|
Post by tessfield on Nov 13, 2016 21:41:30 GMT
If you add a remote control module to a crewed ship, you retain control of the ship after all crew modules have been destroyed. Oh wow, really? That's brilliant! Does it affect what "type" of ship it is, however? (As in, does it still end up in the "warship" section and work "as usual" in the game?) Nope, still just a warship as usual. In order to make a ship a "rammer" you actually need a remote controller (otherwise it doesn't ram the enemy, just passes by it when Homing); I was finding all the crew was dead and everything was still working and was confused until I realized it was the remote controller that was still alive.
|
|
|
Post by jonen on Nov 13, 2016 22:03:41 GMT
If you add a remote control module to a crewed ship, you retain control of the ship after all crew modules have been destroyed. Oh wow, really? That's brilliant! Does it affect what "type" of ship it is, however? (As in, does it still end up in the "warship" section and work "as usual" in the game?) Aff. As long as there is a functioning crew module, it works as normal (and is classified as a warship). Once the crew module is disabled, the ship runs like a drone (it might be a bit less responsive, but whether that is because of the remote, or as a result of battle damage, I don't know. Don't know how it behaves if the crew module is disabled by overheating due to loss of radiators - so this works best on ships with little to no armor that rely on enemy not hitting them in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Drahkan on Nov 13, 2016 23:47:46 GMT
In any case it's a brilliant tactic that I'm happy to have found out about.
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Nov 14, 2016 1:30:47 GMT
After what Qswitch mentioned in the other thread on the timeline of the mission, this remote control in crewed ship things make a ton of sense.
The crew is dead? Well hand me the fucking control and just give the ship one last run for the death of our enemy!
Damn our Admiral is cold blooded.
|
|
|
Post by coaxjack on Nov 14, 2016 3:15:56 GMT
Rather that than let millions of credits of possibly functional weapons go sailing off into oblivion.
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Nov 14, 2016 3:37:58 GMT
Or you know, the dramatic self destruction mechanism.
Because letting salvage fall into the enemy's hand is dangerous.
|
|
|
Post by Pttg on Nov 14, 2016 3:55:31 GMT
Starting a thread to share random design tips I found while playing this game: Materials: Boron- A surprisingly good material to build almost everything, cheap, light, strong, blocks radiation, and high melting point Good for cannon barrels, rocket nozzles, propellant tanks, missile-launcher coolant pumps, power plant coolant pumps, radiation shields that double as armor I like selenium for low-temperature turbopumps, and it's generally useful as having among the best relative-yield-strength-per-credit. My fuel tanks are almost always UHMWPE with no extra armor. People have suggested adding high compartmentalization, and I'd second that. Strong fuel tanks will be holed regardless, but a cluster of tanks can take hit after hit after hit. When making small coilguns, consider switching from zir-copper to pure silver. Not only is it slightly more efficient, it also helps protect against werespaceships. I've come to the conclusion that one shouldn't put any neutron reflectors on your reactors at all. It's heavy and expensive, and you have to make it temperature safe. Instead, use a lithum-6 manhole cover between your reactor and your crew module. You'll save mass and cost, and if you somehow manage to park next to an enemy ship, your reactors alone will cook them. Don't overlook conventional guns, especially for large projectiles.
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Nov 14, 2016 4:55:39 GMT
I can't quite see any use for large conventional guns though.
I tried to make some drones with big conventional guns before and they kinda fall flat when comparing performance and cost with cheaper, smaller drones.
|
|
|
Post by Drahkan on Nov 14, 2016 22:09:36 GMT
I can't quite see any use for large conventional guns though. I tried to make some drones with big conventional guns before and they kinda fall flat when comparing performance and cost with cheaper, smaller drones. That and slapping one or more fast-and-far-firing railguns onto a nice laser-protected drone with tens of thousands of rounds in it, since - with the new remote control setup - you can just program them to not boost at all, ever, and let them unload from max range while the enemy frantically tries to fly close enough to engage them with slug-throwers.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Nov 14, 2016 22:54:09 GMT
I use separate ammo for all my ammo-based weapons. Putting the ammo in-line with the rest of the components generally adds less total volume (which in turn keeps cross-section and armor area down), and once the first ammo bin is placed I can keep adding to the cluster until it hits the cap of 20 or reaches the same radius as its neighboring components, which allows me to pack a lot of ammo into as little space as possible. For ammo that is an explosion hazard, there's the added benefit that all of the ammo can be gathered into one heavily-armored section. Ya. For a good example of how not to arrange your ammo bins- the stock Hiveship has 4 nuke mags placed very precisely around the ship's wasp waist...
