Building with 7500 CPU

Discussion in 'FAQ & Feedback' started by dpburke2, Jan 6, 2019.

  1. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    I want to see what can be built with 7500 CPU or less. I would have created this under “Building and Blueprints”, but I don’t have the rights to do so.

    With so much uncertainty around CPU, the purpose here is to explore the draft of CPU presented with Alpha 9 and what can be done for 7500 CPU or less as things currently stand. For this, all claims of some future changes or future devices in relation to CPU is irrelevant. What can we accomplish with CPU as it has been presented? Think of this as “try it before we buy it”. The CPU maximum is not being enforced, so this seems like the ideal time to actually try it out for ourselves.

    There are threads elsewhere on CPU. Let us explore first what can and cannot be done, and then we’ll have a greater understanding of what challenges come with this proposal. So please focus on what can be done here and leave the rest of the discussion on CPU for another thread.

    What I want to see in this thread are examples of blueprints that cost 7500 CPU or less. If you converted a BP, feel free to give us the before, the after, and some explanation of how and why the CPU cost of the BP changed.

    Please add your own examples of working with the 7500 CPU maximum.
     
    #1
    Furious Hellfire likes this.
  2. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    The work in progress that I intended to be my true vision of the Star Cruiser was in excess of the CPU maximum by a large margin.

    Before: 20k CPU
    After: 6,380 CPU

    The Star Cruiser has been replaced on the workshop with this new version, my vision of what it was meant to be. Granted, this revised CV is missing all interior texture and paint work as I have many BP I wish to see if I can convert to the new logistics as well as complying with CPU.

    Containers: 128k SU
    Harvest: 16k SU

    Size Class: 4.93
    Mass: 60 kt
    Dimensions: 90x36x118m

    So she’s not light nor small. I have seen several 20 kt CV that are pushing 7500 CPU. One of those was size class 7, making it far more detailed but much smaller and lighter than my Star Cruiser.

    How did I get the Star Cruiser to drop about 14k CPU? Eliminated RCS, fuel tanks, a couple containers, but mostly thrusters. Lots and lots of thrusters.

    For a capital vessel, the following approximation could be used for thruster meganewton output.

    1 XL = 4 L
    1 L = 10 M
    1 M = 2.5 S

    However, each thruster costs 100 CPU regardless of size or output. The Star Cruiser I was working on had 8 L thrusters and 8 M thrusters in the back of the vessel. I thought the M thrusters made the L thrusters look good. That was 1600 CPU on that facing alone. The thrusters on the other sides were not much better. 1600 + 1600 + 1200 + 1200 + 1200 + 1200 = 8000 CPU in the thrusters alone. So I made some hard choices and modified the BP to use only two thrusters in each direction. That meant switching the 1600 points of thrusters in the rear of the vessel for 2 XL thrusters. The revised thrusters could be represented as 200 + 200 + 200 + 200 + 200 + 200 = 1200 CPU in thrusters, a savings of 6800 CPU. In the process, I reduced the energy needs of the CV, so cutting the fuel tanks nearly in half was quite reasonable, saving about another 2,720 CPU. Yes, that was a lot of fuel tanks removed, and there still is over 40 of the biggest CV fuel tanks. Now the CV didn’t really need 15 T2 RCS. It was nice to have decent yaw, but to save another 900 CPU sacrifices were made. Another major savings was in the weapons on the Star Cruiser. Every retractable turret costs 100 CPU, but each grouping of turrets by type had one turret without a cost currently listed. These CPU free turrets would replace every turret previously on the Star Cruiser, saving over 3k CPU as well.

    While I added a wireless device to the Star Cruiser, most of the storage containers were left untouched. A medium CV container holds 16 kSU but only costs 50 CPU while 16 kSU would require a controller plus CE for a cost of 100 CPU. So leaving the medium containers actually cut the potential cost of storage in half. The only containers removed were from a small auxiliary hold that was removed to add a whole new bonus room.

    Considering that the Star Cruiser is using a number of CPU free turrets, the 6380 CPU build is meant to provide a margin in case future adjustments to CPU is unkind to this CV. That way, if necessary, I can “pay” to retain a few of the turrets. Though, I am guessing I should hopefully be okay as long as the future balance allows a 60 kt battleship to take off from a 2.0 g world.
     

