Reactors and "Ship Modes"

[Qweesdy]

I've been waiting/lurking for ages; and with the new pre-release decided it was time to try Starmade again, and started messing around with reactors. I think I've stumbled across something that some people might not realise yet...

YOUR NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE ONE REACTOR (at least not for larger ships)!

I started by checking out the tech point trees, and getting annoyed that I couldn't have everything I wanted, because I wanted full mining bonus from logistics while I was mining, and lots of bonuses from FTL when I was travelling, and lots of power and defence bonuses while in combat, and...

That's when I realised - why not have 3 reactors with 3 different sets of chambers, and 3 different "ship modes"?

I grabbed a piece of paper and created 3 columns - one for "mining mode", one for "fast travel mode" and one for "attack mode". I went through the tech point trees again figuring out which chambers I'd want for each mode.

Then I discovered that you can connect the same chamber to multiple reactors. Something like "Turn Rate 3" that I wanted in all three modes could be done with the same chamber connected to all three reactors. I went through my list of what I wanted in each mode and figured out which chambers could be shared by 2 or more reactors/ship modes. Of course the stabilisers are also shared by all 3 reactors.

Then I did a "trial build" to see how well it worked.

It works very well.

It takes about 20 seconds (I didn't time it properly) for systems to restart after I change the "ship mode", and it costs a little extra mass (a small percentage compared to all the damn hull I need to fill the gap between reactors and stabilisers); but you get a lot more flexibility in how you spend those tech points, and it's a little more fun to pilot a ship like this.

The other thing is, my ship isn't a dildo shape - it's the same "4:3:2" (length:width:height) ratios I always use.

 

[Dire Venom]

Very nice imo :P
I can certiantly get behind this, seems both fun and engaging as a game mechanic.
Probably one of the better features to come out of the power update.

 

[Non]

why not have 3 reactors with 3 different sets of chambers, and 3 different "ship modes"?

Because thats a ton of useless mass in combat.

 

[Scypio]

Because thats a ton of useless mass in combat.

And you do two things with your ship. Fight and salvage. Travel/jump/cargo ship if you really want.

Two last categories don't care at all about chambers.

 

[Qweesdy]

Because thats a ton of useless mass in combat.

No, it's a small amount of extra mass (like I said). From what I'm seeing, the distance between reactor and stabilisers, and the distance between different separate shield generators, and the power consumption of everything (thrusters, shields, weapons, etc) means that you're forced to have lots of empty space. With the weapon update (and possibly now, without the weapon update) unarmoured systems are "very unwise" (e.g. attackers with ion to take down shields, made worse by lots of pieces of your ship "likely to explode when hit"). The result is lots of empty space plus lots of mass for hulls; where an extra reactor adds up to "half a fart" of extra mass and is almost entirely irrelevant.

And you do two things with your ship. Fight and salvage. Travel/jump/cargo ship if you really want.

Two last categories don't care at all about chambers.

It's a large ship; and I want "turn rate 3" in all modes (because it's too sluggish without it) and "reactor base enhancement" in all modes (because I need a huge amount of power for thrust and this helps reduce the reactor size and therefore reduces distance between reactors and stabilisers). These add up to 40% of all tech points.

For mining I want "mining bonus 2" which costs 50% of the tech points, which means that I'm using 90% of tech points for this mode. I also add "shield base enhancement" to use up the last 10% of tech points, even though it's not particularly needed.

For fast travelling, I want "jump distance 3", "jump autocharge" and "jump charge 1", which (combined) cost 55% of the tech points, which means that I'm using 95% of tech points for this mode. I also add "top speed 1" to use up the last 5% of tech points, even though it's not particularly needed.

For fighting, I want "reactor booster 2", "shield capacity 2" and "shield outage redux 1", which (combined) adds up to 60%, which means that I'm using 100% of tech points for this mode.

