Hyperdrives vs Reactors (Full Version)

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



Message

WoodMan -> Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 12:14:17 AM)

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? [:D]

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 [:D]



Igard -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 1:10:55 AM)

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.



ggf31416 -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 3:10:05 AM)

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.



J HG T -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 8:05:52 AM)

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? 



Bingeling -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 8:26:59 AM)

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. [>:]




J HG T -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 8:29:08 AM)


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.



Bingeling -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 8:52:47 AM)

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.



J HG T -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 9:26:06 AM)

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



ggf31416 -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 12:51:19 PM)

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.



J HG T -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/8/2011 1:06:16 PM)

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. 



Lrfss -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/23/2011 5:10:34 PM)


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!



Data -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/23/2011 5:30:36 PM)

Yes, it does



Lrfss -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/23/2011 5:41:48 PM)


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?



Data -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/23/2011 7:54:10 PM)

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



ggf31416 -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/24/2011 1:22:49 PM)


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.



Bingeling -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/24/2011 1:35:16 PM)

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.





Lrfss -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (3/24/2011 3:23:17 PM)


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[&o]



Trifler -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (4/29/2011 3:13:58 AM)

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. [:D]

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.



Trifler -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (4/29/2011 3:22:37 AM)


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.



Data -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (4/29/2011 6:37:31 AM)

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



cookie monster -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (4/29/2011 9:07:47 AM)

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



Data -> RE: Hyperdrives vs Reactors (4/29/2011 9:59:08 AM)

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.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.59375