Why power reactor module formula is not something like the power capacitor formula ?

[matheod]

Hello,

Why the power reactor module formule is not in the same form than the power capacitor formula ?

Giving bonus because it's one group seems logical, but I don't see the point of having this very complicate power reactor formula.

Thanks.

 

[Peekie30]

Hello,

Why the power reactor module formule is not in the same form than the power capacitor formula ?

Giving bonus because it's one group seems logical, but I don't see the point of having this very complicate power reactor formula.

Thanks.

Because otherwise it would be way too easy to build ships with insane power supply, and to give a layer of complexity to the game; build smarter, not just bigger (i prefer both)

 

[Byamarro]

Because otherwise it would be way too easy to build ships with insane power supply, and to give a layer of complexity to the game; build smarter, not just bigger (i prefer both)

Current algorithm is not anywhere of being smart. Longer lines = better.

 

[NeonSturm]

I partially agree with that Byamarro

It creates an artificial difficulty for building small ships, which is not smart. (For big ships, just use pre-made 23^3 reactor blocks)

BTW: why not use cargo crates as new filler blocks? No entity-entity-transfer penalty :p

 

[lupoCani]

For big ships, just use pre-made 23^3 reactor blocks

Reactor blocks? Granted, one can to that, but it's nowhere near as efficient as actually shaping your reactor to the ship, no?

 

[AtraUnam]

Current algorithm is not anywhere of being smart. Longer lines = better.

Unless your ship is able to support a 700 block long reactor you're going to have to use multiple lines at which point it become significantly more complicated. Admitidly if you have for example a 10x10x100 block space then checkered lines would almost be the most efficient design but with some effort you can get an extra 0.5% efficiency out of it which can make all the difference in a battle.

 

[matheod]

Because otherwise it would be way too easy to build ships with insane power supply, and to give a layer of complexity to the game; build smarter, not just bigger (i prefer both)

If you ajust the formula, then there is no problem with insane power supply. It's not difficult to build long line.

 

[lupoCani]

Still, it adds an element of design. Without the current power system, system architecture would be solely a matter of squeezing in the most blocks possible. Building long lines may not be difficult, but it's a hell of a lot better than filler blocks. And really, building multiple, long lines in a space-efficient manner, utilizing all three dimensions as much as possible, while still being structured, understandable and player-accessible isn't entirely a walk in the park.

 

[0ldSkull]

BTW: why not use cargo crates as new filler blocks? No entity-entity-transfer penalty :p

There is an option in the block behavior config to make cargo crates more effective in large groups. The current default value is 1.0 which makes every crate equal, but the possibility is there to be changed in balancing or to have some servers treat it differently.

 

[GRHayes]

Hello,

Why the power reactor module formule is not in the same form than the power capacitor formula ?

Giving bonus because it's one group seems logical, but I don't see the point of having this very complicate power reactor formula.

Thanks.

I got into that discussion with them a while back. Basically large ships have lots of room to use and small ships don't. So they did it to give small ships a boost. They also brought up the square cube law. Two ways you can look at that law. You can look at it as the as the surface area of the ship increase the volume increases or you can look at it as how some others do where it regards things like ants that are powerful and strong at the size they are but if you made a giant ant it would crumble under its own wait even if it was proportionate.

Honestly, I don't know which way they intended it. What I can say is from an engineering point its backwards logic. But maybe all the power systems put in large ships are 50 or 100 years older than what is put in new ships to explain their lack of efficiency. Doesn't really matter its a game.

 

[AtraUnam]

ants that are powerful and strong at the size they are

Completely off topic but not really, its just that stuff is generally lighter for its size at those scales. A human muscle is about 10 times stronger for its size than that of an ant.

 

[NeonSturm]

Completely off topic but not really, its just that stuff is generally lighter for its size at those scales. A human muscle is about 10 times stronger for its size than that of an ant.

However, ants have to carry a few millimetres of height on their feet, humans have to carry about 1.8m when adult.

