The Energy Thread

So energy systems haven't been super nailed down, and I wanted to get the community's ideas on what combination of power systems we wanted. The poll summarizes each option, but I cover them all below with drawbacks and benefits.

Fusion Reactors
This is an option best chosen if other cheaper, unreliable forms of energy generation are also implemented; a choice if you can't depend on said options (maybe you're stuck on the dark side of a tidally locked planet with no geothermal deposits nearby) but would either be on a scale or lack of cost efficiency that is impractical for normal use.

Air-ite Reactors
Supreme Commander style. One-time expenditure to construct, then furthermore produces energy at no cost. The most straightforward but least interesting/deep system.

Metal Processors
Similar to how Supreme Commander would do it, but these would consume metal to operate and produce energy.

Solar Power
The classic form of TA power generation. Since we have planets, it would be relatively trivial to make solar panels generate based on the amount of light falling on a given planet area at the time. It would presumably be cheap, but consume large quantities of space making it impractical for small planets. (may not be how TA did it but is IMO the best way to go)

Hydrocarbon/Geothermal/Hydrothermal
The idea is an energy deposit like a mass deposit which gives increasing returns for how long you can hold it. Sort of like Hydrocarbons in SupCom, which fell flat since they were kind of irrelevant past T1 and not all that great anyway for actual T1 ops. Would possibly be a primary means of energy generation on water planets.

Hydro Power
A dam of some sort, basically. Not sure what the special properties would be here; manipulating bodies of water? Making artificial bridges as well? There's options.

Wind Power
This is the kind I like the least, but is something similar to wind power. Consumes space over resources, but is unpredictable in how much energy you'd get from them. Usable in lack of light but do we want basically an RNG energy source? Optionally, Wind power could be buildable on Gas Giants for cheap, constant, high energy output.

Other
These are the major forms of power generation models that can be added, but if i missed an interesting idea then please do put it up.


--------------------------

I also want to ask: Since we have water planets and gas giants are looking extremely likely (and I understand that Uber intends to allow functional combat and bases on both), how should each kind of planet handle power generation? Have buildable floating platforms which indirectly solves the problem (just build normal power on those)? Have specific kinds of power generation work on normal planets AND a different type?

All of the above?

Metal Processors/Air-ite reactors/Fusion reactors are all variations on a theme and I honestly don't see how to fit all 3 into the same game with them basically being different color T-shirt style choices or one being OP compared to the others.

Easily? they all produce different levels of energy output for increasing cost?

I just don't see the point of "here, have a power generation system that generates for free but kinda sucks in cost efficiency, have another one that costs metal but doesn't suck in cost efficiency, and a third large-scale one that REALLY sucks". That on top of 4 specialized power generators.

Other water based options are Ocean Thermal, and Wave Power.

As far as power generation goes, I like divide the production methods by their building requirements as it is fairly easy to justify the small/medium/large sizes in each category.

1. Power sources that are reliant on a deposit or are only available in a relatively small area. these can either be infinite sources or finite, but the most important factor is that they have to be single locations that the players must fight over.

2. Location dependent power sources are those that need to be placed with a general area to work (or work effectively). This would include solar and water based energy sources.

3. The final category that I can think of are power sources that are independent of all factors and simply must be build to work.

What I would like to see from PA is the second and third category combined to some extent as well as the first category being present but not playing a major role. I think it would be best to have a series of progressively larger and more efficient power planets that take on factors of their placing environment. For instance say that they are more efficient when placed in or adjacent to water.

I've got one: Methane Ice!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate#Natural_deposits

I agree with zordon, this is a silly poll because it is not a mutually exclusive choice.

Solar uses a lot of space, and is cheap, low yield.

Wind should require an atmosphere (and ZK came up with the idea of having higher altitude increase yield).

Tidal is like a windgen that can be placed underwater. Might even be the same structure.

Fusion is expensive, high yield. Less efficient than lower-yield sources, and represents a high value target. This is the Air-ite Reactor from TA- they are the same thing.

Should probably also have an inefficient, super-high-yield energy source that will rarely be constructed in serious games.


Fixed position energy sources, acting like metal spots that produce energy. More efficient than sources that can be placed anywhere.

Hydrocarbon: low yield, but cheap to construct. Requires a deposit on the map.

Geothermal: higher yield, more expensive than fossil fuels. Requires specific location on map.

Helium 3: Fusion-scale fixed-position power generation. Requires specific location on map.


So-called "Metal processors" are a poor idea. If you are managing your economy correctly, you should be stalling on metal and have a surplus of energy. Nobody in their right mind would trade metal for energy, ever.

Tidal forces tend to be stronger near the surface than deep underwater, so they may wish to not implement that as a underwater structure. Also what about floating wind farms?

Thus the ability to vote for a bunch of options?

Aside from that, I was hoping people would discuss about what sorts of tradeoffs we would want from various power generation systems, not "well duh system X is the obvious good one, this is a stupid poll"

We don't know consumption rates of various styles/types of units; maybe if someone decides to specialize in air then they stall out on energy instead of metal?

If they're stalling out on energy, then they didn't build enough energy generators. Seeing that energy is able to be constructed anywhere and doesn't require a resource point they've just managed their economy badly.

Which is how it works in current games, but it doesn't *have* to work that way. Which is what I'm asking about...

Wind (at sea and on land) definitely needs to return, solar (for when wind is not an option), geothermal/hydrocarbon/whatever (medium-yield, low-cost, but requires a deposit), tidal, HE3, and Fusion (high yield, high cost, high priority target).

Metal-for-energy is something nobody would ever use, at least if they were smart, and I disliked SupCom's boring Tier 1 solution.

For one thing we're looking at a different type of resource system to TA. Obviously if we have HE3 extractors on a gas giant, that doesn't really fit neatly into the classic "metal" or "energy" system. I guess arguably these robots can just immediately leverage HE3 for raw energy..

But perhaps "mass" and "energy" would be a good umbrella, or "mineral" "gas" "energy" if it seems weird to build structures using "mass" when that mass is just gas.

Pretty much all of those ideas in the poll are valid, but the large variety of sources present another challenge, menu-crowding. I suggest breaking down resource structures into three broad categories of structure whose visual design changes based on its context.

I think you can break down everything into Collectors, Refineries, and Turbines.

Collectors work passively, they receive resources - I can really only think of solar for this, but maybe HE3 extraction would also work this way, catching it in the wind of a gas giant or something.
Refineries is just a catch-all for things that work to extract and process useful minerals from strata.
Turbines work through gases or liquids to generate energy.

The basic idea is, what if the only difference between an "underwater vent turbine" and a "floating windmill" was whether you built a "Turbine" over an obvious foam of bubbles rising from the ocean floor, or elsewhere?

In an idea world, i want all of them.

But i'll take whatever they can manage to balance easily.

I'd like to see the possibility for mobile or orbital units that generate energy.

Orbital solar collection system would be awesoem.

Orbital solar collectors make sense to me. If that is thought of as too unbalanced they could require a power station it beams it power to.

I was thinking Metal Processors make more sense, though there should be some finite generators to act as a sort of boost for the current planet's economy if it gets invaded.

Also Geothermals are a good idea, but they should be Semifinite based on how much power is being drawn from them. What I mean is the Geothermal source should have a slowly regenerating resource that would go directly into the plant above it, and if it got to the point where regeneration< consumption, it would stop producing until it filled up again or something. And the plants could have enableable modes, one for never consume more resource than is produced, and one to consume the source permanently for some sort of huge boost.