Hyperdrives vs Reactors

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Hyperdrives vs Reactors

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> The War Room >> Hyperdrives vs Reactors

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 12:14:17 AM

WoodMan

Posts: 1345
Joined: 6/2/2010
From: Ol' Blighty
Status: offline

Hey all!

I'm playing my first real game in RotS (late I know) and I got to admit I'm a bit rusty and lost on some of the finer details of the game.

Here is my question:

Do the more advanced Hyperdrives require better reactors to run them? Or is it the opposite, the more advanced you get the less energy you need, or are the two completly not connected at all?

The furthest I've got along any tech chain is the second block along, except for Hyperdrives where I have reached the end of one chain entirely and am halfway along the other chains. I've found a lot of Hyperdrive tech around the galaxy. I'm just wondering if I now need to focus on the reactors or not

It's quite funny, I'm a dinky little Empire, a minnow with hardly any money, territory, firepower or influence at all, but my ships are the fastest in the galaxy, zooming around the tradelanes

< Message edited by WoodMan -- 3/8/2011 12:15:21 AM >

_____________________________

"My body may be confined to this chair, but my mind is free to explore the universe" - Stephen Hawking

Post #: 1

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 1:10:55 AM

Igard

Posts: 2282
Joined: 3/29/2010
From: Scotland
Status: offline

There are lots of hyperdrive techs. Someone with a better memory than me or has the game running can fill us in on the details. Some are energy efficient, some have a fast prep time, some are just plain quick. I think it's safe to say that the last level tech is a mix of all the best qualities, though I'm not entirely sure from memory.

Reactor tech is hugely important, though. You need a powerful reactor to add more weapons, engines and other cool gear, so it's always a priority tech for me, especially the hydrogen based reactors.

_____________________________

The Picard Era for Distant Worlds

Igard's Romulan Stormbird

(in reply to WoodMan)

Post #: 2

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 3:10:05 AM

ggf31416

Posts: 17
Joined: 1/6/2011
Status: offline

The hyperdrives consume more power as they improve, however their efficiency (speed/power) increases. That's means that they won't become slower even when they improve even if they don't receive enough power. Last time I checked the exception were the Dhyut hyperdrives that become a little less efficient when they improve.

Gerax: If you have nothing else.

Equinox (high-speed): I think their are the best choice for general usage if you have enough power.

Calista-Dal (efficient): They are useful for small ships with little power. If you have enough power for an Equinox or Kaldos their low fuel usage usually is not worth their limited speed compared to an Equinox or their long jump times compared with a Kaldos.

Kaldos (fast jump): Their fast jump time makes them a good choice for ships that need to travel to close systems or need to escape quickly from danger. However their low speed and high power usage means they consume large amounts of fuel.

You can get high speed, low jump times and acceptable fuel usage if you put 2 hyperdrives in the same ship: Your fastest hyperdrive and a Kaldos. If you put 2 different hyperdrives the game will use the lowest jump time, highest speed and highest power usage.

VelocityDrives (Dhayut): Fast, fast jump and efficient. If you can buy or steal them from a Dhayut player do it. Use them until you can get the equivalent Torrent Drive.

Torrent Drives: Fast, fast jump and efficient. The best hyperdrives. You have to research first Equinox, Calista-Dal and Kaldos hyperdrives as well as Hyperdeny to research them. You can add an equivalent Kaldos hyperdrive to reduce the jump time by 1-2 seconds.

(in reply to Igard)

Post #: 3

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 8:05:52 AM

J HG T

Posts: 1093
Joined: 5/14/2010
From: Kiadia Prime
Status: offline

As others said, more advanced hyperdrives consume more power but usually have such pros that the energy consumption doesn't matter that much.

I usually go for Equinox-hyperdrive and Quantum-reactor combo. Have worked very well for me. If you have slow research times (manually set below 500. I use 650) getting the best techs (Torrent drives and such) can take a very long time. Sticking with the level 3 tech (Equinox-HD, Quantum-R, Shatterforce-L etc. etc.) can sometimes be a good thing as you can research wider range of stuff in shorter time.

Just out of interest: Why it seems that everybody go for the fusion-reactors? Apples and oranges?

_____________________________

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it!
"And they hurled themselves into the void of space with no fear."

(in reply to ggf31416)

Post #: 4

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 8:26:59 AM

Bingeling

Posts: 5186
Joined: 8/12/2010
Status: offline

In my last game, which did not run too far, I did not switch to Hydrogen fuel. The caslon reactor was just more powerful at my tech level.

But one thing is that there is a thing called fuel shortages. So it may be nice to have the military and civilian ships on different fuel to make the most of your gas mines. The bad thing is that the auto updater of designs does not allow to lock parts. So if you want to auto update the civilian ships and still keep them on caslon, you have to edit the reactor on every single one afterwards.

