Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigWolf

Why's it an exploit?  That's working as intended, your energy collection exceeded your energy usage, even during combat
Since bases are stationary, their collectors work all the time

quote:

ORIGINAL: pipewrench

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigWolf

Why's it an exploit?  That's working as intended, your energy collection exceeded your energy usage, even during combat
Since bases are stationary, their collectors work all the time

yes but the exploit is in the fact that the human player can re-design a megabase that really does not use fuel, as the reactor never turns on. The AI uses ship designs that when firing weapons force the reactors on , hence fuel usage.

if you see in scanning that the AI uses collection to power everything while stationary and never use fuel when firing then I withdraw my exploit remark and apologize.

I installed scanners on my explorer and went into an enemy system

on 1 defensive base it has

16 max blasters = 16 x 12 = 192
6 collectors = 4 x 24 = 96
3 fission reactors

if i am not mistaken this design requires 2 reactors to come on line just to fire all weapons and forces the AI to set aside more fuel storage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigWolf


I personally have only 1 reactor on all of my designs, and cover static, weapon fire and shield recharging by solar collectors alone

However, the easy way to close the issue is to either let the AI also design bases in the same manner
Or (and this would be quite realistic I'd imagine), Energy Collectors work at part-efficiency for, say, 2 seconds after the shield is impacted, and maybe go completely offline for a couple of seconds if it's hull is hit

Of course, we could just build lot more collectors, but eventually the upkeep costs would simply not be worth it

Oh, and for the flip side, I can easily build a similar strength base running purely off of reactors, the key is ensuring it has enough fuel capacity to not need refuelling to often
I also design two types of Weapon Platforms, one running purely on collectors, the other purely on reactors, now while I've yet to have either design in combat, I dare say both will be very efficient in combat

Also, the reactor design is still cheaper despite being 35points larger, and that's using the first reactors which are the largest and least efficient, if I replace them with Fusion Reactors, the base is smaller even cheaper, and then I can even have one less reactor, making it cheaper and smaller again