Hydrogen engines - are they really meant to be that weak?

Let the numbers speak first. That's comparison of currently available power sources.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1H9Pl5GNfTnZkmc9NocqctnfHNNbJGX7K0MSJpJTLm7E/edit?usp=sharing

Of course I might have messed up some calculations, so correct me if I'm wrong.

They are way weaker than batteries for short time (up to 2h).
And after time required to be better (due to ability to refuel without infrastructure) solar panels are better. And require no mining.

In other words - what's their purpose? Being cheap starting option before you can build solar/wind power?
IMO all blocks should have some potential through whole game.

How I'd fix it? Make H2 better than batteries at storing power, but keep them worse at output. So you can make hybrid vehicles - use batteries for manoeuvres, and H2e for recharging between them.

 

Solar and hydrogen power have to be weak in order to make uranium reactors worth acquiring.

Having weak power outputs slows down early progression as it should be. If you found uranium ore in the past, you would just grab a huge blob of it and cue it to process in front of everything else. No worries about survival after that. You should struggle with the inferior energy sources.

 

The power supply methods are different. Lets put raw power data aside for this discussion, and focus on the power cycle "yield" of each style of power. Just talking Earth-like large grids:

Wind- medium yield, but constant 100% all the time input.
Solar- low yield, 100% constant in space, ~50% time on planets.
Battery- High Yield, limited duration, rechargeable with negative yield for equal duration.
H2 Engine- High yield- short duration, high fuel needs.
Reactor- high yield, long duration, low fuel needs.

So, just with this info, we can see how wind turbines are nearly always a consideration- their power is constant.

We can also see that solar is a feeble substitute, but is viable in space.

Batteries are temporary "borrowed time" devices (as they should be)

And H2 engines... well. H2 engines are a bit special. While they can be used as literal engines for vehicles (whose low power needs means its internal tank will actually last all day), I think their main use is "turbo power surges" to an existing grid... like lighting a fire, and bottling it. Pouring the (prepared) fuel into it for a needed span of time, and let that thing scream away for as long as it lasts. Instead of an "under building generator running for months" it actually a Nitrous Supercharger on an engine.. by no means is it intended to fun full time (theres not enough fuel in the world), only for those extra special moments of our choosing.

I can see h2 engines kicking on to recharge jump drives, for instance.. but only for that purpose on a large spaceship.

Alternatively is the battery recharge "gas station"- simply a bunch of h2 engines on a lake, some o2 gens to feed them, and a connector powered by a turbine. A battery powered ship docks to it, which is full of ice it delivered, and whoosh all the engines kick on, and the small ships batteries recharge in minutes. ice runs out, engines die, ship undocks and either flies away recharged, or gets more ice for a top off. The lake engine grid is simply that, does nothing more.


^^ that i think best describes the hydrogen engine in its effective use.

 

Keen really needs to get the nomenclature correct.

The things the game calls "thrusters" are actually engines (although motor is acceptable). Engines are motive force. Their purpose is to make something move.

Keen's "Hydrogen Engine" is a power-plant. It is not designed to provide motive force. It provides power to motors/engines, and they provide the motive force. It is not a hydrogen generator in that its purpose is not to generate hydrogen (which it does do, but posts about how wrong that is have been ignored).

It is, in fact, a hydrogen fueled generator. It should be called a power-plant. That's what they call the thing it was modeled after.

If the goal of the game is to be as realistic as possible, it's best to use the correct nomenclature. Otherwise, credibility is weakened.

 

Then again, an "engine" can be defined as "a mechanism that self perpetuates" -Making it an engine, and not a domino effect. Or fluke re occurrence.

..It is a designed re occurrence, perpetually. Since we're getting all semantic nerdy

but yes, "hydrogen powered emergency generator" would have indeed been a better term

 

Powerplant is just shorter

 

and what's with filling the internal h2 supply on these anyway? If you turn the block off they won't refill, you turn them on and you can't feed them fast enough. I kind of envisioned these as "auxiliary power". You kind in the high output but short duration power source when it's sorely needed like if you're charging the jump drive for a quick getaway...

 

The Engine tank will not fill if you do not have enough hydrogen supply feeding the engine... 1 o2 generator can just barely run the engine, NOT run the engine and simultaneously fill its tank. multiply the o2 generators to fill the tank.

Or, let the engine run with no power supply forced out of it (do this by having the battery on your grid set to discharge, so it will handle the power load, not the engine) THEN the engine will be running and will fill its tank, because its fuel consumption is related to how much power the grid is demanding from it.

Once its internal tank is full this way, you can shut off the engine, and it will be standing by as a power surge generator, no ice needed. Though it wont last very long.

 

The hydrogen engines really do need adjustments. Right now it requires two 02/H2 generators to fuel a single large hydrogen engine. Two. That's just silly. The other issue is their internal tank: it's far too large and there's no way to drain it. If you turn them on, they completely drain the system of all hydrogen, making them flat out dangerous to use alongside hydrogen engines. For example, let's say you had a base running off of a hydrogen engine, and you dock your ship. The engine will drain your ship's tanks and there is no way to get that back. The internal tank should be much smaller, and we should have small, medium and large tanks available for storing gasses. The thrusters don't store gasses in them, they require a tank to draw from. The engine block should do the same.

 

I disagree. We don't want another (practically) infinite power source. Also physics: There's always loss of energy during conversion. The engine should not be able to power a h2 generator to power the engine, that's perpetuum mobile, which is impossible. Consider not having the generators on the same vehicle you want to fuel. Have fueling stations which only purpose is to generate hydrogen. I wouldn't use the h2 engine for bases at all, just vehicles.

As for the rest of it, I agree completely.


The grand problem here is that with the h2 engine, there was a need for a complete power/fuel rebalance, all around, affecting all power sources and sinks.

 

You're missing the fuel in this equation. It would work real world

 

I don't think it would. You need power to melt ice, then to split h2 and o2 from h2o. That's not insignificant.

 

It's more like:
Type| yield| duration| fuel
Solar| very low| infinite| free
Wind| low| infinite| free
H2 Engine| medium| short| common
Battery| high| medium| recharge from other power source
Reactor| high| long| rare

For the first use, ground vehicle, battery will serve way better - it will last 10x longer. Or coupled with solar panel - if needs are so low, there is no point bothering with engine.
For "turbo power surges" battery works better too - with 2x more output per mass and 5x per volume. So I'd rather use some H2E for out of use (out of combat, breaks between mining, ect) recharging of batteries, and use those in case of emergency.

That setup costs ~9k Fe for engines and generators. For that price you can have 2 batteries and 35 windmills. It will give lower constant output (14MW vs 25MW, assuming constant refuelling) and higher temporary output (36MW when batteries are charged, ~30% of the time). Takes more space (which is not a problem usually) but require no mining, and you can recharge any vehicle (combat, welding, grinding, ect.), not only those that bring ice.

In engineering game I value the choice I get when designing. If one block is unobtainable in early game, while other is obsolete in late game, there is no choice. Only impression of progress, that veteran players can achieve within hour.
Sidegrades > upgrades.

Uranium is well worth acquiring anyway. That's the single most dense power storage available, incomparable with anything else. Even if it had less output per mass/volume than batteries and hydrogen, it would still have it's use for long range vehicles.