Naval Battle League 2016-2018

[Canberra_Gaming]

Just now, ScriptKitt3h said:

I need to do a bit more testing before I'm ready for using it in combat- mainly simple things like testing the hull and whatnot, but that's something made more complicated with not having HyperEdit working in 1.1.2 yet, though I've been attempting to find a work-around...

Am I the only one not having problems with Hyperedit in 1.1.2? I promise it's working for me.

[ScriptKitt3h]

2 minutes ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

Am I the only one not having problems with Hyperedit in 1.1.2? I promise it's working for me.

I'm not saying it's completely broken, but in my install it seems to cause major bugs whenever I decouple a stage or undock a module/missile, or when I EVA a kerbal and accidentally bump into my ship with them.

[Spartwo]

When used with scatterer the entire bottom half of my screen is the water.

[Canberra_Gaming]

6 minutes ago, ScriptKitt3h said:

I'm not saying it's completely broken, but in my install it seems to cause major bugs whenever I decouple a stage or undock a module/missile, or when I EVA a kerbal and accidentally bump into my ship with them.

Might explain what broke my bloody recording save... Yeah, time to uninstall.

[Alphasus]

24 minutes ago, Spartwo said:

When used with scatterer the entire bottom half of my screen is the water.

Press alt f10 and go into rebake oceans. Click that.

[sdj64]

I am still getting a bug where ships that are brought into rendezvous outside of 200m fly away from each other at high speed despite being on the exact same orbit.  This bug has happened to me for every version of Hyperedit I've ever had.  Can be fixed by editing to within 200m and backing off (unless you time warp) or starting on some far away orbit and flying in.

No other bugs as far as I have seen on 1.1.  Using EVE and KER, no other mods (yet)

[Servo]

37 minutes ago, sdj64 said:

I am still getting a bug where ships that are brought into rendezvous outside of 200m fly away from each other at high speed despite being on the exact same orbit.  This bug has happened to me for every version of Hyperedit I've ever had.  Can be fixed by editing to within 200m and backing off (unless you time warp) or starting on some far away orbit and flying in.

No other bugs as far as I have seen on 1.1.  Using EVE and KER, no other mods (yet)

I've had the same problem myself, in addition to a weird one where using the rendezvous function across SOIs doesn't work; despite KER and the map saying it works, visibly it's really far away (90+km).

[curiousepic]

12 hours ago, sdj64 said:

I am still getting a bug where ships that are brought into rendezvous outside of 200m fly away from each other at high speed despite being on the exact same orbit.  This bug has happened to me for every version of Hyperedit I've ever had.  Can be fixed by editing to within 200m and backing off (unless you time warp) or starting on some far away orbit and flying in.

No other bugs as far as I have seen on 1.1.  Using EVE and KER, no other mods (yet)

Make sure you aren't hacking gravity? I've had that issue and though that fixed it, but correlation isn't causation.

Edited May 4, 2016 by curiousepic

[FallingIntoBlack]

Busy rebuilding, are they? How foolish to pretend they are safe, to think that building some ships would mean the end of this...to forget that I'm still here...

Edited May 4, 2016 by FallingIntoBlack

[ScriptKitt3h]

It's funny how we always discuss having fleets of ships setup for battles, and yet I just realized: I've got easily approaching 20+ functional capital ship designs (of varying effectiveness), and various sub-craft and fighters as well. I really need to post a pack, and/or do some pruning of vessels...

[Spartwo]

Nah, 20 isn't that many when you think about it.

 

*Counts*

 

Between 23 and 40

[ScriptKitt3h]

6 minutes ago, Spartwo said:

Nah, 20 isn't that many when you think about it.

 

*Counts*

 

Between 23 and 40

I somewhat left out my older ships that are effectively useless in modern KSP battles, but I'd say I'm around that number range myself (lower-mid end) counting those in.

Believe it or not I still have a couple of my ancient S-X series ships sitting in my install, they're just so outdated and rendered irrelevant that I've not bothered trying to resurrect them.

[Servo]

At least you're using your ships. I have 5&10 ships of each weight class and I've never even had an actual battle. Speaking of which, would anyone be up for something over the weekend? 

 

Say, 150 tons, 3 ships (max), around Duna? Anyone game?

[panzer1b]

3 hours ago, Servo said:

At least you're using your ships. I have 5&10 ships of each weight class and I've never even had an actual battle. Speaking of which, would anyone be up for something over the weekend? 

 

Say, 150 tons, 3 ships (max), around Duna? Anyone game?

Ill be glad to fight you although i will need a fighter of some sort since i only have 70t warships laying around (i can do 150t easily with 2 of them and a 10t fighter).  If you want a battle over weekend then by all means, ill defenetely have a fighter since im working on a few for my comic im also working on.

Speaking of which, the pirate asteroid base's super heavy cannon works great.  Too bad ammo for it is so excessively heavy and high on parts (as in never gonna be used on a warship cause dv would go out the door unless its like a single shell).

