Reactor axis rotation - the hacxs

    Joined
    Oct 8, 2014
    Messages
    138
    Reaction score
    220
    • Community Content - Bronze 2
    • Purchased!
    • Legacy Citizen 9
    What if I told you the reactor below apparently has Stabilizer groups on 5 different dimensions and 133% stabilization (100% and 33% buffer) as compared to 62% stabilization when the reactor axes has not been rotated to a specific setting?




    Something needs to be done.

    (As a proof of concept, I've attached the BP. Just set the reactor axis rotation to X = positive 40 degress, Z = negative 45 degrees to get the same result)
     

    Attachments

    • Like
    Reactions: klawxx
    Joined
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages
    350
    Reaction score
    775
    • Community Content - Bronze 2
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    • Likeable
    I'd say yeaup... it works better with 8 groups, 4 at each end and a gap of three blocks between the groups, if you do that you get all 6 dimensions when the plains are 45,35,0 depending on which plain the stabs have been placed in. I believe it occupies less volume then the 6 stab as well and it's symmetrical and easier to build around.
    19, 199, 1999 & 19999 below. All with 6 dimensions and over 100% stability with approximately equal number of stabilizer blocks to reactor blocks.
    starmade-screenshot-0254.png

    This is my preferred layout these days... at least for long ships. This one is a 199 reactor with 180 stabs.
    starmade-screenshot-0240.png
    Has 3 dimensions and is nice and compact. The stabs at the front can be used as a bit of ablative shielding as well, the reactor above is over 100% stability so theoretically can lose 3/4 of the stabs before power is affected. Works well for AI wars at least.
     

    klawxx

    Product Manager - Roden Shipyards
    Joined
    Jan 5, 2016
    Messages
    337
    Reaction score
    595
    • Legacy Citizen 4
    • Community Content - Silver 1
    • Likeable
    This is Sad... Now we need a fix for the fix... I think we wont be able to withstand a "Power 3.0"...
    [doublepost=1542020751,1542020714][/doublepost]And rebuild AGAIN everything from scratch...
     
    • Like
    Reactions: NeonSturm
    Joined
    Sep 27, 2013
    Messages
    684
    Reaction score
    1,247
    What if I told you the reactor below apparently has Stabilizer groups on 5 different dimensions and 133% stabilization (100% and 33% buffer) as compared to 62% stabilization when the reactor axes has not been rotated to a specific setting?




    Something needs to be done.

    (As a proof of concept, I've attached the BP. Just set the reactor axis rotation to X = positive 40 degress, Z = negative 45 degrees to get the same result)

    If you rotate one of those sets of stabs 180% you can get all 6 dimensions btw, not that it matters now that power 2.0 is already dead again (i have 2 ships in cc with that setup)
     

    NeonSturm

    StormMaker
    Joined
    Dec 31, 2013
    Messages
    5,110
    Reaction score
    617
    • Wired for Logic
    • Thinking Positive
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    It is ANOTHER feature which PRO-players CAN use and NEWbies not! =D
    Just like the compact-reactors of old days...

    Note: Maybe someone makes a secret project ship to force bloody newbies using their own cheaper / more efficient designs to remain competitive. when they don't know about this trick jet.
     
    Joined
    Jan 5, 2016
    Messages
    30
    Reaction score
    18
    Wow a thing which everyone has been doing since power 2.0 dropped and is one of the major contributing factors to all those players leaving.
     

    NeonSturm

    StormMaker
    Joined
    Dec 31, 2013
    Messages
    5,110
    Reaction score
    617
    • Wired for Logic
    • Thinking Positive
    • Legacy Citizen 5
    Wow a thing which everyone has been doing since power 2.0 dropped and is one of the major contributing factors to all those players leaving.
    Or joining.

    If I compare "accumulating knowledge for SM" versus "stupid grinding in other games", I prefer prior.
     
    Joined
    Jun 1, 2015
    Messages
    162
    Reaction score
    63
    yes, and this is easier then those overly complicated power snakes … (I meant this as sarcasm for those that didn't catch it)
    what bugs me is that I cant cramp this into my design ships without sacrificing allot of potential power