How do you use solar panels?

[DaLagga]

So I noticed that their position relative to the sun heavily influences their power yield (makes sense). So naturally, my main goal was to use rotors in order to get them facing in the perfect direction. By using two rotors in a sequence, I was able to point a solar array any direction I wanted. Sweet, right?

Well, all was going perfectly until I started on my 6 or 7th solar panel when the rotors starting "jiggling" just like landing gear do. I had no idea that this bug affected rotors attached to stations so now I'm at a loss as to how to properly position solar panels. Is there a workaround for this or am I just going to have to settle for sub-par power output per panel?

[VanGoghComplex]

Originally posted by DaLagga:

Well, I found a good solution to the problem a few days ago. If you simply build a ship with loads of solar panels you can then just attach a connector on the station attached to a couple of rotors. Line the ship up with the sun for maximum yield and then use the rotors on the station to position the connector right next to the ship's. Connect them together and now you're able to supply your base with power from the solar ship and not have to worry about components jiggling themselves apart because the station rotors are technically only supporting a connector block and not the actual array of solar panels. As an added bonus, you can remove the solar ship later if necessary and use it for other purposes.

Unfortunately, as I pointed out in another thread, using a low of solar panels completely destroys your game speed. It seems that they're quite CPU intensive and once you get hundreds of them your game will slow down to a crawl. I used 3 solar ships with over 200 panels each to power my main factory (still was only able to output ~80mw of power which is less than a single large reactor) and my game speed dropped into the 50-60% range on a high end CPU. So it seems like solar panels have to be used relatively sparringly which is a bit of a problem because their low power output means that you need tons of them to do much good.

If you think that 600 panels is the point where you can no longer say "sparingly," your expectations are... well, high. =P

Using a much smaller amount of solar panels and an array of batteries set to cycle through charge/discharge states using timers/programming, you can achieve output on par with reactors by only charging one battery at a time. As long as you have enough solars to charge one battery at an appreciable rate while meeting the idle power requirements for your installation, you'll be set! Fuelless power source with high output!

[maninredagain]

Well, I haven't tried out 600 Solar Panels yet (just for giggles I may build a big panel like that in creative mode, maybe it's not eating the CPU-power if it's not on ships since so far it only slowed my game down when the solar panels started swinging around), but here are 40 in a frame, all stable on two rotors (one horizontal, one vertical).

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=405758684

Can I say now "You call this a solar panel? THIS is a solar panel!" ?

[maninredagain]

Wait, no. THIS is a Solar Panel (made in creative, 920 units inside, not wiggling though getting the rotor to the right angle gets a pain since it swings on for a few degrees before coming to rest)
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=405788359

With my mid-tier (i5 with 2,5 GHz per core) CPU still having a sim speed of 1 I guess DaLaggas ships are not stable (always trying to correct themselves), causing his lag.

It's really mean that all they need is a simple frame and all that time I thought I'm limited to 6 units per tower.

[MyProfile]

Working as intended, very realistic and practicly useless.

[VanGoghComplex]

Originally posted by MyProfile:

Working as intended, very realistic and practicly useless.

Nope.

It baffles my mind when someone knows enough about solar to know the panels are realistic, but still calls them useless. This is because I figure if you know that much, you also know that they are almost never used as a direct power source in real life either: they are always used in conjunction with batteries.

[MyProfile]

I know they are made of glass.
I know that rock breaks glass.
I know the asteroid storms come from the Sun.
I know that solar panels do squat without solar energy.
I know solar panels do squat compared to reactors.
I know reactors work just as well on the dark side of the roid as the light side.

What did I miss?
Batteries?
Yeah, I can charge those with reactors also and they still provide back up power.
lol.

There is a reason why they are never used as a direct power source in real life.
Its because they suck.

[maninredagain]

Well, don't use asteroid storms then. Afterall in an asteroid environment in which the big ones don't move, the small ones wouldn't move either so it's even more realistic.

[VanGoghComplex]

Originally posted by MyProfile:

I know they are made of glass.
I know that rock breaks glass.
I know the asteroid storms come from the Sun.
I know that solar panels do squat without solar energy.
I know solar panels do squat compared to reactors.
I know reactors work just as well on the dark side of the roid as the light side.

What did I miss?
Batteries?
Yeah, I can charge those with reactors also and they still provide back up power.
lol.

There is a reason why they are never used as a direct power source in real life.
Its because they suck.

Or, engineer around the problem. Make them retractable. Defend them with guns. Think of it as the alternative to mining for uranium, because that's what it is. Just because you don't prefer them doesn't mean they're useless. One of my old capital ships has no reactors. As a result, I have to hide it behind asteroids during storms or feed it bullets.

[MyProfile]

Originally posted by VanGoghComplex:

Originally posted by MyProfile:

I know they are made of glass.
I know that rock breaks glass.
I know the asteroid storms come from the Sun.
I know that solar panels do squat without solar energy.
I know solar panels do squat compared to reactors.
I know reactors work just as well on the dark side of the roid as the light side.

What did I miss?
Batteries?
Yeah, I can charge those with reactors also and they still provide back up power.
lol.

There is a reason why they are never used as a direct power source in real life.
Its because they suck.

Or, engineer around the problem. Make them retractable. Defend them with guns. Think of it as the alternative to mining for uranium, because that's what it is. Just because you don't prefer them doesn't mean they're useless. One of my old capital ships has no reactors. As a result, I have to hide it behind asteroids during storms or feed it bullets.

Solar will never be an alternative to anything more than nothing.
You had it right when you called it a means to keeping a bank of batteries charged for an Emergency Backup and that is exactly all that they are good for and only then if you disable certain game mechanics so that they survive.

The developers have Solar Power nailed to a tee. Very fun and cool to play with but not so dependable or efficient as to be relied upon heavily.

[VanGoghComplex]

Originally posted by MyProfile:

The developers have Solar Power nailed to a tee. Very fun and cool to play with but not so dependable or efficient as to be relied upon heavily.

If you say so. Meanwhile, my majestic Manta capital ship will continue floating majestically past all those uranium deposits while it soaks up rays like a Cancun tourist. ;)

[MyProfile]

Originally posted by VanGoghComplex:

Originally posted by MyProfile:

The developers have Solar Power nailed to a tee. Very fun and cool to play with but not so dependable or efficient as to be relied upon heavily.

If you say so. Meanwhile, my majestic Manta capital ship will continue floating majestically past all those uranium deposits while it soaks up rays like a Cancun tourist. ;)

Sure it will,
as long as you keep those meteor storms disabled.

[VanGoghComplex]

Originally posted by MyProfile:

Originally posted by VanGoghComplex:

If you say so. Meanwhile, my majestic Manta capital ship will continue floating majestically past all those uranium deposits while it soaks up rays like a Cancun tourist. ;)

Sure it will,
as long as you keep those meteor storms disabled.

Nah bruh. Storms are on. The sunside of the ship is dotted with gats. I haven't lost a panel since the defenses were completed.

[DaLagga]

Originally posted by VanGoghComplex:

If you think that 600 panels is the point where you can no longer say "sparingly," your expectations are... well, high. =P

Using a much smaller amount of solar panels and an array of batteries set to cycle through charge/discharge states using timers/programming, you can achieve output on par with reactors by only charging one battery at a time. As long as you have enough solars to charge one battery at an appreciable rate while meeting the idle power requirements for your installation, you'll be set! Fuelless power source with high output!

Well, seeing as how it takes 833 solar panels to generate as much power as a single large reactor, I actually would consider 600'ish to be fairly light use. As for the batteries, I don't quite understand what you're saying. If you don't have enough solar panels to handle your base output, then I don't see how batteries will help. At best, batteries are only useful if you produce more power than you need and store it for when your energy needs spike. But like I said in the other thread, I've got 120+ refineries constantly processing ore so I need about 80mw just to power the base. As such, I don't think batteries are going to help me.

Originally posted by maninredagain:

With my mid-tier (i5 with 2,5 GHz per core) CPU still having a sim speed of 1 I guess DaLaggas ships are not stable (always trying to correct themselves), causing his lag.

And I think we have a winner! Here's a screenshot of my solar array (648 panels in total across 3 solar ships that I chained together with connectors) while in a cockpit.

http://cloud-4.steamusercontent.com/ugc/32987878442121606/9A2592D60F2D5BAB3A4F4B0217F8996AD973354C/

And here's a shot taken seconds later where the only difference is the fact that I've left the cockpit and am floating in open space. In neither shot am I moving.

http://cloud-4.steamusercontent.com/ugc/32987878442122235/03D9B9BD8ED5C70EA3B2AEE35B3BE13D56142902/

Notice how my game speed takes a noticeable hit just from being outside of a cockpit? I pointed this out in the other thread on game speed and it's very odd indeed and happens no matter where I am. That being said, even with all my refineries off, my game speed is sitting at around 75-80%. But now, if I use merge blocks to connect the ships to one another and to the station, here's the result.

http://cloud-4.steamusercontent.com/ugc/32987878442122741/AE9E3B3577046FB00B19A32E6114E15BE809BB41/

As you can see, my game speed is now once again perfect and all I did was merge the solar ships to the station. So it would seem you were correct maninredagain. Solar panels appear to cause a massive CPU hit if they're on a ship but connected to a station the impact is far more minimal.

[maninredagain]

Yay, I'm a winner. What's the price?

I also experienced the lag while not in a cockpit, but only after I mined some ore very messy and left the other chunks of it flying around. In that case saving, then reloading helps me since it seems to stop those chunks of ore in the place where they were saved. Or maybe it removes the more than the set limit ones, I don't know exactly.

[Topminator]

Imagine if the developers would add a x100 solar panel!
You need components for 100 panels to build it but it gives you the power of those panels all in one panel (or maybe it needs like a component that needs tons of materials and/or the panel yields like 80 or 90 basic panels... You still get the benefit of it being a single panel)