internal combustion generators

pavvvel

Veteran endo
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Messages
208
#1
Now on warships, which are designed, usually, for a 2-3 hour flight time, there is no way to add flight time because the extra equipment takes up a lot of space, you need more engines and armour - that's a problem.
A battleship has to react to sudden situations, and keeping the main generator at 50% power while waiting is inconvenient.

I suggest to add in-game internal combustion generators that are small in size, can convert propellant into energy, can be turned on full power at once, require cooling, but have low power. with their help, you could wait out the loading of the main generator.

of nice features - such engines could be made to sound like a motorbike...))) that would be nice.

Besides, such generators would be useful not only in combat but also in emergency situations when there are no asteroids with the needed ore nearby, but there is ice, or if the main generators are out of order.

It is desirable for such a generator to have all the necessary connectors for cables and pipes.

P.S. with such generators you can make a real motorbike)))
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2021
Messages
10
#2
You are concerned, that nuclear power sources don't last long enough, and instead want to use chemical power sources, which provide less than 1% of energy per unit of mass compared to nuclear sources?
Just use a reactor script, more fuel chambers and possible more batteries, that can just buffer everything.

Plus, the propellant is just the hydrogen (or the water, maybe). But no atomic oxygen.
Oxygen is just a waste product to endos. Such an aggressive gas, that tries to oxidize everything. So, they dump it retrograde, to never see it again.
The Engines use the propellant just as an exhaust medium (and the energy to heat it up), and hydrogen (or water, maybe) is quite the best choice for that, anyway.
 

pavvvel

Veteran endo
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Messages
208
#3
What makes you think there is nuclear energy in the fuel cell? I see you've decided to be clever - it's inappropriate. you need an alternative energy source anyway. solar panels are too weak and expensive.
 

Askannon

Veteran endo
Joined
Feb 13, 2020
Messages
103
#4
What makes you think there is nuclear energy in the fuel cell?
Probably the tooltip for the T2 Fuel (Exorium: "Radioactive metal that is used in fission generators as fuel. Exorium also has uses in some sensors and in kinetic ammunition as penetrator.")

And there is already a combustion fuel (T1 Nhurgite: "Corrosive gas which is used in explosives and as reaction propellant.")

(Quotes from the wiki page for "Materials", and just in jest provided :b )





And yes, an inefficient but compact generator would be nice (more options are always nice, although I have a miniature ship already with the given pieces).
Though, since the proposed use of propellant, it might be a mid tech (or higher) piece of equipment made out of aegisium to resist the corrosive properties of burning/heated propellant.

Alternatively it could be a dynamo/turbine as a substitute for the nozzle of the thrusters, which in return reduces the provided thrust but generates energy while thrust is applied.
 

pavvvel

Veteran endo
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Messages
208
#5
Just because it's radioactive doesn't mean it works like nuclear fuel.

Going back to internal combustion generators: the efficiency of car engines in 2021 is 20-25%. it is quite strange to compare this to the game.

I just gave an idea and I will be happy if someone develops it.
 

pavvvel

Veteran endo
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Messages
208
#8
So you want a source of energy which stores it in inefficient, explosive way, and can release it instantly.

We have that, it's called battery.
I understand your thinking.

But I still think that there should be alternative sources of energy. especially for those with little money and for beginners.
It is expensive and inefficient to make solar panels.
A beginner could get a backup generator that runs on propellant and I am sure he would sleep better.
Besides, you can hide it under the armour, but solar panels can't.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2021
Messages
18
#9
When I was a beginner I made a trip to asteroid field in safezone with my starter ship and mined ores to craft tier 1 generator. It costs nothing. Now I'm not a beginner and I still haven't used solar panels (cause I didn't see a reason to do so).

Having more options is not bad, but suggesting that crafting tier 1 generators and fuel rods is too much of a task for beginners makes no sense.
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2021
Messages
17
#10
I think the gradual increase of generator's output is there for a reason, there is no point in having such system and a magic device that makes it insignificant, now you have to build you battleship and plan your strategy with generator's behaviour in mind. Imho gankers would benefit from such devices the most, they could completely ignore current generators.
 

pavvvel

Veteran endo
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Messages
208
#11
I think the gradual increase of generator's output is there for a reason, there is no point in having such system and a magic device that makes it insignificant, now you have to build you battleship and plan your strategy with generator's behaviour in mind. Imho gankers would benefit from such devices the most, they could completely ignore current generators.
how can it be good for the gankers? it's just a spare source of energy.
even if the gankers get more benefit from it than something else, there is nothing wrong with it.
A ganker is a part of gameplay, it's a role in the game just as much as a miner, explorer or defender.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2021
Messages
39
#12
A generator that instantly spools up isn't a cool idea. That kills a core mechanic that makes ships interesting to build / design.


The challenge is there for a reason, having to build around limitations means you need to come up with actual creative solutions to problems instead of just MOAR X - and the current interplay we have between batteries, spool up time, and automation is interesting and has several valid approaches to a solution, each with intriguing benefits, drawbacks and costs.

Your suggestion as written has multiple benefits, no drawback, and less cost - nobody would use the current generators if they could consolidate all ship costs into one resource and never need to reload fuel rods or worry about spool-up time. That would be dumb, you'd take an interesting design challenge that brings a lot of character to one of the fundamental pieces of ship piloting and design, and replace it with a one-size fits all solution with no interesting quirks.


Now, if you wanted a backup generator that runs on propellant, conceptually, I think there could be a place for that in the game, but you'd need to make it pretty clearly inferior to the generators currently in the game.

Also just FYI real world internal combustion generators also have a spool-up time. All generators do, 'cause that's how turbines work. If you put peak draw on the generator immediately the turbine would seize and you'd bring the whole circuit down, because a turbine is basically the exact inverse of an electrical motor - the more current the circuit "wants" the harder it is to turn the thing. It's like trying to start a car from something other than neutral - doesn't work unless it's already moving, and if you keep trying it you'll break the engine.

FWIW I am not 100% sure exactly how that would translate with a fission reactor, but best case it'd be REAL expensive and worst case you'd end up with roundabout trip to a cascade reaction because you'd have blown a gasket in your steam turbine and now have no way to shunt enough heat from your reactor to keep the whole thing from melting.
 

pavvvel

Veteran endo
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Messages
208
#13
I am well aware that the idea as originally described may be subject to criticism and change - that's fine. thanks for the additions and feedback
Again, this is just an idea.
while waiting for normal mouse control, one can only spend time dreaming ))
 
Top