Naval Battle League 2016-2018

[WinkAllKerb'']

is anyone asking for a black hole it can't handle ? (i never liked this ((((( thoose ))))) thread)

Edited October 14, 2016 by WinkAllKerb''
((((((((((((((((((((( ))))))))))))))))))))))

[panzer1b]

I think im on to something, and believe it or not i thought of it when i was looking back at some of the really old weapon mods, probably the first weapon mod in KSP, the one that had a stack of decouplers that shot themselves at the target.  Basically took the next best thing in stock, decoupler with its %decouple force set to like 50000%, and then put ibeam in front, works great.  Not a replacement for ibeam+4 sepatron missiles, but in situations where part count really hurts or you cannot fit a large weapon, its at least an option.

Also works great on my tanks, and lets me make ultra-compact cannon systems.  While this is just a prototype proof of concept turret, its pretty much a quadruple cannon that fits in the same area as a single sepatron missile.  If i can create a reloadable system (where the quadruple cannon can be replaced after firing), i think ill finally be able to have tanks with decent ammo capacity (most tanks that looked semi realistic had at most 2 shots, now i can have 4-8 shots per tank without sacrificing looks (and i can even have a fully hull mounted integral light cannon that would make a solid backup weapon in the event of turret failure and it can be integrated so that you dont even see the cannons but a little hold for the rounds to fly out of).  Really the only thing that limits the thing is recoil.  Sepatron missiles have very minor recoil (due to back blast) but work fine on all planets, these guns make tanks flip all over in low-grav environments.

Finally, what do you guys think of the concept?  I think its actually a fair weapon to use since it has distinct advantages and disadvantages over the more typical sepatron powered railgun and while it does use cfg edit to increase the % decouple force above 100%, it isnt modded at all outside of the craft file.  This thing is lower part count and can be crammed very tightly together (so lots of shots for a given cross section), but the guns have insane recoil when firing even lightweight projectiles, only 1 projectile velocity (lack of versatility against targets), and tend to do less damage then a ibeam and the 4 sepatrons on it while being a tiny bit lighter in mass.  Need to do more feasability testing but i think its perfectly fair as is, if deemed OP then i guess i can add ablator to the decouplers so its heavier or whatnot.  Regardless, i think these will be my new offline weapons of choice, incredibly low part counts, and still at least semi lethal when spammed in large numbers.  Too bad it isnt really practical for weapons heavier then ~0.5t since the recoil becomes such an issue that you are unable to use it on ground vehicles and have a high risk of destroying whatever you are shooting from too.  Also, doesnt really work at incredible velocity either.  Tried making a mass effect style weapon that fired at like 5% the speed of light.  Instantly vaporized the ship, sent the 1 ibeam flying 5% of light, and sent all the leftover debris flying the opposite direction on a solar escape trajectory.  Actually, that gives me an idea for a very simple self-destruct system for ships, a decoupler with near infinite force which tears the ship into pieces...

Edited October 15, 2016 by panzer1b

[WinkAllKerb'']

sad i was expecting to killing this thread ^^ and you keeping on posting well keep it on posting for n o w ^^

^think about i_t that's not a muddy day not a muddy day at all ^^

are we talking about mud again in this thread ? for rel ^^ of well if this is about mud then you know I M ALWAYS AROUND ^^ when it cume to mod i mean ^^

fact is i never been more than a 51% fan of the naval battle clubs(sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss) thread(sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss) but i guess

 

naval battle club poster never been a fan of myself since i wonder around ass weell ^^ prolly ৠlist

Edited October 15, 2016 by WinkAllKerb''

[panzer1b]

19 minutes ago, WinkAllKerb'' said:

sad i was expecting to killing this thread ^^ and you keeping on posting well keep it on posting for n o w ^^

^think about i_t that's not a muddy day not a muddy day at all ^^

are we talking about mud again in this thread ? for rel ^^ of well if this is about mud then you know I M ALWAYS AROUND ^^ when it cume to mod i mean ^^

fact is i never been more than a 51% fan of the naval battle clubs(sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss) thread(sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss) but i guess

 

naval battle club poster never been a fan of myself since i wonder around ass weell ^^ prolly ৠlist

If you dislike a thread topic then why are you bothering posting here?

