|
Post by gfarrell80 on Aug 17, 2018 23:27:51 GMT
So has anybody started rocking anything with the level editor yet? Any custom campaigns to share? I am flush with ideas for campaigns, but alas have lacked the time necessary to execute. I'm sure somebody is cooking something up though for us to enjoy. Pipe up if you are working on something!
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Jul 27, 2018 17:40:49 GMT
Woa, cool, an update! I am going to have to check this game out again.
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on May 4, 2018 1:38:56 GMT
Cool stuff man! I hope to mess around with your designs a little bit this weekend.
Stupid question: how does one take the text file and put it the proper folder so it shows up as one of your ship designs? I'm new at this.
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 29, 2018 19:11:08 GMT
Good comments AtomHeartDragon.
Can you explain "With pentagonal you pretty much need to stick with rotationally symmetrical rings of multiples of 5 thrusters - preferably in pairs for CW and CCW rolling - you can get good roll performance with that and pentagonal ships look way cool without being too mass and cross-section inefficient" with a screenshot? I'm still not getting very good roll performance.
(side note - it would be nice to be able to control which direction you were commanding your ship to roll in!)
I tried ditching the ventral armor as well to optimize mass; however I was surprised that going to a light armor layer underneath didn't really save very much in terms of cost or mass. Also during crazy maneuvering despite best efforts the ventral areas do get exposed breifly; it is better not to have it tin-can thickness. Although for specialized glass cannon designs I might go with the paper thin ventral armor.
The blast launcher sympathetic detonation problem is avoidable if you (annoyingly) fire just one missile at a time to allow decent clearance between the missiles, or launch shortly before engagement. But yeah, it is a significant problem. I had 20 nuclear strikers warm up my belly once with a blast, and have seen a stack of flak missiles similarly evaporate. So, careful staggered launches or pre-launches before contact are necessary. I do prefer the blast launchers over the powered launchers to avoid having to put another radiator on the ship, and the blast launchers are relatively compact.
And yes, combustion guns on one side for the close final phase of the intercept is an excellent idea. I already started getting into that idea slightly with the side/cheek mounted guns, but I have been toying with the idea of ventral guns as well.
Side note: I've been challenging myself with these stock designs that my design should be able to come out on top in a 1 versus 5 match up versus a standard ship of similar weight class. Gunship, Corvette, Cutter, Gunskiff, no problem. However I've gotten to the Frigate class and the stock Laser Frigate is pretty tough to take on with a similar weight all stock ship 1 v 5. So take it as a challenge: see if you can build an all stock ship that can take out 5 laser frigates.
Parameters:
Stock laser frigate: 7.02 kt 5.88 deltaV
Improved Stock laser frigate: Maximum 8 kt (give you a bit of extra weight to play with) Minimum 5.0 dV At least 1x 100MW Violet laser and 4 mounts Other weapons and equipment at your discretion (stock parts only). Must be able to defeat 5 stock laser frigates.
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 23, 2018 23:33:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 22, 2018 15:47:08 GMT
Yep. That was it. Turn off dodging and you can manually control normally. Dodging is kinda useless.
Also: as a side effect when I was trying to figure this out, deactivating your engines makes a huge difference in your heat signature. Pretty much the worst thing you can do when missiles are incoming is turn your engines on and burn to try to dodge. Deactivate your engines and your heat signature goes way down, you can pop some decoys and the missiles are pretty much completely ineffective.
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 16, 2018 21:39:09 GMT
Have you tried manually putting radially offset engines on your ship in an asymmetrical fashion, so that the thrust vector is off-axis when the engines gimbal to get it through the centre of mass? I think the AI should cope (because it can handle ship with unplanned asymmetrical engine layout due to enemy fire), but don't know whether it will put it at angle or nose-forward straight, but with angled thrust resulting in net sideways acceleration during manoeuvring. Either way could be interesting and potentially useful. I am thinking of childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/post/33735/thread and designing a dedicated nose-forward, sideways dodger with single preferred orientation relative to perpendicular component of relative velocity. The RCS setup is going to be a nightmare, though, and I don't think a corified version will be possible. I am definitely going to mess a little more with my CA design, I like a few features of your Dragon, very cool ship. And yeah, I've also tried setting up something with both rear thrust engines and powerful sidethrust engines, but it is a tricky challenge in the ship editor. Edit- these LOX Methane combustion rockets... what is the proper ratio of Oxygen and Methane propellant tonnage to provide? First time I've messed with them.
