Search results

Outward appearances suggest they have a similar opinion to my own. I don't what you think might be achieved by me discussing it with them.

I don't disagree that that might be nice, I just don't think it's practical from an efficiency or business point of view.

No, don’t worry, it's still fine. For example you can double the reactor size to 20 blocks and place the stabilisers at 40% efficiency (a semi-random choice for this example's sake) for a separation of just 15m, and double your power. But why? If you've got two or more people coding it may...

Separation for 100% stabiliser efficiency starts at around just 6 metres (without even considering lower efficiency), and you're already 23m long without even needing stabilisers yet. Doesn't sound like anything to worry about there...

Or conduits between reactor and stabilisers. I don't think replicating power 1.0 ships was a goal for power 2.0. I'm not sure if I should be able to see an image of a ship above, so I may be misunderstanding, but you aren't restricted to one dimension, you can place as many groups of...

Decloak ships when they undock a child entity.

The first SM player ever to say that!

Even if you remind yourself that by placing then at closer distances you'll be maximising total ship efficien y? I don't think reducing stabiliser efficiency is breaking the system. It's a feature not a bug.

Yes, for a specified armour thickness (e.g. 1 layer of AA) there will be an upper limit of reactor size that benefits. For more reasonable/realistic/typical armour thickness the limit will be far higher. For example if a 30x30x30 reactor (27k blocks, 2.7million e/s) wants to drop to 50%...

Of course you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I strongly disagree. For me the entire ship is important.

No, sounds like you messed up the maths. I just gave example numbers that show mass savings for a reactor larger than that. I'll post screenshots of ships when I get a chance.

Obviously,a s I've already said (why is it necessary to say it again?) this mechanic is not applicable if you split your hull into two separate sub hulls. 15% stabilisers? Sounds very high...

I have no idea, don't ask me. (Why didn't you ask the op that same question about his image that appears to show a very long hull?) Presumably you'll be putting systems in that space between reactor and stabilisers. The image isn't a full ship, it's only to visualise the concept. On a related...

Yes, it's all about numbers, and it isn't true for every conceivable situation (e.g. stabilisers and reactor each in their own sub-hull without a connection, like you suggest). (Slightly OT but I really hope conduit becomes required between reactor and stabilisers) Your point isn't entirely...

This is somewhere between potentially misleading and incorrect....(depending on geometry involved, and assumptions used for the image) Note that I've assumed that the ship before it was widened had its stabilisers at 100% efficiency (i.e. all the way out at "optimal" separation distance from...

For design I think the new power and shields systems look like they have amazing potential, I'm glad they're happening, and I'm actually looking forward to revamps of other systems... For actual play, similar to something Ithirahad said earlier, I think a fully functioning economy is what will...

I liked chaining reactors in a hierarchy and then attaching systems to different levels ;) Safer to speak for yourself, because you don't speak for all of us. This isn't the depth YOU want.

Do you prefer simple or complicated? I can't tell. One possible simple way of thinking about power system depth: In power 1.0, excluding designs that had multiple reactors (which FTR I loved and would like to still have), you had a very, very good chance of being able to guess pretty much...

By efficiency you mean minimising block count/mass? If you want an efficient ship in power 1.0 then you'd also be "forced" to build a certain shape.

For most ships I doubt it. Because of the recent stabiliser separation distance increase, you can save a lot of hull by reducing stabiliser efficiency. Obviously it depends on the geometry of each individual ship, and how heavily armoured it is, and what the final configs are, but I would...