Naval Battle League 2016-2018

[SG Aero]

Hush child

[Spartwo]

2 hours ago, Matuchkin said:

Shouldn't the name be changed to 2017-2018?

what year is it

[SG Aero]

2017

[Matuchkin]

2 hours ago, Spartwo said:

what year is it

It's the final days of 2017: the transition between 2017 and 2018.

[0111narwhalz]

5 hours ago, Matuchkin said:

It's the final days of 2017: the transition between 2017 and 2018.

So we wait 'til that transition's complete to change the thread title. And then it'll be 2016–2018.

[MiffedStarfish]

9 hours ago, Matuchkin said:

Shouldn't the name be changed to 2017-2018?

Not yet... 

[SG Aero]

Why did that comment bro everyone back?

[Spartwo]

2 hours ago, ShadowGoat said:

Why did that comment bro everyone back?

people like arguing

[SG Aero]

So when are you doing your turn spartwo 

[Spartwo]

I only see a persist of.

Will be soon though

Edited December 21, 2017 by Spartwo

[SG Aero]

That’s the persist. I did that outside of it though.

[Spartwo]

Armor: good
 

Everything else: Not so good


-no range
-light weapons don't fly straight
-Lack of purpose beyond combat

Heavy are pretty decent

[SG Aero]

Yeah it’s kinda intended to be a combat only craft. It’s more of a defensive design. And yes. I forgot most of the fuel. Also yes the I beams are worthless this is an old design. I need to update it.

also thank you for the compliment on my heavy weapons.

Edited December 21, 2017 by ShadowGoat

[0111narwhalz]

@Spartwo, since you're around:

What are the rules of collision damage? I posted on this a couple pages back:

On 12/15/2017 at 8:31 AM, 0111narwhalz said:

Does anyone know the collision rules which dictate which part is exploded in a collision? I'm having trouble with my target's internals destroying my projectile even though there's a significant difference in the impact tolerances. I've had this issue on a range of incidence velocities, from 100 to 300 m/s. Below there I can't get any kind of reliable component kills either way.

I've used small I-beams, large I-beams, and edge-on plates with anywhere from no dead weight to a ballast of several tons. Haven't touched the more advanced stuff like torwheeldoes, claw warheads, or scatter/shrapnel 'cause it doesn't make sense when I don't even have simple kinetics working reliably.

My greatest success has been flaying off the farside armor with a phasing round, but a hole in the armor doesn't do me any good when I can't kill components anyway.

[Sam ik Kerman]

DELETED

Edited December 28, 2017 by Sam ik Kerman

[panzer1b]

So hows everyone doing?  havent been on here in a while as i just havent had much KSP time lately and well, i now have a life, full time job, family, ect.

Had a bit of time over the last few weekends for KSP though, and i think ive finally found a solution (after YEARS of messing around with space warships) to the age old worthless armor problem, one that doesnt involve stupidly high mass parts, nor does it require massive part counts to pull off (solong as the ship aint huge).  Basically my current armor involves a combination of structural paneling (classic armor), mk2 cargo bays (to both create a variable armor property as certain weapons are good/bad vs mk2 bays and to cut down on parts vs pure paneling), and a ibeam based core structure to tie everything together.  Seems to work well, and while its still vulnerable to multiple hits (no armor will withstand 4+ 5t warheads), it seems more then capable of taking a few hits from capital ship torps, ibeams, SRBs, ect before it gives way (and actually its more likely the internals will get shredded b4 the armor fails or the ship is split apart).

 

Maybee if i have some time next weekend ill perfect the armor (and the above ship) into something thats a bit lighter, a bit better armored, and a bit lower on parts all while actually not looking terrible. 

On 12/21/2017 at 6:53 PM, 0111narwhalz said:

I've used small I-beams, large I-beams, and edge-on plates with anywhere from no dead weight to a ballast of several tons. Haven't touched the more advanced stuff like torwheeldoes, claw warheads, or scatter/shrapnel 'cause it doesn't make sense when I don't even have simple kinetics working reliably.

My greatest success has been flaying off the farside armor with a phasing round, but a hole in the armor doesn't do me any good when I can't kill components anyway.