Most of us "civilized" people dont go around derailing or troll posting just because they dont like something?  Do you really have nothing better to do in life then spam random useless posts in a thread you dont like?

Sorry about the negativity and arguably useless post on my part, but its late and im not exactly amused by this crap...

[WinkAllKerb'']

can't you you just let me kill this thread once again ... or are you attempting tio sell then put anithing in "someone" hand (wich is not your own) question ? or wut a g a i n ? )

Edited November 3, 2016 by WinkAllKerb''
@Alex a yup, it happen all the time my bad

[AlexanderTeaH]

4 hours ago, WinkAllKerb'' said:

can't you you just let me kill this thread once again ... or are you attempting tio sell then put anithing in "someone" hand (wich is not your own) question ? or wut a g a i n ? )

M8 wut u on about. I can't understand you.

[quasarrgames]

14 hours ago, panzer1b said:

I think im on to something, and believe it or not i thought of it when i was looking back at some of the really old weapon mods, probably the first weapon mod in KSP, the one that had a stack of decouplers that shot themselves at the target.  Basically took the next best thing in stock, decoupler with its %decouple force set to like 50000%, and then put ibeam in front, works great.  Not a replacement for ibeam+4 sepatron missiles, but in situations where part count really hurts or you cannot fit a large weapon, its at least an option.

 

That's a great discovery! Doesn't seem to work without editing the .craft file directly though, and i don't think we should descend into the perfectionist madness of craft file coding that is present in other games like SimplePlanes.

Knowing how much of a hypocrite i am, though, you'll probably see some futuristic single stage to anywhere planet cracker on the spacecraft exchange using terrifyingly mutated parts in a few days.

Also, were you saying that you would prefer it if i didn't use cargo ramps as armor? If so, i guess i can do that. It'd suck since i'd have to redesign most of my fleet with effectively double the part count, but i could do it. Although, to be honest i don't consider them to be incredibly overpowered. They weigh about the same as regular armor, and as you said they have a distinct weak spot, or can simply be destroyed like any other armor with a powerful enough missile, as @ScriptKitt3h demonstrated. 

[panzer1b]

4 hours ago, quasarrgames said:

That's a great discovery! Doesn't seem to work without editing the .craft file directly though, and i don't think we should descend into the perfectionist madness of craft file coding that is present in other games like SimplePlanes.

Knowing how much of a hypocrite i am, though, you'll probably see some futuristic single stage to anywhere planet cracker on the spacecraft exchange using terrifyingly mutated parts in a few days.

Also, were you saying that you would prefer it if i didn't use cargo ramps as armor? If so, i guess i can do that. It'd suck since i'd have to redesign most of my fleet with effectively double the part count, but i could do it. Although, to be honest i don't consider them to be incredibly overpowered. They weigh about the same as regular armor, and as you said they have a distinct weak spot, or can simply be destroyed like any other armor with a powerful enough missile, as @ScriptKitt3h demonstrated. 

I dont mind editing the craft file if its a minor thing and it keeps overall stats (besides part count) similar or even identical to a ship without it.  Take my edited ion engine, i added integrated xenon gas and integrated battery storage, but then i added ablator to compensate for the dry mass of the equivalent in fuel tanks (in terms of stats its 100% identical to a unmod ion engine, 3 batteries, and 2 of the medium xenon tanks but 1 part vs 6).  The day that KSP allows me to have 2000+ parts loaded in one spot ill gladly ditch the craft file modding, but for now its a matter of part count (since in offline mode i really have a thing for fleet scale battles, and i just cant afford to load all those extra parts for ion ships).  As for the new "cannons" i created i dont really think they are unfair at all.  They are lower part count and a hair lighter then a ibeam+4 sepatron missile, but you have massive recoil (this may or may not create its own engineering nightmare for ships that werent designed to handle it), you cannot alter the projectile velocity as you can with conventional sepatron missiles, and they seem to be far less reliable at actually killing anything (meaning you need to carry more of them and that makes your ship pretty damn heavy). 

