• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

513 Excellent


About panzer1b

  • Rank
    Sci-Fi Military Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

1485 profile views
  1. Well im ready to setup whenever you guys are ready to get started, so just ask me to put my ships in teh save once we are actually starting. I just waited since i had the impression a large number of people were still developing their vessels for the battle and we wouoldnt actually start teh fight until a week or so at the minimum...
  2. Cant say i approve of "random" disasters that would cause stuff to fail for no reason, same way i do not support the concept of "random" part failures either (scipted part failures as like in the expansion would be interesting, but completely random, no thanks). That said, what i would like to see are limited weather effects. Even something as simple as very gently winds to make aircraft takeoffs/landings more difficult or make launches into space require a minor compensation to keep them flying straight in the wind. Id even like to see stuff like rain/snow which might add a small drag to craft just to keep it interesting, and the somewhat random nature of this would allow you to either launch during bad weather (albeit id make the effect fairly minimal so it doesnt make going somewhere impossible, just somewhat more challenging and or less fuel efficient), or wait for it to pass by. Ofc on the extreme end things like hurricanes do sound fun on higher difficulties (but not destroying buildings as thats just plain annoying), especially on laythe, it always struck me like something akin to that cloner planet in star wars where there were hurricanes and rain and generally crappy weather.
  3. I think the new parts are pretty nice, and the few personal issues with them i can always photoshop out (not a big fan of that green color on engine butt that seems random and doesnt fit with any other stock KSP part). Granted i dont care one bit about the other things in the DLC (mission builder is kinda pointless when i play sandbox all day and make up my own missions as i actually have an imagination and creativity), i think ill probably get it just to support a game that i really enjoy as its arguably my fav game atm, especially since its unique in that i can do anything from arcade style combat flight sim (BDA + planes/tanks/flak guns) to starship battles (and even the very rare occasional peaceful mission that doesnt involve vaporizing something), at least when using the correct mod. That said, my one biggest issue with this game over the last year or so has been the utter lack of old part overhauls. While im not one to say the old art is worthless, id really like to see some sort of consistency in the game, and right now its all over the place with parts from porkjet, nova, and other developers thrown into the mix with little thought on how they'd look together. The biggest issue is really the modeling, which is completely broken in a few places (mk1 and mk1-2 pod are prolly the 2 biggest eyesores to the point i NEVER use them unless its a pirate/rebel/redneck vessel that i intentionally want to look like it came out of a garbage can that was in a garbage pile) and could seriously use an overhaul. Especially annoying is the fact that (i may be wrong as i dont know everything thats being worked on) it seems that DLC parts are being made to look good, and most of the old parts are basically being left behind to be forgotten. I understand the DLC is priority, but id really love to see the mk1-2 pod redone in a similar style to that capsule that was released last week in the art preview. That feature alone would really make KSP 100 times better and more enjoyable, where every part was at least somewhat good looking and most of all didnt look off when combined with other parts. That said, its probably nothing more then a dream of mine that will never be done, a point where every stock part looks reasonably together and there are no more obviously broken models that dont even match up correctly (why do some of the old pods have different sized end connectors that mook terrible with anything attached but the parachutes that are too small anyways or the 1.2m docking port that is also too small for proper 1.2m connection)...
  4. I dont see the issue, when i pick a target im gonna go into the tracking station, and basically look at whatever i feel may be killable by my ship (obviously if i see some monster im not gonna waste my turn shooting at it and doing jack) and they fly my ship over to it and hit it. Its kinda hard to "hide" your ship when anyone can go into the game and take a quick glance at every ship on the battlefield anyways. Now in real time MP i totally see this as viable and even necessary since you can deploy countermeasures in real time and you have a chance the enemy will target the wrong thing. Doesnt do much (besides maybee annoy people and make a turn take slightly more time) so i say its fine to use (albeit pointless use of part count in turn based). Myself i have the capability of probe spamming, but i dont see why id want to do it as noone is actually going to target those things... Also, im 100% ready to deploy, but im still wanting to make a few minor tweaks to the weapon loadouts before i put my ships on the battlefield. Im not gonna be that gujy that deploys last, but ill take the little more time i have (since not everyone is ready atm) to improve the torps (especially the tripedo-II, it works but its not quite as lethal as i was hoping given its mass and part count).
  5. Lets stick to the original plan of Dres, Elloo, and Jool, any ship that goes beyond that excessively is out of the competition and counts as if it was dead (solar orbits are allowed i think, but if its much past dres or eeloo its a dead ship). Transfer burns between these planets are low enough (especially if you aerobrake/grav assist in jool) that any ship here including LFO ones should be useable (especially since we clearly allow 1 support ship per person). Fuel management should be a factor in winning, but its not exactly all that much fun when people abuse long range to basically avoid combat indefenetely (if we were to do that id just bring a light scout ship with 30K dV and be really annoying with putting that basically so close to the sun noone could reliably intercept the thing (especially if it was retrograde and or polar orbit). I will setup in a bit, around pol as i planned before. Just need to finish the IRSU lander system as im so not bringing a supply ship that doesnt have the ability to refuel itself as thatd be kinda stupid (unless ofc noone was allowed IRSU). Anyways, i think IRSU should be legal, since its a considerable weight penalty on anything but the heaviest of ships.
  6. fine, ill swap to regular SRMs, granted the part count increase is not fun when ur ship is already over 600 parts... and i dont even want to know how many parts my soon to be finished station will be when i carry SRM reloads. Thats gonna be painful to be near...
  7. kk technically sepatron ibeams are guaranted hit too you know (as is basically every other weapon ive ever developed when used correctly)... and its not a mod, i just opened the CFG and icnreased the decoupler force % past 100% that the in game allows you to.
  8. Most of those are actually outdated. As i mentioned before i fell down the road of trying to make everything super compact, and while the ships themselves aint half bad, my modern vessels (regulator and rectifier class, as well as the in-progress SK-106 which ive yet to name) use my modern layout which is moderate size with alot of empty space inside them. Most of the ships on my repository are last generation, with the so called "sub-capital" class being really popular with me for the last year or so (the concept is sound, super tiny and lightweight, hard to hit, ect, but in practice it kinda doesnt stand up well to any high end weapons and they get annihbillated by ibeam spam). That and most of the last year or so ships used the so called internal ion spam technique, not that its illegal or anything according to rules, but i kinda feel really cheap abusing it to the extent that it was impossible to mobility kill any of my vessels period without vaporizing the entire thing outright. Thus switched back to conventional engines as they feel more like an actual capital ship, even if they have the obvious downside of being less mass efficient and an easier target. The larger ones (Sk-1xx and 2xx which are corvettes and frigates respectively) are basically from 2+ years ago and thus outdated by alot. Most of the really outdated ships are just terrible and id never use them in a competitive battle (pretty much any ship that has a lengthwise girder skeleton structure in my repository is trash armor wise), and the just slightly outdated ones are the previously mentioned subcapital ships that are designed to be ultra lightweight and super tiny (but in doing so a single shot tends to do alot of damage). Also a bit unrelated, but something id like to clarify with yall incase anyone has objections. Is everyone ok with me using pulse cannons on my ships? They are stock cfg edited weapons that use a decoupler with its eject force increased by enough to blast long and short ibeams at lethal velocity without the use of sepatrons (saves alot of parts). From testing they are weaker then ibeam+sepatron in general, they just have the ability to be fired at point-blank and still do full damage to a target (not that i actually engage from that distance, usually ~100-200m out). Its basically used entirely as a part count saving measure, and they have more disadvantages then advantages actually (less firepower, flat invariable impact velocity, insane recoil problems which have resulted in weapon mounts being ripped apart on some badly designed ships, inaccurate, ect). I can alwasy swap these things out for conventional SRMs, but id rather not as they are just meant to be secondary weapons anyways and the saved part count is imo worth their weaker performance compared to regulat sepatron powered ibeams.
  9. When it comes to protection, there are really 2 distinct choices when it comes to skeletal design, yeah there are variations of the concept, but basically 2 unique ones. The first involves using a line of girders/ibeams and building out sideways. The is the older style, which still works and has its merits these days. This has good results in that loosing the central girder will at worst split your ship in half, with a complete 1 hit KO being very very difficult if not impossible if you have the front and back redundified properly. The way to do this is to use either engines inside your ships (ant, ion, rcs thrusters are the only engines right now that do not have a thrust hitbox modeled properly and thus work inside a craft), or have external engines so that every section can be propelled on its own. Basically treat the ship as if it is a modular vessel (every segment stacked in front or behind has everything it needs to be its own ship) and this style of build will serve you very well, but at the cost of complexity, part counts, and mass. You dont absolutely have to have super redundancy, but ive basically dismissed the old style completely without it, since getting cut in half happens all to often and most of the time if that happens you are finished because you either loose most of the weapons or the engine compartment. The other style involves having one critical root part and then building outwards from that. This is (in my opinion at least) the better way to build nowadays because you can abuse the concept of probability and make the ship so that the odds of hitting that part are extremely small. This has the obvious downside of being instakilled when the root part goes with most designs of the sort, but you can kinda make a ship in 2 parts or so so that if the root goes its split in half and half usually remains a ship. Anyways, the basic style here is what i call a H-frame (look at my SK-104 to see what i mean), you have 1 part in the middle, then branch out on 4 directions to make the main hull and corners of your ship. Then optionally you can branch out up/down as needed if your ship is large/tall. Each branch should have a reasonable amount opf stuff attached, but not so much that having 1-02 branches shot off considerably affects ship performance. My newer ships have 8 branches, the 4 up front have weapons of em, 2 in the back have engines, and 2 in the back have weapons. if i have more then 2 main engines all 4 rear branches get engines and there are usually 2 extra on the back with a few guns on em for 10 total. Also worth mentioning is that this design may benefit from wing armor vs plating, since the vast majority of the craft can be made hollow and with wings ordinance just passes through taking a weapon or engine with it but rarely actually doing enough damage to negatively affect ship function. Like anything, itll die to a luckshot (hit the root and its game over), and its not going to survive 20 impacts one after the other either (nothing will), but it has the best qualities of suitability coupled with the ability to use almost exclusively wing armor to lower the overall mass and allow you to bring more guns (or actually have more then 500dV, although who would even increase the dV if they can put more guns on ). Anyways, there are many other variations of both styles, but generally you can choose one of these 2 options. Generally speaking the older style of building is probably easier to make and a safer bet for newer players (if it isnt done perfectly the 2nd style can result in pretty reliable deaths, and you also have to deal with the wobble kraken that seems to feast on ships that have alot of branches coming off a single root part). Still, feel free to try both and see what works better for you. I think the G3 is a high penetration weapon, similar to my Tribeam missiles my ships carry. It is very good against heavy compact armor, but its absolutely atrocious against anything with alot of empty voids inside with little vulnurable components to hit with 1 shot. Most weapons with a cone shaped front spike work that way, they are great at phasing through and tearing the core apart, but are bad without exceptional aim since they have no shrapnel and are very thin with a little hitbox/front profile.
  10. Im close, all i need to do is touch up freighter and finish station, all my 4 ships are in a state id be ok with using even right now (i will upgrade things like weapons layouts/types a bit given time but they can be used atm effectively). Hard to hit ships are one of those things that is deceiving actually. I kinda fell down that road for a year or so, trying to make smaller and smaller and more compact ships, but the moment someone has both skill and properly designed torpedoes the concept of being so small its hard to hit you with fire goes out the window. Recently ive settled for the concept of compact and hard to hit skeleton/core, but a very large ship with lots of empty space to render high powered weapons less useful since they will just punch straight through and do little if any real damage. After years of trying, ive concluded that "invincible" armor is IMPOSSIBLE to make (you CAN do it with fairings, but i consider any use of fairing armor to be a cheat and thus id never use it or fight someone who does use it), and because of that, you need to rely on probability to defend yourself, and the less likely the enemy is to hit a critical section the less likely you are to die from any one shot.
  11. I should be ready maybee tomorrow, worst case the day after that, i have 4 ships that are in a useable state, and i just need to finish refitting a old carrier for my support ship (claws, lotsa RCS, lotsa fuel, ect), and i need to finish my station with ammo and all, i dont really make that many non modular stations (most stations i have in my offline campaigns tend to be built up over a long time, many of which are based on potatoroids) and i think itll be best if i make one from scratch which will allow me to actually get a more practical design there with just ammo and a little bit of fuel+replacement engine pods for the very likely case where something gets shot up really bad and needs a new engine after being towed back to base. Also, i think the 750 tons limit should include EVERYTHING you plan to deploy, and not just the 4 ships. This way its a strategic choice between deploying all of your tonnage by spamming battleships and dreadnoughts, or having a smaller and more modest fleet but with good logistical support (as in lots of fuel and reloadeable weapons, which not only are useful for you, but make it possible for you to act as a useful alliance member after all combat ships have been kaputed. Btw, what do you think of adding the following to rules regarding support ship: *support ship/station can be targeted like any other vessel but the attack counts as your turn (since we only can attack 1 thing per turn) *support ship may ONLY carry fuel and replacement engines (the station is where you keep extra weapons just so you cant get away with a do anything support ship) *support ship can only do one job per turn: this means you may refuel a ship, grab a ship and tow it, lanfd somewhere to refil with IRSU, but you can only do one of these things per turn and no more to keep supply ships from being abused to say refuel your entire alliance per turn (which is kinda possible given enough patience, just land, IRSU, fill up 4 ships, and repeat until everyones full) *stations can carry anything from weapons to replacement engines to fuel *stations cannot have more then 100dV total (to allow for minor orbital tweaks but not moving them interplanetary) *station cannot be attacked if there are friendly warships in orbit around the same planet/body (meaning to go after someone's station you need to first kill warships near it if any are there) and also, i think you need to make a rule about making/breaking alliances in that an alliance cannot be broken without prior notification and at least 1 turn passing between that (to prevent blatant backstabbing where the alliance member has no way of responding and moving their ship out of the way and or attacking)
  12. Thats a really bad idea, i have MAJOR issues with part counts that are like above 1000, and with that tonnage there is NO WAY i can fight against 2000 part warships... I think a better choice is to have us share ships with those that lack vessels of correct size. I myself am open to sharing some of mine, i have plenty of thinsg from like 40t to almost 100t, if you need a lightweight filler then i can guarantee ill find something thatll fit the gap. Especially with sub-capitals, i have a handful of fairly strong (weapons are all mostly short range so you might want to replace them if you dont like to get in the enemy's face). Other then that, a minor increase to like 600ish i support (then id be able to bring 2 fail rectifiers of doom) but i think increasing the weight limit much past 700 is just going to result in such excessive ships that part counts start to kill my rig and not to mention that at that point there is absolutely no engineering challenge anymore, just strap on so much fuel and armor that nothing can kill any ships. Worth noting is that lower tonnage also makes fighters/escort ships useful, whereas with 1000 its going to be entirely super heavy destroyers/cruisers and no lightweight ships which are kinda interesting to mess with actually...
  13. So question for everyone, is 55 TONS of heavy and medium torpedoes enough for a single ship? I think i might not even need a dedicated ammo station, the newest prototype rectifier is basically an ammo station for all intents and purposes . Armor is absolutely worthless (cant afford to structural panel the monster as it already weighs 150t with purely wing armoring), but 55 tons of weapons has to mean something... Also, i think i may be entering your league @zekes in terms of weight and part count now... My most likely deployment will be 3 regulator class and 1 rectifier class, prolly end up sending the rectifier on a suicide mission early game since its got absolutely no armor and anything that looks at it instakills it. That leaves me with ~150t for a station and a fuel support ship with tug capabilities and IRSU. I think thats a fairly good amount, enough to work, but not so much that its really taking away from my offensive capabilities. Kinda need those supplies with the fact that the rectifier eats fuel like crazy (assuming it doesnt just die before i even get to make my move that is with glass cannons and all)...
  14. Well im no pro either, ive had a few battles back when, but these days all of my new ships are about as "new" as you guys are, so i have no idea how theyll hold up to actual enemys. Granted i do have some experience from the old days, and i tend to approach these fights strategically (as in half of my kills to date are mobility kills since its so hard to fight against dedicated engine sniping), but im not as good as you guys seem to make me look ...
  15. So yeah, looking at my expected total mass of combat ships, anyone allied with me will not likely need to bring much supplies, i get 200t of bloody fuel/weapons to work with ... Im prolly going to bring 2 regulators and 2 rectifiers, assuming the rectifier comes out as expected and doesnt suck like my recently failed SK-105 i was really hoping would be a solid choice for me to bring. Looks amazing, lets see how that monstrosity holds up in battle. Btw, is 100t of fuel enough to keep that running? I plan on having a 100t supply ship which id be happy to follow you around in to keep that fueled since im basically 200t short of 500 with my 4 ships i plan to use. Also, how many parts/tonnage, just looking at that makes my "heavy" warships look like escort vessels