- Joined
- Jun 14, 2017
- Messages
- 273
- Reaction score
- 148
TL;DR nutshell index table of contents thingy:
• Change stabilizers to make more sense
• Replace the current stabilizer system with a bonus power supply (basically copy paste the original mechanics and change both differently)
• Different bonus power supply methods
• Chamber ideas
• Misc. power ideas
• The end
Make stabilizers make sense or remove them
• First off, the stabilizer mechanic can be replaced by something else since it would make more sense for stabilizers to be placed around the reactor at the same distance relative to the closest block. If a spherical or three dimensional thing was applied to the stabilizer mechanic as it is now with the block in each axis idea, we would end up with flying space balls and sausages. Not everyone wants those.
• Stabilizer count could be based on a ratio of six stabilizers to ten (these numbers aren’t final) reactor blocks which have to be placed the same distance around the reactor in each axis direction.
• The distance between the reactor and stabilizers would increase by an amount but not as far as the radiator explained below since the stabilizers have to be close enough to stabilize the reactor but not enough to melt (they could be made out of a common tough material).
• Maybe the ratio could start at 4-6 stabilizers for 10 reactors and a distance of 0 with the stabilizer count multiplied by 2 and the distance increases by 1 with each addition of 10 reactor blocks.
• To prevent space balls maybe the stabilizer positions can be reduced to two axis?
• Nah just kill them.
Power output methods
• Method one is similar to (or exactly like) the one at Stabilizer Mechanics: Flux Dissipation; hot plasma could be pumped from the reactor to plasma turbine things which consume a bit of plasma and generate energy and the rest of the plasma could be pumped to a radiator which feeds the cold plasma back into the reactor. This could allow for a kind of resource consumption thing later on.
• To prevent islands, the radiator (I'm not sure about the turbines though) could be spaced out away from the reactor like the original stabilizer system but shouldn't be too far. Perhaps two times the distance of the stabilizers minimum without melting from external and internal hot plasma contact. It could be placed anywhere just not too close to the reactor. The beam could lead from the reactor, through any nodes, to the turbines, to the radiator, and back to the reactor.
• (Tiny reactors don’t require stabilizers anyways unless your “tiny” reactor has stabilization below 20% (?). This useless idea is here in case anyone has some kind of use for it) For smaller ships thermal contact generators could be used to generate energy directly from contact of the smaller reactors (perhaps one generator for each 5 blocks?). Since tiny reactors don’t generate as much heat as larger ones, the generators won’t melt. Larger ships could be built with those but a larger reactor would generate so much heat the generators would melt.
• My third idea is a combination of these systems. (Also pretty useless) If the cooling/power generation system gets destroyed (perhaps enough damage to the plasma stream damages and then destroys one block at a time then the next one along the chain until the last turbine or radiator block is destroyed) the ship will still have the contact generators. To prevent them from melting, a heat regulation chamber (or effect processor) could automatically throttle down the reactor's heat.
• Disregarding the dumb ideas, the plasma pumping idea seems pretty pointless. Since Schine's idea for the stabilizers is to make them necessary for large reactors, maybe the plasma pumping would only be necessary for large reactors since the internals get very hot and need to be cooled down like a real reactor. Since it's hot in a reactor, the coolant is turned into hot plasma and turned back into coolant.
• The stabilizer supplement idea thing is pretty dumb but Schine wants stabilizers and not island ships. Oh well.
Chamber ideas
• They are cool, but calling them that makes them seem like useless reactor casing. Why not call them effect processors or such? They could regulate power output to different systems enabling different effects that are disabled when they don't receive power.
• Processor amount for each type of system can be controlled by the size of the system(s) being affected and reactor size can be based on power requirements of the whole ship and the capacity required to support the various (or not so much) effect processors.
Misc.
• For the stabilization beam that exists I would suggest making the nodes able to split the beam by having multiple nodes connect to one parent node.
• The texture is ugly.
• Make the old power system remain as an option. It would almost be balanced with the new system because near uber special effects can sometimes best spaghetti.