Imagine stacking ants, stacking to a 1.8m tower. The ant at bottom would crash under the weight, no matter how strong the whole is. Each part has to support the weight of the 3rd dimension.
That applies to ants as much as it does to wheels or shields and many other mechanisms.​

It also applies to game balance. If something takes 4x of your view, it has to be 4x as strong, or not? Wrong, 8x, with the 3rd dimension (depth).
[DOUBLEPOST=1450691753,1450691126][/DOUBLEPOST]

Still, it adds an element of design. Without the current power system, system architecture would be solely a matter of squeezing in the most blocks possible. Building long lines may not be difficult, but it's a hell of a lot better than filler blocks. And really, building multiple, long lines in a space-efficient manner, utilizing all three dimensions as much as possible, while still being structured, understandable and player-accessible isn't entirely a walk in the park.

True, but currently dimension bonus is not limited to 80% block count.
That means that you have to shape your ship after the reactor, not the reactor after the ship, as every wrong placed block subtracts efficiency.

 

[karkinosz]

Personally, I'd prefer power to work like neither the system now or that for power capacity.

Think docked reactors, except not docked.

 

[GRHayes]

In case anyone is interested the Most efficient reactor setup currently is 912 block combined dimensions. providing 1665.8 e per block.

If you are interested in what size power module that would work out to with two beams.
Total power produced by 912 blocks would be 1,519,165.2 e
beam time = 2.5 seconds
(1519165 x 2.5) /1500 = 2531.9 blocks in a beam 2531 don't round up you will go over power.
2 beams + 2 sets of blocks for timing.
Plus you will need enough power cap for at least 1 tick or 0.5 seconds. which is 1519165.2/2=759582.6 e
That requires 520 power caps which can store 760891 e

making this into a module
1 docker
1 core
912 power reactors
520 power cap
2 power transfer beam computers
5062 power transfer beam module
2 buttoms
8 delays
2 invertes
totaling = 6510 blocks.
mass 649.9 per actual build.

Providing (2531*1200 e)/2.5 = 1,214,880 e/sec
1,214,880 e/sec / 649.9 mass = 1869 e/sec/mass

 

[icky]

i dont particularly like either system, caps or reactors. the way reactors are, you have to build a 600m long ship or 200x200x200 or something in between to get the ideal efficiency. that means small ships are at a bang for buck, or bang/mass, disadvantage to larger ones. like if i double the length of my ship i can support 4 times the weaponry and shields. (and thrust to make up for the added mass so maneuverability isnt even as much of an issue with larger ships)

power caps also make you build the largest ship possible to get better efficiency. where again, if i double my ships length i can store 4 times the power. just guesstimating numbers here, i dont know the exact math, but you get my point.

 

[Keptick]

Current algorithm is not anywhere of being smart. Longer lines = better.

Straight lines aren't the most efficient way of doing it, far from it. Ideally you'd want a cross (+ shape thingy) that extends as much in each direction as you can. Then you keep adding those multidirectional crosses until you reach the soft cap. Making sure that they don't intersect or touch each other, all while ensuring that you're maximizing the dimensions of each individual group, can be pretty challenging at times (especially with smaller ships).

 

[Darkkon]

Usually, i just build a sort of skeleton out of reactors on the interior hull of my ship...if necessary, i'll have multiples that are one block apart but in general thats my strategy.

 

[maverson]

where do you get that
pre-made 23^3 reactor blocks)

I partially agree with that Byamarro

It creates an artificial difficulty for building small ships, which is not smart. (For big ships, just use pre-made 23^3 reactor blocks)

BTW: why not use cargo crates as new filler blocks? No entity-entity-transfer penalty :p

 

[Peekie30]

where do you get that
pre-made 23^3 reactor blocks)

you build one and copy/paste/save it

 

[maverson]

you build one and copy/paste/save it

Is making crosses from inside out the most efficient or making corner point ones the most efficient?