Poor SK-CRV-IVg0-V7 prototype...  The production models are alot tougher though as this one was defective because the struts got broken while saving it (and i didnt notice until it was already launched and enroute to minmus, quickly deverted it to go suicide scout the pirate HQ.

[Alphasus]

Could someone possibly test out this ship? It uses an experimental heavily strutted core, and is double coated with spaced armor plate. I have noticed its impact resistance, however my current existing missiles aren't great, and can't crack the armor.USS Core

[Canberra_Gaming]

24 minutes ago, Alphasus said:

Could someone possibly test out this ship? It uses an experimental heavily strutted core, and is double coated with spaced armor plate. I have noticed its impact resistance, however my current existing missiles aren't great, and can't crack the armor.USS Core

On it.

[Canberra_Gaming]

@Alphasus Using my new Hellfire Mk-Xs (You might remember the Mk-VI from the Vindicator you fought) this was every shot...

(I took four shots, I got sick of the repetitiveness)

[Alphasus]

10 minutes ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

@Alphasus Using my new Hellfire Mk-Xs (You might remember the Mk-VI from the Vindicator you fought) this was every shot...

(I took four shots, I got sick of the repetitiveness)

Yeah, expected kills. I'll do some independent I beam testing. I didn't think it could take full ASM hits, but I wonder if glancing ASM hits could be survived because they wouldn't kill the core.

[panzer1b]

13 minutes ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

@Alphasus Using my new Hellfire Mk-Xs (You might remember the Mk-VI from the Vindicator you fought) this was every shot...

(I took four shots, I got sick of the repetitiveness)

Is that a guided or unguided round?  Also, are you firing from 150m or less, firing any farger engages a bug that i would consider cheating (because it results in near every vessel dying regardless of construction.

 

 

Anyways, i also did my armor test (and limited myself to firing at short range with unguided to guarantee no bug instakilling ur ship).  Results for a few select weapons:

Popper-H Knockoff (single guided missile): decent.  Not once did the ship get permanently neutered in 1 shot, with the absolute worst damage i managed to do after ~10 shots is obliterating an entire half and then some, but the ship retained an engine and a few of its secondary weapons so it wasnt exactly destroyed.

SRM-6M (6 shot long ibeam+4 sepst cannon): extremely susceptible.  Virtually every time it got sawed in half (when firing from the sides).  Firing from the front/rear its better but still usually gets cut in half before i reach the 6th shot.

Dual ASC-H (RT5 based weapon with 2 shots per weapon so 4 total): ok.  Depending on the trial but it usually retained at least 1 engine and some weapons.  A few tests completely vaporized the ship (as in tore it into like 6+ pieces) but most left enough there that it could at least move and shoot.

 

opps almost forgot to add a album of testing images.  Ohh and i never diss a design until ive both tried a variety of weapons and done at least 10 tests per weapon.  Now as for my actual opinion of the design, i like the looks, and its defenetely unique, but it is not part count efficient in the slightest.  Do you actually NEED that many RTGs?  Same with reaction wheels, nothing wrong with good maneuverability, but i feel its a little over the top there.  Armor is actually above average imho because you can actually survive a salvo of RT-5s, which is a feat in of itself as my recent testing has shown that 4 ASC-H rounds can tear apart almost anything based on drek style hull design (long spine of XL girders with everything coming offa those).  Its a little easy to obliterate with a SRM-6M, which isnt the case with all ships, but it does still take a full launcher's worth of rounds to do so (so no single ibeam kills you, rather the repeated shot after shot into the exact same spot).  As for high end ASMs, its actually decent against those.  You need to find a way to better armor the middle section (where your core is located, especially from above and below).  Otherwise its a good ship, but a little highish on part count for the armor it offers.

 

Edited May 5, 2016 by panzer1b

[Alphasus]

2 minutes ago, panzer1b said:

Is that a guided or unguided round?  Also, are you firing from 150m or less, firing any farger engages a bug that i would consider cheating (because it results in near every vessel dying regardless of construction.

 

 

Anyways, i also did my armor test (and limited myself to firing at short range with unguided to guarantee no bug instakilling ur ship).  Results for a few select weapons:

Popper-H Knockoff (single guided missile): decent.  Not once did the ship get permanently neutered in 1 shot, with the absolute worst damage i managed to do after ~10 shots is obliterating an entire half and then some, but the ship retained an engine and a few of its secondary weapons so it wasnt exactly destroyed.

SRM-6M (6 shot long ibeam+4 sepst cannon): extremely susceptible.  Virtually every time it got sawed in half (when firing from the sides).  Firing from the front/rear its better but still usually gets cut in half before i reach the 6th shot.

Dual ASC-H (RT5 based weapon with 2 shots per weapon so 4 total): ok.  Depending on the trial but it usually retained at least 1 engine and some weapons.  A few tests completely vaporized the ship (as in tore it into like 6+ pieces) but most left enough there that it could at least move and shoot.