If you have better ideas please put them in the comments. I think this thread is now as messed up as power 2.0.
• Change stabilizers to make more sense
• Replace the current stabilizer system with a bonus power supply (basically copy paste the original mechanics and change both differently)
• Different bonus power supply methods
• Chamber ideas
• Misc. power ideas
• The end
Make stabilizers make sense or remove them
• First off, the stabilizer mechanic can be replaced by something else since it would make more sense for stabilizers to be placed around the reactor at the same distance relative to the closest block. If a spherical or three dimensional thing was applied to the stabilizer mechanic as it is now with the block in each axis idea, we would end up with flying space balls and sausages. Not everyone wants those.
• Stabilizer count could be based on a ratio of six stabilizers to ten (these numbers aren’t final) reactor blocks which have to be placed the same distance around the reactor in each axis direction.
• The distance between the reactor and stabilizers would increase by an amount but not as far as the radiator explained below since the stabilizers have to be close enough to stabilize the reactor but not enough to melt (they could be made out of a common tough material).
• Maybe the ratio could start at 4-6 stabilizers for 10 reactors and a distance of 0 with the stabilizer count multiplied by 2 and the distance increases by 1 with each addition of 10 reactor blocks.
• To prevent space balls maybe the stabilizer positions can be reduced to two axis?
• Nah just kill them.
Power output methods
• Method one is similar to (or exactly like) the one at Stabilizer Mechanics: Flux Dissipation; hot plasma could be pumped from the reactor to plasma turbine things which consume a bit of plasma and generate energy and the rest of the plasma could be pumped to a radiator which feeds the cold plasma back into the reactor. This could allow for a kind of resource consumption thing later on.
• To prevent islands, the radiator (I'm not sure about the turbines though) could be spaced out away from the reactor like the original stabilizer system but shouldn't be too far. Perhaps two times the distance of the stabilizers minimum without melting from external and internal hot plasma contact. It could be placed anywhere just not too close to the reactor. The beam could lead from the reactor, through any nodes, to the turbines, to the radiator, and back to the reactor.
• (Tiny reactors don’t require stabilizers anyways unless your “tiny” reactor has stabilization below 20% (?). This useless idea is here in case anyone has some kind of use for it) For smaller ships thermal contact generators could be used to generate energy directly from contact of the smaller reactors (perhaps one generator for each 5 blocks?). Since tiny reactors don’t generate as much heat as larger ones, the generators won’t melt. Larger ships could be built with those but a larger reactor would generate so much heat the generators would melt.
• My third idea is a combination of these systems. (Also pretty useless) If the cooling/power generation system gets destroyed (perhaps enough damage to the plasma stream damages and then destroys one block at a time then the next one along the chain until the last turbine or radiator block is destroyed) the ship will still have the contact generators. To prevent them from melting, a heat regulation chamber (or effect processor) could automatically throttle down the reactor's heat.
• Disregarding the dumb ideas, the plasma pumping idea seems pretty pointless. Since Schine's idea for the stabilizers is to make them necessary for large reactors, maybe the plasma pumping would only be necessary for large reactors since the internals get very hot and need to be cooled down like a real reactor. Since it's hot in a reactor, the coolant is turned into hot plasma and turned back into coolant.
• The stabilizer supplement idea thing is pretty dumb but Schine wants stabilizers and not island ships. Oh well.
Chamber ideas
• They are cool, but calling them that makes them seem like useless reactor casing. Why not call them effect processors or such? They could regulate power output to different systems enabling different effects that are disabled when they don't receive power.
• Processor amount for each type of system can be controlled by the size of the system(s) being affected and reactor size can be based on power requirements of the whole ship and the capacity required to support the various (or not so much) effect processors.
Misc.
• For the stabilization beam that exists I would suggest making the nodes able to split the beam by having multiple nodes connect to one parent node.
• The texture is ugly.
• Make the old power system remain as an option. It would almost be balanced with the new system because near uber special effects can sometimes best spaghetti.
If you have better ideas please put them in the comments. I think this thread is now as messed up as power 2.0.
Last edited:
