Originally posted by Emmote:

Yes.

What do you use to do these drawings?

None of them are redundant and actually there needs to be a continuous line along the top and bottom because otherwise they have nothing to transmit power through.

Originally posted by Emmote:

None of them are redundant and actually there needs to be a continuous line along the top and bottom because otherwise they have nothing to transmit power through.

If you surround the whole thing with 1 wire, and there is one wire in each row which is adjacent to the outer row of generators, there's no need for any wire in the outer row.

Any row which has 2 wires in the outer ring, shift all wires 1 to the left and that saves 1 space.

Of course but that won't make there any fewer cables inside the scrubber range because otherwise you'll end up with some generators without a cable. Or worse yet you'll cut off the inner cables from the outside.

51 wires. Hoping you're not going to tell me where I screwed up! :D
https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1361179781
I had a few goes at completely asymmetrical designs but my head started spinning.

I also wonder if having them on maximum power is the right answer. You can reduce the power consumption of each tower from 12.8 to 9.8 and only lose one row of hexes from theri radius and move the towers 1 hex closer to each other. Can't be bothered to count them now but that'd be more efficient if the number of hexes within the radius was 9.8/12.8 or 76.5625% of when the towers are on max power, when towers and wires are placed. Even lower tower power settings may be even better, of course, but the lower the setting and the fewer hexes, the more significant the spaces taken up by the generators themselves become. The lowest power setting is 1.8 or just 1.8/12.8 of the maximum setting, just under 1/7th, so if the working area is about 1/7th or more than that at maximum power ...

Ok I'm impressed. It works (no orphaned generators) and I see what you've done - limiting the join to the outside to only one side to shave 1 off from inside.
And I am a fan of it being symmetrical.

Originally posted by Indiebob:

I also wonder if having them on maximum power is the right answer. You can reduce the power consumption of each tower from 12.8 to 9.8 and only lose one row of hexes from theri radius. Can't be bothered to count them now but that'd be more efficient if the number of hexes within the radius was 9.8/12.8 or 76.5625% of when the towers are on max power, when towers and wires are placed.

Yeah, the area covered per power spent on a Scrubber does go up as the radius goes down.
If you really wanted to know if it was better though, you'd need to find the most efficient layout for each and compare them that way. And that's too much effort even for me.
I suspect that if you use the method of surrounding a layout with cables then the larger area will work out best overall.
If you use one that doesn't use a surrounding cable then maybe smaller area might be best.

Steam won't let me upload it for some reason but here's a 50 wire setup.

Worked! 50 wires ...
https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1361569635&fileuploadsuccess=1

Originally posted by Emmote:

Firstly that's far too many cables to be an efficient use of space. And secondly it does use maintenance because you only have 1 scrubber, which can't scrub itself.

Try this pattern. Far far less cables.
https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1356620729

Damn! This was cool!

i like the OP's design more. looks aesthetically pleasing compared to the 2nd one. maintenance is a non issue in this game anyway once you get past a certain point.