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Nov 15, 2016 18:20:37 GMT
Ya. For a good example of how not to arrange your ammo bins- the stock Hiveship has 4 nuke mags placed very precisely around the ship's wasp waist... Well, in all fairness, the nukes, as far as I can tell, would only really be a problem in that the propellant might get lit off by sustained laser fire, which isn't likely to set off the nuclear warheads as anything other than a fizzle. Granted, that would still fuck the ship up something fierce, because you've got several kilos of high explosive going boom surrounded by lots of shrapnel behind all of your armor, but that's better than having your nukes light-off in full on detonations. Although, really, I question the use of conventional guns to propel ordinance in the first place. Honestly, all of the Nippon Prime designs seen in the game that we can be relatively certain are purely Nippon Prime designs seem rather extraordinarily terrible. The Cutter and Corsair both have utterly fracking pointless water resistojet RCS, along with using water as the fuel for their NTRs, which is a terrible choice because water produces terrible exhaust velocity compared to even decane, and is actually almost as bad if not worse than LH2/LOX chemical rocket motors, which leaves me wondering why Nippon Prime even bothered. The Hiveships are also horrible designs, because they have to close to suicide range to employ their most dangerous weaponry, which makes them functionally useless in any fight with someone packing coilguns or railguns. Sure, they have railguns of their own, but a tiny number of them, which are practically guaranteed to get sniped by anyone with lasers followed by the Hiveship being ignored until every other enemy ship is dead.
|
|
|
Post by Drahkan on Nov 15, 2016 22:03:36 GMT
I'm about 95% sure that when you destroy a nuclear payload module, it explodes at full force (regardless of that being a "bug" for all intents and purposes, since it should only ever - maaaaybe - happen if it was hit by a large slug made out of a U-233 or similar...and even that's highly unlikely). I'm trying to make a "nuclear cluster bomb" missile at the moment, and any time the enemy shoots at - and destroys - one of the nukes, my screen flashes white and every single nuke in the area (as well as the missile) is immediately vaporized. And that's even if I have them armored enough that they shouldn't be destroyed by a nearby non-nuclear explosion, so I can't see any way that this could be happening other than "destroying nuclear payload = payload explodes".
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Nov 15, 2016 23:01:49 GMT
We really need a "detailed mode" or an after-action report detailing exactly what happened during combat. For example, this would tell us if the nukes fizzled or blew up at full force, or what made the first nuke blow up exactly.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Nov 16, 2016 6:18:48 GMT
Ya. For a good example of how not to arrange your ammo bins- the stock Hiveship has 4 nuke mags placed very precisely around the ship's wasp waist... Well, in all fairness, the nukes, as far as I can tell, would only really be a problem in that the propellant might get lit off by sustained laser fire, which isn't likely to set off the nuclear warheads as anything other than a fizzle. Granted, that would still fuck the ship up something fierce, because you've got several kilos of high explosive going boom surrounded by lots of shrapnel behind all of your armor, but that's better than having your nukes light-off in full on detonations. Although, really, I question the use of conventional guns to propel ordinance in the first place. Honestly, all of the Nippon Prime designs seen in the game that we can be relatively certain are purely Nippon Prime designs seem rather extraordinarily terrible. The Cutter and Corsair both have utterly fracking pointless water resistojet RCS, along with using water as the fuel for their NTRs, which is a terrible choice because water produces terrible exhaust velocity compared to even decane, and is actually almost as bad if not worse than LH2/LOX chemical rocket motors, which leaves me wondering why Nippon Prime even bothered. The Hiveships are also horrible designs, because they have to close to suicide range to employ their most dangerous weaponry, which makes them functionally useless in any fight with someone packing coilguns or railguns. Sure, they have railguns of their own, but a tiny number of them, which are practically guaranteed to get sniped by anyone with lasers followed by the Hiveship being ignored until every other enemy ship is dead. Target a hiveship's cannons with a 1GW laser at 1000km. The first magazine will detonate in seconds, usually chain-detonating the others and splitting the ship in two. I think this happens every time. A wider range of outcomes for magazine cookoffs would maybe make this less of a liability though.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Nov 16, 2016 15:25:13 GMT
Target a hiveship's cannons with a 1GW laser at 1000km. The first magazine will detonate in seconds, usually chain-detonating the others and splitting the ship in two. I think this happens every time. A wider range of outcomes for magazine cookoffs would maybe make this less of a liability though. Huh. I never really bothered with lasers above 320 MW, mostly because that was good enough for point defense work and I'm a sucker for high-power kinetic weapons. Although, the magazine detonations could still just be the high explosive that propels the shells and compresses the fissile material cooking off, which shreds the magazine itself and sets off the magazines around it, which turns the magazines and their armor into shrapnel to shred the structural material around the guns.
|
|