< Message edited by Bingeling -- 3/8/2011 8:28:18 AM >

(in reply to J HG T)

Post #: 5

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 8:29:08 AM

J HG T

Posts: 1093
Joined: 5/14/2010
From: Kiadia Prime
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bingeling

I So if you want to auto update the civilian ships and still keep them on caslon, you have to edit the reactor over every single one afterwards.

I do stuff like this all the time, so not an issue for me.

_____________________________

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it!
"And they hurled themselves into the void of space with no fear."

(in reply to Bingeling)

Post #: 6

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 8:52:47 AM

Bingeling

Posts: 5186
Joined: 8/12/2010
Status: offline

You update all your civilian designs all the time? Or you run forever on ancient designs?

One issue with doing all manual design for me is that the boring stuff gets unupdated. That is. Most stuff without guns...

Another issue is that it is easy to forget the latest gadget as they are researched somewhat early. And you may find your fancy cruiser without a DCU, targeting computer, or something like that.

(in reply to J HG T)

Post #: 7

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 9:26:06 AM

J HG T

Posts: 1093
Joined: 5/14/2010
From: Kiadia Prime
Status: offline

I update ALL of my designs manually all the time. I just love to tinker with the designs.

_____________________________

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it!
"And they hurled themselves into the void of space with no fear."

(in reply to Bingeling)

Post #: 8

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 12:51:19 PM

ggf31416

Posts: 17
Joined: 1/6/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: J HG T
Just out of interest: Why it seems that everybody go for the fusion-reactors? Apples and oranges?�

1) While fusion reactors are less efficient than Quantum reactors size and price-wise, fusion reactors are 50% more fuel-efficient, so ships use less fuel.
However if you have enough full ressuply ships you may be better off using Quantum reactors and use the saved space in more fuel tanks.

2) You don't need to change ressuply ships when you switch to HyperFusion reactors. That's only important if you don't play at a slow research setting.

3) It's a carry-over from the original DW where Quantum reactors weren't really better than the fusion reactors that preceded them.

< Message edited by ggf31416 -- 3/8/2011 12:52:03 PM >

(in reply to J HG T)

Post #: 9

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/8/2011 1:06:16 PM

J HG T

Posts: 1093
Joined: 5/14/2010
From: Kiadia Prime
Status: offline

I tend to have custom-built resupply ship for each of my main fleets, so having enough fuel has never been my problem. Also, I go on building spree everytime I start a game and build as many gas-mines as possible. You can never have enough fuel, as I use to say.
+ I have no serious problem retrofitting and customizing my ships.�

< Message edited by J HG T -- 3/8/2011 1:07:35 PM >

_____________________________

Nothing is impossible, not if you can imagine it!
"And they hurled themselves into the void of space with no fear."

(in reply to ggf31416)

Post #: 10

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/23/2011 5:10:34 PM

Lrfss

Posts: 349
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Spring, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ggf31416

The hyperdrives consume more power as they improve, however their efficiency (speed/power) increases. That's means that they won't become slower even when they improve even if they don't receive enough power. Last time I checked the exception were the Dhyut hyperdrives that become a little less efficient when they improve.

Gerax: If you have nothing else.

Equinox (high-speed): I think their are the best choice for general usage if you have enough power.

Calista-Dal (efficient): They are useful for small ships with little power. If you have enough power for an Equinox or Kaldos their low fuel usage usually is not worth their limited speed compared to an Equinox or their long jump times compared with a Kaldos.

Kaldos (fast jump): Their fast jump time makes them a good choice for ships that need to travel to close systems or need to escape quickly from danger. However their low speed and high power usage means they consume large amounts of fuel.

You can get high speed, low jump times and acceptable fuel usage if you put 2 hyperdrives in the same ship: Your fastest hyperdrive and a Kaldos. If you put 2 different hyperdrives the game will use the lowest jump time, highest speed and highest power usage.VelocityDrives (Dhayut): Fast, fast jump and efficient. If you can buy or steal them from a Dhayut player do it. Use them until you can get the equivalent Torrent Drive.

Torrent Drives: Fast, fast jump and efficient. The best hyperdrives. You have to research first Equinox, Calista-Dal and Kaldos hyperdrives as well as Hyperdeny to research them. You can add an equivalent Kaldos hyperdrive to reduce the jump time by 1-2 seconds.

I was not aware that you could use two type's of Hyperdrives and benifit from the best of each. I suspect you have tested this and it works?

Thanks!

(in reply to ggf31416)

Post #: 11

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/23/2011 5:30:36 PM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

Yes, it does

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Lrfss)

Post #: 12

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/23/2011 5:41:48 PM

Lrfss

Posts: 349
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Spring, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Data

Yes, it does

Cool, thanks!

BTW, is there anything else that works this way? Can't think of anything off hand. Sensors/ECM, etc?

