|
|
Post by gedzilla on Aug 12, 2018 12:38:32 GMT
Do you have any designes that actually benifit from non-clindrical armor ?
If so, please share, and show why that shape is better than a cylinder.
(P.s. hello again everyone)
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 12, 2018 13:00:18 GMT
Do you have any designes that actually benifit from non-clindrical armor ? If so, please share, and show why that shape is better than a cylinder. (P.s. hello again everyone) If you use MPDT's and a fairly dense propellant, you can place your propellant tanks next to your crew module in flattened hulls. |
|
|
|
Post by gedzilla on Aug 12, 2018 14:21:46 GMT
Do you have any designes that actually benifit from non-clindrical armor ? If so, please share, and show why that shape is better than a cylinder. (P.s. hello again everyone) If you use MPDT's and a fairly dense propellant, you can place your propellant tanks next to your crew module in flattened hulls. I dont understand, u can do that anyway with external propellent tanks. What unique advantage does that shape offer ? |
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Aug 12, 2018 14:37:54 GMT
What unique advantage does that shape offer ? Having only a sharp wedge of sloped armor shown to the enemy, when using a broadside fighter.
Sloped armor is more likely to bounce incoming kinetics, and it spreads the intensity of attacking lasers. |
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 12, 2018 15:08:45 GMT
If you use MPDT's and a fairly dense propellant, you can place your propellant tanks next to your crew module in flattened hulls. I dont understand, u can do that anyway with external propellent tanks. What unique advantage does that shape offer ? External propellant tanks are unprotected. This allows you to keep your propellant tanks under your armour, and in some circumstances allows you to do so without increasing cross section. |
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Aug 12, 2018 15:26:47 GMT
Side impacts close to dead center encounter higher slope with polygonal designs - more so if they are also flattened.
Flattening allows for effective broadside or hybrid broadside/nose forward designs.
Polygonal hulls also permit roll-capable RCS setups.
Lastly, they look cool.
|
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 12, 2018 17:29:18 GMT
I don't know if it is beneficial for anything other than having angled broadside armor. Usually when I use broadside for a ship I am dodging fire not sponging it so angling the sides is never particularly useful for me. Certainly doesn't help my DV at all. Though I will admit it is hard to make a Star Destroyer without square armor.   (I got them to scale to 1600m by 900m by 450m now to add green tracers and 100 crew modules and GIANT IMPRACTICAL BLUE THRUSTERS!!!) |
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Aug 12, 2018 22:05:46 GMT
(I got them to scale to 1600m by 900m by 450m now to add green tracers and 100 crew modules and GIANT IMPRACTICAL BLUE THRUSTERS!!!) I'm not sure if Rocket Witch got blue NTRs to work or not, but green tracers are pretty easy; use Copper. I dunno how you'll get the TIE Fighter screaming without some serious modding though. Good luck! |
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 12, 2018 23:09:05 GMT
I know chlorine gives a teal exhaust when you pump 30MW into it. Gives 158 KN and 1.9 DV. For an engine it is disappointing, but it's a start. I know krypton burns blue at 30,000K in a NTR but that's not particular useful when TaHC has the highest temperature safety margin (4050K).
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 14, 2018 13:09:04 GMT
You can make a capital ship which has a beam skiff level cross section with flattened armor, only if the game worked in that way.
You can rip of the useless farside armor to get more Dv and reduce cost, which is useful to beat the campaign tonnage/budget limitation.
You can get slope-armor effect which increase the effective armor thickness by arcsine, which I don't know work in this game or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 14, 2018 15:03:23 GMT
|
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 15, 2018 21:13:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by anotherfirefox on Aug 16, 2018 4:06:51 GMT
 The most space efficient ship I've ever built, never was able to without flatten armor |
|
ghgh
Full Member
Still trying to make kinetics work.
Posts: 136
|
Post by ghgh on Aug 16, 2018 4:18:53 GMT
There's a weird bug were flat armor will make missiles disappear. I launched 30 flak missiles at the ship and they all vanished before they hit the tip. Probably something to do with the aspect ratio messing up the cross section.
|
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Aug 16, 2018 9:31:22 GMT
The most space efficient ship I've ever built, never was able to without flatten armor It needs a bit more dV and some turrets for PD, other than that I would love to see design files.
BTW: Depedning on how stupid the AI will be about it, if you increased your Meth-LOx RCS count to 6, you might achieve disproportional increase in manoeuvrability, as with this sort of aspect ratio 4 of them will be on the opposite flats and capable of applying torque. |
|
