Naval Battle Club

[Frozen_Heart]

Another failed design by me. Very wobbly, part count is already too high, awful dV and bad acceleration. I've just had a total mind block for ages now.

[8bitgammers]

http://i.imgur.com/ltBFpTI.png

Fite me m8.

U Wot M8....

this thing exploded!

Edited May 8, 2015 by 8bitgammers
to improve awsomeness

[zekes]

http://i.imgur.com/ltBFpTI.png

Fite me m8.

I'm down - let me finish my lighter escort ships, all i have ATM is my 200 ton MACEYDEAN.

[Spartwo]

Give me a bit to update the Cambuk, or meet at Scythe point which is 120 tons which leaves you at a number disadvantage.

[zekes]

Give me a bit to update the Cambuk, or meet at Scythe point which is 120 tons which leaves you at a number disadvantage.

Yeah, I need to come up with a 60 - ton destroyer, and a 110 ton Cruiser. I'll probably update the Drek XIV-XII to meet the latter weight.

[ScriptKitt3h]

My SX-13 frigate still works, as does my much more aesthetically-minded SX-00 Spectre:

I'm probably going to make a replacement for my old SX-3, since its part count has ballooned out of proportion, and then focus on strong medium-to-small size ships, filling specialist roles.

[Three1415]

I see the return of Macey Dean has kickstarted some some shipbuilding endeavors .

In any event, I shall soon join those with operational vessels, though I shall be in the same position as Zekes (lacking functional escorts), as I am building a ~250-ton flagship first.

Also, use cargo bays as engine shields; they are vastly stronger than airbrakes and can be opened and closed to either allow the passage of thrust or obstruct incident missiles, and they make excellent heatsinks for Nuclear Engines.

Edit: Also, never use fuel cells in conjunction with Ion Engines...I just did some calculations and found that when draining both xenon and fuel/oxidizer, their specific impulse drops to 194 seconds (from 4200), which is abysmal and makes them utterly useless.

Edited May 8, 2015 by Three1415

[daemonCaptrix]

Yeah, I need to come up with a 60 - ton destroyer, and a 110 ton Cruiser. I'll probably update the Drek XIV-XII to meet the latter weight.

I still don't know how people get to 110-120t and still have a functional ship. o_O

My most successful ship weighs in at just under 80t.

[Three1415]

I still don't know how people get to 110-120t and still have a functional ship. o_O

Massive, massive amounts of armor...And even more fuel. My flagship is in its early stages of construction (i.e, before armor) and already weighs in at 130 tons, 90 of which are in tanks alone.

[zekes]

I still don't know how people get to 110-120t and still have a functional ship. o_O

My most successful ship weighs in at just under 80t.

Range, my dear - Range. MACEYDEAN is 195 tons, but that's 12,000 m/s of range.

[Spartwo]

Because Ions and stuff...

[ScriptKitt3h]

http://i.imgur.com/shJjgHC.png

Because Ions and stuff...

Yup- You got enough Xenon and power supply systems (RTGs/Solar) to keep 'em running?

Also, remember: As of 1.0, solar panels really become nerfed out past Dres.

[zekes]

http://i.imgur.com/shJjgHC.png

Because Ions and stuff...

Woohoo, I outrange that thing

[ScriptKitt3h]

"Weapons testing complete, preparing for full-scale production..."

SX-1.0. Harvester

EDIT: I just realized it has the "Feed me Chechens" eyes of a T-90. 0_o

[War Eagle 1]

"Weapons testing complete, preparing for full-scale production..."

http://i.imgur.com/sl99hhC.png

http://i.imgur.com/mf7wkgK.png

http://i.imgur.com/slUmFf5.png

SX-1.0. Harvester

EDIT: I just realized it has the "Feed me Chechens" eyes of a T-90. 0_o

Looks like a Halcyon Class Cruiser

[Spartwo]

Yup- You got enough Xenon and power supply systems (RTGs/Solar) to keep 'em running?

Also, remember: As of 1.0, solar panels really become nerfed out past Dres.

Panels + lots of LF/O, Batteries, fuel cells, and panels.

And I don't like it for the same reason I don't like the Maceydean, a TWR which has to be rounded to 2 decimal places.

EDIT: Is that the actual D/v or D/v with no missiles?

Edited May 9, 2015 by Spartwo

[ScriptKitt3h]

Looks like a Halcyon Class Cruiser

I did somewhat base it off the Halcyon's bigger siblings, the Marathon-class and Autumn-class. I also made it that way for an actual, tangible reason: The extra side paneling serves as a comfortable buffer layer between the internals, hull, and outer hull (the side panels and small sections of core hull on the top, bottom, and bow).

- - - Updated - - -

Panels + lots of LF/O, Batteries, fuel cells, and panels.

And I don't like it for the same reason I don't like the Maceydean, a TWR which has to be rounded to 2 decimal places.

EDIT: Is that the actual D/v or D/v with no missiles?

Yeah, low TWR can be a pain in the rear. I've not checked the D/v of the Harvester-class yet, but it clocks in a 116 tons and 674 parts WITH a full ammo load.

[Spartwo]

Curtana is clocking in at 280 and 780, the number of missiles has become ridiculous at this point.

