New Weapon + Thruster + Shield + Generator + Fuel Generator, using resources

    NeonSturm

    StormMaker
    Joined
    Dec 31, 2013
    Messages
    5,110
    Reaction score
    617
    • Wired for Logic
    • Thinking Positive
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    If the power regeneration is very slow, then the moment you're out of power, you're pretty much out of the fight.
    A solution to this would be to require much more power for effect-boosted weapons - 67% comes from fuel, 33% from reactors.

    Another possibility is that the attacker (the faster ship) runs out of power first - then it can only make hit&run attacks.

    And if you face a greater force which is also faster, why should you win?
     
    Joined
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages
    43
    Reaction score
    24
    • Purchased!
    If the power regeneration is very slow, then the moment you're out of power, you're pretty much out of the fight.
    Well to be honest I kind of like that idea. Although ships being 90% capacitors would be an odd change to peoples designs, I feel that managing power and the size of weapons would be a good thing. In theory this could make weapons smaller, or at the very least just make people be smarter on how they design the entire weapons system on the ship to give the most output for the least amount of power. That's how I see things, but to be honest I'm not to good at the theorizing on a technical level. I'd have to literally test this idea out too see if it was worth the massive change. It just sounds good too me right now, cuz I feel that the game should go into a more realism type of sandbox. Where it feels like you're really, really flying a spaceship.
     
    Joined
    Oct 25, 2015
    Messages
    14
    Reaction score
    12
    Not to take things in a slightly different direction but instead of having a resources you need to operate well, you need to rid yourself of something accumulated?

    My understanding is that in the game starsector they have flux which is basically the equivalent of heat. From what I know about real world spaceship design, heat is a huge problem and is quite difficult to get rid of in space since all you have is conduction and radiation as there is no medium to reject the heat. You can certainly store the heat but you can't destroy it.

    So going back to design without changing things too much. What if each ship had a heat structural heat limit and as the ship fires weapons/cloaks it starts to build up excess heat which is rejected at a certain rate. Once the ship gets too hot then components start to fail and are unable to operate.

    That system could be in place with no new blocks, but in the future blocks could be added to facilitate quicker cooling or larger capacity. Now that I think of it, mechwarrior used to have a similar system too. This is almost like needing fuel but in reverse...
     
    Joined
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages
    278
    Reaction score
    31
    I don't think special fuel versions for everything is necessary. I think it'z just too much, and seems like an unnecessary layer. Power blocks, fuel for power, maybe fuel also being used for JDs, and possibly some ammunition(I'm not really feeling it tbh), is good though.
    Similar to other fuel suggestions, not much new. Slightly off the track of discussion.

    Hydrogen-fusion: plentiful and cheap, renewable, and compact enough to not be too annoying.
    But takes enough storage to make you stop once in a while and visit home or a shop.

    Can mine a little and temporarily turn your ship into a slow/immobile, and vulnerable, "capital ship" (regardless of size) to operate a factory and process the renewable nebula/planet/asteroid material, if you're desperate. Hard to be stranded, especially with backup power from other systems.

    Antimatter/???: expensive, very compact. Equal/slight bonus to power.

    Solar: Has to go on the outside(pending implementation of inside/outside), cheap, light.
    Zero-point: Softcap, boxdims, know and love it, may take a powergen/softcap nerf.

    (Maybe expensive and/or heavy. If not expensive or heavy, can be the same block as hydrogen and antimatter reactors. Otherwise, it shares the block with antimatter. Or, antimatter and hydrogen are the same block and zero-point remains separate. Hydrogen should be the "standard, middle option", and thus should not be expensive or heavy. But we should compress the blocks down as much as possible, make it simple and easy.)
    Fossil, Chemical
    I think that would be insufficient. Fusion would be a more better counterpart to antimatter, and fits the high tech level of warpgates, jump drives, and transporters better. Chemical rockets could be good for afterburners(movement/strafing), though.
    Not to take things in a slightly different direction but instead of having a resources you need to operate well, you need to rid yourself of something accumulated?

    My understanding is that in the game starsector they have flux which is basically the equivalent of heat. From what I know about real world spaceship design, heat is a huge problem and is quite difficult to get rid of in space since all you have is conduction and radiation as there is no medium to reject the heat. You can certainly store the heat but you can't destroy it.

    So going back to design without changing things too much. What if each ship had a heat structural heat limit and as the ship fires weapons/cloaks it starts to build up excess heat which is rejected at a certain rate. Once the ship gets too hot then components start to fail and are unable to operate.

    That system could be in place with no new blocks, but in the future blocks could be added to facilitate quicker cooling or larger capacity. Now that I think of it, mechwarrior used to have a similar system too. This is almost like needing fuel but in reverse...
    You might need complex, cpu-intensive code to calculate making radiators that can't be exploited, and without making radiators it's silly IMO.
     

    NeonSturm

    StormMaker
    Joined
    Dec 31, 2013
    Messages
    5,110
    Reaction score
    617
    • Wired for Logic
    • Thinking Positive
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    I think we need both long-term fuel and a second layer of energy-capacitors. One for burst fire, one for continuous fire or burst-cloak huge objects with low infinite regeneration.

    You can certainly store the heat but you can't destroy it.
    You can't destroy energy, but maybe you can destroy the form of energy called heat.
    Scientists created a molecule that activates a endotherm chemical reaction once heat excesses a certain level (it absorbs heat).

    If you can make it releasing the heat in another form of energy you can from that regain energy for any purpose.
    Imagine you could use all the thermal energy from a nuclear fission plant's boiled water.