    Attached Files:

    #2
    Furious Hellfire likes this.
  3. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    Before the introduction of mass and volume, the Swallow SV was a sweet little cargo transport. Unlike some of my other BP, I couldn’t just make the Swallow larger to accommodate its intended purpose to haul freight. The problem is that this SV was built to fit within the six small parking spaces on my Pelican CV, a 3x3 door and limited depth before you ran into the central storage rack.

    Fortunately, all the containers on this SV are all in one spot, touching each other. It seemed to me that the Swallow cargo space was nearly prebuilt for the new CC and CE combination. The biggest limit would be there was only 10 medium cargo boxes in that space.

    Now the Swallow is also built as a starting SV. In other words, no cobalt or other advanced materials required to build it. With four gatling guns, it has served this purpose well for me in the past.

    Before: 3000 CPU
    After: 3550 CPU

    Containers: 2,625 SU

    Size Class: 0.39
    Mass: 18.3 t
    Dimensions: 4.5x4x7.5m
     

    Attached Files:

    #3
  4. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    Prior to Alpha 9, all the storage boxes on the tiny Chick HV meant it could hold far, far more than the BA box and yet take up less space. With the introduction of Alpha 9 and the volume difference between HV and BA blocks becoming an actual game detail for storage, in that moment the Chick was no longer the portable storage it once was. Reinventing the Chick, I was going to aim for 8000 SU and it would only be a block wider, a block taller, and a block longer. Bigger by a bit. Then I wondered why not 12k SU? I realize I could have set my goal for more SU capacity, but what I hope will set the Chick apart from the other solutions is that the Chick does not need to be carried around on worlds up to 2.0 g. With a wireless device included, I can use the HV as a portable storage unit on its own when gathering resources or loot. So the Chick went from cheap CPU cost at the launch of Alpha 9 to pushing 7500 CPU. And with just a little more practice, I realize that I could go back and edit the Chick perhaps to get that up around 14k SU. However, I like the Chick the way it is currently.

    Before: 2050 CPU
    After: 7450 CPU

    Containers: 12k SU

    Size Class: 0.16
    Mass: 18.7 t
    Dimensions: 2x6x2m

    I once read in a thread a claim that once we had volume and mass, that the HV would be superior to the SV for hauling cargo. Now I modified and built the Chick HV to operate in 2.0 g. The inferior output of the HV thrusters cost that BP some of its storage capacity. So if my goal is 2.0 g, the SV has the advantage because it takes fewer thrusters, fewer devices.

    This is the origin of the Fledgling. There is no before and after because this is a whole new BP for me. In fact, I had once told myself that I would never build a SV to compete with directly my own Chick HV. However, if I am going to explore what I can accomplish with 7500 CPU, this seemed like one of the things I have to do. Now with 200 CPU spare and some decent acceleration in one direction already, I feel like someone could make something a lot nicer than my SV and still have the 16k SU container capacity.

    Initial: 7300 CPU

    Containers: 16k SU

    Size Class: 0.17
    Mass: 13.0 t
    Dimensions: 2x6x2m

    Now the SV will be totally grounded once mass exceeds its ability to provide lift. While the heavier the HV gets, the lower it will hover until eventually it is flat on the ground just like the SV. In other words, the SV will work until it doesn’t anymore, while the HV will have a bit of a buffer where its performance gradually drops, quite literally.
     

    Attached Files:

    #4
  5. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    1,266
    Just wanted to say that while this limit may not have the slightest sign of being balanced or near implementation, I applaud your scientific endeavors. :)
     
    #5
    Neal, Sephrajin and dpburke2 like this.
  6. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    The Steamer Duck is my personal favorite starting HV. But it wasn’t built to be a starting HV. That was more of an add-on feature. The Steamer Duck is a mobile defense platform built with starting materials.

    Upgrading the storage to make this more suitable to my early game needs increased the CPU cost. While I was at it, I also bumped up the rear thruster arrangement for climbing hills in 2.0 g.