If your having trouble with weapons perhaps try some of my old and still working concepts.  I stick to 3 weapon types for my ships (most of the time), the first of which is the age old SRM or short range missile, what i call the generic ibeam with 2-8 sepatrons depending on how hard you want it to hit.  Its really simple, decoupler, ibeam (long for capital ship killing, short for anti-fighter), and 2 or 4 sepatrons generally speaking (2 for the small ibeam, 4 for the large ibeam, 8 for tank mounted ones as you need crazy velocity to counter gravity).  These are good for eviscerating unarmored targets and seriously hurting capital ships, but they need to be used en-mass (rarely achieve a kill below 4 shots, some ships require over 10) to ensure a kill against any well made vessels that posses armor plating.

The next weapon type is the kinetic drone, which is basically a probe core with a fuel tank, 2 RCS quads clipped inside, a RTG or battery, and a short ibeam on the front so it has good damage potential.  These do trash damage against armor (structural anything), but they are unique in that they are so bloody accurate i can snipe out exposed engines consistenty, and when used at low velocity (sub 80m/s), have a very good chance of not being damage in the impact and thus being sorta reuseable.  Ofc i can still fire it from 5km and build up enough speed to nail a capital ship at 300m/s, but generally speaking not very good for that purpose but can be used against capitals when out of other ammo.

Finally, i use generic 1.2m capital ship torpedoes, most of which are ~3-5t heavy and have moderate to high lethality depending on how good my aim is and how well the target is constructed (and a bit of how lucky i get with whether it phases properly).  My current best weapon is the G-5 series torpedo, although im working on the G-7 which should be far more lethal despite being only a tad heavier.  Both of these are what i like to call hybrid warheads, consisting of a dual mode shrapnel and armor piercing core.  Half of the structural parts are attached to a fuel tank which is easily destroyed on impact, scattering those parts all around the ship's interior to take down fuel and other unarmored bits, and the rest are made into a armor piercing solid shot that does the true heavy damage to a ship.  i used to use wheels, but after the forced autostruts in 1.3 i stay away from those since they end up screwing with the ship's protection, and ive started to view autostruts as a exploit that takes the challenge away from making strong warships and weapons (only time i use them is when part counts gets so bad i cant deal with normal struts).

[0111narwhalz]

Thanks, @panzer1b. What impact velocity do you go for with your I-beams against various kinds of targets?

[panzer1b]

1 hour ago, 0111narwhalz said:

Thanks, @panzer1b. What impact velocity do you go for with your I-beams against various kinds of targets?

Usually ~250m/s.  Ive found that much higher and the ibeam has a greatly increased chance of shattering instantly doing absolutely nothing regardless of whether its hitting armor or a fuel tank, and much lower wont phase enough to hurt the internals of a heavily armored vessel.  That said, against unarmored or very lightly armored craft, i fire those things point blank as to cut the impact velocity to ~100m/s at best, more effective then.

 

I usually fill each sepatron with ~2.4 fuel, and i use 2 for small ibeams while i use 4 for large ibeams, optionally you can use 2 with 4.8 fuel for large ibeams, just need to give it a longer distance so it accelerates.

Also, its ugly as sin, has major issues with loosing torps (ill prolly switch it to pure SRMs and no G5s), but ive thusfar been unable to disable or kill the damn thing in a single shot of any weapon up to and including zeke's old 10t supertorp (the one on his squid class destroyer), the one thats sorta known to obliterate almost any ship from any angle in a single hit.  I think this armor style is the best thing ever, now if only i can figure a way to stop the damn thing from loosing engines and weapons and ill have the strongest ship on here (every ship ive ever downloaded or tried could be killed by either ~10 ibeams, or a solid dead center hit with a torpedo, this one just refuses to die).

Ill upload it if anyones interested next weekend, but im warning you, it looks atrociously ugly...

Edited January 8, 2018 by panzer1b

[0111narwhalz]

52 minutes ago, panzer1b said:

Usually ~250m/s.

Hm, I'll have to do some more science then. I've had issues with projectiles exploding instead of the thing they're hitting at anything over 80m/s.

