Spartwo

Naval Battle League 2016-2018

Recommended Posts

@Alphasus, have you downloaded the save file yet? because if not, i'm going to make a few teeny adjustments to it* :)

*These teeny adjustments will involve rebalancing the ibeam missiles on two fighters, because i have since found them to be horribly underpowered. I will in turn remove some of their weapons, so the weight stays the same and the game stays fair. I hope this is ok

Edited by quasarrgames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, quasarrgames said:

@Alphasus, have you downloaded the save file yet? because if not, i'm going to make a few teeny adjustments to it* :)

*These teeny adjustments will involve rebalancing the ibeam missiles on two fighters, because i have since found them to be horribly underpowered. I will in turn remove some of their weapons, so the weight stays the same and the game stays fair. I hope this is ok

I downloaded the save file, and am about halfway done with ship placement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://imgur.com/a/kotXA

I'll get the persist up ASAP.

I brought 7 ships:

1 CR-02 Pico S ASM(26 tons)

2 CR-02 Pico S Mini-ASM(29 tons)

4 CR-03 Pico 2 Mini ASM(33 tons)

This turn was rather simple. I fired 1 missile from the Zeus(Pico S ASM), hit the Religion, and disabled 2 solar panels, as well as all but 2 engines. The Zeus then moved to a 700 km circular orbit with its 9 ion engines.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3IvrPbGhZWFdENWZDFOUEk5SXc

@quasarrgames

Edited by Alphasus
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Alphasus said:

https://imgur.com/a/kotXA

I'll get the persist up ASAP.

I brought 7 ships:

1 CR-02 Pico S ASM(26 tons)

2 CR-02 Pico S Mini-ASM(29 tons)

4 CR-03 Pico 2 Mini ASM(33 tons)

This turn was rather simple. I fired 1 missile from the Zeus(Pico S ASM), hit the Religion, and disabled 2 solar panels, as well as all but 2 engines. The Zeus then moved to a 700 km circular orbit with its 9 ion engines.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3IvrPbGhZWFdENWZDFOUEk5SXc

@quasarrgames

That's kind of ironic, isn't it? Zeus ruining religion... No wonder the greeks invented philosophy...

Anyways, will get my turn done soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, quasarrgames said:

That's kind of ironic, isn't it? Zeus ruining religion... No wonder the greeks invented philosophy...

Anyways, will get my turn done soon.

All my ships are named after Greek gods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Alphasus said:

All my ships are named after Greek gods.

Oh i understand that, i'm just happy that my plan to give all my ships edgy names so the irony intensifies over the course of the battle is working. 

Also, that's a clever strategy of yours, having a lightweight ship with massive armament as a first strike vessel.

 

Anyways, the KSS Never Gonna Give You Up Never Gonna Let You Down Rendezvoused with and fired upon Athena.

Spoiler

qaC6ods.png

Migxa6r.png

m4bCQSP.png

AW54Lfq.png

aDJA6cQ.png

The first shot took off some of the ship's top plating, and dislodged its three front missiles. The second shot destroyed all the dislodged missiles except for one. The fighter then put itself into a 400km orbit.

Savefile:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dex8rudhjuuid13/The Irony Intensifies.sfs?dl=0

@Alphasus

Edited by quasarrgames
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Oh i understand that, i'm just happy that my plan to give all my ships edgy names so the irony intensifies over the course of the battle is working. 

Also, that's a clever strategy of yours, having a lightweight ship with massive armament as a first strike vessel.

 

Anyways, the KSS Never Gonna Give You Up Never Gonna Let You Down Rendezvoused with and fired upon Athena.

  Hide contents

qaC6ods.png

Migxa6r.png

m4bCQSP.png

AW54Lfq.png

The first shot took off some of the ship's top plating, and dislodged its three front missiles. The second shot destroyed all the dislodged missiles except for one. The fighter then put itself into a 400km orbit.

Savefile:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dex8rudhjuuid13/The Irony Intensifies.sfs?dl=0

All of my ships have similarly powerful, if not stronger, armament than the Zeus. The Zeus had one anti-ship missile. All other ships have 3 smaller ASMs. So, those 3 missiles have similar kinetic energy to one of my large ASMs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to add a new rule to the games or else battles will end up pointless...

No unguided weapons past 200m!  Otherwise you end up having perpetual explosions, NaN errors, and the kraken feeding off of your ship!  It appears that this is triggered when your current control point (whatever vessel you are actively controlling) is beyond 200m from the location of a collision.

fYKTdGg.png

PaKiafH.png

(both of those ships kept exploding for like 10 minutes straight after a single shot hit it)

This bug has been around since the start, but 1.2 is teh first update that made it create perpetual explosions that will literally keep exploding until the entire vessel is gone, so amazing to watch though!