    Before: 2800 CPU
    After: 4750 CPU

    Containers: 3500 SU

    Size Class: 0.27
    Mass: 21.4 t
    Dimensions: 4.5x5.5x2.5m
     

    Attached Files:

    #6
  7. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    There is a strong temptation to say it is or is not balanced, or what it does or does not need to be, without ever trying it as it is. I thought while CPU is not being enforced that this might be the best time to see what can or cannot be done. Which is why I wanted to start this thread focused on builds at or under 7500 CPU. I would like to see some of the following at least: a heavy tank, a 7500 CPU tank without every gun, large SV, medium SV, and even at least one mining HV. I believe I should have at least one for each of these, but it would be really nice to see the examples rounded out with creations from other designers. A showcase of what people can accomplish with just 7500 CPU based on this early proposal of CPU points.
     
    #7
    Sephrajin and IronCartographer like this.
  8. Sephrajin

    Sephrajin Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    976
    Likes Received:
    2,413
    I prefer allrounders, yet i dont feel this will be possible, not without the promised 'CPU-extensions' (for CV's that is!)…​

    This said, here's an 'early' Allrounder CV that's even below the max: 'Rogue One', works well up to 3G.
    * 8 Turrets
    * 8 Mounted weapons
    * 3 Drills
    * 1 Multi turret
    * 1 AC (for fuel and creating repair parts)
    * 1 Fridge ; Drilling in space makes hungry

    Vehicle: CV
    - CPU: 6410
    - Cargo: 175 kSU (85.5kSU Ore, 2kSU Ammo, 2 x 32 kSU work store, 24k SU Pilot store)
    - Size Class: 1.09
    - Mass: 3.79 kt
    - Dimensions: 34 * 50 * 18m



    Likewise, there's a small vehicle called 'Slicker', which is more of an mid to endgame everday goto/allrounder SV, but sure no cargo hauler, allthough it flys well up to 3.5G.
    * Warp
    * 2 Railguns
    * 4 H-MSL
    * 4 x Cargo 125l = 500L

    Vehicle: SV
    - CPU: 4600
    - Cargo: 1 kSU (4* 125l Cargo, 2x 125l ammo, 250L fridge, 1 armor locker)
    - Size Class: 0.55
    - Mass: 41.6 t
    - Dimensions: 6.5 * 8.5 * 3m


    Both have been built in A9.
    I'm not willing/motivated to update any previous builds of mine for aslong we have no idea how or when these things are getting close of beeing balanced.
    Specialy true since the dev's said themself to currently ignore the CPU value, just saying….

    However, i very much apreciate your attempt to collect data for them to work with!
     
    #8
    IronCartographer likes this.
  9. Sephrajin

    Sephrajin Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    976
    Likes Received:
    2,413
    I just had a look at my 'old Cargo Container', it 'requires' 7050/7500 CPU.
    20190106163038_1.jpg

    Meaning, as it is/was, it's by 450 below the maximum.
    However….
    Since the containers volumes got reduced, i aimed for a 'Job oriented' container, and with the lazy Approach of just removing the old boxes, and 'fill the space' with CE's and one CC, i had 6 'boxes' of 5000 SU each = 30k SU.

    But there's a catch, the CPU usage raised up to 14'450, providing slightly more than the half of a single - well 6 - BA/CV CE or CC.
    So we havent even covered every of the 8 (ore based) building materials.
    This was 1*CC + 39 * CE.

    I then removed 23 CE's so the SU per CC was down to 2000 (which is 1/4 of a single CC of a BA/CV).
    20190106161652_1.jpg
    In that process i also replaced several thruster S by Jet S and medium ones, had to keep 4 of the S ones though.
    Also removed/replaced some RCS.
    This helped to get the CPU down to 7250.
    The ship can lift off of 4.5g, but dont you ever roll over there!

    Vehicle: SV Cargo Container - A9
    - CPU: 7250
    - Cargo: 6 * 2000 SU + 1 armor locker =12k SU
    - Size Class: 0.87
    - Mass: 28.5 t
    - Dimensions: 6.5 * 12.5 * 5m
     
    #9
  10. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    I have no idea what the devs have in mind to accomplish with CPU, though I have seen a few claims of what a couple "players" state CPU is supposed to accomplish. Now I could be wrong, but my gut impression is that if either of those claims was correct that there was a distinct possibility that CPU could miss the mark. Now if both those claims were incorrect, who knows, maybe CPU will hit the mark just fine.

    Now I have never considered myself a great gamer. I like to think myself decent at least. We all typically want to think we are at least good at something. And I have certainly seen a vast many BP here and on the workshop that exceed anything I could accomplish. That being said, I thought I would do my meager best to create various examples based on the current CPU draft. Which is why I will be leaving some of my BP missing the polish of the texture and paint tools, so I can get a broader sampling completed.

