schrodingersDipshit Posted February 7 Report Posted February 7 So the simple logic of "water with more momentum will go farther" aside, I think it would make for easier use of the waterwheel as a power source. In my own world in the prerelease, I came up with the idea to make an aqueduct to move the rapidly flowing water I found closer to my home. Unfortunately, because this water doesn't flow very far, the angle of the aqueduct is quite steep and I couldn't make it very far from the mountain where I found the source block. I think it'd make utilizing waterwheels as a power source much more fun and interesting if it were slightly easier to make this sort of infrastructure. Currently it flows about 6 blocks away from the source, meaning you have to make it drop every 5 to flow farther, and while I think boosting it to 11 for an even 10 blocks for every drop would look the nicest, I don't know if that would necessarily be balanced considering the reliability of water wheel power vs windmill power. 6
LadyWYT Posted February 7 Report Posted February 7 1 hour ago, schrodingersDipshit said: I don't know if that would necessarily be balanced considering the reliability of water wheel power vs windmill power. Welcome to the forums! I think to balance it, the rapids could just switch to normal flowing water after a certain distance from the original source. That way players can have a bit of freedom when building watermills, with the watermills still being more limited than windmills when it comes to location. Basically, you could reasonably build a little aqueduct nearby for a watermill if you don't want to build right next to the source, but you're not building an aqueduct halfway across the local area or otherwise splitting the flow to power multiple water mills from a single source.
williams_482 Posted February 8 Report Posted February 8 Is allowing players to move the flow from rapids blocks a significant distance (provided they construct a viable aqueduct) actually a balance or realism problem? An aqueduct would be a significant investment, dropping one block every 10 blocks would still be a serious limitation, and water presumably needing to fall onto the water mill structure would further limit things. Aqueducts and similar watercourses are also just cool, and building them should be encouraged. Splitting rapids flows is a separate, further question. I think the big balance questions are: Can you split rapids flows the way you can with water? If not, how can that be prevented? Can you run multiple wheels in sequence off of a single flow branch? How deep under ground can water wheels continue to function? I think ideally, waterwheel setups should be possible to scale up, at meaningful expense/effort. If every rapid source equals one water wheel that seems kinda boring. 2
LadyWYT Posted February 8 Report Posted February 8 8 minutes ago, williams_482 said: Is allowing players to move the flow from rapids blocks a significant distance (provided they construct a viable aqueduct) actually a balance or realism problem? An aqueduct would be a significant investment, dropping one block every 10 blocks would still be a serious limitation, and water presumably needing to fall onto the water mill structure would further limit things. Aqueducts and similar watercourses are also just cool, and building them should be encouraged. They are cool, and the player shouldn't be discouraged from building infrastructure. I was thinking more along the lines of, water tends to flow quite fast in rapids and waterfalls, but the current slows down as the water moves past those points. Players are also very good at exploiting game mechanics to do things that may not be intended. Most watermills that I'm aware of tend to be built close to the source; it's probably possible to power one via an aqueduct but it does seem like the kind of thing that shouldn't be stretching miles across the map. 12 minutes ago, williams_482 said: I think ideally, waterwheel setups should be possible to scale up, at meaningful expense/effort. If every rapid source equals one water wheel that seems kinda boring. I think scaling up the power would require a proper river. The small rivulets we have now are fine for small waterwheels, but I don't see a tiny stream like that powering a big wheel.
Bruno Willis Posted February 8 Report Posted February 8 I think the problem in V.S. is that we are able to move water. We can, if we want to, make an entire, wide river, by placing bucket loads of water and then causing them to flow endlessly from those sources. In that world, it makes sense that water rapids would be easy to make, just by placing a bucket of water above a steep slope. That'd make water power trivial, which is not good. But why does V.S. allow us to make water source blocks with buckets? It seems like a hold over from TOBG. and it is linked with how gardening works. At the moment, gardens need a source block of water right next to every farm block, which is so very very unrealistic, and looks bad. If water sources were non-movable, and if gardens had more believable moisture systems (I.e. rainfall on an average year is enough to keep a garden watered), and if large bodies of water naturally corrected themselves (If you remove a block on the shore, that block fills with a water source?) I think we'd get a more realistic game. In that scenario, I could see it being viable and reasonably balanced to be able to make rapids by steepening a water flow, or by moving water with an aqueduct before dropping it over a wheel. 1
LadyWYT Posted February 8 Report Posted February 8 5 minutes ago, Bruno Willis said: I think the problem in V.S. is that we are able to move water. We can, if we want to, make an entire, wide river, by placing bucket loads of water and then causing them to flow endlessly from those sources. In that world, it makes sense that water rapids would be easy to make, just by placing a bucket of water above a steep slope. That'd make water power trivial, which is not good. To my knowledge, the rapids can't be moved around via bucket like normal water. The idea is that water power is a lot more consistent than wind power and lacks the linen requirement, but in order to utilize it the player needs to build in the area near the source.
Bruno Willis Posted February 8 Report Posted February 8 2 minutes ago, LadyWYT said: To my knowledge, the rapids can't be moved around via bucket like normal water. The idea is that water power is a lot more consistent than wind power and lacks the linen requirement, but in order to utilize it the player needs to build in the area near the source. Yeah, I get that. But I would like it if "rapids" had something to do with the steepness of water's decent, rather than be a special, unique block. I understand why they're doing it like they are though. It's simple, and works to make water power localised, which is good. 1
Recommended Posts