Also, i absolutely love the new ship you have @Alphasus, it creates such a beautiful debris field when you hit that engine cluster!  Also, your weapons are decent ill say, i managed to pull a mission kill on my SK-002 A2 (newest ship i have) so while they arent that reliable (kinda inherent to all 0.6m ordinance), you have 3 of em and they work pretty well.  The recent changes to SAS makes it a tad wobbly on occasion which makes the whole "aim at target" autopilot far less useful then it was before...  Still helpful but no more autoaim at the core and hit it every single time regardless of what you are firing at the target.  I think its a change for the better, especially after the realization that the new "autostrut" feature is at best useful to lower the part counts and doesnt do much if anything for armor protection with the majority of ship designs.

vl4s5RP.png

Ohh, and i think ive figured out my previous lagfest problems.  Apparently the shortcut ive been using to run KSP went to teh 32 bit version, so today is literally teh first time ive managed to get some half decent performance out of the game (i thought ive always been using x64 but not until today)!

Finally, the one thing i absolutely hate with 1.2 is the new aerodynamics, do you know how many times my SR-1 replica has been ruined by game changes, i refuse to not have a SSTO Normandy but its getting harder and harder with each update...

Edited by panzer1b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a purely academic question regarding weapons:
Are burner weapons considered fair play? I know fairing ones aren't, but burners exploit intentional game mechanics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, 0111narwhalz said:

I have a purely academic question regarding weapons:
Are burner weapons considered fair play? I know fairing ones aren't, but burners exploit intentional game mechanics.

Burners as in get into point blank and use sepatrons as flamethrowers?

Those are banned since there is a rule saying you cannot engage from closer then a certain range.  The reason is that a properly designed burned weapon will counter everything but armor tailored to countering burners, and most of the time if you dont know enemy will use burners its pretty much game over, and if you know they will you can be near immune to them.  That said, if you want to battle with flamers allowed just add a rule exclusion and if the opponent agrees to battle without that rule then you may do so.  The rules arent hard coded, its just that they are what we have found over the years to produce the most fair and balanced games.

Edited by panzer1b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. I see.
What's the impact tolerance of the AGU, such that it'll lock on but not itself break? If I were to ring an AGU with sepratrons and toss it unguided, would that be permissible?
Totally not looking for loopholes...

Also, I have nothing remotely combat-ready. Maybe later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2016 at 7:46 PM, 0111narwhalz said:

Ah. I see.
What's the impact tolerance of the AGU, such that it'll lock on but not itself break? If I were to ring an AGU with sepratrons and toss it unguided, would that be permissible?
Totally not looking for loopholes...

Also, I have nothing remotely combat-ready. Maybe later.

ring of sepatrons on a weapon is perfectly fine with standard rules, what isnt are little probes that fly up to a target (as if they were their own craft) park next to it and then fire some form of flamer weapon at the target.  The best "flamer" weapons ive used are low velocity ibeams that jam themselves into enemy ship and have some long burning sepatrons aiming sideways, doesnt work very well in 1.1.3/1.2 (as the heating effect is vastly reduced, only worked well in like early 1.1 where the burn damage was so insane that half a second of engine burn and entire ship gets sawed in half).  If the weapon impacts the ship at something above what i'd call rendezvous velocity (at least 20-30m/s on average) then you are fine with standard rules, if it comes in at very low velocity (under 10) then it would count as a dedicated flamer weapon regardless if it was placed on the ship or on a probe/missile thing.

And yeah, if you want to create a ring of sepatrons on a probe then go for it, just dont park it next to the enemy buit actually shoot it at them with some velocity (doesnt have to be that high but defenetely more then 10m/s)...

 

I think ive officially outdone myself...

A WORKING TURRET!

Spoiler

DE8WRdq.png

apkpILc.png

YqbDLwd.png

BUOD6Y4.png

THAT SHOOTS DOWN PLANES!

Now to mount it on my panzer-IV chassis and make a P-51 for it to kill...

Edited by panzer1b
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/23/2016 at 4:43 PM, quasarrgames said:

@Alphasus, It's been a while... How's your turn coming?

Oh! I forgot.... that's embarrassing. Should be done by this Monday.(but it wasn't and the save file is now just about done to 95%.) 

Edited by Alphasus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about actually building some warships again and maybe participating in a battle for once in the near-ish future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, more ships being made...

dgql9Xl.png

Just finished the new SK-003 series.  Using concepts learned with the SK-002, i pretty much improved upon the basic concept while giving it a much better look imo.  I crossed 4 things to make this, the hull shape and structure is taken from a concept AKS cruiser i made in 3ds max a few years back, the claws on the sides are in the iconic AKS style pretty much all KSP ships have, the internal hull uses lessons learned from the SK-002, and the weapons layout is taken from the failed SK-105 that pretty much sucked in every way but the weapons looked really good on it.

F4azl4Y.png

Armor is so-so, but since ive just about given up entirely on armor protection, not a big deal.  The more i think about it and look at ship designs, test them ect, the more i realize that procedural designs are the way to go, so what if i get a section of the ship shot off or the core split apart, if half of what remains retains full combat ability, then the ship is still in the game!  That and i can pretty much settle for a wing based exterior with a few structural panels for critical sections, less mass, and still enough protection to keep it from being 1 shotted or anything of the sort.  A hair heavier and higher part count then the SK-002, but it has better weapons variety (8 SRMs and 4 LRMs), better survivability (less raw armor but better redundancy and spread out weapons), a 1.2m hardpoint on the back (can be equipped with emergency thruster, interplanetary drive, or carry 1-2 capital ship torps).  Its by no means perfect, but at ~33t, and enough firepower to wipe out 300t capital ships reliably, i cannot complain.