    Here are a few that I think I can accomplish but haven't even started on.

    The following used to be public on my workshop page but I made them private until I can get them under 7500 CPU (or if takes me too long at least compliant with whatever the CPU system is at that point):

    --SV--

    Space Skimmer: This 188 ton SV had 7900 CPU just in the RCS alone. I will lose a lot in yaw, pitch and roll but I did some quick math and think I can shave off 16 tons and get it under 7500 CPU. Will require a complete overhaul.

    Swift Skimmer: This was the Space Skimmer converted to small jets. Even more RCS, fuel tanks and generators plus 4 times the thrusters. This requires a complete rethink of its design and purpose.

    I will try to get around to converting one or both of the Skimmers as soon as I can because even shaving off 16 or more tons will still make either of those an example of a heavy SV.

    Green Darter: This 78 ton SV was my pride and joy, pushing 54 m/s^2 minimum in six directions, but all those S jets push it way over 7500 CPU. I already shed my tears and calculate that it won't be anywhere near the performance I was so proud of, but I might be able to still capture some of that spirit.

    Blue Hawker and Red Hawker: Both of these SV were quite large for being starting SV. Using only M thrusters, they didn't require cobalt, but it took a lot of M thrusters to move SV so heavy. These are low priority conversions as the Dream SV was also a large starting SV that managed to stay under 7500 CPU for now. If I convert either of these anytime soon it would be because I was so fond of them.

    --CV--

    Create: This was my newest CV on the workshop. I used a lot of M thrusters so that it would not require any zascozium or erestrum. If want to bring this under 7500 CPU, introducing those material costs may be a sacrifice I have to make.

    Pelican: Just barely over 7500 CPU, but if I want to convert it to the new CC and CE system, I may need to make some more than minor sacrifices because it will bump up the CPU costs quickly. This is the CV that goes with the Swallow SV, so this might be earlier on my radar.

    Green Saddlebag: This is my second biggest CV. Since I already converted the Star Cruiser, which is bigger, this is a low priority conversion, but I ran some numbers already....

    --HV--

    Thorax: This was my mining HV for tunneling and unconventional attacks on POI from underneath. With the new volume and mass system floating out there, this will be a challenge and I am not sure I can pull this off with a 7500 CPU max. Plus, I am afraid I may have waited too long on recording a demonstration of how much patience someone needed to actually attack a POI this way. The only video I captured skipped most of the boring stuff because, well, it is really boring. But as a player that used the technique, the reward for my patience was what made it so very enjoyable. I am just afraid that my approach may not be approved in this sandbox. I'll have to test whether I can still drill up to the basement of a POI (default without editing yaml) and then I will decide if I try to convert this BP to 7500 CPU. Unlike some of my other BP, I haven't yet run any numbers to see if I could pull this off.
     
    #10
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2019
  11. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    My first HV “tank” was actually built as an enhanced point defense system. The Cassowary was originally drafted as a variant on the Steamer Duck with double the turrets by placing four turrets vertically. As I put together the concept, I realized there was room to squeeze in the six gatling guns, giving the Cassowary over half the potential firepower for a HV. At that time, the game was still on Alpha 6, and as I tried out my new light tank I was surprised by what it could do. Thus I because very fond of my “little engine that could”. However, some game change adjustments over half way through Alpha 7 took this from being a little wonder to driving around a coffin. So even before Alpha 9, I had already started on a refit of the Cassowary.

    The Cassowary was going to be my example of a 7500 CPU tank. A light tank, mind you, but as I was finalizing the BP, being able to see a couple of the HV jets from inside the cabin just seemed out of place with the rest of the HV build. Even after removing just those two jets, the HV still hit my target thrust, so they were some extra icing that in this case I decided I could do without.

    I tried to preserve as much of the original Cassowary as I could. As I said, I had grown very fond of this little wonder. Between moving the pilot's seat back a couple blocks and combat steel upgrade, there was a noticeable size and weight increase, so the HV got a matching overhaul of its RCS, hover engines, and thrusters as well. Going from just two fuel tanks to four to support the extra devices. I was in the process of testing the new build when Alpha 9 hit. So it has now been updated for the new container system and CPU.

