Realistic Fusion Power


Adds a new way to produce energy through nuclear fusion. Fully compatible with K2, Angel's/Bob's, SE and IR2. Currently getting rewritten (see end of description).

Content
11 months ago
0.17 - 1.1
26.3K
Power

i [Added in 1.8.10] SE update compatibility

2 years ago
(updated 2 years ago)

with the newest Space exploration update, the Aeneutronic reactor is now non-viable for ships, this is due to SE imposing a heavy cost to energy converters on ships.
I propose a simple solution:
- when SE is active, a duplicate of the Aeneutronic energy converter is available,
with exactly the same cost, unlock in the tech tree, and functionality.
- it has a max power output of 2GW (or 4GW? something much smaller than 20GW) this would make the reactor usable in ships,
without changing anything else for anyone.
- I would also propose that its recipe be 1x Aneutronic energy converter, and when deconstructed gives the original item back to reduce confusion

2 years ago
(updated 2 years ago)

I was just making my own post about this, but then Mr. 'Geddon here beat me to it. (we were having a lengthy discussion about this on the SE discord)

Anyway, I would like to add my own suggestion: make the reactor a compound entity, combining the DEC and the reactor itself. This way, the area the actual power generating entity takes up is greater, so the energy density integrity penalty is lower, while still allowing the full use of the reactor's 20GW output. This could cause a bunch of migration issues, but I'm willing (jumping at the opportunity, more like) to help with the code, as I'm no stranger to compound entities.

Also, would it be possible to add a mod setting for RFP to not replace it's own antimatter with SE's antimatter?

2 years ago
(updated 2 years ago)

would it be possible to add a mod setting for RFP to not replace it's own antimatter with SE's antimatter?

There is one already in startup settings, it's only visible if SE is loaded.

I would like to add my own suggestion: make the reactor a compound entity, combining the DEC and the reactor itself. This way, the area the actual power generating entity takes up is greater, so the energy density integrity penalty is lower, while still allowing the full use of the reactor's 20GW output. This could cause a bunch of migration issues, but I'm willing (jumping at the opportunity, more like) to help with the code, as I'm no stranger to compound entities.

I had to do something similar for RFP 2.0 already so adapting the code for this wasn't hard, but thanks for offering to help.
I've added it as a mod setting, so there shouldn't be too many migration issues (hopefully, anyway...)

I don't have a way to test it because I haven't ever gotten that far in SE, so here's the update. Tell me if there are any problems.
https://mega.nz/file/D4sE0bZI#bFrJKiQGbHnVrtPrGdZsxtMRXZqohj8Ag-AuOSk4QIg

And by the way, I'm in Earendel's server too so feel free to just ping me on there next time.

2 years ago

...just noticed I forgot to add the locale for it, it's the "Unknown Key: .. ". I'll add the locale in release.

2 years ago
(updated 2 years ago)

I just loaded the file from mega and enabled the setting,
- the compound entity appears
- it appears to have the desired effect for SE ships (structure cost of approx 913)
- it reset all the fusion efficiency and heating research
- upon loading a save with the reactor already placed, the reactor is set to the position of the energy converter (meaning it might now be overlapping anything on the right side of the exchanger previously)

2 years ago
(updated 2 years ago)

but progress has been made :-)

2 years ago

Check yo discord.
I sent you a mod file with my own modifications which solve a few issues with your current method. (such as the offset with already placed reactors)

2 years ago
(updated 2 years ago)

Made a few modifications to wretlaw120's modifications, check 1.8.10.
Yesterday I forgot to actually upload it and respond here, but better late than never.

2 years ago

Another thing, at least with SE unsure if in normal, particle deceleration efficiency 3 doesn't require particle deceleration efficiency 2 research, you can just skip particle deceleration efficiency 2 entirely. :-)

It looks like particle deceleration efficiency 3 was parented to particle acceleration efficiency 2 instead of particle deceleration efficiency 2.

2 years ago

Fixed in 1.8.15.

New response