วีดีโอ

In the start I say 9 I ment 27 will generate 405Mw and 27 take the same space like one large Reactor

True, but imagine how much digging you need to do and how big of a space you need to dig out, in order to fit enough turbines. Doesn't sound worth it to me.

@@AliceDoesThings404 I don't have to imagine, it's not that bad to get enough room for just minimum power. Takes five minutes or less with right click on the character drill. More if you're setting up pistons and drills to clear tunnels, but mainly from the setup time. A decent drill rig will have you done in a jiffy though. The battery solution works if you have a limited space, or no atmosphere, definitely not saying it's a bad solution, but it requires more input after the initial setup and you have to be vigilant about keeping it topped off if it's running your med stations. Having even a trickle to constantly charge your system can make a huge difference.

Merge blocks. Takes multiple ships to do it

You need to claim the NPC grid to stop the despawning. Once you can access the grid inventory/menu there is a red button on the top right that lets you do that. The simplest way is just to bring along the parts for a control panel so you dont need any existing access. However you have to do that for every seperate grid. So good luck getting there, clearing the defenses, taking out the self destruct if present and accessing all the grids within 2 hours. Enjoy the challenge :)

You can grind it down to just below the hack point without damaging any of the non-recoverable components. I’ve finally gotten all the pieces, but you not only need to claim their grid but also hack them to use them. Don’t be like me, taking someone else’s grid and only realizing too late I led them back to one of our safe zones…

That's dumb. Obviously they intended for batteries to be partially charged on construction. Therefore generating power via batteries is an intended feature and it's not utilizing a bug. Meaning it's not an exploit

@@jamestaylor9887 ive been told otherwise by officials themselves :/ tho they cant stop it on private servers or solo games its a no-no in official

@@gamerelite3989 oh i believe you. i'm just saying its dumb because it is. if they didn't want it in the game batteries should have zero charge when you finish building them.

Stone is all that's required, it's practically free

Yeah but how much stone do you need? I feel like 1 player can't harvest enough to maintain a base.

​@@demiurgoplatonico7815Make a stationary miner

@@jonasstahl9826 I'm testing it rn and I think harvesting all minerals separately is way more time-efficient for a medium-large base/ship. With one full big container you can recharge almost 400 batteries.

@@demiurgoplatonico7815 Depends how you do it. I usely use an automatic mining drone with a refinery ship close by. I let the drone collect all the stone it gets while mining the ore deposit I am after and unload it in the refinery ship to process. Only when the cargo capacity on the refinery ship reaches 90% I start to dump stone. Usely I get enough iron without minig iron ore and can focus on more valuable ores.

irl yeah but in SE they have future tech that can extract 1000% of the minerals from the ground without even putting enough power in to melt the metals for instance the iron alone you get from a survival kit smelting 100kg of stone would take 3600kJ of energy alone but it melts it all with just about 600kJ

@@Polar_Onyx I wonder if on realistic settings this would even out, would be an interesting test (realistic inventory, realistic assembly speed, refinery speed, etc.

This. Maybe you could show this on the video for a new players as well? :) I remember when I did it myself for the first time. Event controller is also helpfull here so you could completely automate it - if battery is depleted it will grind it, create a new one and you can add Isy's IM to make sure you always have enough power cells :D

@andyblondyn1898 I actually tried to make something like this and its not as easy as it sounds. At least when trying to involve event controllers. But I might give it another try.

@@AliceDoesThings404 if I remember correctly, I did it on a subgrid. Projection with connector, battery set to discharge. This way I did not have any issues with events itself :)

Yes it is a bug that everyone has rn there is a mod that fixes it or a really tedious method that I found but it resets when you leave and rejoin other then that you will have to wait for it to be fixed

@@JaydenClemens-t7s спасибо за ответ, а то думал что это я что-то не так делаю. Игра конечно с этими ветряками за этот вечер потрепала мне нервы неплохо так)

it's significantly (20%) more efficient to have two banks of batteries. Do not put either on recharge - build/destroy each bank alternately. The charge efficiency loss applies when you transfer power into the battery by any means, not just from renewable sources, so if you recharge a battery from a newly built battery, you lose 20% of that new battery's charge. If you just discharge the battery normally to power your equipment you "keep" that power.