    So how did I get the new version back under 7500 CPU? Although it exceed the lift I needed, instead of 8 small hover engines, there are now 4 large hover engines--double the lift but half the CPU. These were placed closer to the center to compensate for the reduced RCS, allowing me to still tip the HV up or down to aim the 6 gatling guns at hostiles accordingly. I also switched some of the thrusters from M thrusters to HV jets. Up to this point, I tended to skip HV jets because it would take just as many to get similar results to the M thrusters, but the jets consumed more energy and took up more space in the build. However, with CPU, almost every other thruster no matter their size, output, or blueprint type are 100 CPU. All except the M thruster for HV. Those are 150 CPU each. Converting to HV jets would not improve the BP in any way except to reduce the CPU cost. I would end up keeping a few M thrusters simply because I refused to stretch my HV yet another block longer. As I said, I was fond of the original Cassowary. I was trying to restore its ability to survive taking on POI without significantly altering the HV. If I could manage it, I wanted to keep this HV tank compact.

    Before: 6100 CPU (alpha 6 build)
    After: 7300 CPU

    Containers: 4500 SU

    Size Class: 0.57
    Mass: 51.0 t
    Dimensions: 7.5x7x3.5m
     

    Attached Files:

    #11
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2019
  12. Furious Hellfire

    Furious Hellfire Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 3, 2017
    Messages:
    1,282
    Likes Received:
    2,837
    Just noticed that my new SV is using 10100 cpu XDDDD
    I am not too fussed about this atm.
    By the time CPU becomes a thing thrusters & RCS will use much less than 100

    If they power up the RCS a bit we would not need so many, so maybe @EleonGameStudios might tweak that for us with the whole CPU thing ;)

    I have another sv also that I just built called the Toledo.
    she uses 9200 cpu and 7100 of that is just thrusters and RCS.
    The speed stats are not great compared to my older sv builds, and she is only 80.7 t size class 1.004

    The current CPU values are placeholders I think, if RCS and thrusters stayed at 100 then nobody would be able to make a fast ship.
    Therefore eleon will either modify the values for rcs and thrusters to use much less than 100, or they might add CPU buffs to increase max CPU potential, or maybe even increase power to rcs thrusters requiring less of them because lets face it, half a sv structure built from RCS in order to turn good is just not realistic and the CPU usage required to make something even remotely fast is going to be well in excess of the default figure.

    In the meantime as far as I am concerned, CPU does not exist until i see an eleon feedback thread on the idea. (I had a quick look but could not find one lol)
    So I will carry on building as normal.

    I am not bending my workshop until I see features set in stone with concrete values because everything we know now about CPU is not going to be so when it is released.

    Also if anyone can point to me to an eleon thread regarding their intentions with CPU please help me out and drop it here xD
     
    #12
    dpburke2 likes this.
  13. IronCartographer

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    936
    Likes Received:
    1,266
    #13
    Sephrajin and dpburke2 like this.
  14. Germanicus

    Germanicus Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    2,338
    Likes Received:
    4,203
    If a Base is here a Case...
    A9 Changes_2018-12-27_12-42-45.png A9 Changes_2018-12-27_12-42-19.png A9 Changes_2018-12-27_12-26-28.png
     
    #14
    Sephrajin and dpburke2 like this.
  15. Sephrajin

    Sephrajin Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    976
    Likes Received:
    2,413
    #15
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019
    Germanicus likes this.
  16. Germanicus

    Germanicus Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    2,338
    Likes Received:
    4,203
    It is a start for sure:) Nothing else intended.
    But as an advanced Base, which can be tweaked a bit(I am sure of it) ->
    A9 Changes_2019-01-05_12-35-06.png A9 Changes_2019-01-05_12-34-41.png A9 Changes_2019-01-05_12-33-38.png
     
    #16
    Sephrajin and dpburke2 like this.
  17. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    Whatever our various opinions on what makes a good starting base or advanced base, I thought it was a great example for what can be accomplished with the current draft of CPU. The question would be then is whether the developers think that such a base represents what they have in mind with CPU. For that, I have no clue.

    As for myself, I have been putting off finishing my heavy tank conversion. On all these I have been converting, I have been trying to keep backups of the originals. Depending on what happens with CPU in the future of this game, having those backups may be helpful.
     
