|
Post by wazzledazzle on Feb 17, 2017 11:08:27 GMT
So turns out redesigning the Scorpion was a silly idea. I tried reverting to the old version (which has less armour and a backup 11mm railgun on the nose), and noticed it was almost much smaller, weighed under 2kt and barely cost 24Mc. Woops... Redesign does not always mean improvement. For the same cost, you could afford 11 Scorpions for 1 pursuer, but that would be horribly cheesy, so I matched them for mass, which gives a more reasonable 5 Scorpions to 1 Pursuer. The main idea behind the class was to be an affordable spam-ship, so I guess that worked. The AI likes to be silly and twirl the gun around, so I had to enforce the Broadside order manually. The battles went roughly like I had expected. With its smaller size, the Scorpion starts firing at 50km while the Pursuer has to wait until 37km. It is designed to be a bit of a zombie with thick armor and redundant modules. The redundant power plant works great, but you should do something about the crew modules - they're placed right behind the nose and its flat armour, which means they often get hit while the Pursuer accelerates towards its target. If you look at the Pegasus, you'll notice the crew is behind a fuel tank to avoid that situation. Obviously this wouldn't be a problem under human control - the Pursuer can orient its armour properly and wait for the Scorpions to come into range, instead of accelerating towards them. With some aggressive dodging, avoiding the Scorpion's shots is very doable, and the Pursuer is much superior at close ranges where the Scorpion's gun cannot turn fast enough. Overall, I'd say both ships are pretty matched - if it weren't for the silly AI the Pursuer would probably be able to dodge most shots, but with the number of Scorpion to engage it isn't always safe from a few lucky 2kg impacts. As a sidenote, I'm pretty sure both the stock 8mm railgun and my 220mm coilgun are a bit broken. I wonder how the designs will change once those are fixed.
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Feb 16, 2017 22:23:37 GMT
- Good armor and nose on slope
- Loss of external tank leads to pitching, improper attitude leads to armor penetration and destruction
- 11mm railguns lack armor penetration
- Outranged by 8mm railguns
- Partial armor leads to quick destruction
- AI likes to tumble, spinal coilgun gets few chances to fire
- Range advantage over FA Pursuer is minor
I'd like to give the Scorpion a better chance, but it just doesn't manage to live long enough due to the lack of armor. Ha, that went about as well as I expected it to. That Pursuer is great looking. The Pegasus tumbling was something I noticed early on. I tried adding more mass towards the nose to avoid the CoM being so far back but it apparently wasn't enough. The Scorpion had a similar problem, the early versions were a LOT smaller (and thus had a more noticeable range advantage, because of the very low cross-section), but that made them so light a single impact would send them spinning. Thinking about it again, I probably should try a smaller Scorpion again. The added armor probably isn't worth the increased cross-section. That should make the coilgun a tad more effective. Or hell, even get rid of the armor and make them as small as possible for added effective range advantage. That 8mm railgun is serious, though. The range is very nice.
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Feb 16, 2017 19:21:12 GMT
I think no one does; the idea is to build a new ship for this "performance". I might have a couple actually, from older versions where kinetics were still relevant. Gave them a little patching for this contest, but I don't know what they're worth. Here we go! Pegasus-class Skirmisher The idea behind the Pegasus-class was to have a tough nose with front-firing 11mm railguns. Ideally the nose should absorb weapon fire more effectively than heavy, all-round armor. It also has a few 60mm cannons for close-range work. SK-240 Scorpion-class frigate Here's a more "pocket-sized" ship. The "SK" in the name stands for "Spinal, Kinetic". It's built around a relatively long-ranged coilgun. Once ships get too close, it swings to present an angled armor plate that masks the whole craft, radiators included. There's also a couple 11mm for backup. Bear in mind, those designs are pretty old! There's probably a lot that could be optimised. But I'm looking forward to other designs in this thread. Kinetics vs kinetics is pretty fun, as the stock ships can show. Here are the codes: Pegasus
