Naval Battle League 2016-2018

[Canberra_Gaming]

@Joseph Kerman Care for a battle?

[Joseph Kerman]

2 hours ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

@Joseph Kerman Care for a battle?

Ah nuts... I have no good ships, but I have good missiles. No time now, maybe soon...

[Abraxis]

I have some pretty decent ships I'd be willing to fight with:

 

[Canberra_Gaming]

2 hours ago, Abraxis said:

I have some pretty decent ships I'd be willing to fight with:

 

Ooooohhhhh. Do you have any destroyers or frigates? I'd like to battle test the United Kingdom.

[Abraxis]

Sadly, no, not yet. As you can see by the last picture, I have an unhealthy habit of constantly trying to over-engineer my weapons to make them as unfair to fight against as possible, and have thus far found no need for medium-large ships which can carry a heftier arsenal, since usually, one hit will be enough 

But just in case you still want to fight me, and would prefer me to use a larger ship, the only other possibility would be for me to use my cruiser:

Warning: I take the classification of "cruiser" very lightly. This piece of garbage is almost 900 parts, with most of it going into struts and needlessly complex torpedoes. Viewer discretion is advised.



 

 

Edited June 17, 2017 by Abraxis

[Canberra_Gaming]

I was actually talking to Spartwo earlier about the fairing warheads. Sadly my design doctrine refuses me to use them. It's too easy to me, I like seeing the over engineered designs I've come up with. Let me finish the armoring on the United Kingdom and I'll throw out a fight. Would you rather do the battle by tonnage or ship class?

[Joseph Kerman]

1 minute ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

I was actually talking to Spartwo earlier about the fairing warheads. Sadly my design doctrine refuses me to use them. It's too easy to me, I like seeing the over engineered designs I've come up with. Let me finish the armoring on the United Kingdom and I'll throw out a fight. Would you rather do the battle by tonnage or ship class?

Hey, I heard that you can "forge" armor by making sure most armor plates are connected to the root part. @Abraxis told me.

[Abraxis]

I can battle either way, but personally prefer to do so by ship tonnage, as I find that ship classification varies wildly amongst different players. Another interesting point that I found out during my testing runs, is that, in contrast to what one might expect, fairing-based missiles actually don't perform better than regular ones. As contradictory as that might seem, one must take into account that, while the fairing itself may be indestructible, the cylindrical part which it resides on, however, is not, and usually, the shockwave received from impacting with an enemy ship, is enough to cause that cylinder to collide with the part behind it, destroying it, and the fairing warhead as well. I, personally, use fairings to make my missiles seem more appealing, as well as to give them an actual "missile-like" look. 

Only when the fairing is sufficiently far enough from its base, do the invulnerability effects become visible (AKA Fairing armor), but when used on missiles, however, the fairing is, most of the time, too short to be able to manage to do serious damage, and in the cases when it does, the injury can be explained by other factors, such as designing the ship with a relatively weak fuel tank for its spine.

 

And yes, I wrote a simple script which will re-route all part connections to the core, meaning that you cannot fracture or crack the ship in half, since, without destroying the core, any part remaining will still be connected.

Note: this is complete, 100% stock. Running this program would be identical to manually placing every part on the core, then offsetting it into place along the hull, except that, in my case, it would take much, much less time and effort.

Edited June 17, 2017 by Abraxis

[Canberra_Gaming]

Send me a persist with your cruiser please. I'd like to test this armor for myself. I haven't been here in months. I'd like to see the advances people have made.

[Abraxis]

Although it is not the best of designs, I can more or less guarantee that it can withstand at least one shot.

Persist file:
https://mega.nz/#!Ij5yWKAZ!xjbEEondcivfAg1qsUtj2vpjjeg4_oGIIkiu50PgbaM 

Cruiser craft file:
https://mega.nz/#!E7hQmQKC!glOdOt6RqclAlbthMZrhnvfH19tKKU4PtgVmFnZJKJM 

Due to the tremendous amount of parts it has, here is a smaller, less intensive vehicle which, much like the cruiser, also incorporates the forging technique. Feel free to disassemble both crafts and their respective weaponry if you so wish:
https://mega.nz/#!5uhnVBxD!xPKbhdcyZ7QZFXbRjou5TEO746bt5m_7-iggZd0UIxM 

Edited June 17, 2017 by Abraxis

[Canberra_Gaming]

1 hour ago, Abraxis said:

Although it is not the best of designs, I can more or less guarantee that it can withstand at least one shot.

