AE2 P2P 5% loss cause powerfailure

[samsonsin]

Your GTNH Discord Username

samsonsin

Your Pack Version

2.8.0

Your Proposal

AE2 P2P EU tax should be subtracted from AE network, rather from packet itself.

Your Goal

It subtracts it from the EU packet itself. This causes some machines (like the volcanus doing osmium ingots, 2x LuV hatches, HSS-S or Trinium coils), to instantly powerfail as it cannot draw enough power.

Without this, you would need on-site batteries to compensate, increasing lag and setup, or run longer powerlines which would increase lag.

Your Vision

Would reduce the lag and setup cost of P2P transfers in the edge case where the 5% loss results in powerfailure.

Final Checklist

• I have searched this issue tracker and there is nothing similar already. Posting on a closed issue saying I like this change please reconsider adding it will prompt us to investigate and reopen it once we confirm your report.
• I understand this change request may not attract enough attention and thus not be implemented.
• I understand this change request may be rejected due to other community members think it's inappropriate.
• I believe this feature would make the pack better.

[boubou19]

This is intended, you should always do some energy buffering at the end of the P2P, or take into account the loss when drafting your setups

[samsonsin]

This is intended, you should always do some energy buffering at the end of the P2P, or take into account the loss when drafting your setups

Before the 2.8.0 update, doing this was needed because during startup, chunk unload/load and network change, P2P's would take a few seconds to initalize, requiring buffers to not have issues. 2.8.0 fixed this, but with this, you still need buffers for a small subset of recipes (of when doing stuff like megas not maxxing out parallels).

Is there any reason to do buffering anymore other than to not have this exact issue come up? Far as i see it, it just adds lag, forcing the player to make excess LSC's just so the setup can pull an extra 5%. Id personally easily pay 10% penalty for eu p2p, rather than 5% on the packet itself. You trade conveniece for intreased powerdraw, but the convenience is simply not very good.

[lc-1337]

Cool but its huge strike on wire balance, especially on UHV+

[Miklebe]

Did you try supply them with more power or using better cables on the end of the p2p so it's not just 4A that powerfail? Other suggestion, use step down transformers.
I did the most braindead thing and used p2p directly on the hatches and using 64A LuV source, and it works fine, no instant powerfails.

Been smelting for 2 minutes now, works fine.

Tho it might depend on the setup/coils, but since none were provided, no idea how to even test it.

If we remove penalty or place burden on AE, either AE will constantly die, depending on the buffer on the AE system, or nobody would use cables or lasers anymore.

[Miklebe]

I just smelt 2 stacks of osmium without a single powerfail using HSS-G coils which did 4 ingots per 28s (no fluid).

[samsonsin]

IT works if you use electrum flux coils, rather than trinium ones. Using transformers on the end work, and would be much cheaper than using LSC or batbuffers on the ends, at least.

[samsonsin]

HSS-S coils also powerfail. Naq, Naq alloy and HSS-G seem to work fine

[samsonsin]

If we remove penalty or place burden on AE, either AE will constantly die, depending on the buffer on the AE system, or nobody would use cables or lasers anymore.

If you want to make sure P2P isint attractive, just have the tax be larger, like 10%, for the conveniece. Seems that the volcanus powerfailing on some coils when doing some ingots is just unintuative. Would make the neutronium powercells more powerful, and disincentivise p2p early on, while making it a go-to in later game. I've not gotten past ZPM before, so i dont know how this might affect balance at higher tiers, but i was under the assumption that laser was mainly for mutlis that can take thousands of amps, at which point running laser rather than gteu just makes sense.

[samsonsin]

worth noting tesla tower only has windings until ZPM, so increasing ae2 tax would incentivie the use of the tower as well, while after ZPM you can use the neutronium powercell to use ae2 instead

[boubou19]

We don't want to make P2P EU unappealing, we want them to be used with a bit of tinkering. And that 5% of loss forces you to either count your power, or find alternatives to bypass the loss (step up/down transformers, endpoint buffering, etc).

[Miklebe]

while making it a go-to in later game.

And nobody would use them in the late game because lossless cables are a thing, wireless energy is a thing, lasers are a thing, and 5% tax from basically nothing is too much. 5% supposed to emulate long distance non SC cable loss.

[samsonsin]

We don't want to make P2P EU unappealing, we want them to be used with a bit of tinkering. And that 5% of loss forces you to either count your power, or find alternatives to bypass the loss (step up/down transformers, endpoint buffering, etc).

I didint know about the transformer up then down trick, which solves the issue while adding some tinkering. The QB should mention these tricks though, imo.

[kopatych3348]

I agree that machines should powerfail trough p2p a lot or else that would make wires useless. Even if there would be like 20% power loss but from ae net and not voltage, I would just produce more power and use only p2p eu.

Hovewer, there is indeed an issue with parallels calculations sometimes causing unwanter powerfails. A double hatched HV mixer can get something like 21 parallels and require almost a full EV voltage and that behaviour is causing issues even when there only a bit (less than 1%) of loss. This is hovever a completely different discussion with a lot of caveats