Engineers Powerplant Choices

VGuy

V
Hi all,

I got this game for a song and a dance during the Steam winter sale, and I'm frankly embarrassed to admit how much time I've spent playing. I'm even more embarrassed to admit how much I never stopped sucking at combat.

Anyway, I'm trying to put together a PvE Chieftain, and I'm wondering what my best powerplant choice is. I have some extra power available with a 6A powerplant, and I'm trying to figure out if I'm better off engineering it for low emissions or getting a 5A powerplant instead.

The associated question I have is if my approach of generating the minimum power necessary for a specific build makes sense; in either of the above cases, I'm disabling my FSD and cargo hatch while my hardpoints are deployed. Put another way, are you better off with more headroom or less headroom on the powerplant? Aside from the weight difference.

Thanks.
 

Ceekay

Ceekay
Don't disable the FSD as it'll take several seconds to reboot before it starts charging, you can use the power priority setting in the RH panel to set things like the cargo hatch and docking computer to lower priorities so that non essential modules power down when weapons are deployed but not the FSD!!!!!!!!!! ;)

Here's a build I used the large beams are effective against small medium targets with the cannons being used on the unshielded hull of large ships, you probably could run this build on an engineered 5A plant but you may want to try rail guns and PAs at some point and they require more power.

https://coriolis.edcd.io/outfit/all...AcICmBDA5gG2SGF8hRFA&bn=Chieftain beam cannon
 

VGuy

V
Thanks for your help. I ended up going with an unengineered C6 power plant. In my first draft, I was using two C3 efficient PAs, so I just swapped those out for long range since I can't hit anything. That pretty well closes any gap I had in available power, so I'm pretty content now.
 

BradHann

BradHann
Be aware that it's not all about the power - an A rated power plant (of any size) also has the best heat efficiency.
 

Daynen

D
The extra integrity of B modules is rarely worth the considerable extra weight. A-rated powerplants do best on heat and give you the power to experiment with your build more, which keeps your targeting signature from spiking to crazy ranges, mitigates heat damage and removes the worry of hot weapons. Lastly, an A-rated plant also gives you a bit more of a damage buffer--if you start losing plant integrity you're going to start losing power. Having that extra buffer from the A-plant means more margin for mistakes before you start losing critical module function. Unless I'm building a weaponless trader, speed racer or long range explorer, I rarely see any reason to use anything less than the top line powerplant for the ship in question; otherwise my weapon options get cut, sacrifices have to be made and I risk shutting down weapons due to power loss after just a hit or two--not okay with me.

EDIT: Oh, or a miner. Miners don't necessarily need A plants unless you're bringing a lot of drills.
 
Last edited:

VGuy

V
I hadn't really considered going with anything less than an A rating. Just tonight, I discovered the armored powerplant mod, and it appears to me that the only drawback is the increased mass, which can be largely offset with an experimental effect. Is everybody but me running with this mod?
 

Mugur

M
VGuy said:
I hadn't really considered going with anything less than an A rating. Just tonight, I discovered the armored powerplant mod, and it appears to me that the only drawback is the increased mass, which can be largely offset with an experimental effect. Is everybody but me running with this mod?
Click to expand...

Frankly, I always use Overcharged with a special and downsize the PP. Mass is important. Armored is good only in PvP builds and only when you have enough power for weapons, etc. (some ships don't - like the Vulture, for example, but there are others too). If you are grade 5-ing everything, you will consume more power in a pure combat build.
 

Eugee

E
There are only two reasons I will ever use Low Emissions--if I'm going to regularly use Silent Running, or want to land on ridiculously hot planets. Otherwise, it's always Armoured for me; you get improved power output, and improved heat efficiency, in addition to more integrity. Yes it's a little heavier, but it's negligible. There's only one ship I use Overcharged on--the Vulture, because even with Armoured/Monstered I can't make my favorite build fit.

For your Chieftain I'd try to run an A-grade with either Armoured/Thermal or Armoured/Monstered, depending on what gives you enough power.
 

Bigmaec

Bigmaec
VGuy said:
Hi all,

I got this game for a song and a dance during the Steam winter sale, and I'm frankly embarrassed to admit how much time I've spent playing. I'm even more embarrassed to admit how much I never stopped sucking at combat.

Anyway, I'm trying to put together a PvE Chieftain, and I'm wondering what my best powerplant choice is. I have some extra power available with a 6A powerplant, and I'm trying to figure out if I'm better off engineering it for low emissions or getting a 5A powerplant instead.

The associated question I have is if my approach of generating the minimum power necessary for a specific build makes sense; in either of the above cases, I'm disabling my FSD and cargo hatch while my hardpoints are deployed. Put another way, are you better off with more headroom or less headroom on the powerplant? Aside from the weight difference.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

For combat ships I tend to use the smallest A-rated powerplant with the armoured G5 mod & mostly thermal spread experimental.
- A-rated because it's most heat efficient
- armoured because it won't break so fast then, especially not when getting sniped by PvPers :D
- the smallest possible because my inner Scrooge McDuck compells me to it and because it makes the ship faster.

Sometimes it's possible with one size smaller, sometimes not. Depends on your loadout.
 
Last edited:

Hokahey

H
"Sometimes it's possible with one size smaller, sometimes not. Depends on your loadout."

In my Krait loudout i could fit an 6A class PP instead of the installed 7A one.
Coriolis says the 6A has a 4% lower resting heat and the the weight advantage on top.

@seasoned cmdrs: is there any reason to keep the 7A ?
 
Last edited:

dm06

dm06
Hokahey said:
Umm, don´t get that. Guardian weapons / guardian modules need more power than standard engineered ones ? So better stick with 7A ?
Click to expand...

in a nutshell: Yes, yes.
Standard hull and module reinforcement packages do not require power at all.
There's no standard shield reinforcement package.
Even 7a couldn't be enough, either 7a hybrid powerplant or overcharged.
 
Last edited:

Bob Lighthouse

Banned
Bob Lighthouse
Hokahey said:
"Sometimes it's possible with one size smaller, sometimes not. Depends on your loadout."

In my Krait loudout i could fit an 6A class PP instead of the installed 7A one.
Coriolis says the 6A has a 4% lower resting heat and the the weight advantage on top.

@seasoned cmdrs: is there any reason to keep the 7A ?
Click to expand...



Depends if you can run the essentials on 40/50% power for malfunctions and failure, respectively.
 

Bob Lighthouse

Banned
Bob Lighthouse
VGuy said:
I hadn't really considered going with anything less than an A rating. Just tonight, I discovered the armored powerplant mod, and it appears to me that the only drawback is the increased mass, which can be largely offset with an experimental effect. Is everybody but me running with this mod?
Click to expand...

I use armored on most of my ships.
I don't use the stripped down effect very often.
Monstered and thermal spread are more common in my fleet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom