inigma

[ASC-III] Air Superiority Challenge - King of the Hill (BDArmory 4v4 AI Duels: WW1 Theme) - Now Concluded!

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Box of Stardust said:

It does? Why?

They explode on impact, which means the heat (damage) is spread out over several parts, watering down its destructive effect. Meanwhile 20mm rounds deliver their heat concentrated on one part, and destroying a single part immediately is much more effective than taking several rounds to destroy a cluster of parts.

Edited by drtricky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, xoknight said:

Alright, i've been waiting for ASC II. Here we go. (yes I have tested it against the current leader) (also spam space bar to activate emergency cockpit parachute)

https://kerbalx.com/xoknight/Yak-41-Camel

There's uh... no current leader. ASC-II starts sometime next week.

Edit: Otherwise, looks like you've got a battle ready craft!

Edited by JollyGreenGI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, xoknight said:

Alright, i've been waiting for ASC II. Here we go. (yes I have tested it against the current leader) (also spam space bar to activate emergency cockpit parachute)

https://kerbalx.com/xoknight/Yak-41-Camel

Downloading to test against my VulcaRaptor. I'll post some vids.

@inigma

Do we have to do 3 v 3? it still bogs my system down and I get a lot of pre-fight collisions. 2v2 will give us much smoother animations and more accurate physics, and reduce friendly collisions.

CameraTools seems to be broken as well?

Edited by g00bd0g

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, JollyGreenGI said:

Okay, so I might be considered biased, but I'll try not to be. Looking at the match, your fighters are definitely capable of dodging missiles, but it looks like they sometimes burn too much speed whilst doing so. That would leave them vulnerable to follow-up shots. I really do like the lightness of the fighter, but if you're going to be firing 2 missiles at a time I'd suggest carrying two more for more chances to attack, it's just a preference though. You could probably resubmit it into ASC-II and do pretty well! I'd just take a look at the AI settings so you can maintain at least 80m/s, or above whatever your stall speed is.

Food for thought for sure. Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am entering the VulcaRaptor to get the ball rolling. If anyone wants to test their ships against it, please feel free :)

https://kerbalx.com/g00bd0g/VulcaRaptor

 

@inigma

I was getting some strange glitches where I lose the "esc" menu and resource panel when I hit F3. Have to restart to fix. I removed KAX/firespitter folders and it seems to have gone away plus my frame rate jumped. Have you verified KAX works with 1.1.1? (edit: Hmm, edit maybe not, seems to have fixed itself?) But I still can't seem to get camera tools working...

2nd edit: using your ported camera tools seems to work, but not the one from link provided in the OP.

 

@xoknight

Just ran some test battles against your Yak-41 Camel, it did not go well for you :)

 

Edited by g00bd0g

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, g00bd0g said:

I am entering the VulcaRaptor to get the ball rolling. If anyone wants to test their ships against it, please feel free :)

https://kerbalx.com/g00bd0g/VulcaRaptor

 

@inigma

I was getting some strange glitches where I lose the "esc" menu and resource panel when I hit F3. Have to restart to fix. I removed KAX/firespitter folders and it seems to have gone away plus my frame rate jumped. Have you verified KAX works with 1.1.1? (edit: Hmm, edit maybe not, seems to have fixed itself?) But I still can't seem to get camera tools working...

 

@xoknight

Just ran some test battles against your Yak-41 Camel, it did not go well for you :)

 

Darn! Well back to the drawing board (also the fact that I forgot to set the missile launcher higher was a fault, launch 1 missile and then forced to wait another 3 seconds to launch another one)

Edited by xoknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, inigma said:

Shall I propose a rule then that all missiles must be mounted on a rail (up to 3 missiles per rail)?

No. It makes it too hard to find innovative ways to design, especially when every part counts. We've already used up 10 percent of the BDA parts allowance on the WM and Autopilot, and now we're supposed to use up another 20% on only 6 missiles? That may make sense in the ASC-M challenge, but not here, where we're testing with almost no constraints.

And come to think of it, there's another reason why not- it makes it too hard for fighters with weapons bays to mount missiles. If they're all internal, then that's 10% of the allowance per missile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dman979 said:

No. It makes it too hard to find innovative ways to design, especially when every part counts. We've already used up 10 percent of the BDA parts allowance on the WM and Autopilot, and now we're supposed to use up another 20% on only 6 missiles? That may make sense in the ASC-M challenge, but not here, where we're testing with almost no constraints.

And come to think of it, there's another reason why not- it makes it too hard for fighters with weapons bays to mount missiles. If they're all internal, then that's 10% of the allowance per missile.

ASC-II is ASC-M.

I have decided in testing I will be adding these rules for ASC II:

- All missiles must be mounted to a rail.

- 3 AIM 9s max per rail

- 1 max per rail for all other missiles including AIM 120. 

- Rails will still count against your BDA part count.

- You may of course mix and match missiles on a rail.

This is to prevent AIM 9s from going extict vs 120s. ASC II will not feature 120 spam.

Edited by inigma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, drtricky said:

@inigma You may also want to ban part clipping too.

I disagree. :)

But that's a whole other debate.

Edited by Dman979

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, drtricky said:

@inigma You may also want to ban part clipping too.

Too restrictive and arbitrary. I like freedom of design. Besides the BDA part limit should be enough to curb most objections to clipping. I think of clipping as  KSPs version of real world minaturization and innovation.

Edited by inigma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, inigma said:

- 1 max per rail for all other missiles including AIM 120. 

Would you reconsider bringing that up to 2 AMRAAMs per rail? 

It's not like it's unrealistic.

EDIT: Would the rotary rack be considered one rail as well?

Edited by JollyGreenGI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, inigma said:

Too restrictive and arbitrary. I like freedom of design. Besides the BDA part limit is enough to curb most objections to clipping.

I built this to basically demonstrate why allowing part clipping is a bad idea. It's not indestructable, but I don't want to see anything like this ever.

Edited by drtricky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, inigma said:

Alright 2 per rail.

Yay!

 

13 minutes ago, inigma said:

Too restrictive and arbitrary. I like freedom of design. Besides the BDA part limit should be enough to curb most objections to clipping. I think of clipping as  KSPs version of real world minaturization and innovation.

Boo! drtricky's example shows why. Several of the entries to ASC-I had multiple weapons and engines just buried inside each other. Not a fan...

But you're the boss :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, drtricky said:

Needs rails to qualify, and needs to be tested against the Pretender. Would it ever become KOTH? Would it last? I'm not worried. :wink:

Edited by inigma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, inigma said:

Needs rails to qualify, and needs to be tested against the Pretender. Would it ever become KOTH? Would it last? I'm not worried. :wink:

That thing I built actually managed to defeat the old stealth weasel in a 1v2 fight on a few occasions. And this was when I forgot to put a radar in it, so its AIM-120's only served as dead-weight in those rounds, and this was also when I modified stealth weasel to have AIM-9's (which it didn't have the first time round).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, SuicidalInsanity said:

@inigma: What's the ruling on the rotary rail?

considered a turret. not permitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, inigma said:

considered a turret. not permitted.

Uhh, what? Are you thinking of the Jernas Missile Turret?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@inigma im starting construction on my ww1 fighter can i have a basic run down of the rules. or is it like no jet, only 50cal guns, must be biplanes

Edited by The_Mad_Emu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.