To be honest, making a bore (now) is both extremely easy and extremely cheap (resource wise). No. The amount of CPU it takes to mine just one single block is massively greater with a frame borer than with a quarry. All the "movement" for a quarry is done by a fairly quick piece of code in Java, whereas moving and executing a block breaker takes an unholy number of physics updates, not to mention the sometimes excess amount of piping that items have to travel through simply to leave the boring machine. What other ways? There are no other ways of mass resource extraction in any other mod that can possibly compare with a frame borer. Frame borers are easily the most efficient and the quickest. Arcane borers from TC slow, immobile, and require a supply of new tools; BC3 quarries are slow and immobile; rail-based borers from Steve's Carts and Railcraft are extremely limited; and you're not going to actually mine with TNT. The only possible competition is from ComputerCraft's Turtles, but those present a host of other problems (including balancing). There were absolutely no changes made to BC3 quarries. They are breaking due to, as I suspect, the failure of chunk loaders to work. "Fixing BC3 quarries" would therefore only require enabling chunk loaders, but as very few people would actually abandon their frame borer and covert to quarries, it would only compound the problem even worse. Stop attaching some baseless blame to all your posts without a single clue of what's involved. Does it make you feel good inside?
I would remove them completely since they pretty much ruin the fun of mining and makes the materials obtained from them worth next to nothing. We just stopped playing after getting like 100k of iron, redstone etc ( took 4 days with a 30x15 borer), and realizing uu is pointless.
btw I dont know if its just me but literally always right after im done using my frame bore redpower always seems to crash
see that's what i mean by running it when they don't need it -.- and they don't play .... so there not even using the stuff
You didn't rip out the force-chunk-loading in BC3 quarries? Because that was my understanding, and my understanding for why they are glitchy as hell on this server and not on any other server. When Alice launched quarries were not even enabled. Personally I prefer quarries over frame bores because they're fire, forget, and don't utterly overwhelm your storage capacity all in an instant. In my mind Quarries and TBM's are the only viable mass-scale mining, and you nixed Quarries from day one, leaving only TBM's, then reintroduced them later after TBM's were well established. If the performance gains from nixing TBM's and allowing quarries to function properly, normally is significant, why try to find a way to preserve the, as you call it, unholy amount of physics updates, inherent with TBM's?
No, that would have actually fixed the problem. But we didn't modify BC3 because Railcraft had a silly piece of code to force a server crash with no explanation if even a slight modification was made to BC3, IC2, or RP2 (very strange when BC3, and possibly IC2, are open source to begin with). While that absurd feature of RC could be blocked or removed, this was pointless difficulty and there were bigger problems (notably the mining world) to tackle. The BC3 team is adamant that quarries MUST load chunks and they will not have it any other way, for reasons unknown to me, and therefore BC3 itself would have to be modified to remove the chunk loading "feature." Quarries were not enabled because people would quarry mountains as they saw fit and leave large holes in the terrain in Alice 1.2.5, and therefore the "solution" for that problem was to require that they would be placed on the mining world. However, the mining world was not initially available because the old server software was too poorly performing to handle loading a fourth world (after the main overworld, the Nether, and The End). With the switch-over to the current server software that we do now use, it turned out that its support of multiple worlds was poor and the addition of a fourth world created havoc (and that is still the case, but we have special modifications to fix that), creating well-known problems such as the "flipped over IC2 machines." With a greater concurrent number of players in MC 1.4, as well as the increased demand for resources, the number of "quarry holes" would have massively jumped. People still build and will always build TBMs simply because they are so efficient, regardless if they have other means to mine. Especially now with the change to allow tubes within frames, much less space in a frame borer is required for supporting structure, and borers are now even larger and more effective. It doesn't take an army of borers running at once to create an impressive amount of server load; you only need one large one. Part of the problem also isn't the borer itself, but the supporting piping to handle the sheer output of a frame borer. I have no personal desire to maintain any particular feature of any mod, if not for the usual backlash always caused by partially or wholly reducing the functionality of any feature used by someone.