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 16, 2018 3:59:37 GMT
I can usually control the nose of my capital ships by using the 'move' command, but it is weird - when a flight of missiles is incoming, for some reason the AI is non responsive and the ship decides to do its own thing, usually roll and turn in the direction opposite to how I want it to move. Anybody else experienced bizarre movement behavior during missile intercepts?
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 16, 2018 3:52:28 GMT
Your vessel is a worthy adversary. imgur.com/a/N1N3TPiloting is everything, it is an easy enough kill for my [Core] CA Heavy Cruiser when the AI is running the dragon, but it also kills my heavy cruiser no problem when I'm piloting your Dragon.
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 15, 2018 14:34:39 GMT
I've updated my stock collection with pictures and descriptions: steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1356489930They're all meant to be piloted, AI won't cut it. Working my way up to the heavier ship classes, going to do some frigates, destroyers, and cruisers. My faves to pilot 1 versus overwhelming odds in the sandbox: PKK Gunskiff PTG Missile Patrol Ship CRG Corvette CA Heavy Cruiser
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 11, 2018 4:36:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 8, 2018 14:19:28 GMT
I modified my heavy cruiser design that I like to use stock only modules. Here's a dumb question: is there a FAQ page anywhere that explains how to use the Steam workshop? I am not familiar with steam. <edit> Bam! steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1356490107I seem to be having trouble figuring out how to upload screenshots though. Hmm... ah well, imgur gallery: imgur.com/a/iw8WI3/4 view: imgur.com/QapggJKBy manually using the 'move' control to swivel the nose, this is the orientation you want to present to the enemy: imgur.com/UNNmzdtThus, mostly shielding your radiators on your belly: imgur.com/VrFgiCaCan wipe out 3 stock corvettes by going in guns blazing at 1 kps closing speed without even using its missile armament. imgur.com/dR2yv01
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 7, 2018 22:01:01 GMT
I like the line of reasoning - Can we allow different size radiators, but same stock materials as the stock radiators? That is the only change to the 'all stock' rule I would seek
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Apr 5, 2018 2:38:58 GMT
I dig this thread. Here are the basic stats on some of the fun 'heavy' guns I've been playing with. They're supposed to be fun marginal improvements over stock:
Conventional Cannon: 60mm, 30 gram, 2.88 km/s velocity, .003 spread, 66.7/s turning, 200ms reload, 1.37 tons, 34.4 kc, 50 kw power. 80mm, 100 gram, 2.83 km/s velocity, .006 spread, 47/s turning, 222ms reload, 5.67 tons, 96.1 kc, 6.74 MW power.
Railgun: 12mm, 50 gram, 8.30 km/s velocity, .002 spread, 30.3/s turning, 360ms reload, 29.5 tons, 1.42 Mc, 22 MW power. 13mm, 100 gram, 8.08 km/s velocity, .002 spread, 20.1/s turning, 555ms reload, 41.5 tons, 2.32 Mc, 40 MW power.
|
|
|
Post by gfarrell80 on Feb 27, 2018 1:32:47 GMT
The ambient temperature of of armor depends on a lot more factors than just distance from the sun. It's whatever temperature the incoming and outgoing energies balance out at. Most of the energy will probably come from the sun, but even that is not that simple. Surface reflectance and interreflection can have an effect on incoming irradiance as well (think parabolic mirrors for an extreme case.) Heat conduction can go both ways: if the armor is heated by the sun, it may conduct heat towards the inner hull, where it will eventually go out through some radiator. Alternatively, if the armor is cold, some energy is bound to find its way to the armor through structural supports. Finally, the armor radiates heat away just like a radiator would, if perhaps a little less efficiently since its materials are not optimized for the purpose. The armor also won't stay at a uniform temperature, but will have heat gradients based on local changes in incoming and outgoing heat. The armor will settle at whatever temperature all these factors balance out. Incoming heat will be roughly constant, whereas energy loss through heat conduction will scale with the local temperature gradient, and heat radiation to the fourth power of temperature. All of this is so complicated to simulate properly that you would have to either limit ship count to just a few ships, or use gross estimation to make the ordeal pretty much pointless in the first place. And either way, armor ambient temperature is quite an insignificant factor, even with lasing damage. If I had to guess, the game just sets the ambient temperature to some low constant and settles at that. Fantastic explanation. Only thing I would add is different materials do have different emmisivity/radiating of heat properties, so your ship clad in aluminum will shed heat better than a ship clad in aerogel. Also I am not sure if armor temperature it is entirely insignificant, based on distance from the sun. Radiator performance would also be impacted I would think if you are near Mercury, Earth, Mars, or Neptune.
|
|