Yeah, low TWR can be a pain in the rear. I've not checked the D/v of the Harvester-class yet, but it clocks in a 116 tons and 674 parts WITH a full ammo load.

Must have a frightening armament.

[Three1415]

A preview of what is to come:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

I am prepared to dethrone zekes for the title of "most durable armor."

[panzer1b]

A preview of what is to come:

http://imgur.com/a/1l1zR

I am prepared to dethrone zekes for the title of "most durable armor."

Impressive that SOMEONE has created something that is at least resistant to the popper H (my SK-CRV-IIIG2 can take some hits from that but will still die to luck/good hit). Im wondering how much the part counts are on that hull segment, as personally with 1.0 actually increasing lag/stutter with higher part counts, i fail to see the point of even trying to make super ultra good armor schemes (the best i managed was a borg cube styles hull, basically enough spaced armor to counter phasing to a certain extent, and even if something did phase thru it wouldnt do much if any real damage).

Also, the popper H (and any missiles using the 999m/s indestructible AP tips) have lost alot of their previous firepower, due to the fact that those now get lower impact tolerance then a regular structural panel. They still work and still kill, but no more instant guaranteed damage to most ships as you cant rely on armor piercing tips anymore (or well not as much as you could before).

Now that i see im not the only one doing space craft development, im starting up a new armor layout design that focuses on keeping mass and pat count to an absolute minimum while keeping as much armor integrity as humanely possible. I actually think my SK-CRV-IIIG4 and SK-FRG-IG3 have a good chance at becoming some of the most practical ships around once finished. Im not going to claim they will be all that great, but sofar im planning on hulls that are 150-200 parts, and the things will have armor similar to the drek-27, enough to bounce quite a bit, and they should also be fairly cut in half resilient, not to mention their low mass and still decent dV will give them the edge in practicality. If anything comes out of this project ill post some pics lateron.

Yeah, low TWR can be a pain in the rear. I've not checked the D/v of the Harvester-class yet, but it clocks in a 116 tons and 674 parts WITH a full ammo load.

try using ions to push a 200t ship....THATS what i call PAINFUL! Actually isnt there someone here who likes to use ion clusters on their capitals? I cant even comprehend how you can survive watching such long burn times, even if your dV is crazy because of it.

Anyways, i usually have a rule of 1 nuke for ~20t. That makes burns minimally painful (a 20m burn max for jool ejection burn is ok). While i know that any added mass lowers dV, i feel dV is pointless if you have to spend ages burning anywhere. I find 0.3TWR is what i like minimum. i have some craft that are as low as 0.2, but i NEVER go below that as i cant have any fun burning for ages (if you could burn on-rails then thatd be another story, but sofar you cant).

Edited May 9, 2015 by panzer1b

[Three1415]

Im wondering how much the part counts are on that hull segment

The armor (which I have now completed) is less than 850 parts for the entire surface area of the ship; even armed and with propulsion, I do not anticipate the total part count for the ship exceeding 1300 despite the craft's projected 375-ton mass and extreme size.

They still work and still kill, but no more instant guaranteed damage to most ships as you cant rely on armor piercing tips anymore (or well not as much as you could before).

Fortunately, I have also improved my weapons technologies to compensate; at least I now have missiles that can easily penetrate bi-layered armor (although the prototype above remains mostly resistant to them), and doubtless others soon shall as well.

I find 0.3TWR is what i like minimum. i have some craft that are as low as 0.2, but i NEVER go below that as i cant have any fun burning for ages (if you could burn on-rails then thatd be another story, but sofar you cant).

I, too, do not use ions on any craft over thirty tons; nuclear engines are preferable in such cases. In most circumstances, my minimal tolerance for TWR is 0.1, although I often cannot spare the typically large quantity of parts necessary to construct an Ion drive, as I am typically inefficient in terms of part count.

Edited May 9, 2015 by Three1415

[Frozen_Heart]

I do not anticipate the total part count for the ship exceeding 1300 despite the craft's projected 375-ton mass and extreme size.

This is why I dropped out of the battle club. Everyone is throwing around 1000+ part ships while I can't even manage 500.

Strangely I have good GPU, CPU, and RAM and only struggle with KSP. Skyrim on ultra with 20 graphics mods is a walk in the park in comparison.

[zekes]

This is why I dropped out of the battle club. Everyone is throwing around 1000+ part ships while I can't even manage 500.

Strangely I have good GPU, CPU, and RAM and only struggle with KSP. Skyrim on ultra with 20 graphics mods is a walk in the park in comparison.

The problem is weapons - my popper is some 45 parts.... I got my MACEYDEAN under 800 parts by using less effective missiles, but if i put poppers on it's 1077....

[daemonCaptrix]

This is why I dropped out of the battle club. Everyone is throwing around 1000+ part ships while I can't even manage 500.

Strangely I have good GPU, CPU, and RAM and only struggle with KSP. Skyrim on ultra with 20 graphics mods is a walk in the park in comparison.

I don't know why people can't keep their part counts under 300-500.

[Three1415]

This is why I dropped out of the battle club. Everyone is throwing around 1000+ part ships while I can't even manage 500.

Well, I am the least part-count efficient person on this thread, because I enjoy complexity .

Everyone else usually uses 800 parts or fewer...