Absolutely Wrong The Engines' Tech Tree: Building Costs & Power Output Replaced vice versa Hyperspace Energy Engine & Scout Engine

it doesn’t match … Tech Tree - WRONG, …

*Tech Tree is that “next engine type or advanced engine model is developing from currently researched(developed) engine model”, …

[out of current order of things] Hyperspace Energy Engine - evolved version of Zero Gravity Engine;
Scout Engine - of Dark Energy Engine,
now detected that’s also- WRONG!
*must be : *
Zero Gravity Engine - evolving into Scout Engine;
and Dark Energy Engine - into Hyperspace Energy Engine, … as its core - Energy(MW) …

yow! :sunglasses:

Imo, The scout engine needs the high energy output as having to run a generator on a corvette hull with limited slots wouldn’t be very good.

nah, that’s your personal problem…
you didn’t get any sense i wrote about …

I tend to agree the Scout Engines a bit high but Warmongers raises a fair point. Maybe make it just a bit more than the DM drive that precedes it perhaps?

Its also the reason certain (nameless!) corvettes are ludicrously over powered… so a slight nerf might help game balance a shade over all I am wondering?

another “no” … read more precisely matter …
i didn’t mean anything as much good or bad for corvettes scout engines are …
you swear!

I am afraid I cannot understand your English to completely grasp your point (sorry) but why should it redouble which is what (I think) you are saying?

1 Like

the key is 2x(two, twice) …
MW precedent engine model x2 = new engine model MW, …
this doesn’t match & despite of your usefulness … it’s WRONG, …
Dark Energy Engine has 125 MW & it’s precedent model of Scout Engine … then Scout shall be 2x 125 = 250 MW …
same for Zero Gravity Engine & Hyperspace Energy Engine …
have to report your inclination … as it’s too offensive because of paws on mistaken things …

you have nothing do out of my saying … just go your way …

I think the answer is that the engines on the left are meant for freighters – ships that don’t need to go very fast and don’t need a lot of energy. If you put freighter engines on a warship, you will need to compensate with more generators.

The engines on the right are for warships. They are meant to burn fuel most of the time and they deliver more energy. It’s an intentional advantage of the right path, with the disadvantage being that they suck if you aren’t burning tons of fuel.

That may be the design intent. I really do not know, personally I have on occasion put the DM type sprint drives on warships designed for interception duties. A rapid reaction force if you like.

Likewise on rare occasions the 2/4 & 3/5 cruise type engines have gone on smaller craft for specific purposes. Like a cloaked scout that keeps its fuel for cloaking operations yet still needs to travel long distances into the unknown?

If I am getting the OP’s point then yeah a nice linear increase in power over its predecessor would make some kind of sense but given the increase in speeds and or free warp I don’t see that it has to be be directly linear myself.

The scout engine I do feel produces too much energy for its supposed role. But that’s personal preference I am not convinced its an out and out Bug.

1 Like

It’s a line of truck engines vs sports car engines.
Each has a weakness.
Each has a practical use.
None of them should do it all.
Likely more engines are to be added as well.

When wormholes are added it might not matter at all.

1 Like

As much as I want to report this post for being ignorant, that’s not how I roll.

Your English is a problem, that’s fine. But randomly accusing people of “your behavior of SHIT!” is not okay.


For the record. I just reported it.

As @Teeo will testify if I have an issue with somebody I say so directly and dont dodge about. Also for the record at no point did I intend to give insult here. I genuinely have not been able to decipher the gentlemen’s point precisely and I wanted to understand. Nothing more.

The last I shall say on the matter is: “I recommend Decaff” /Zath out.

  1. scout engines - on the right, these have no need lot power but need lot speed & less fuel consumption, … same for freighters, …
  2. warships need power & as it is - speed is sacrificed, …

    & this matter has concern with Law of Energy Conservation for the dimensional system(s), …

When using scout engines on a scout, sure, there’s not much need for power. A corvette on the other hand has more power demand.

With this being the only engine that’s hull specific I don’t think you can apply the same rules that are used for general purpose engines. The design was purpose build for two hull classes.

If we’re only arguing the scaling then I don’t see an issue here. If we’re going after balance by suggesting the engine gives an additional advantage over other ships because now it’s not only faster, but also has more available power, then that I can agree with. (at least until we start getting more hull class specific modules)

1 Like

does anyone SEE that evolution of Engines is absolutely WRONG?! …

ZGE(Zero Gravity Engine) is precedent model of HEE(Hyperspace Energy Engine)
& DEE(Dark Energy Engine) is pre-model of SE(Scout Engine)

out of images it is the following :
Building Cost__Credits__Farsu__Ziryl


BUT! THIS order of things is INCORRECT & ABSOLUTELY! …

correct order is the following :
Building Cost__Credits__Farsu__Ziryl


like this there is evolution in building costs, …
HEE = ZDE : 3,33x credits, 2x Farsu, 2x Ziryl;
SE = DEE : 3x credits, 3x Farsu, …

*try this time - without corvettes & etc spam, …

So the manufacturers have improved the prior engines and lowered costs by the time they had developed the scout engine. Costs don’t always scale up and typically performance is increased not lowered as better components are researched.

you can’t build power engine without Ziryl

Based on what?
Liquid fuels.
Electric engines. (Ion)
Nuclear thermal rocket’s.

They all do the job and none of them use the same fuel type.
Why claim you need Ziryl to have a scout engine with a high energy output?

so, i have to search the proofs for U in Outscape? or to prove to?