 3
    Cost: Iron 94, Copper 96, Tin 31, Gold 16

    Edit: Since it's a 0 chamber design, it can also be duplicated like this. This one could probably be greatly improved on. I didn't mess with it beyond trying to clone my design above across 6 reactor chambers.
    Mark I EB (6 Chambers, 15 single uranium cells)
    Eu/tick: 225
    Efficiency: 3
    Cost: Iron 276, Copper 343, Tin 87, Gold 48

    Nevermind, just saw that Reactor 3 is also 0 chambers, and produces more Eu/tick than mine and is more efficient.

    You can use fuel to make superfuel to power your generators you know. Don't just can 6 coalfuel or 6 fuel cells into the fuel can. Add some things for a little extra kick.

    I think I found a bug with the Resources Needed tab.

    Adding a Heat Vent to the planner costs 6 Iron.
    Adding a Reactor Heat Vent to the planner costs 16 Copper and 6 Iron.
    Adding an Overclocked Heat Vent to the planner costs 6 Iron and 2 Gold.

    This implies that to make an Overclocked Heat Vent requires a Heat Vent and 2 Gold.
    But on the server, crafting an Overclocked Heat Vent requires a Rector Heat Vent and 2 Gold.
    So the true planner cost of adding an Overclocked Heat Vent should be 16 Copper, 6 Iron, and 2 Gold.

    Copper: 445
    Tin: 151
    Iron: 277
    Gold: 26

    Yours: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…nvtbw3ty0gbfg5qt6blzlk3k0
    Copper: 446
    Tin: 128
    Iron: 238
    Gold: 50

    Sure it's 1 less chamber, but it's also:
    Copper: +1
    Tin: -23
    Iron: -39
    Gold: +24

    So that change to my design costs almost twice the amount of gold. Is +24 Gold and +1 Copper worth saving 39 Iron and 23 Tin? I'd rather spend a little more Iron and Tin and have 5 Chambers than spend 24 more Gold and have 4 Chambers. How are we classifying what an "Improvement" is? At what point is 1 less Chamber worth the extra Gold?

    Edit: Also, was messing with that re-design and found you could make a pretty safe Mk2 design and save 2 Gold.
    Mk2-E EA*
    Eu/tick: 140
    Efficiency: 7 (Uses neutron reflectors)
    Cost: Iron 238, Copper 446, Tin 128, Gold 48
    Requires 1min 20sec cooldown between cycles.

    Edit2: Ok Zombie I updated my post. I did post a bug to the Planner thread because I'm pretty sure it's not calculating Copper costs correctly for the Overclocked Heat Vents. But I'm not sure why the resource amounts got thrown off when I was writing this the first time.

    Edit3: I think to arrive at the true Copper cost, we should take the total number of Overclocked Heat Vents and multiply them by 16 Copper each. On the planner the current difference between an Overclocked Heat Vent and a Heat Vent is 2 gold. But to make an Overclocked Heat Vent it requires a Reactor Heat Vent plus 2 Gold. A Reactor Heat Vent requires a Heat Vent plus 16 Copper.

    So my design uses 13 Overclocked Heat Vents, so the planner should add an additional 208 Copper.
    The other design uses 17 Overclocked Heat Vents, so the planner should add an additional 272 Copper.
    So I think it would cost an additional 64 Copper.

    Transferring heat to the core is mostly for breeders.
    However heat exchangers with core ratings also transfer heat from the reactor to themselves, and then that heat is able to be interacted with by other components. It can be pulled away by other exchangers, or by the exchanger itself if it has side transfer ability.

    Best thing to do is read the sticky describing the new reactors, then read the guide describing all the new components.

    It seems both names are valid to use.



    The name "tungsten" (from the Nordic tung sten, meaning "heavy stone") is used in English, French, and many other languages as the name of the element. Tungsten was the old Swedish name for the mineral scheelite. The other name "wolfram" (or "volfram"), used for example in most European (especially Germanic and Slavic) languages, is derived from the mineral wolframite, and this is also the origin of its chemical symbol, W.[6] The name "wolframite" is derived from German "wolf rahm" ("wolf soot" or "wolf cream"), the name given to tungsten by Johan Gottschalk Wallerius in 1747. This, in turn, derives from "Lupi spuma", the name Georg Agricola used for the element in 1546, which translates into English as "wolf's froth" or "cream" (the etymology is not entirely certain), and is a reference to the large amounts of tin consumed by the mineral during its extraction.[13]

    Put a RP Relay under your Generator and stuff coal into the Relay.
    That should work similar to a "multi-block" machine.

    New version of BC has a "Hopper" which can be placed on top of things like engines. Fill the Hopper with coal and put it on top of a Steam Engine, and it will keep the Steam Engine supplied with more coal than just the 64 stack it usually can use. It only works on top of things though, so I don't think you can put one on top of a Generator, because they have to be fed from the bottom I think.

    Replaced the lower right corner heat exchanger with a component heat exchanger for 0 core heat balance. All credits to TheBard for a nice efficient design.

    Downside is that your modification costs +4 Gold and doesn't really change anything. A reactor running with 0 heat and a reactor running with 4 heat are the same thing. Good change for people with OCD maybe. ;) I would have never noticed it was running with 4 heat vs 0 heat though.

    Edit: Although this reminds me of the first time I made a reactor in the 1.2.5 Minecraft. I found a good 0 heat reactor... and turned it on, and immediately started to panic because the thing started to heat up. I couldn't understand why a heat neutral reactor was gaining heat. So I spend a lot of time looking at the design, looking at my setup etc until I finally realized that I guess all the previous reactors had a sort of minimum "operating" temperature. Once the heat got to that level, it stayed at that level though.