Really surprised with how good it came out considering it began as a purely aesthetic design that i later built an internal for...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna wait until 1.2 to re-design my fleet

Share this post


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

It just hit me how much 1.2 is going to change everything in this group. Sorry @zekes your drones won't work anymore

Except that noone is going to force anyone to use the new antenna range system because it is ill-suited for multiplayer (especially PvP).  Right now a single antenna allows both sides to get full functionality (so unless a mod comes out where you can have distinct "teams" with the comms system i cant say its going to work on here).  Droid fighters/vessels are still going to work as they always did with the system disabled so im not concerned about it affecting any combat scenario though.  Ofc if you want to play with the comm limit you can always start a battle that specifies it, but i think we can assume the default rules assume that the comm system would have to be disabled.

2 hours ago, AlexanderTeaH said:

Another pretty yet explosive ship from me!

qOhTQ47.png

Looks good.  That said, id HATE to be the kerbal who gets the privelage of sitting in the manned torpedo on the front of the ship...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, panzer1b said:

Looks good.  That said, id HATE to be the kerbal who gets the privelage of sitting in the manned torpedo on the front of the ship...

I actually had the kerbal's safety in mind the whole time. I placed him right at the front to help protect him from the vast majority of the shots that will be landing in the centre of the ship. And as for the missile aspect of his cockpit - the sepratrons serve to eject him to safety or deorbit him to the surface of an atmospheric planet if necessary, making sure to add a heat shield below his pod!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2016 at 1:16 PM, AlexanderTeaH said:

Another pretty yet explosive ship from me!

qOhTQ47.png

That is quite a pretty ship. Doesn't look like it has much armor, but i guess it's for a good reason.

Also... would anyone like to battle? 

Also, given armor's significant weakening (ramp armor still works fine for me) how would people feel about having "macey dean battles", where no part with over 40m/s impact tolerance may be used in weapons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i m starting thinking about designing a hot chick'n cheap that spit missile from it's torso (is this thread even serious ^^ ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, quasarrgames said:

Also, given armor's significant weakening (ramp armor still works fine for me) how would people feel about having "macey dean battles", where no part with over 40m/s impact tolerance may be used in weapons?

Except that such games will devolve into everyone running out of ammo if you ask me.  My most basic (relatively unarmored) ships are 90% immune to macey dean styled weapons .  Ofc if i make a fairing missile ill be more then capable of killing anyone without using 80m/s parts, but imo fairing weapons (or any other form of abusing parts that have indestructible colliders) isnt exactly fair.  Ramp armor and anything with movable sections, pretty much relies upon two factors to work, indestructible sections and luck to an extent.  Ive done extensive testing against it and you have to hit a very specific section to actually destroy a ramp (the wider area near the back), shooting teh ramp itself will never actually destroy the ramp.  Yeah ibeams work so-so against em (pretty much aim at the vulnurable section and hope you brought enough rounds to get a lucky killshot), but i personally wouldnt consider usign them since it makes games more luck dependent and less based on design decisions.  Then again, i dont exactly build 100% fair ships either so i cant complain too much about fairing armor.  While they arent what id call cheating, 90% of modern AKS warships/fighters employ so much redundancy in their construction that you pretty much have to have lots of ammo AND high precision to have any hope of killing them.  Almost all the new models need 12+ direct hits from ibeam styled weapons or 4+ competitive torps before i can say that they are 100% unable to function whatsoever (probe cores everywhere + damaged sections tend to break apart into smaller functional subsections which can move, shoot, and have their own dedicated probe cores).

Also, when it comes to classic macey style torpedoes, the game's destructive interaction actually changed in such a way that such weapons (in particular the antpedo as i like to call it, oscar-B+ant engine+2 docking ports) are incredibly weak and more often then not will not do ANYTHING to a ship.  The only thing from macey's series that still works today is the RT-10 torpedo.  Its extremely inefficient on mass, but it has low part count and it provides enough raw kinetic energy to break joints.  The real reason i dont touch those in competitive games is because they are extremely large, forcing me to build either a very large ship (heavy+part count issues), or stack em lengthwise leading to distinct weakspots where the entire stack of weapons gets shot off by a single precisise hit to that spot.  RT-5s are better, but still have the same issue that they pretty much require stacking for decent ammo capacity in a smaller ship and 90% of all my competitive ships are so small that you can fit at an absolute maximum 4 1.2m hardpoints on the front (and mounting anything broadside is going to result it terrible accuracy).

Also, since 1.2 has come out, most of my fleet is kinda dead (i have 2 fighters, 1 subcapital, and 1 capital that im even remotely happy with and has been updated to work well in 1.2).  Need to spend a few days making some new ships, then il battle you guys some...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now