    #17
    Sephrajin likes this.
  18. Sephrajin

    Sephrajin Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2017
    Messages:
    976
    Likes Received:
    2,413
    True that!
    While I totaly understand, and initialy would have supported, the currently used CPU Disclaimer (not existing etc), i'm as well more for this apporach - nowadays...
    The earlier we 'apply' the values that are, the faster Eleon has values to rely on for Adjustments -> the faster this feature will 'become stable' or at least will be better adjusted on Upgrades, compared to when Eleon has to guess all together....

    It's our Job to stay within the values, but since we build, we also know what we need (more/in addition), and can/could/should plan/build accordingly.


    About updating…
    I reserve that job for when the new values are settled.
    However, since i'm now aware of the existence of these values, I can at least do some guess-prepared builds to not be completly overhelmed by the changes that WILL happen - one way or another.

    For the current CV Project, which i hope to have 'completed' this evening, i'm currently writing the descrption, and some numbers regarding the CPU….
    I could easily tripple the CPU value by adjusting the ship to my actual needs & preferences.


    Needed Values (achieved):
    * 0.27° yaw (10 rcs)
    * 52hrs standby (15 T3)
    * 1.5MPU (3 T2 generators)
    * Basic Ammo (2 CC (ammo))
    * Ore Storage, each ore once (8 CC + 6 CE)
    * General production storeage (8 CC + 8 CE)

    Wanted Values (aka recomended upgrades):
    * 1.1° Yaw (~50 RCS ; add them to 'Thruster_Basic' group)
    * 8x24 hrs = 200hrs standby (60 T3)
    * 2 MPU (4 T2 generators)
    * Basic Ammo (2 CC (ammo) + '4-22' CE) (i'm not so much a 'shooter', so not much experience in that need, but atleast there is room for it :p)
    * Ore Storage, each ore once (8 CC + 80 CE)
    * General production storeage (8 CC + 80 CE)
    * General storage 'area' (12 CC + ?? CE ; Add the CC's to the group 'Access_ALL')

    Additional CPU Required: (if/when upgrades are done completly)
    1 * T2 (100) = 100
    40 * RCS (100) = 4000
    45 * T3 (80) = 3600
    74 * CE (50) = 3700
    72 * CE (50) = 3600
    12 * CC (50) = 600 (this is just the ABSOLUTE minimum, to get all the required container/slots!!)
    ------------------------
    Additional Required/Recomended CPU: 15'600

    Also note, this is in ADDITION to the already used 7500/7500 CPU as of build 2137

    https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1621535332
     
    #18
    dpburke2 likes this.
  19. dpburke2

    dpburke2 Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2017
    Messages:
    536
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    Today, I was checking out the CPU of my completed BP. Up to this point, I had just looked at a few. I am debating updating a base or two and adding that to this list.

    In the process, I realized I had a few HV that came close to hitting 7500 CPU. A few BP that I hadn't even considered. Why? Because they are racing HV. This means they are all thrusters, RCS, a couple generators and fuel tanks. No storage. No weapons.

    Energy #315

    Initial: 6750 CPU

    Size Class: 0.31
    Mass: 26.4 t
    Dimensions: 4.5x5.5x2.5m

    Racing Nymph #516

    Initial: 7100 CPU

    Size Class: 0.35
    Mass: 29.1 t
    Dimensions: 4x7x2m

    Rail #85

    Initial: 6700 CPU

    Size Class: 0.35
    Mass: 27.2 t
    Dimensions: 4.5x5x2m

    These three examples are approximately the same size as my Steamer Duck, mobile point defense I use as a starting HV, but on average twice the CPU. As such, these HV really demonstrate how thrusters and RCS can dominate the CPU cost of a BP.
     

    Attached Files:

    #19
  20. Germanicus

    Germanicus Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    2,338
    Likes Received:
    4,203
    There are different scenarios thinkable how the CPU 7.5k limit can be enough..or even not.

    One way, as so often stated by the Devs and Mods, the system is not fully thought through yet and will be tweaked until..?(must be done anyway)
    Second way, also as stated by a Mod, there will be extensions or upgrades for CPU.(love the Idea)
    Third Way, the values will be reduced to fit, but the 7.5k limit stands. (could be the worst solution IMO)
     
    #20
    dpburke2 likes this.

Share This Page