(in reply to Data)

Post #: 13

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/23/2011 7:54:10 PM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

No, this is the only such combo and I'm pretty sure it was not intended as generally DW does not allow benefits from stacking

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Lrfss)

Post #: 14

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/24/2011 1:22:49 PM

ggf31416

Posts: 17
Joined: 1/6/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Data

No, this is the only such combo and I'm pretty sure it was not intended as generally DW does not allow benefits from stacking

I'm pretty sure that it was intended. Finding the maximum speed, maximum energy and minimum jump, requires iterating over the hyperdrive collection (with a loop or equivalent) on the design and selecting the 3 attributes. That's too much work to be accidental.
If it was a programming oversight it would likely take all the stats from first or the last added hyperdrive. Anything more complex would require planning for multiple hyperdrives.

(in reply to Data)

Post #: 15

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/24/2011 1:35:16 PM

Bingeling

Posts: 5186
Joined: 8/12/2010
Status: offline

What would make some sort of sense, is to make the jump initiation by the fastest starter, and the speed by the fastest cruisers. But energy consumption should be by the fastest cruiser too. Even better would be separate cruise and startup cost, but I guess this would take a non insignificant amount of developer time, and add very little to the game.

(in reply to ggf31416)

Post #: 16

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 3/24/2011 3:23:17 PM

Lrfss

Posts: 349
Joined: 5/20/2002
From: Spring, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ggf31416

quote:

ORIGINAL: Data

No, this is the only such combo and I'm pretty sure it was not intended as generally DW does not allow benefits from stacking

I'm pretty sure that it was intended. Finding the maximum speed, maximum energy and minimum jump, requires iterating over the hyperdrive collection (with a loop or equivalent) on the design and selecting the 3 attributes. That's too much work to be accidental.
If it was a programming oversight it would likely take all the stats from first or the last added hyperdrive. Anything more complex would require planning for multiple hyperdrives.

What do you guys think would be or are the best Hyperdrive Combo's? Not to sound lazy, but I would like to intiate this new program in my ships ASAP...

I'm starting a new game again... So it would be nice to know from the start working forward about these great sounding idea's on this

(in reply to ggf31416)

Post #: 17

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 4/29/2011 3:13:58 AM

Trifler

Posts: 115
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ggf31416

You can get high speed, low jump times and acceptable fuel usage if you put 2 hyperdrives in the same ship: Your fastest hyperdrive and a Kaldos. If you put 2 different hyperdrives the game will use the lowest jump time, highest speed and highest power usage.

Wow I would never have discovered this if I hadn't read it here! Thanks for posting it.

I was going to use two of the same hyperdrive on a few of my designs to allow for escape even if one gets damaged, but now I see I can use two different hyperdrives to both provide a backup *and* provide the benefits mentioned.

< Message edited by Trifler -- 4/29/2011 3:26:14 AM >

(in reply to ggf31416)

Post #: 18

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 4/29/2011 3:22:37 AM

Trifler

Posts: 115
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bingeling

What would make some sort of sense, is to make the jump initiation by the fastest starter, and the speed by the fastest cruisers. But energy consumption should be by the fastest cruiser too. Even better would be separate cruise and startup cost, but I guess this would take a non insignificant amount of developer time, and add very little to the game.

Well, if I imagine this as a real-life scenario, I would think it would work something like this:
1) Both hyperdrives start "spooling up" and draw enough energy to run both of them (so the sum of both their energy requirements).
2) The hyperdrive with the faster jump initiation time takes the ship into hyperspace. The second hyperdrive is still "spooling".
3) The second hyperdrive's initiation time is met and the second hyperdrive is able to keep the ship in hyperspace.
4) The first hyperdrive shuts down, allowing the ship to complete the rest of its journey using the second hyperdrive, which is either faster, more efficient, or both.

(in reply to Bingeling)

Post #: 19

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 4/29/2011 6:37:31 AM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

Or this procedure is handled by the crew, lots of Scotty's among us willing to have as much hyperdrives as possible

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to Trifler)

Post #: 20

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 4/29/2011 9:07:47 AM

cookie monster

Posts: 1693
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline

Under what conditions would two hyperdrives be necessary?

I mean why would one need a fast jump, then the higher hyperspeed kicking in?

It's interesting but for the most part fleets are idle

(in reply to Data)

Post #: 21

RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors - 4/29/2011 9:59:08 AM

Data

Posts: 3909
Joined: 1/3/2011
Status: offline

This combo may be useful when you need both the capability of faster jump initiation (an explorer that needs to run away for example) and faster hyperdrive speed (always useful).
I've played with the idea in the begining but let it go, both for your reason and the fact that I needed the extra space and the advantage this combo gets is not that big. Plus, given the fact that the UI does not handle info about this very well I think it was not intended so it may be an exploit.

_____________________________

...Igniting stellar cores....Recharging reactors...Recalibrating hyperdrives....

(in reply to cookie monster)

Post #: 22

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> The War Room >> Hyperdrives vs Reactors

Page: [1]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

1.219

Slitherine

Hyperdrives vs Reactors