Reactor Chamber effects

[Ithirahad]

but if you stabilize it i dont see a limmit

Yes, and your ability to stabilize is tied to the dimensions of your ship. If your ship is too short, you won't be able to stabilize the reactor.

There's a maximum reactor output associated with the dimensions (and possibly configuration, if you want to avoid silly reactor placements) of your hull.

 

[Antikristianos]

as i said the system is still w.i.p. so the dimension requirements for stabilisations may change. but i think that if your reactor is that big and you really need the Energy to power your ship... and then your ship is too "short" maybe your ship is just ways too small for the ammount of systems you put inside ;-)

 

[Non]

My guess is this will be one of the last things that get added for fine-tuning balance. It just doesn't make sense right now.
To answer your question, yes, as of 0.200.153 all chamber blocks cost 100 credits if you buy them, or one mesh to produce.

I meant reactor capacity cost if thats still how it works.

 

[Valck]

I meant reactor capacity cost if thats still how it works.

No, different chambers have different capacity cost progression. As an example, "mobility/turn rate" costs 5/5/10% for levels 1/2/3, while "mobility/top speed" costs 5/10/15%, again from 1 to 3.

 

[kikaha]

My guess is this will be one of the last things that get added for fine-tuning balance. It just doesn't make sense right now.
To answer your question, yes, as of 0.200.153 all chamber blocks cost 100 credits if you buy them, or one mesh to produce.

Very cheap to make.

 

[Valck]

Very cheap to make.

Of course they are, for now. Don't forget this is still in development, the current costs are meant to facilitate testing them.
In the final release, I'm sure they will have their costs adjusted to something more balanced.

 

[kikaha]

This will make every ship we build something of value so destabilizing a big faction to win a war will have meaning- raiding ressources fields and mining outpost to undermine economy, ganging up on big ship...

Exciting times ahead.

 

[Lancake]

Of course they are, for now. Don't forget this is still in development, the current costs are meant to facilitate testing them.
In the final release, I'm sure they will have their costs adjusted to something more balanced.

Correct, crafting recipes and their prices are one of the last things to be modified. Chamber blocks will be quite expensive compared to other blocks, but you also don't need them in large amounts unless you field a large reactor. Each general chamber block will have a difference resource requirement too.

Reactor blocks will be relatively cheap, and definitely easy to make so that you would always have some ability to get power. Stabilizers would be similar but a bit more expensive.

 

[Wrathserker]

Booster
Gives an enormous boost to Thrust.
Energy consumption scales exponentially with mass (and duration?).


Shield Burst
Causes shield to explode outwards when used.
Deals massive Ion? / emp? / explosive? damage in an area around the ship.
Area and damage scale with remaining shields when used.
will disable own shields temporarily.

 

[StormWing0]

Gives people like me a reason to deploy mining and scanning stations to bump up the mining bonus and keep the area well lit.

That said when are fleet getting fixed?

 

[Dire Venom]

I would quite like to see some station specific chambers. .E.g:
-Buffing/Debuffing Auras
-Interdiction/Inhibitor based
-Minefields/Traps etc

 

[RB101]

To sum up this thread;

90% children making stupid suggestions because they have no idea what game balance is.
5% people moaning about current development speed
3% adequate ideas for chambers
1.5% excellent ideas for chamber
& me.

 

[Gandrac]

I know that Weapon Chambers are not gonna make it in this update, nevertheless i just got an idea for a Weapon-Chamber that could actually work and would not be mandatory for a Combat-Ship.

Additional Weapon Effect Slot:
Gives all Weapon Systems an additional Effect Slot.

This chamber would allow for combinations like Ion\EMP, Piercing\Explosive etc. without making it a straight upgrade.
You still need to supply the needed Effect Blocks to make it work, so it will only give you more options to choose from.

Edit:
Furthermore Weapon Chambers would be a great opportunity to implement restricted aiming based on the ships movement, to make it harder for capital class weapon systems to hit fast moving targets. To circumvent this new base-mechanic, a Weapon Chamber could be introduced to revert aiming back to the free crosshair movement we are accustomed to.