CraftBlueprint Pegasus Skirmisher Modules 1.000 kt Methane Tank 1 0 null 0 30 Crew Module 1 -0.125 null 0 30 Crew Module 1 -0.25 null 0 600 t Methane Tank 3 -0.75 null 0 13.5 MW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor 1 -0.875 null 0 6.18 km/s Methane Gimballed Nuclear Thermal Rocket 7 0 null 0 14.0 m Diameter 6.00 cm Radiation Shield 1 -0.8125 null 0 4x20 Titanium Carbide Radiator 5 10.981 13.5 MW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor 0 13.0 MW 11mm Turreted Railgun 4 136.46 null 0 10.0 m x 0 m Spacer 1 124.49 null 0 2x20 Titanium Carbide Radiator 2 88.397 30 Crew Module 0 60mm Turreted Cannon 3 62.367 null 0 60mm Turreted Cannon 3 99.542 null 0 60mm Turreted Cannon 3 121.78 null 0 60mm Turreted Cannon 3 75.523 null 0 300 t Methane Drop Tank 5 34.365 null 0 Armor ArmorLayers Reinforced Carbon-Carbon 0.3 0 0.7 1 1 Boron Carbide 0.04 0.2 0 1 1 Aluminum 0.008 0.75 0 1 1 Tungsten 0.0005 0 0.844 0.88 1 Constantan 0.0005 0 0.905 0.94 1
Scorpion
CraftBlueprint SK-240 FF Scorpion Modules 13.5 MW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor 1 41.637 null 0 300 t Methane Tank 5 7.1498 null 0 20 Crew Module 2 2.0709 null 0 7.00 m Diameter 10.0 cm Radiation Shield 1 4.6104 null 0 13.0 MW 220mm Coilgun 1 0 null 0 6.18 km/s Methane Gimballed Nuclear Thermal Rocket 1 34.133 null 0 10.0 m x 0 m Spacer 1 59.793 null 0 632 m/s 13.2 MW Methane Gimballed Resistojet 3 8.1092 null 0 6x3 Aluminum Radiator 3 13.657 20 Crew Module 0.01 4x20 Titanium Carbide Radiator 3 30.744 13.5 MW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor 1.01 10x3 Silicon Nitride Radiator 3 16.867 13.5 MW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor 0.01 10.0 m x 0 m Spacer 1 0.53547 null 0 0 m x 10.0 m Spacer 10 24.393 null 0 10.0 m x 0 m Spacer 1 60.793 null 0 10.0 m x 0 m Spacer 1 60.793 null 0 10.0 m x 0 m Spacer 1 61.793 null 0 13.0 MW 11mm Turreted Railgun 2 32.482 null 1.57 632 m/s 13.2 MW Methane Gimballed Resistojet 3 3.4605 null 0 Armor ArmorLayers Reinforced Carbon-Carbon 0.07 0 0.485 1 1 Aluminum 0.007 0.9 0.495 1 1 Constantan 0.0005 0 0.87 0.92 0.999 Bismuth 0.0005 0 0.805 0.85 0.999
220mm coilgun for the Scorpion
CoilgunModule 13.0 MW 220mm Coilgun UsesCustomName false PowerConsumption_W 1.3e+007 Coil Composition Aluminum Copper Lithium WireRadius_m 0.089 NumberOfTurns 3 NumberOfLayers 7 NumberOfStages 34 BarrelArmorThickness_m 0.01 Armature Composition Iron BoreRadius_m 0.11 Mass_kg 5 Tracer Sulfur Payload null Loader PowerConsumption_W 75000 AttachedAmmoBay Capacity 2000 Stacks 6 TargetsShips true TargetsShots false
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Feb 7, 2017 14:06:09 GMT
I usually go with letters and numbers, since it makes finding a specific ship easier. Two letters for the class's strong points, one number for the version, and two numbers for its dV. For example, in the OS class of ships (made for Offense and Survivability), OS-257 is the 2nd design of the class, and has 5.7 km/s of dV. Of course, you could make the two letters into an actual name for the class - OS-class could also stand for Overseer class.
I also had a naming system in the works a while ago, for a story I was planning. Basically, ships come in two categories : Fleet ships (used in a fleet, so focusing on certain aspects), and Independent ships (used alone, so more overall capability over specific strengths). So that gives you nice ship classes ! IO (Independent, Offence), IC (Independent, Carrier), FC (Fleet, Carrier), FE (Fleet, Escort), etc...
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Nov 19, 2016 18:52:21 GMT
Did somebody say coilguns? Higher projectile mass is obviously harder to get to high speeds, but the nice thing with larger projectiles is that the force of the impact can actually tumble ships, if they hit far enough from the center of mass. I used to have 50kg projectiles (back when coilguns were horribly broken), but 5-10kg is more reasonable. Nice firepower, decent ammo count, and the price isn't too bad! Probably could optimise it further, though. The main issue with really big guns right now is that the reaction wheel style turrets for them don't really work. Yeah, turrets tend to make those things expensive/too large and heavy. I prefer to mount them directly and use resistojets for aiming. That way you can have ships with a much smaller cross section, giving you time before the enemy can engage. Also, has anyone experimented with guided or fragmentation shells? That would improve their usefulness quite a bit (Fire a salvo - move out of range - repeat as needed)
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Oct 2, 2016 15:27:16 GMT
AI vs AI makes sense. By the way, I had thought about this a little. CoaDE is excellent for tactical battles, but lacks a strategic layer. Meanwhile, the board game Battlefleet Mars has a grand campaign that spans across the entire solar system, but battles are resolved with a simple dice roll. Oh, and it has a hard-fi theme as well. So, if we can get asynchronous battles working, that could be an idea for a forum game. Use BFM for the strategic part and resolve battles with CoaDE ?