If I didn't do this; I'd have to build 3 separate ships - one as a "fast travel carrier" that can't mine and sucks in a fight; one as "miner" that sucks for travelling and sucks in a fight; and one for "attack/defence" that can't mine and sucks for travelling. I'd spend all day switching between different ships (and replacing ships because I was attacked while I was mining and had poor defence and couldn't escape because the jump drive is shit).

Note: I've also been thinking of adding a 4th mode for "recon" - against a purpose built stealth ship I'd be relatively defenceless. It's easy to spend 100% of tech points on recon alone.

 

[Zoolimar]

No, it's a small amount of extra mass (like I said). From what I'm seeing, the distance between reactor and stabilisers, and the distance between different separate shield generators, and the power consumption of everything (thrusters, shields, weapons, etc) means that you're forced to have lots of empty space. With the weapon update (and possibly now, without the weapon update) unarmoured systems are "very unwise" (e.g. attackers with ion to take down shields, made worse by lots of pieces of your ship "likely to explode when hit"). The result is lots of empty space plus lots of mass for hulls; where an extra reactor adds up to "half a fart" of extra mass and is almost entirely irrelevant.

Reactors with stabilisers could weight up to 1/5 of your ship mass depending on how heavy you go with DPS weapons and shield regen. Don't forget that they both have 0.4 mass per block. Which means each additional reactor could add up to 10% to ship mass.

Armor, besides antimissile shells, is mostly a joke and doesn't really protect you against anything.

 

[Dire Venom]

For non-combat ships they certiantly would be useful imo. A bit of extra mass or reduced production doesn't matter a lot if your not in combat.

For Combat I could see myself piggybacking on a Jump Ship to bring it into combat, with the main ship built for full evasive/dps then undocking

 

[Qweesdy]

Reactors with stabilisers could weight up to 1/5 of your ship mass depending on how heavy you go with DPS weapons and shield regen. Don't forget that they both have 0.4 mass per block. Which means each additional reactor could add up to 10% to ship mass.

You need the same amount of stabilisers regardless of how many reactors share them.

For an idea of what I'm doing, here's a screenshot of my current "under development" ship's reactor setup (I decided to add the "recon mode" I was thinking about earlier, so it's 4 reactors now):

For this; the reactors and chambers add up to a total mass of 48 K, where one of them (instead of 4 of them) would've been 12K; so the extra 3 reactors and their chambers adds up to an extra mass of 36 K. The entire ship currently has a total mass of 143 K; so those extra 3 reactors are about 25% of the mass.

However; this ship is currently just an empty shell with no shields, no weapons, no turrets, no cargo and about a quarter of the thrusters it needs (because I used them for filling some gaps). By the time I'm finished the mass will be about 1500 K.

By the time I'm finished filling it in, that extra 36 K is going to be about 2.5% of the mass.

That's 2.5% extra mass for significantly better defence when I want it, and significantly better mining when I want it, and significantly better FTL travel when I want it, and significantly better recon when I want it.

Now think about what this mass effects - it doesn't effect stealth or recon (unless I'm in "recon mode"). About the only thing it effects is acceleration (but for ships this size the acceleration is poor regardless).

So... Unnoticeable worse acceleration; for significantly better defence when I want it, and significantly better mining when I want it, and significantly better FTL travel when I want it, and significantly better recon when I want it.

Armor, besides antimissile shells, is mostly a joke and doesn't really protect you against anything.

Currently; armour without the related "defence chambers" is a joke. With chambers it's improved - I haven't tested, but maybe it's currently not a joke if you have these chambers.

However the game is currently "not well balanced" and there's 2 bonuses that effect armour that currently have no effect (where it's obvious the developers are planning to do something with them later). It would be incredibly silly to assume that armour will remain how it currently is. I'm not wasting my time designing a ship that becomes crap tomorrow (whenever armour is inevitably "re-balanced").

 

[Dire Venom]

You need the same amount of stabilisers regardless of how many reactors share them.