 

Do you have any tips on large anti ship missiles? I need a platform to use them on to begin with, but how does their design work? I know RT-5s are standard, and I have used my missile pods before(similar to SRM-6Ms). In my experience, the pods don't hurt as much as they used to. They have 6 of those long i beams, but with 8 seps. I will probably add one to the Core, but I just can't easily kill with them. I like the shrapnel damage resistance, as evidenced by Popper H testing. I do need help with single shot ASMs.

 

[panzer1b]

2 minutes ago, Alphasus said:

Do you have any tips on large anti ship missiles? I need a platform to use them on to begin with, but how does their design work? I know RT-5s are standard, and I have used my missile pods before(similar to SRM-6Ms). In my experience, the pods don't hurt as much as they used to. They have 6 of those long i beams, but with 8 seps. I will probably add one to the Core, but I just can't easily kill with them. I like the shrapnel damage resistance, as evidenced by Popper H testing. I do need help with single shot ASMs.

 

As for large ASMs, ive honestly stopped bothering trying to defend against em as every kill with them is 75% luck, 25% hull design (provided you have something to stop shrapnel inside like bulkheads there isnt much else you can do). 

As for teh SRM-6M, the reason its so lethal is because its center mounted and because i have (from lots of experience testing various designs) found the optimal range to engage at for the given weapon im using.  You need to have these things centralized for optimal effect because the whole point is to fire multiple shells into teh exact same component (cockpit for aiming right behind the gun is near mandatory as relying on the autoaim doesnt alwasy target optimal spot).

If you fire too close you wont build enough speed, and if you fire too far you will either trigger the "instakill target" bug or have entire shell phase thru your target outright doing 0 dmg.

 

Anyways, keep working towards ur armor design, its not a bad ship, just needs competitive weapons, lets face it, RCS tank warheads are useless even vs MK2 fuselage (and thus every one of my own fighter designs).  Your missiles are so-so though, i tried them and they do do damage to a target, just not quite enough to kill decently built ones.

[Alphasus]

Just now, panzer1b said:

As for large ASMs, ive honestly stopped bothering trying to defend against em as every kill with them is 75% luck, 25% hull design (provided you have something to stop shrapnel inside like bulkheads there isnt much else you can do). 

As for teh SRM-6M, the reason its so lethal is because its center mounted and because i have (from lots of experience testing various designs) found the optimal range to engage at for the given weapon im using.  You need to have these things centralized for optimal effect because the whole point is to fire multiple shells into teh exact same component (cockpit for aiming right behind the gun is near mandatory as relying on the autoaim doesnt alwasy target optimal spot).

If you fire too close you wont build enough speed, and if you fire too far you will either trigger the "instakill target" bug or have entire shell phase thru your target outright doing 0 dmg.

 

Anyways, keep working towards ur armor design, its not a bad ship, just needs competitive weapons, lets face it, RCS tank warheads are useless even vs MK2 fuselage (and thus every one of my own fighter designs).  Your missiles are so-so though, i tried them and they do do damage to a target, just not quite enough to kill decently built ones.

Thanks, but my armor design is a massive part count already. I may need a teardown of the design. The RCS tank warheads are to be replaced with .6m ASMs, such as my fighter killers. I guess over range, they could kill capital ships.

[ScriptKitt3h]

Jormungand- the serpent.

1.1's resurrected the heavy capital ship and supercaps/carriers...

[panzer1b]

50 minutes ago, ScriptKitt3h said:

Jormungand- the serpent.

1.1's resurrected the heavy capital ship and supercaps/carriers...

Love your use of the radiators as makeshift doors...

Now if only there was a way to stop the stupid thinsg from rotating, same with the solar panels...

 

 

Edit:

guess its back to the drawing board...  Apparently my SK-CRV-IVg1 is suceptible to SRM-6Ms (and given that ibeam+sepatrons is the primary weapon i use, i cant have a AKS warship die to that crap so easily).

Im gonna try a smaller and more compact core, perhaps itll help with lowering probability of having the root parts destroyed, which is a death sentence to this thing (and any other ship for that matter).

Edited May 5, 2016 by panzer1b

[Alphasus]

9 hours ago, panzer1b said:

Love your use of the radiators as makeshift doors...

Now if only there was a way to stop the stupid thinsg from rotating, same with the solar panels...

 

 

Edit:

guess its back to the drawing board...  Apparently my SK-CRV-IVg1 is suceptible to SRM-6Ms (and given that ibeam+sepatrons is the primary weapon i use, i cant have a AKS warship die to that crap so easily).

Im gonna try a smaller and more compact core, perhaps itll help with lowering probability of having the root parts destroyed, which is a death sentence to this thing (and any other ship for that matter).

My core was the smallest type of girder, with fewer outbound connections. I think that design is inherently weak to impacts that deliver many simultaneous shocks to the craft.