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Oct 1, 2016 12:06:41 GMT
Frame of reference just means "make this object the center of the world". So let's say you want to intercept an object that's orbiting a moon, you have to not only intersect the target's orbit, but also intersect at the right time to get an intercept. While if you choose that object as the frame of reference, you only have to make your trajectory cross the center of the screen.
Of course, if you set a ship or moon that is also moving as the frame of reference, things can look confusing very quickly.
Usually, I only use it as a second step for very long range intercepts. So use the planet-centered frame to do a rough intercept, then use the target-centered frame to arrive at the right time. Not sure if this is clear enough.
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Oct 1, 2016 11:59:55 GMT
I think it would be nice to have a little explanation of the various AI settings in the sandbox mode.
I get that "Defensive" doesn't do anything and that "Agressive" rushes the player, but what exactly does "Balanced" mean ? What about "Reckless" ? "Cunning" ?
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Sept 30, 2016 18:08:15 GMT
Recently I've been doing lots of tweaks on a ship design that uses a coilgun as its primary armament. So instead of going for pure coilgun efficiency, I also tried to keep the power usage (13MW), weight and size relatively low, so the ship could keep a small cross-section. Low price as well, to afford multiple ships. Also have a slightly scaled-up variant, with a 10kg shell instead of a 5kg one. The 5kg is more precise, faster and lighter, but the 10kg shell has the neat side effect of being heavy enough to knock enemy ships into a spin. I usually have both types in a fleet since the ships themselves are pretty cheap. By the way, has anyone experimented with flak payloads for coilguns ? I've done some quick tests, and while they do less internal damage that standard shells, they're very good at destroying exposed weapons and radiators. Ideally, with a big enough spread and burst distance, you could even get a greater chance to hit, but I haven't found the right flak settings to do that. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Sept 29, 2016 12:55:10 GMT
The lighting and effects look great. Radiators, projectiles, even exhaust really add some charm to the game. It's true that some of the textures could be improved, but hey, graphic design is a full time job. Yes, fantastic graphics. Love when my ships get 'toasty'! Wait, are you the same Baloogan that does the CMANO AARs ?
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Sept 11, 2016 18:21:14 GMT
I admit that it's a bit silly, but since we cannot dock ships together (yet ?...), I tried to make a launcher-type weapon "fire" a manned ship.
If I try to launch the ship in question, and then select it, the game crashes without creating a log.
However, everything else seems to work : I can give orders to the launched ship, even use the "select all" button. Also, the launched ship seems immune to collisions with its "mothership", unlike missiles or drones.
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Sept 11, 2016 18:04:17 GMT
Stumbled across a very odd and specific issue, and onyl just managed to consistently replicate it. If a craft has both partial armor AND a spacer in it, it spawns without the spacer as soon as I enter tactical view. Example : I duplicated the fleet carrier and made it have partial armor. When I spawn the ship in the sandbox and open the tactical view.... poof ! No more spacer, leaving two halves of the carrier. Attachment DeletedAttachment DeletedDid some further testing, looks like removing all armor works too, but not always... Also all spacers seem to be affected.
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Sept 6, 2016 15:04:58 GMT
The discussion just reminded me of heatsinks. As in, instead of shedding heat constantly through radiators, you pump it into a large amount of liquid and then vent it away into space. Obviously this doesn't allow for stealth, but it could allow firing more heat-inducing lasers without needing prohibitively large radiators. Of course, there's the drawback of the sinks being single-use.
Have you thought of implementing that, or is it something you researched and simply wasn't effective ? I'm curious, since those are featured in Attack Vector Tactical (hard-fi board game, though set farther in the future than CDE)
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Sept 2, 2016 19:17:47 GMT
Those main engines are used as RCS I assume? That turnabout time must be ridiculous. Yes, turnabout time is something like 8 seconds or less. Using the small resistojets is enough to aim the coilgun, but if hostile ships close in quickly (as the AI likes to do), I needed them to turn around quickly to present the armour plate, and turn again after overshooting.
|
|
|
Post by wazzledazzle on Sept 1, 2016 20:11:03 GMT
80kg/s out of a 3m caliber coilgun? I was expecting more. It seems like the dual tanks could be moved a bit further back to reduce cross-section a bit, although i don't know how much that would limit thruster gimbal range. Yeah, that coilgun wasn't great. I'm still learning the editor. And moving those tanks didn't change the cross-section, surprisingly. However, with the new update, I felt like that ship class needed a full redesign. So here's the new edition : The Scorpion-class gunship ! The main coilgun has been redone as well; it reloads a bit slower but is much cheaper, smaller and fires 10kg shells at 21km/s. I loved the huge armour damage of the 40kg shells, but in the end they just passed through the ship. The lighter shells are a lot more effective. Once ships get too close to use the coilgun, the ship turns around to present a thick armour plate and an 11mm railgun. And it's still quite cheap !
|
|