 

[nuvank]

I believe For larger vessels The distance between the reactor and the stabilizer needs to be exponentially smaller as with my build of a 2km long IDM- class Dreadnought the reactor size i require is unfeasible due to the fact that id have to more than triple my ships size to accommodate a reactor that is for a ship a 3rd its now enlarged size. Other wise im likely doing it wrong because as i know/understand it multiple reactors also increases the stabilizer distance still making ships of Pocket Dreadnought and higher* size rely on reactors meant for cruiser class ships which power wise dosnt work.

Now this is from my experiments however these are limited due to the buggy nature of the update as of current if some one has found the solution if any to the said described problem plz inform me / comment on this i would like to know as this issue effectively renders 70% of my ship class's useless hulls.

 

[StormWing0]

Supposedly we're needing less of all things to be powered in the first place. So maybe experiment with using less blocks to get the same overall stats you had before? It'd help though if the new stats were displayed somewhere useful though. >.>

 

[NeonSturm]

A mining chamber which instantly mines asteroids which fit into your array.
But just imagine the power requirements for this! You would need to reload a minute or so.

 

[Benevolent27]

Lancake

Here are my ideas on making chambers that will help allow AI and bases to defend without a player nearby. I am making these suggestions because right now it is far too easy to destroy enemy bases and ships when no player is around. Right now players can do the following to bases:
1. either use cloaked warhead ships to break off turrets and then torch the faction block or just destroy the base/ai ship.
2. Move just within max missile range from a base, let off a giant volley of missiles, then move out of range, so the base cannot return fire. Rinse cycle, repeat, till base is dead.

• Stable Scanner
  • Makes attached scanners on a base or ship auto-scan at set intervals while the entity is remaining still.

• Stable Weapons
  • Can be upgraded to increase the range and speed of weapons systems when the weapons are fired from an entity that is NOT moving. (If this is too complicated, then make this a BASE-ONLY upgrade)
  • Variable to modify: missile/cannon/beam range and speed

• Impact Shielding
  • Makes shielded areas immune to warhead damage with a cost of extra energy cost to regen
  • Variable to modify: shield energy consumption
• NOTES: Implementing this could also potentially result in an extra value for blocks that gives them permanent warhead immunity, such as a variant of armor that is more costly to build. These blocks then might be preferred for SHIPS that are left to defend sectors.

Well,that's all I have for now. I feel these additions would be extremely important step in the direction of removing homebase protection and instead relying on actual base defense. It would also be necessary to allow players to feel more comfortable actually defending points of interest in the galaxy.

 

[NeonSturm]

Well,that's all I have for now. I feel these additions would be extremely important step in the direction of removing homebase protection and instead relying on actual base defense.

There also needs to be a higher limit on the size of stations allowed. But this is working atm I think

 

[Benevolent27]

There also needs to be a higher limit on the size of stations allowed. But this is working atm I think

On LvD our ship mass cap is 500k and base cap is 2m. But even with a base 4 times as large as a ship, it's still ridiculously simple to take down the bases. I'd love to be able to have custom functionality on LvD where players must defend sectors with bases, but I can't implement it because I know people will just get warheaded or have their bases destroyed easily. We had designed a system where players would need to hold points of interest in sectors. One faction had deployed several 1m mass defense stations and within a single day they were killed. Massive losses and there was no benefit to them. And it's entirely because stationary targets that cannot scan are easily outranged or just warheaded.

 

[MacThule]

Stop confusing the Chambers with being "part of" the reactor.

They aren't physically part of it, and they don't affect power generation - they consume reactor resources, like engines do (if differently, they still are pure consumers of reactor production). We don't have "Reactor Thrusters."

Chambers exist entirely seperately from the power generation process. Failure to recognize and clarify this confuses their role and their potential.

Also...

Maybe make the chambers be actual chambers as per the definition of "chamber" instead of misnamed bricks.

Why?

They'll demand a lot more space that way and you can then starting coding them to later house crew as the explanation for how they generate all the mysterious effects they give to ships.

Maybe.