As for ramp and cargo bay armor, its just a matter of the fact that one, it tends to make killing ships much more luck based, and it generally makes large volume of small weapons worthless.  Ofc its pretty much because 90% of my ship designs rely on larger quantities of weaker weapons to kill the enemy with bug-bites, which fairing armor renders rather pointless.  One of my own ships that used cargo bays (the SR-1 Normandy replica) pretty much shows what i mean, firing ibeams at it (and cargo bays are easier to kill then ramps), sometimes you end up wasting 12 shots and it is still more or less intact, sometimes a single shot vaporizes the entire ship, i just prefer some sort of consistency and not playing the lottery.  That said, I dont mind you using the ramps against me, ill just bring weapons that are specifically designed to kill them (like fairing impactors which have a very good chance of killing fairings, fight fire with fire, or indestructible hitboxes with indestructible hitboxes in this case), but it wont really be as fun of a fight as the more conventional armor schemes using structural parts where we dont have to use extremely powerful weapons either, not that there is anything wrong with instakilling competitive warheads, just i prefer to have more drawn out battles where people do damage but dont necessarily instakill every ship that gets attacked).

Also, a bit off topic, but ive actually created a few tanks.  Fighting land battles in low gravity (love the new cheat menu set grav to minmus level) is so much fun when the wrecks get shot apart and sent flying!  Now have 3 new omni-purpose tanks, a pz-iv analog (doesnt really look like a pz4 but its turreted and it has fairly balanced stats in terms of armor and firepower), a flatpanzer (lower profile, no turret, twice the ammo as the pz-iv, and similar armor protection), and a stug like thing based on a slightly modified hull (no turret and same firepower as pz-iv, but considerably better armor protection which lets it tank fire in any spot but the gun mantlet which will rip apart the cannon).  All of them use the new decoupler powered "cannons" to save on part count and to allow me to cram 4 shots into a very tight package (finally no more dual barreled turrets, but a single-barrel lookalike turret with 4 shots before requiring reload).  Tried to make a new flakpanzer-IV replica but i cant seem to get the "cannons" to stop tearing the turret out of its bearing when firing (works fine with a single heavy bearing turret, not so well with the wirbelwind turret which is much lighter and smaller but because of it weaker and prone to being ripped out of he bearing).  Defenetely gonna try to make a new bearing for the wirbelwind, hopefully i can make it small enough to look similar to the real thing...

Now, to rebuild my old dropship to work with these new tanks.  Kinda hard to deploy these things on Duna to combat the new invasion i have in progress wiping out one of the AKS facilities...

Edited October 15, 2016 by panzer1b

[AlexanderTeaH]

17 hours ago, panzer1b said:

-snip-

That is so cool!

Also, I've constructed yet another ship, it's so pretty...

 

[panzer1b]

Not too happy with it but i finally have myself a dropship that can carry the new tanks (had to make one from scratch as the new tanks are much wider then older models making the older relatively compact dropships i had laying around useless, and im not gonna use a 200t dropship to deploy a single lightweight 10t tank)....

If only the thing wasnt so offcentered (its barely controllable right now even with like 20 reaction wheels spread throughout the craft) itd actually handle well.  That and too much flexing even with struts placed here and there.  I didnt want to use the autostruts as the new cannon system gives me more parts to play with (saved part count from cannon goes to the struts, that and it wasnt that high on parts to begin with).

Really the ONLY thing im happy about with this thing is the cannon which is insanely accurate and while it lacks firepower (only so much i can do with short ibeams), it does actually damage stuff and can easily surprise fighters trying to take it down during a drop.  Still deadly against tanks that have absolutely no protection from above (wing armor is worthless vs ibeams).  Anyways, gonna make a new version that is less of a replica attempt and more of a cross between a replica and AKS styling (prolly will end up a AKS dropship provided i can get the sort of dV and performance i expect out of an AKS vessel).

[0111narwhalz]

I like this development with overpowered decouplers. However, what about the Stock Orion Drive that appeared on the Spacecraft Exchange a couple weeks ago? I think that has potential to be weaponized as a cannon too.

[panzer1b]

11 hours ago, 0111narwhalz said:

I like this development with overpowered decouplers. However, what about the Stock Orion Drive that appeared on the Spacecraft Exchange a couple weeks ago? I think that has potential to be weaponized as a cannon too.

