Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
According to the block info mod I'm using, it has a max output of 42 MW which is fine, but the max input is bugged at only 4 MW. According to the same info mod, that means it will take something like 6 hours to charge from fully discharged? That's a really long time, and the 3x3x3 40MW battery doesn't have that issue.
As far as general balance is concerned, I think the 1x1x1 battery is in a good place, but the larger batteries should actually be better by volume than the smaller batteries due to the square cube law. Basically, there's less battery casing and more battery in the larger battery blocks, and the battery management electronics would take up a basically fixed amount of space.
But in that same space with a 3x3x3 you would only have 40MW? Why even use the larger ones?? I'm confused...
What about... opening up Space Engineers and checking?
https://steamhost.cn/steamcommunity_com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1333198750
I am making a new mod to make exploration more interesting. Basically each exploration ship will include a "blueprint" which is good to build 1 block of that blueprint type.
I would like to add this mod to it (specifically the 3x3x3 version) as a capacitor (so values will be changed). Your model looks awesome and I hope I can have permission to add it.
If you accept you will of course receives full credits and co-authorship if you so desire :)
I hope to hear from you soon.
Usually, batteries either have high storage capacity and low discharge rate, or the reverse with shallow capacity and high discharge.
1x1x1: 2 MW in, 2 MW out, 1 MWh capacity.
3x3x1: 20 MW in, 20 MW out, 10 MWh capacity.
3x3x2: 42 MW in, 42 MW out, 21 MWh capacity.
3x3x3: 66 MW in, 66 MW out, 33 MWh capacity.
Setting the power density to ~2MW per block would put them at exactly the same power outputs as the Azimuth fusion reactors.
Setting the volumetric energy density to ~1 MWh per block would make these batteries useful, feel like batteries, and not take forever to charge.
Using those numbers, the new specs for these batteries would be:
1x1x1: 2 MW in, 2 MW out, 1 MWh capacity. (Baseline)
3x3x1: 20 MW in, 20 MW out, 10 MWh capacity.
3x3x2: 42 MW in, 42 MW out, 21 MWh capacity.
3x3x3: 66 MW in, 66 MW out, 33 MWh capacity.
The physically larger batteries are slightly better than exactly proportional because of the Square-Cube law. A larger battery should be slightly better than a smaller one, because it spends less of its volume on structure and more on batteries.
Max power in, max power out (both in megawatts), and power storage capacity (megawatt-hours)
Example:
Size: Input Power, Output Power, Capacity
1x1x1: 5 MW in, 5 MW out, 5 MWh capacity
etc.
Right now I only see "1x1x1 5MW" and I don't know which stat(s) that is describing.
However, your balancing is just broken. Efficient engineers would just spam the small blocks. Here's the maths explaining why:
First the sizes...
Size1 = 1 * Size1
Size2 = 9 * Size1
Size3 = 2 * Size2 = 18 * Size1
Size4 = 3 * Size2 = 27 * Size1
The stored energy as it should be, measured by size compared to Size1:
Size1 = 1 * 5MWh = 5MWh
Size2 = 9 * 5MWh = 45MWh != 20MWh
Size3 = 18 * 5MWh = 90MWh != 30MWh
Size4 = 27 * 5MWh = 135MWh != 40MWh
Measured by size compared to Size2:
Size1 = 1/9 * 20MWh ~ 2MWh != 5MWh
Size2 = 1 * 20MWh = 20MWh
Size3 = 2 * 20MWh = 40MWh != 30MWh
Size4 = 3 * 20MWh = 60MWh != 40MWh
So...
Nice models, nice idea, bad balancing.