Naval Battle League 2016-2018

[Sharkman Briton]

I have some ideas and wanna hear you people's thoughts on them.

Would a scout ship carrying scout drones (that scout enemy positions) be at all useful? On one hand it could check if an enemy is damaged and/or the amount of missiles it's used, but in the current way space battles work atm it would be useless. But what if it was in a DMP scenario?

And what use would a crew carrier have?

[Canberra_Gaming]

So does anybody other than me that runs heavier ships like to battle?

[Alphasus]

18 minutes ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

So does anybody other than me that runs heavier ships like to battle?

What weight do you run? I used to use basic 120 ton ships, but 2 60 ton ships worked better anyways.

2 hours ago, Sharkman Briton said:

I have some ideas and wanna hear you people's thoughts on them.

Would a scout ship carrying scout drones (that scout enemy positions) be at all useful? On one hand it could check if an enemy is damaged and/or the amount of missiles it's used, but in the current way space battles work atm it would be useless. But what if it was in a DMP scenario?

And what use would a crew carrier have?

A crew carrier could drop crew for tanks, or transfer crew to ships so that you could sustain them for longer. I have sniped crew modules before, but if you have an unfilled backup crew module, you could fill that.

[Sharkman Briton]

4 minutes ago, Alphasus said:

What weight do you run? I used to use basic 120 ton ships, but 2 60 ton ships worked better anyways.

A crew carrier could drop crew for tanks, or transfer crew to ships so that you could sustain them for longer. I have sniped crew modules before, but if you have an unfilled backup crew module, you could fill that.

Nice, I made a new cruiser/corvette thing.

 

[ScriptKitt3h]

2 hours ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

So does anybody other than me that runs heavier ships like to battle?

Perhaps, if I can get some time this weekend.

[panzer1b]

2 hours ago, Alphasus said:

What weight do you run? I used to use basic 120 ton ships, but 2 60 ton ships worked better anyways.

I like weights from 50-80t for most of my ships.  The reason is that under 50 you start to make too many sacrifices either in armor or firepower, and above 80 you start having overall part count issues at least for a combat ship.  60-70t is my sweet spot right now, where i can get a bit of everything, armor, firepower, TWR, and useable dV (above 2000 is adequate for my preferences given most of my combat is either in high kerbin orbit, or mun/minmus, all of which have rather lowish dV requirements.  Never liked super specialization, so i tend to build generalistic vessels that arent screwed in any type of fight, be it range, firepower, or armor, but are also not excessive in any of these categories either.  Specialization is for flagships and the like that can rely on an entire fleet to support them so things like dV and secondary weapons are usually omitted where escort ships defend it against fighters and it just uses its primary weapon to obliterate the enemy.

2 hours ago, Sharkman Briton said:

Nice, I made a new cruiser/corvette thing.

 

This ship reminds me of something...

I know...Just about every single AKS warship hull (minus the front and rear and engine that sticks out the back ).  Did you get the idea from my ships or was it just a coincidence?

 

 

Also, just released 2 new warships...

AKS SK-CRV-IVg2

Alliance Flagship "Regulator"

[curiousepic]

1 hour ago, panzer1b said:

Also, just released 2 new warships...

AKS SK-CRV-IVg2

Xenon tanks with 660 Liquid Fuel each? ಠ_ಠ

Edited May 7, 2016 by curiousepic

[panzer1b]

46 minutes ago, curiousepic said:

Xenon tanks with 660 Liquid Fuel each? ಠ_ಠ

I calculated 660 to be the same mass fraction compared to regular tanks, so thats why i went with it.  I dont consider this a cheat because i maintain the same effective dV had i used any other fuel tank, its just in a smaller area.  Have been using this for AGES in SSTOs or anywhere where i needed more fuel in a smaller area but dont want to rely on a stack of clipped tanks that is too high on parts.

That said, i just got a truly evil idea: using XL girders as fuel tanks!  I MUST TRY THAT NOW!

Edited May 7, 2016 by panzer1b

[Servo]

Panzer, here's a persist, if we want to get started. (If Panzer doesn't want it, anyone else is free to join in)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4kc6bldhhwwep5l/persistent.sfs?dl=0

150 tons, three ships, high Duna orbit.

 

I deployed two D-62 Uranus-class Destroyers, "Miranda" and "Ariel", and one Jupiter-class Destroyer "Tethys". Your move.