Its not that modern a development, got the idea when i was looking back at very old mods i cant say for certain but i believe the first ever weapon mod was something that had a decoupler in bullet form factor that shot itself out of the ship at high velocity and you could stack these ontop of each other for a sort of multi-shot effect.  Very limited and nowhere near as good as the modern version (which is 100% stock aside from manually changing a number past 100 in the craft file), it did work and most of all it was low on parts.  Only reason i even went down this route is the lagfest that occurs when you pile on the parts, and while it may seem like nothing to cut a 6 part weapon down to a 2 part weapon, if a ship carries over 10 of said weapons (and ive even put 48 on a single craft once, dont ask me why because there is no sane reason) that over 40 parts (184 in the case of that monstrosity armed with 4 SRM-12s) removed from the ship for a minor decrease in firepower (lets face it, decoupler weapons are inferior to good old fashioned sepatron missiles in every way but compactness and part count).  Also, i will say its handsdown better on tanks since the instant velocity lets you facehug your opponent to death (and my new flatpanzer-IV is literally so low to the ground that many tanks cant even hit it at short range).

Also, ive managed to accelerate a ship to solar escape velocity with a single decoupler cannon when i was attempting to shoot a ibeam out the front at 5% light speed.  Believe it or not it DID work, but the ship was obliterated by the recoil (and thus what was left, err a cloud of debris shot out of the solar system at fairly high velocity).  Considering it is the exact same thing as an engine (instead of LFO you are expelling weapons grade ibeam from the front at lethal velocity), i think you could easily modify the concept to function as a makeshift engine that gives you a strong kick every time you fire it...

Ohh and as for the stock orion drive, im pretty sure someone streamed it, worked by using landing legs to shoot stuff.  That would be more then capable of being weaponized, but how exactly effective it would be is another story.  Based on my rather extensive optimization tests, you want to have the ibeam impact at ~100-300m/s depending on the target you are shooting at (200m/s is a good generic that works against most targets).  If you can get a orion drive styled system to fling stuff out the front at those velocities (preferably structural parts at that), itd easily become a weapon.

[AlexanderTeaH]

On 18/10/2016 at 5:27 AM, panzer1b said:

-snip-

That's quite some research you've done, however, have you tried to place decouples on opposite ends to try and negate recoil?

[panzer1b]

11 hours ago, AlexanderTeaH said:

That's quite some research you've done, however, have you tried to place decouples on opposite ends to try and negate recoil?

It IS possible but i generally dont bother as the sole reason i am even using decoupler powered ibeam cannons is to cut down on part count.  That and having to fire 2 cannons for every 1 actual shot is essentially like bringing twice the firepower but being unable to use half of it on the enemy.  Its so inefficient on mass that id rather deal with the recoil issues which only really come into play with the long ibeams and off-center mountings which send your ship into a sideways spin every shot (not critical in singleplayer/turn based, but itd be a death sentence in real time combat since you'd need anywhere from 10-30 seconds to restabilize).

Also, while i had to try it, attempting to fire recoilless hypervelocity rounds just rips the ship to shreds as the sheer amount of impulse generated when accelerating something to 5% light speed instantly will overload every single joint in stock KSP (only way i can think of making a functional weapon of that firepower would be a sacrificial weapon hardpoint that decouples at the same time the round is fired, it gets vaporized but the ship itself should remain functional).  That said, dont even bother making such cannons, there is like a 1/1000 chance of it even interacting with a 1km long warship let alone the conventional small stuff...

In other news, made new subcapital, the SK-003 B1 model.  Its a little heavy at ~45t, but it has 16 cannons and 6 LRMs for a total of 22 rounds of ammunition (and that doesnt even count the theoretical ability to carry up to 3 capital ship torpedoes), better armor protection, and more dV (~3000 with only the standard weapons loadout, no torps)...

[AlexanderTeaH]

1 hour ago, panzer1b said:

A true terror of the night... really wish I could see it though. 

[panzer1b]

1 hour ago, AlexanderTeaH said:

A true terror of the night... really wish I could see it though. 

Uploaded, feel free to tear it apart and learn how it works.  Im not one to keep secrets, and I also uploaded a few more recent craft that have the decoupler cannons on em (if you want to try em out)...