So I see the issue like this: Though mass-mining is less efficient and quick, we can expect significant performance gains. On account of those performance gains, in an ideal world, BC3 quarries begin to function normally and as expected, serving as a replacement for the loss of the TBM's. World anchors load and behave as they should, mobs spawn and remain, and the server as a whole improves through all the things that are no longer being automatically culled due to server drain. This seems like a really easy decision. The tradeoffs are worth the loss of TBM's, and it's not like Quarries won't still bring in large volumes of material, particularly if they start loading chunks and can be left unattended while people go about their business in the regular world.
This is partially theoretical. I do not have performance data on the server for every moment, only snapshots of when the server seems particularly slow. The data is also not very granular -- I cannot tell if a Pneumatic Tube is causing load as a result of a poorly designed tube network or a frame borer without having to open out a full set of tools. Additionally, there's no super simple way to disable frame borers because blocking the relevant items used in a frame borer (frames, frame motors) would prevent their use for other tasks. And lastly, I cannot absolutely reliably predict what people would actually do in response. Besides that, there's always the possibility that some important issue has not been accounted for, and asking everyone for an opinion is a good way to make sure that every rock has been turned.
My opinion is to advocate for a live-test of what happens when TBM's are removed from the equation, accomplished by having everyone turn off/dismantle their TBM pending results of the test. Test period would need to be suitably long to see what crops up after that.
my tmb is not running unless i am there watching it and i don't run it for more then 30 mins and when possible when there is not many people if other used there tbm's only when they need them and had smaller sized tbms there wouldn't be any problem at all and they would still get more then enough ore
if anyone is wondering what's wrong with frame bores... This is what's wrong with frame bores. Then again you can be stupid about BC Quarries too I guess.
Full size quarry, the most efficient quarry... stupid? Full size TBM, the most efficient TBM... stupid? The only thing wrong with frame bores is their performance hit.
Are fillers disabled due to the current issues with them? I liked using them to quarry. I know they don't drop blocks but they clear them really fast and I run around silk touching the exposed ores.
And if this does create a huge improvement on the server, there should be a replacement system for those who lost there borers. Have mods come out and check how many resources were invested in these projects, provide a quarry or two. I think the Pros too greatly out way the Cons to not give this a shot. As for me I don't have a frame bore, I have a glitchy, nearly unusable quarry that has never been fully functional because of the need for server resources, if I leave unattended I have to completely reset it. Quarrys are a viable way to get resources, just not now, I believe if people are refunded in some way, server performance can be improved without any loss of player productivity. I have the resources to make a bore, however I never made one, not to be sassy, but now frame users will get to know a less OP flow of materials, and not have to ruin performance for the rest of us.
Meh, I would not seek out a refund. I have spent a lot on it, but it has more than returned that. I would be much happier with the improved server performance to care about the loss of the quarry.
I vote for getting rid of them, increasing server performance would be a huge relief, and myself would rather use a Quarry,(don't know about others). Get rid of em!
Regrettably, I think block breaking bores need to go. As SK said, they consume a large portion of the server's resources and are incredibly overpowered. Rather than removing and making block breakers uncraftable, I would suggest two changes I have seen on other servers: Disable blockbreaking for stone and cobblestone. Impliment the Gregtech recipe for block breakers. Step one will make frame bores and quarries unworkable, as well as stopping block breaker-based cobble generators when there are several, much better ways to make cobble. Step two would make block breakers much more expensive, and should encourage players to limit block breaker usage. Players would still be able to use block breakers for a few specialized tasks, but silly things like cobble generators and pumpkin farms with hundreds of block breakers would be a thing of the past.
I for one currently have a 22*64ish bore running... resources intensive yes, yet I am more then happy to give up the bores to gain chunkloading and stable quarrys. you're whinging about people who havn't made bores wanting to get rid of them, most of us who HAVE made them want to get rid of them too. Just saying I've run 1 bore 30k blocks and the latest one over 2k already. just left random bores in the mining world. If you had a bore you would know that it really isn't that much by way of resources. P.s I agree with glitch, he has great ideas. Lol owned. Er. Mad, Path, Neon and I did some testing with the bores, before we activated ours just after the server was started TPS was between 18 and 20, and as soon as we hit the lever thus starting the process it dropped the TPS to between 9 and 14 fluctuating constantly. While this isn't proof that bores are the only thing causing TPS issues we are certain that it is causing a significant amount of it.
Just a thought - You have already benefited greatly from your frame bore, so you do not need to care about whether or not they are disabled.
