3 Thrust questions

[HaViC is Chaos]

1. What is the record for fastes ship? Mine is currently at 7500 kph

2. Is there some sort of configuration you can place them in to be efficient? I have run into a problem where if I place a thruster in a certain position my ship will lose thrust. It seems to work similar to power but different, if that makes sense. I cannot seem to find any rhyme or reason to the pattern.

3. Why does holding w and e make the top speed faster?

 

[Yhgi117]

For number 3, I believe that holding \"W\" makes you go in the x direction (relative to your ship), while holding \"E\" makes you move in the y direction. Holding both keys moves you in both directions at once, and as one speed stacks upon the other, it moves you faster \"up\" and \"forwards\" faster than if you were just travelling in one direction.

Hope that made sense.

 

[Zaflis]

#2: Thrusters work with box-dimension principle like power generators. You can test it simple way using 20 coil thruster blocks:
Ship config 1) Make 10x2 box of thrusters.
Ship config 2) Make 2 groups of 10 thrusters.
You\'ll notice that config 2 outputs more thrust.

Box dimension has 1 logic rule, when placing new block to group, it should be placed in a spot where that group grows in size to some direction. If it\'s not adding to size, its effect is less meaningful. Shapes like lines and crosses make up the easiest box-dimensions, and you can put them in checkerboard pattern, so that the groups aren\'t touching.

 

[Math321]

So, would it be a good idea to use the same designs we use for power generators for thrusters?

 

[Nootau]

Why use one inefficent design for another block?

 

[Morhe]

Unlike power generators, thrusters also grow exponentially in addition to their box dimension growth, so the wasted space in the middle of a reactor configuration would give you less thrust than if you had simply filled the entire thing with thrusters. It does, however, mean that the same number of thruster blocks will provide more thrust if its in a longer shape than if it\'s clumped together.

 

[Morhe]

I think he was asking whether or not it would be worth it to weave thrusters through his ship alongside the power blocks; he used the phrase \"power blocks\" and not \"reactors.\" And, the answer to that is \"sort of\", since the additional exponential scaling that thrusters get means that a single, unified thruster group is better than having a small thruster line for each of your reactor lines. There is, however, a benefit to having your thruster group span the entire length, width, and depth of your ship for the dimension bonus before filling it out to make the lines thicker or adding a bigger chunk somwhere.

 

[Nootau]

He said \'power generators\' and refers to a design.. How is that not talking about reactors?

 

[Math321]

I meant using the same designs we use for reactors, but replacing all the power generators with thrusters.

Thanks for the info.

 

[Morhe]

The reactor setup is a specifc design. Not all power generator designs are reactor designs. As the OP did not specify, it made more sense to me at the time to assume that he meant power generator designs in general, including ship-lines.

 

[Zaflis]

Actually what i noticed yesterday, is that unlike power generators, thrusters strength don\'t grow exponentially but linearly. Another simple test:

 

[Morhe]

Thrusters are exponential for block count as well as dimension count, albeit with diminishing returns. For a thruster grouping with a box dim of 50:

• Thruster Count / Thrust Provided / Gained
• 100 / 226.8 / NA
• 200 / 436.8 / 210.0
• 300 / 661.0 / 224.2
• 400 / 894.9 / 233.9
• 500 / 1136.3 / 241.4
• 600 / 1383.8 / 247.5
• 700 / 1636.6 / 252.8
• 800 / 1893.9 / 257.3
• 900 / 2155.3 / 261.4
• 1000 / 2420.4 / 265.1

For thrusters, there are actually two equations being added together; one for box dimensions, and one for contiguous thruster count. So, while you could get more thrust out of the same blocks by sticking them all in one long line, with the ammount of space that would take up you\'re better of just making the grouping bigger and taking advantage of the exponential per-block increase as well. Hence I said a few posts up that you\'re best off running an internal line of thrusters the full length of your ship, then just adding more by chunk.

 

[WiskeyEcho]

Sum Of Dimensions - 3 + Blocks^1.125
From: http://www.starmadewiki.com/wiki/Hyperflux_Coil_Thruster

So to put that in words(Basicaly same as Morhe said); Also that Dimensions is the total Ship, So unlike power in which each section is counted; For Thrusters it seems to be the Total ship thrusters box... So Run a line to the tallest/Widest/Longest areas of your ship but after that it is more efficent to place the rest where ever they fit... IE: use the 10x10x10 Mode...

Also Addition seems to be +2.4 if adding to size, and 1.4 if not...

 

[Zaflis]

my picture above wasn\'t to prove linearity, but the fact that box-dimensions matter. I did other test for linearity which i didn\'t show here but i only did it with 1-5 blocks. Using your numbers i get more impressive graph. I agree, it\'s not linear but it almost looks like one

 

[Morhe]

It\'s not much of an increase. But it does prove that you\'re better off adding to your first thruster group than building a second one with the same box dimensions, since that will only double your thrust, whereas doubling the number of blocks on the first grouping will (usually) give you more thrust total.

It doesn\'t seem like a significant gain at first, until you take into account the fact that webbing multiple full-box-dimension thruster groupings into your ship is a lot more work, and you can get much more total thrust by filling in the gaps between the groupings anyhow.