[panzer1b]

41 minutes ago, Servo said:

Panzer, here's a persist, if we want to get started. (If Panzer doesn't want it, anyone else is free to join in)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4kc6bldhhwwep5l/persistent.sfs?dl=0

150 tons, three ships, high Duna orbit.

 

I deployed two D-62 Uranus-class Destroyers, "Miranda" and "Ariel", and one Jupiter-class Destroyer "Tethys". Your move.

 

Ill make my move in evening, need to finish something irl, then ill attack...

[Servo]

Just now, panzer1b said:

 

Ill make my move in evening, need to finish something irl, then ill attack...

 

Let's go!

[max_creative]

I just experimented with hexagonal shapes and radiatior panels. I used two layers of armor, a lower one made or radiatior panels, and an upper one of wings. I ran the fighters six LV-N's at full thrust until the fuel ran out, and it worked fine. So my space fighter may be seen soon, if I can take screenshots and actually get it in orbit.

[panzer1b]

5 hours ago, Servo said:

 

Let's go!

 

AKS launches a strike group from KSC due to its Duna fleet being busy with other matters.  Two capital ships, both of a new design are deployed, with a FK-103A5 starfighter.  Shortly afterwards a replacement fighter needed to be brought after the FK-103A5 deployed its fairing and fell victim to the resonance kraken, tearing itself apart in the process and killing a brave pilot.  The replacement is a FK-103B1 prototype rushed into service at the last second.  Hopefully the replacement is viable because AKS cannot afford to keep loosing vessels to the kraken.  With the new fighter appearing to be functional, the strike group burns from LKO to Duna, and does a minor correction burn along the way.

The FK arrives at Duna first, ahead of the capital ships, and quickly detects three hostile vessels.  Confident in her new fighter, the AKS pilot attempts to engage one of the heavier vessels.  On closer inspection, it appears that there is a major weakspot, namely the rear engine cluster.  Lacking the firepower or ammunition quantity of a capital ship, the FK powers up the SRM-6M and fires 2 shots into the rear of the target, completely destroying its main engine assembly.  With plenty of ammo remaining, the pilot takes two more shots at the midsection, taking out some of the armor and a few weapons.  Just as the fighter was about to leave for high orbit, the pilot spots that the armor plate that was shot off has exposed the ship's main weapon array.  It takes 2 shots of the secondary weapon to destroy the ship's primary source of firepower.  With only 2 shots remaining on both the primary and secondary, the ship decides to leave and save its precious remaining ammo in the event it is needed later in the battle.

Finally, after a few days, the main force arrives, with both class-IV corvettes entering the system and attempting an aerobraking maneuver.  The first ship manages to get into a stable orbit without a hitch, and with minimal onboard fuel wasted.  On the other hand, the second ship goes too deep into the atmosphere and ends up having to waste considerable amounts of fuel to get into orbit.  While the fuel losses are not critical to the mission, having only 50% of its primary booster fuel remaining may end up being a major problem in the long term.  Hopefully the enemy does not learn of this problem and take advantage of the now heavily reduced operating range of the second warship.

Persist

Sorry it took a while but i actually enjoy stuff like orbital maneuvers and actually getting my ships to destination without hyperedit.  Also, while i completely botched the aerobrake on the last ship, wasting too much fuel, i dont mind since its still my own stupid mistake and everything goes once i get my ships into LKO.  Finally, i hope you dont mind me taking one of the ships to Ike orbit (its not around Duna but its within Duna's SOI so in my opinion this is fair game, but if youd prefer not using Ike at all i can always move that ship out of there and send you another persist.

[Sharkman Briton]

15 hours ago, panzer1b said:

I like weights from 50-80t for most of my ships.  The reason is that under 50 you start to make too many sacrifices either in armor or firepower, and above 80 you start having overall part count issues at least for a combat ship.  60-70t is my sweet spot right now, where i can get a bit of everything, armor, firepower, TWR, and useable dV (above 2000 is adequate for my preferences given most of my combat is either in high kerbin orbit, or mun/minmus, all of which have rather lowish dV requirements.  Never liked super specialization, so i tend to build generalistic vessels that arent screwed in any type of fight, be it range, firepower, or armor, but are also not excessive in any of these categories either.  Specialization is for flagships and the like that can rely on an entire fleet to support them so things like dV and secondary weapons are usually omitted where escort ships defend it against fighters and it just uses its primary weapon to obliterate the enemy.