For an idea of what I'm doing, here's a screenshot of my current "under development" ship's reactor setup (I decided to add the "recon mode" I was thinking about earlier, so it's 4 reactors now):

For this; the reactors and chambers add up to a total mass of 48 K, where one of them (instead of 4 of them) would've been 12K; so the extra 3 reactors and their chambers adds up to an extra mass of 36 K. The entire ship currently has a total mass of 143 K; so those extra 3 reactors are about 25% of the mass.

However; this ship is currently just an empty shell with no shields, no weapons, no turrets, no cargo and about a quarter of the thrusters it needs (because I used them for filling some gaps). By the time I'm finished the mass will be about 1500 K.

By the time I'm finished filling it in, that extra 36 K is going to be about 2.5% of the mass.

That's 2.5% extra mass for significantly better defence when I want it, and significantly better mining when I want it, and significantly better FTL travel when I want it, and significantly better recon when I want it.

Thats pretty cool, thanks for sharing!
Out of cuirousity do you have those values in blocks:? I find it kinda hard to picture what that sort of mass represents. E.g 100k blocks, 1 million:?
Thanks!

 

[Qweesdy]

Thats pretty cool, thanks for sharing!
Out of cuirousity do you have those values in blocks:? I find it kinda hard to picture what that sort of mass represents. E.g 100k blocks, 1 million:?

It's a little complicated...

This is the current exterior:

Those squares you see on the top and sides (and bottom) are for 29 dock-able "defence plates", where the idea is to provide several different types of these "defence plates" - one with a single huge turret mount, one with some medium turret mounts and some small missile defence turrets, one that is just a light-weight filler without any turret, etc. These defence plates are 75 x 75 (and 14 deep excluding turret heights).

On each side there's a set of 4 "interior module slots" (see how it goes in much much deeper?). These interior modules are 75 x 75 x 75 cubes that are placed internally (and then covered by a "defence plate" on the exterior). The idea is similar - to provide several different types of "interior modules" (one for extra cargo space, one for dispensing drones, one for carrying lots of small fighters, one for carrying a single large ship, some that are purely decorative, one that is just light-weight filler, etc).

The point of all this is that you can reconfigure the ship - install eight of the "attack drone dispenser" interior modules and slap on a set of heavy turret defence plates (and switch reactors to "attack mode") and turn it into a military attack ship; install carrier type interior modules and light-weight filler defence plates (and switch reactors to "travel mode") and turn it into a civilian drop ship; install six "mining drone carrier" interior modules and two "cargo expansion" interior modules, and give it some medium/small turret defence plates (and switch reactors to "mining mode") and have yourself a mobile mega-miner; slap in 8 cargo expansion interior modules and have a bulk transport ship, etc.

Of course I have no idea if any of this will work at all..

For the ship itself; the entire front will be packed with weaponry, shields, stabilisers and salvagers. The stabilisers and salvagers (a 2 x 221 array of 442 individual "salvager+cannon" beams for planet gobbling) are already done (and were included in the 143 K mass I mentioned earlier). The back quarter is supposed to be reactors, chambers, thrusters and more shields. The picture I posted earlier was taken from the middle of the ship looking back at the reactors and chambers.

If you estimate the volume of the ship; it's mostly a 342 x 265 x 185 box (16.7 million blocks) box with two triangular pieces taken out the nose, where the triangular pieces are equivalent to one 75 x 265 x 75 box (1.5 million blocks). This gives a volume of about 15 million blocks. If you assume "about 0.1 mass per block" (assume blocks that have more mass are cancelled out by empty space used for corridors, etc) it works out to the "about 1500 K mass" I mentioned earlier.

 

[Dire Venom]

15 Million blocks is huge dude .....
My laptop can barely handel 1-2 mill at the most.
What on earth are you planning on mining with that thing O_O.......

 

[Qweesdy]

15 Million blocks is huge dude .....
My laptop can barely handel 1-2 mill at the most.
What on earth are you planning on mining with that thing O_O.......

Sometimes I'll select a star system, and then (one by one) every planet and (AI) station in the system will just disappear until the entire system contains nothing but a star (and any asteroids that respawn) about 10 days later.