While im quite happy with the design (especially in the looks dept), it is still a "sub-capital" ship, and thus should be viewed as such, more or a support/escort role then a combat ship. The main reason for the insane ammo count is that i wanted to give it some staying power in a fight, an issue with most older ships for all factions i make ships for (some, and i dont mean fighters, had as few weapons as 4 ibeams and a single RT-5).  Otherwise, id consider this comparable in ability to a ship armed with dual SRM-6 launchers (what i call the ibeam+sepatron weapon pods that were quite popular on craft a few months back).  As for the rest, besides pis poor TWR (its really not gonna cut it in any sort of real time combat), and the fact that the armor, while there, is still a little lousy (only reason its any bit hard to kill is the fact that there is so many probes in the thing its the equivalent of like 10 separate ships glued together)...  Not terrible, but it isnt as practical as i had hoped it to be...

Edited October 21, 2016 by panzer1b

[AlexanderTeaH]

10 hours ago, panzer1b said:

-snippity snip snip-

I was really only complaining about the lighting in the image, though I'm more than happy to test it as well. 

[panzer1b]

Something needs to be done about the lag...

I just brought together a 1000 part ship, a 600 part ship, and a 300 part ship and the lag became painful (at least i proved it can be done while retaining some playability, not very fun with the FPS down, but i can do fights like this).  Also, restarted work on my base star, ive had versions of it since like 0.25, but its really a ship that nomatter what i try, im not exactly happy with (either too many parts, doesnt look anywhere near what i want, or has atrocious armor).  This particular model was the first with a fully armored skeleton and lack of any major weakspots in the form of clipped cargo bays (pretty much all the old ones used cargo bay spam, looked more authentic but ended up cannon fodder in battles).  That said, it doesnt look right since it lacks that organic style curving on the arms.  I think ill end up going back to cargo bays though for the next build, of everything i tried they actually allowed me to build organic styled shapes and look closest to the real thing.  Now if only i could figure out a way to do that AND make it very hard to kill the ship...

[Andem]

Uh, guys, for future reference...

Spoiler

WinkAllKerb has said before in other interactions with other folks that he has autism.So it's best to take that ino account when talking to him. Just wanted to let  y'all know.

 

[Kutsivi]

hello ladies, gentlemen, and all others. I'm very intrestes In what you guys do. The sheer amount of ships posted here is just amazing. im glad to be joining you guys on this fine thread.

also, I found a strain of bd armory for 1.2

[ScriptKitt3h]

On 11/24/2016 at 5:54 AM, Kutsivi said:

hello ladies, gentlemen, and all others. I'm very intrestes In what you guys do. The sheer amount of ships posted here is just amazing. im glad to be joining you guys on this fine thread.

also, I found a strain of bd armory for 1.2

Generally players who peruse the NBC thread utilize stock-only vehicles to engage in turn-based combat, though outside of the thread some of us have indeed used BDArmory to participate in other militaristic activities in KSP.

The reason for not using BDA in turn-based combat is that it effectively makes each round a guaranteed win for whoever is actively moving a vessel (as they can just shoot until the target is dead/disabled), while stock munitions are a bit more creative and can either be highly effective or ineffective at certain tasks depending on design and use.

 

I do need to start posting here again; haven't worked on some proper warships since prior to 1.1...

[Kutsivi]

On 11/24/2016 at 5:54 AM, Kutsivi said:

hello ladies, gentlemen, and all others. I'm very intrestes In what you guys do. The sheer amount of ships posted here is just amazing. im glad to be joining you guys on this fine thread.

also, I found a strain of bd armory for 1.2

Ah, ok then. If we are talking stock combat, I have some very "ethical" and efficient missiles. The long range kerbal guided anti capital ship missile is probably one of the best.

[ScriptKitt3h]

8 hours ago, Kutsivi said:

Ah, ok then. If we are talking stock combat, I have some very "ethical" and efficient missiles. The long range kerbal guided anti capital ship missile is probably one of the best.

Most people just use line-of-sight i-beam separatron-powered missiles and/or probe-core-guided missiles using LF/O or RCS engines (as they're controllable and work well for intermediate-range guided missiles).

I would suggest reading over some of the older posts showcasing the various ships, weapons, and battles that players have created and participated in for reference and for inspiration- that's how I got started myself.

[Kutsivi]

I have a question. So let's say that I am having a battle around eloo, and I want to launch a ranged projectile. Does that mean I have to have a satilite network reaching said probe for maximum effiecnty, or is low connection good enough?

[Kutsivi]

Edited November 27, 2016 by Kutsivi
Double post?