Persist file:
https://mega.nz/#!Ij5yWKAZ!xjbEEondcivfAg1qsUtj2vpjjeg4_oGIIkiu50PgbaM 

Cruiser craft file:
https://mega.nz/#!E7hQmQKC!glOdOt6RqclAlbthMZrhnvfH19tKKU4PtgVmFnZJKJM 

Due to the tremendous amount of parts it has, here is a smaller, less intensive vehicle which, much like the cruiser, also incorporates the forging technique. Feel free to disassemble both crafts and their respective weaponry if you so wish:
https://mega.nz/#!5uhnVBxD!xPKbhdcyZ7QZFXbRjou5TEO746bt5m_7-iggZd0UIxM 

Actually it isn't a lot of parts. I was digging through my old missile designs. I've already found flaws in the armor design such as long projectiles. Thank you

[Abraxis]

Glad to help! 

[Joseph Kerman]

1 hour ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

Actually it isn't a lot of parts. I was digging through my old missile designs. I've already found flaws in the armor design such as long projectiles. Thank you

I have a long missile! The first ever made, the Javelin First-Generation Missile.

[SG Aero]

No. He was saying long missiles are bad. Just a question. Are you older than 10?

[Spartwo]

Sabre program is back in action. Meet the MK5-2 a modified version of an atmospheric interceptor. I think I had been approaching SSTOs wrong ever since the new aerodynamics came in.

[Joseph Kerman]

1 hour ago, ShadowGoat said:

No. He was saying long missiles are bad. Just a question. Are you older than 10?

13 y/o. And his sentence didn't say anything negative about the missile:

8 hours ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

Actually it isn't a lot of parts. I was digging through my old missile designs. I've already found flaws in the armor design such as long projectiles. Thank you

I assume this means long missiles work well in well-armoured ships, @Canberra_Gaming?

[SG Aero]

Wow we are actually the same age, give or take a few. I'm not putting my actual age on here FYI.

[Spartwo]

Give or take a few years-decades.

 

 

Edited June 17, 2017 by Spartwo

[Joseph Kerman]

Finally, a battleship I made that cannot be 1-hit-KO'ed. Named the SB-11 Dauntless Light Corvette, it withstood a hit from @MiffedStarfish's G4-H Torpedo and still had half fuel left, along with control and missiles. It can also go unscathed from shots of the G3 Torpedo, even a direct hit cannot break the hull (though a frontal collision breaks a probe core {which has 2} and some fuel).

Powered by 32 Ion Engines, it weighs in at under 80t at under 350 parts.

Craft File: https://mega.nz/#!42wAkTTZ!SqGpHckUkXRuMBxTa0EZWjPtk56U0-KZn95a8KzL6pc

Pics coming soon.

Edited June 17, 2017 by Joseph Kerman

[panzer1b]

So with the rectifier surviving to an extent, the next regulator moved to intercept the enemy ship in a highest orbit.  After successfully rendezvousing and using up the vast majority of on board fuel, the ship engaged with the experimental tripedo prototype and the single hit cut the enemy in half.

After firing, it was clear that more fuel was needed to reach friendly ships in the inclined orbit, so the ship klawed itself onto the rear section of the split enemy vessel.  Before extracting fuel one of the enemy weapons was used to hit the front section, but since it was pitch black the actual damage done was not confirmed after the hit took place.  Hopefully its a clean kill, but with no engines or fuel left, its very unlikely the ship is any sort of threat.

After firing and extracting as much useable fuel as possible from the wreckage, the regulator burned into an orbit to get near the other 2 ships.

And as usual persist here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d9exq6cbxo9pplq/NBL_AKSvsX_3.sfs?dl=0

Edited June 17, 2017 by panzer1b

[Abraxis]

Sorry for the misunderstanding--during my testing, I found out that, unless the fairing warhead is very long, the missile is more likely to be destroyed, since there is a greater chance one of the vessel parts will impact the gray cylinder.
TL;DR Long fairing nosecones are superior to anything else (as they can warp into the ship without damaging the rest of the missile), but make them short, and they will perform more or less evenly compared to standard ones.

Edited June 17, 2017 by Abraxis

[SG Aero]

I gaurantee you that the ship is not dead. I can refuel the back section and use it with a much better fuel to weight ratio, albeit less weapons. Oh wait, I can just klaw the two sections back together! Hahah. Also the ship has like 5 cores, so I doubt you killed it.

[Abraxis]

That's why I refrain from making warheads longer than 1 or 2 meters--it sill gives a decent pointy look to it, but it keeps its performance around average.

[Abraxis]

Just a quick question @Joseph Kerman: Did you manually create your ship, or did you use a program akin to mine to pointforge it?

Edited June 17, 2017 by Abraxis

[Joseph Kerman]

2 hours ago, Abraxis said:

Just a quick question @Joseph Kerman: Did you manually create your ship, or did you use a program akin to mine to pointforge it?

Manually