​@@TheUrit Fair, I didn't consider charge efficiency and the amount lost during the transfer. However I still see some problems with your suggested method. ISSUE ONE: Reliability of being a Self-Sufficient power generation source. Generally speaking, power isn't necessarily consumed in a predictable manner or at a consistent rate, which in turn usually requires you to compensate for this by having plenty of power storage as well as generation in order to compensate for spikes in consumption, such as when a refinery (or multiple refineries) with Speed Modules comes online after a mining expedition, or an ion/atmospheric ship or AI drone comes back to recharge itself. Since in this hypothetical our only source of power is batteries, it means our power generation and storage are one and the same, while also requiring auxiliary systems per bank in order for it all to be self sufficient. That is, a battery bank can't refresh itself with newly welded batteries if it has no power because it ground itself down. This in turn requires a second bank of batteries, as you've suggested having. To make sure the process can be completed in any condition, the designated 'auxiliary' bank of batteries should (for safety's sake) remain off, and then come on when the main battery bank is about to begin it's grinding and welding sequence, after which it may do one of the following: 1: Remain ON while the refreshed bank is turned OFF, thus having the roles switch between banks. OR 2: Turn back OFF while the new bank resumes operation as it had before, which I don't think would work in the long term since the auxiliary bank would be drained over time as the machine cycles and cycles over hours of gameplay. This would then require the auxiliary bank be replaced ー in which case you would have been better off programming it all to end in condition 1 ー or recharged from the newly refreshed bank, which results in a loss of energy as you initially stated. Additionally, with that secondary bank being turned off a majority of the time while waiting for the main bank to discharge, it means your base will be constantly operating at less than 100% power capacity, possibly all the way down to 50% capacity if using only 2 battery banks; Using both at the same time would be a liability, as a grid will draw power from ALL batteries toggled ON across all batteries set to auto or discharge at an even, identical rate, regardless of initial charge capacity, with the only method combatting this being having some batteries be more charged than others, which will require either slightly recharging some batteries, or another complex system that selectively turns the batteries on and off in order to stagger consumption from a designated battery bank, or maybe even each individual bank. ISSUE TWO: Physical Scalability of power generation via Battery Banks. Assuming standard multiplayer build restrictions, you can only have 5 welders, 5 grinders, and 5 drills constructed at a time, regardless of what grid size each tool is built as. A single large grid welder can weld up to 9 blocks at a time in the plane in front of it, up to 17 total blocks (9 centered around the block in front of the welding tip, and 8 surrounding the welding tip, encasing it completely). Conversely, a large grid grinder can only theoretically grind 5 blocks, those being the single block directly in front of it, and the 4 directly to the sides of the saw end of the grinder block. I say theoretically, because this would require optimal positioning of a grinder in-between the 5 blocks, and since grinder's cannot grind their own grid, it requires the grinder to be placed on a sub-grid, in which case you are better off using a small grid grinder offset on its small grid, such as to sit in the exact center of a flat 2x2 array of blocks, thereby having a maximum grind efficiency of 4 large grid blocks. Thus, for grinding and welding any set of batteries, there are two setups that would function efficiently: 1: A group of 4 batteries in a 2x2 array with 1 welder and 1 grinder tending to them, on opposite sides of the battery array OR 2: A group of 16 batteries arranged with a welder in the center of them, with no battery in the space directly in front of the welding tip, and 1 grinder per side of the 3x3x2 battery bank, coming out to 4 total grinders, each tending to 4 batteries. In any case, the limiting factor in battery-centric power generation will be how the batteries are disposed of, and thereby the size and shape of any battery bank is limited. In my mind's eye, Setup 1 is ideal since it is easily tileable, which in my opinion offsets the fact that it has a ratio of welders-to-grinders that is 4x more inefficient than Option 2, as the tileability could then allow both the lone welder and grinder to be placed on a piston, and thus access more batteries without additional tools. (For argument's sake, I'm ignoring the possibility of invoking Klang's wrath here, as multiple nested subgrids are typically more stable when the root is a stationary grid, and having a power generation system like this on a ship is beyond asinine.) Any station or planetary installation would want at least 6MW of power generation in order to operate both a single refiner and single assembler (both upgraded fully with 4 speed modules each, coming out to 2.8MW for each building) for any amount of time, leaving 0.4MW to spare for things such as a Survival Kit, some Base Lighting, and the block tools used to generate that power (0.002MW, or 2 Kilowatts are required per Welder, Grinder or Drill used). While this can be covered by a single vanilla large grid battery, which has a maximum output of 12MW, that will be eaten through in 30 minutes at peak operation from a full charge; Using only the 900kWh that comes with the battery upon construction, however, that will be consumed in just 9 minutes, which is rather quick, and extremely volatile when it comes to power generation stability. Let's say the target rate of power production is an average of 6MWh. Since a single battery supplies 900kWh, you will need 7 batteries (6 and 2/3rds to be precise) per hour to meet that requirement if using the power directly. With a 20% loss via my recharging method, that would require 9 batteries (8 and 1/3rds) per hour, which is less efficient, as you were correct in saying. (ProtoTech Batteries have a 10% loss on recharge compared to a normal battery's 20%, but for the sake of simplicity I'll just say that it comes out to 8 batteries an hour.) Now, in terms of scalability, which of the following sounds easier to set up, manage, and/or automate, per hour: A: Grind down and weld up 7 batteries (basically all at once) while activating another separate bank to compensate for the dip in power supply (Requires at least 1 Welder and 2 Grinders in an odd but efficient layout, or 2 Welders and 2 Grinders if tiled), in an hour. B: Grind down and weld up 4 batteries forced set to discharge, twice (totaling 8 batteries) with roughly 9 minutes of downtime between each cycle (Requires 1 Welder and 1 Grinder) without having to worry about auxiliary power banks or outages, in an hour. I think I fried my brain writing this out for too long. But I still think Setup B here is easier to expand upon, since you can easily stack more and more pistons without increasing tool count and you won't have to worry about outages as much. Power generation in Space Engineers is crazy man, heck if we wanted to get REALLY tool efficient, we could have a piston arm assembly with just 1 welder weld up ANY amount of battery banks connected to the main grid via merge blocks, bank-by-bank, and then have an event controller detect when any bank is drained, deactivate and detach the bank's merge block, and have gravity drop it off a slope into a small grinder pit, or have the piston assembly come back over and use a piston on the assembly's 'head' to 'kick' the bank away, jettisoning it into the void.

Discharge isn't infinite, it's included in the specs in the power panel. 12 MW for the normal large grid battery.

@@isoinsignia7540 Ah right you’re right. I’ve been playing too much creative mode recently with the latest update. I should build things that aren’t capital ships so I’m not working with so many hundreds of batteries that they are ‘effectively’ infinite LOL