Add a toggle for the generators to override shutdown at 100% for combat situations where shutdown would be devastating, but without the override let the generators shut down. Keep current mechanics as implemented. Make shutdown at 100% be default.
I'm fine with the damage, can we add a timer for it though, even 3 seconds as I'm finding with coreing a base no matter how fast I switch power off at lease one generator explodes.
I would like it very much if the Statistics page displayed the theoretical max required power. While you're on that page, I'd also love to see the total cargo weight displayed as well.
It could be as simple as making it so anything that would cause it to go over 100% fails to activate with a warning that the system failed. I agree with the statistics page showing max required.
I am currently "turning it off" by increasing the amount of power a generator can put out by adding a 0 to the end of its output number until something is done about this. Dont want this ridiculous change getting in the way of testing the rest of the game.
I can see generators shutting down if overloaded but, my god, overload protection circuits have been around forever. We have warp technology but can't protect generators from blowing up when overloaded? Stupid.
Introducing a generator overload feature is great if there is a way to easily determine the peak load that can be drawn from the generator or surge protect it. When a generator overloads it is obvious that you need either bigger or more generators to create enough power supply for the peak demand. The addition of teleporters themselves will blow most generators (this is to be expected) - however you have to "guess" at how many or how big the generators are that are required.... Again this is fine in creative - but not realistic in survival. I think higher level/tier cores should have more power management capabilities to reroute/surge protect/shutdown and/or manage peak demand. i.e. Under CPU - generator blows up - over CPU generator has surge protection and shuts down (trips and is no longer active)
All devices list the power consumption in PU, including the shield, which has been causing the most issues for many. You can either add up PU for all devices in the ship and then look at the shield generator and what it requires for charging versus steady state (idle) or, what I like to do if it's already built, is the following (I will include an example below): 1) Run the ship with all operating systems, except maybe shield. Note the PU consumption. 2) Apply thrust forward or upward thrust (usually the highest PU demand/biggest thrusters) and then both. Might need to use cruise control to be able to have thrust going and access the 'P' menu to check consumption. Note the maximum PU consumption you see with any given thrust applied. 3) #1 gives you consumption of your devices and maybe some hover thrust. This is the minimum PU required from generators. #2 is a "worst case scenario" and gives you an idea of thruster PU demand (#2 minus #1). I am usually doing this on a planet with gravity close to 1.0. However, to account for higher G environments, I like to comfortably double the thrust PU requirements. So... (#1) + g*(#2-#1) + (Shield charging PU) = designed minimum generator PU output requirement, where g = 2.* *If you regularly operate on a lava planet or so where gravity might be something extreme like G = 6.0, then consider adding more generator capacity but you might need more thrust then too, which means re-evaluating generators again. Note that I used 'g' instead of 'G' as just a "gravity factor". I am not sure if this correlates to the actual 'G' of a planet versus thrust requirements although it would make it easier if the game was programmed that realistically. If not, could be easily done with some simplified software modeling. I then just take whatever generator block is available to meet that size or two smaller ones depending on my design, rounding up. If I'm close, maybe I'll add one more generator just for comfort (at least with this new feature). Oh, and one more thing...remember to use the Statistics page for all consumption values! The Ship Info page, at least in the new experimental branch of Alpha 12 shows everything in kPU, which may not be accurate enough, especially for small ships. EXAMPLE (UCH "White Dart" SV, tested on a planet where G = 0.92 G, no shield*): *SV does not have shields but will show how calculate for adding them below and I would do it this way even if the ship has a shield (turn the shield off for power tests) but up to you. 1) Idle (thrusters OFF) = 74 PU 2) Idle hover (thrusters ON) = 92 to 100 PU. Forward thrust, level flight = 106 PU. Upward thrust = 119 PU. Upward and forward = 134 PU. 3) 134 PU is the maximum I saw. Max PU - Idle PU = 134 - 74 = 60 = thruster demand. So I take... 74 (ship) + 2*60 (double thrust) + 0 (no shield) = 194 PU. So what are my generator options? Generator (small) = 700 PU Energy Out. Generator = 1.5 kPU = 1500 PU Energy Out. Clearly, one small gen would easily cover all demand and over 3 times that. Okay, too easy. What if we want to add a hull shield? How much power does that require? SV Hull Shield: Energy In (Idle) = 360 PU Energy In = 3.6 kPU = 3600 PU (charging power) Can we run with a shield at Idle? Well... 74 (ship) + 2*60 (double thrust) + 360 (shield) = 554 PU. Still about 150 PU below a small gen...so we're good, right? Before A12, yes, you just have to decide how you want to handle high G planets. Usually I just allow overload because I don't go there often. But now, with generator damage, that's not so simple. Also, we don't want damage just for turning on the ship and charging the shield... You know what to do, right? Same addition but don't forget the extra '0' now on the shield power: 74 (ship) + 2*60 (double thrust) + 3600 (shield) = 3794 PU So this is where you really need to be serious about equipping something with a sheild. Look at that power requriement! It dwarfs the PU the entire ship needs! Still want a shield? Okay, how many generators do we need? 2 generators is 3000 PU. Even adding a small gen would yield 3700 PU output. 3 full generators then. 4500 PU. Done. Note that now, no matter how many G's you're pulling, it's a minor difference. let's say 6 G's results in a g = 6... 74 + 6*60 +3600 = 4034 PU Still about 500 PU to spare. This is good theory but I cannot guarantee that the game has all its calculations in order. I've seen similar issues with solar panels in the past. That was a bug, which happens. So if something gets messed up, don't lose hope and assume it doesn't make sense. The game is getting better with each revision! I was originally going to do this example with a CV but didn't get good numbers for an example. I actually think those numbers were more realistic than they have been in the past but I wanted to show the gravity factor too. The "White Dart" is available in the default blueprints so feel free to go play around or actually do this. Test it on a high G planet. With a shield! Did your design work? Most importantly, have fun!
No matter if you are for this change or against it. No matter if you have justifications for this change or not. This is a great opportunity for them to add a new item to the game to expand gameplay...a surge protector that prevents explosion and shuts off your power.
Or for more complicated "repair in the thick of it" game play a slot installed consumable component (replace fuses in generator device menu) made from copper that requires titanium for the large models ... patient T.Edison 1890. Could use a similar concept as a jump limiter- long jumps with increase risk as distance increases. Slap in a gold ingot component to override protection ("penny in the fuse box") and assume the risk of a failure.
I am in favor of either of these, personally. Fuse or surge protector, same thing. One has to be replaced so it is consumable and the other is a resettable circuit breaker. It would be nice to have a way to avoid damage even though there should definitely be some consequence to running generators over 100%. My only concern for adding things is that I have a couple friends that are already intimidated by the number of components it requires to build/run a ship. For example, so far, we only play with the CPU extensions disabled because it just adds a level of complexity that is not fun for them. If you look at the new components already in the list, presumably to be added with a function at some time, there are already several... Robotics, Optronics, Coolant, Chemicals, Filters, Science Equipment, Spare Parts, etc. To both of your points, I kind of wish they would expand the capabilities of the signal logic so we could implement our own things like circuit protection and more switching, better timers, etc. Maybe a day/night sensor for solar powered bases (shut things down at night to survive the night cycle). But, again, my friends may not like all of them. I like realism but I'm also not sure I want to ultimately be playing a game like Eve because of the time (or real money) required just to get going.
Just a N00b here but Electronics Tech for 40+ years. In the US Navy I worked on generators, motors and loads of other power equipment, and was in the Nuclear Power program. Found this thread looking for why my Shield on my little CV (the venerable UCH Dart, slightly upgraded ... ) damn near blew me out of the sky for my having the temerity to try powering it up. Again, I'm a noob and am still learning (painfully) the games mechanics. At the moment I'm in Creative while I learn the basics of this beautiful game. I do have to jump in here and throw my minuscule weight behind the concept of fuse / circuit breaker / surge protection. It just makes sense, no matter the state of the Universe. There's NO way in hell a society can create a Warp drive and Teleporters without having handled this in the "Dark Ages" of building the first motor. Personally, I think the solution is two fold: 1. A "fuse" (available at lower levels) with an upgrade to a circuit breaker (found as loot or as an upgrade at a cost) 2. A capacitor (perhaps small for SV and large for CV/ Base) to mitigate the surge at turn on. These devices should ALSO be available for use with the Transporter system as it seems to be a problem there as well. (Although I've not built one yet, but read other discussions on it) Blowing up from overload is totally real world. Not having protective devices take us out of the game's immersion when we think WTF?? No WAY an Engineer doesn't develop those long before space flight. Really?? A bit high on the Drama Queen scale. It's a ALPHA, which you know since you've been around a while. Make your suggestion and move on. Sheeze Dude. BTW - There is a SAVE built in to the game, just sayin'
Something like "Warning! WARNING! SYSTEM OVERLOAD IMMINENT!" while a klaxon sounds in the background. Three seconds it too short, 10 seconds, even five, would be better (perhaps with a countdown?) Don't want it to be too difficult to program or the Devs will never get around to it ...
Having generators with a finite capacity is certainly valid. No one is disputing that. Even having damage occur as a result of using too much power But here we have a system that explodes but no way for the builder to know if they have sufficient generating capacity??? Forgive me, but I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't understand why this royally pisses people off. How would you feel if you spend dozens of hours building a ship only to have it explode unexpectedly? I think everyone is okay with implementing some kind of feature to limit generator output and to have consequences if that capacity is exceeded, but you have to build in a way for the builder to know if they have sufficient generating capacity or not. And claiming it "overheats" instead of overamps is just as silly. A simple thermostat would be all it would take to shut the generator down to prevent an explosion. Here in 2020, all of my shop equipment motors has a thermistor built into it to shut the motor down when it starts to overheat. Every single nuclear plant on Earth right now has fail-safes built into them to drop the cooling rods into the reactor mass or even flood the containment vessel with water if the reactor core starts to overheat. The idea that people smart enough to build a warp-capable starships would not be smart enough to build in safeguards to prevent an explosion in the case of a power overload is is really, really silly.
LOL! The old "copper penny in the fuse box" routine, but reversed. Love it. "If I want to blow myself up, it should be a right to do it."