This ship reminds me of something...

I know...Just about every single AKS warship hull (minus the front and rear and engine that sticks out the back ).  Did you get the idea from my ships or was it just a coincidence?

 

 

Also, just released 2 new warships...

AKS SK-CRV-IVg2

Alliance Flagship "Regulator"

Why yes, I did! I'm a bit butthurt about the clipping at the front and back but there's no way to avoid it that won't make the ship more vulnerable...

Speaking of AKS weapons, please could you show me (PM or otherwise) your missile designs? I'm always really lacking in the firepower department because all I know is I-beam, tiny probe core, battery, decoupler and seperatrons. 

[Sharkman Briton]

So I took apart @panzer1b 's AKS SK-CRV-IVg2 and decided to recreate it's Tirepedos and put them on a new ship. The result is.....

For once I actually tested it myself! It has about 159 parts with 2 Tirepedos, 2 Unguided I-Torps and 1 Unguided I-Torp that's pretty defective. I tested the Tirepedos on this ship, and it survived two of them, one from about 150m away and the other from over 300m away. A good amount of DV too. I call her the Northwest-Class Cruiser! (Is anyone actually getting these references? McGucket and Northwest XD)

If anyone wants to have a look at her to pit her against their ships, the DL is here. https://www.dropbox.com/s/17v5h2sp2gm0sw3/Northwest-Class%20Cruiser.craft?dl=0

[Sharkman Briton]

So me and Alphasus had a battle, 1 USS Core VS 2 Northwests, USS Core won but the last Northwest tanked three (I think) rams from the Core, according to Alphasus, the NW is a beast

No screenies, sorry!

Final Rating. USS Core 9/10 Northwest-Class 8/10 (Rating is decided by the party that doesn't own the ship being rated)

[Alphasus]

38 minutes ago, Sharkman Briton said:

So me and Alphasus had a battle, 1 USS Core VS 2 Northwests, USS Core won but the last Northwest tanked three (I think) rams from the Core, according to Alphasus, the NW is a beast

No screenies, sorry!

Final Rating. USS Core 9/10 Northwest-Class 8/10 (Rating is decided by the party that doesn't own the ship being rated)

Its in relation to my ships as well, so of course compared to one of panzers ships, the ratings would be lower.

[Servo]

8 hours ago, panzer1b said:

*Snip*

Well... Darn. There goes the Miranda. I guess that's what I get for designing it for a minimum separation of 150m instead of 30. On the bright side, your fighter seems to be mostly out of ammo.

 

The Ariel moved to take out one of your destroyers, and did so efficiently.

Persist:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/4kc6bldhhwwep5l/Servo%20vs%20AKS%20%232.sfs?dl=0

[Alphasus]

16 minutes ago, Servo said:

Well... Darn. There goes the Miranda. I guess that's what I get for designing it for a minimum separation of 150m instead of 30. On the bright side, your fighter seems to be mostly out of ammo.

 

The Ariel moved to take out one of your destroyers, and did so efficiently.

Persist:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/4kc6bldhhwwep5l/Servo%20vs%20AKS%20%232.sfs?dl=0

Servo, could I join the battle on that persist? I have some new ships to test(after you finish with panzer OFC).

[Sharkman Briton]

If you guys are doing a battle I suggest using the IRC channel #kspmilitia on esper IRC

[Servo]

1 hour ago, Alphasus said:

Servo, could I join the battle on that persist? I have some new ships to test(after you finish with panzer OFC).

Sure! The more the merrier. Naturally, I'd want to regroup and rearm.

[Alphasus]

39 minutes ago, Servo said:

Sure! The more the merrier. Naturally, I'd want to regroup and rearm.

So the same persist would or wouldn't be fine?

[curiousepic]

Why is minimum Separation so low?

[Servo]

3 minutes ago, Alphasus said:

So the same persist would or wouldn't be fine?

Well, I have a feeling my ships won't survive beyond this battle, so if you want to battle with the debris from this battle floating around, that works. Otherwise, I see no reason not to just drop more ships into the same save.

[Alphasus]

14 minutes ago, Servo said:

Well, I have a feeling my ships won't survive beyond this battle, so if you want to battle with the debris from this battle floating around, that works. Otherwise, I see no reason not to just drop more ships into the same save.

No, you have a link to the original persist. As in, you gave panzer that file to start. Thats the file with just your ships, all intact.