[SG Aero]

Oh yay! Hey @panzer1b want to fight two of my void class battleships if you have the time?

[MiffedStarfish]

14 hours ago, panzer1b said:

ll upload it if anyones interested next weekend, but im warning you, it looks atrociously ugly

I don’t know, I quite like the boxy-ness. Stuff that’s designed to function never really looks bad to me. 

[panzer1b]

Well here it is for anyone who wants to give it a try.  As always, im not a fan of "secrecy" in armor development (since its the ONE thing that noone seems to be able to really get right these days without resorting to 800+ parts), so if it passes your trials (best way to test a ship is to hand it out so others can give a whack at it) ive officially revitalized KSP armor development.  Obviously not invincible or anything, and it WILL die to sustained fire or a very very lucky dead center killshot by a heavy torp (get ~10t to hit dead center and its dead), but sofar ive found it borderline impossible to 1 shot with any conventional warheads relying on either shrapnel or armor piercing design, can take multiple hits from generic ibeam weapons, and can also eat a few SRBs before its armor gives way.  All that with but 260 parts (almost half of which are guns), 64 tons, 2500dV, workable TWR, and unlike the earlier prototypes it doesnt make you wanna puke your guts out when you look at it (older ones were super ugly).  I think this thing can easily match or exceed anything else out here that has similar mass and part count values.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ak7xpkncugfloiq/AKS SK-IV G3.craft?dl=0

Really its only weakness of the fact that its still above my desired part count, since its over 150 parts.  Sadly, i have serious doubts as to my or anyone elses ability to create a good vessel with a hard limit of 150 parts which can actually take a few hits from any semi competitive weapons.

Its obviously a different visual style then older AKS warships (no curved surfaces, 6 sided front profile), it doesnt look bad or anything and i managed to actually retain some of my more iconic visual features my ships have had over the years (the rear engine covers, that wing plate with partially exposed structural paneling on the sides just like on the 1st gen class-IV warship, 2 claws top/bottom rear, 3 engine layout).  Although its a new one for my ships, i actually like the hybrid organic-mechanical like design with a couple curved surfaces mixed with the old style flat and angled hull.

 

Anyways, if you guys are interested download it and give it a try, perhaps itll show me some weaknesses of the craft that i wasnt able to find on my end...

Edited January 20, 2018 by panzer1b

[SG Aero]

Let me have a shot at it. I have a light ap round that has been tested against heavy armor and usually punches a hole straight through. Usually if it bounces off I can come back for a second hit.

[panzer1b]

Well, starting to use the new armoring for a few more ships now and sofar the results are decent.  i can make ships that are lowish part count, sturdy (especially against ibeams which seem to be borderline useless against MK-2/panel hybrid armoring), and dont have any critical issues in survivability (unless the incoming fire is excessively powerful ofc or spammed en-mass). 

This is my redone SK-II, obviously not a frontline ship since it lacks structural panels like whatsoever, but it seems to be quite resilient and more or less immune to fighter weapons.  Now if only i can find a solution to the whole thing being evicerated when its hit from directly above or below with a 1.2m torp that doesnt require additional mass or part count (ill prolly leave it as is, its a escort ship afterall and not really meant to fight on the frontlines).

 

Now to make a cruiser thats under 400 parts using new armor.  I have a really really nice one that is specially built up around a hangar bay for fighters, but obviously in serious need of armor improvements and lowered part counts to make it anything more then a purely for show vessel...

 

Also a bit off topic, @ShadowGoat, would it be an issue to ask for a download to your void.  I wanted to see how those missiles are build (they are fairly good) and possibly test them on my rig.  Dont worry, i wont copy them or anything for my ships since they arent asthetically compatible with my vessels.

Edited January 21, 2018 by panzer1b

[SG Aero]

Sure. I didn’t get to testing your ship last night and I’m not at my pc rn but I’ll get it to you when I can.

EDIT: Okay here is the link. I haven't updated the craft, and the kerbnet update broke it as it's promarily prode controlled. I'll test it on your ship.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nsw8ci586i41u43/SC Void.craft?dl=0

Edited January 21, 2018 by ShadowGoat