|
|
Post by coaxjack on Apr 24, 2017 23:56:56 GMT
Look at how cheap it is. Let's start a forum GoFundMe and pick one up
|
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on Apr 25, 2017 0:31:51 GMT
Christ that probably is the export version of BMP-1M.
|
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Apr 25, 2017 2:50:43 GMT
I have drone that costs more than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 25, 2017 2:55:31 GMT
I have drone that costs more than that. "I have a drone" or "I have drones" not "I have drone", sorry to be the grammar nazi |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Apr 26, 2017 5:08:07 GMT
Is it the export version of gunskiff? :P I tried it against those and it tends to lose. Groups of neither can destroy each other on the first pass, but Gunskiffs have turrets so they finish off the Chinaships while passing. |
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Apr 26, 2017 5:22:10 GMT
Is it the export version of gunskiff?  I tried it against those and it tends to lose. Groups of neither can destroy each other on the first pass, but Gunskiffs have turrets so they finish off the Chinaships while passing. 8.33 Mc worth of export ships vs one gunskiff? That's a bit disappointing. Maybe it works better with really cheap missiles or drones...? Also, clearly the crew module should be updated to a potassium structure with shell thickness of exactly 2.34 cm, because we want to save up a few more thousand credits on the thing that keeps people alive. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Apr 26, 2017 6:12:55 GMT
I tried it against those and it tends to lose. Groups of neither can destroy each other on the first pass, but Gunskiffs have turrets so they finish off the Chinaships while passing. 8.33 Mc worth of export ships vs one gunskiff? That's a bit disappointing. Maybe it works better with really cheap missiles or drones...? Also, clearly the crew module should be updated to a potassium structure with shell thickness of exactly 2.34 cm, because we want to save up a few more thousand credits on the thing that keeps people alive. Oh, no, I just did 6v6. In terms of costeffectiveness the exports are even better than all the stock drones except Stingers, let alone a Gunskiff. Hah. I did check potassium and thought "nah... I don't want someone spilling their drink against the wall and burning a hole in it". At least with magnesium you have a minute instead of a second to put it out. If we could go thinner than 1cm for crew compartments I think magnesium's strength might make it cheaper anyway. It can also be made a bit cheaper using LOX methane, since methane is cheaper than silane and the reaction uses more oxygen which is even cheaper, while expanding the silicon foil shell around the ship doesn't really increase mass. |
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Apr 26, 2017 6:47:50 GMT
8.33 Mc worth of export ships vs one gunskiff? That's a bit disappointing. Maybe it works better with really cheap missiles or drones...? Also, clearly the crew module should be updated to a potassium structure with shell thickness of exactly 2.34 cm, because we want to save up a few more thousand credits on the thing that keeps people alive. Oh, no, I just did 6v6. In terms of costeffectiveness the exports are even better than all the stock drones except Stingers, let alone a Gunskiff. Hah. I did check potassium and thought "nah... I don't want someone spilling their drink against the wall and burning a hole in it". At least with magnesium you have a minute instead of a second to put it out. If we could go thinner than 1cm for crew compartments I think magnesium's strength might make it cheaper anyway. It can also be made a bit cheaper using LOX methane, since methane is cheaper than silane and the reaction uses more oxygen which is even cheaper, while expanding the silicon foil shell around the ship doens't really increase mass. That depends on whether or not silox running at a mix ratio of 1.5 is better than methalox at 1.0, because IIRC silox 1.5 uses the same amount of LOX relative to methalox, and if it has better performance you might be able to reduce the amounts of both oxygen and the more expensive silane to the point where it's cheaper than methalox. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Apr 26, 2017 7:05:33 GMT
That depends on whether or not silox running at a mix ratio of 1.5 is better than methalox at 1.0, because IIRC silox 1.5 uses the same amount of LOX relative to methalox, and if it has better performance you might be able to reduce the amounts of both oxygen and the more expensive silane to the point where it's cheaper than methalox. I said originally that, but I edited the post after realising it was wrong, sorry. Silox @ 1.5 ratio actually uses 75% of the oxygen of methalox. At 2.0 ratio matches oxygen consumption but performs definitively worse, and you'd need to go beyond I'm guessing 2.6 to start getting silox cheaper since it costs about 30% more, so I don't think it's possible to make silox cheaper while performing even as good as N2O RP-1. |
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Apr 28, 2017 1:43:58 GMT
In what is sure to be further optimized once people have given it more thought: you can make really small and cheap nukes now, if you edit Limits.txt. Behold, a nuke for 2.26 credits:  |
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Apr 28, 2017 2:55:31 GMT
Internal mount has turned the stock Stinger drone from one shot wonder to near indestructible demonic spider.
So yeah, I guess turretless gun just got a good fucking buff.
That meant for guns, we have two options.
Flexible turret mounted guns that can shoot while dodge and weave, and internal mount guns that can be armored properly and eat bullets for breakfast.
|
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 28, 2017 3:38:44 GMT
In what is sure to be further optimized once people have given it more thought: you can make really small and cheap nukes now, if you edit Limits.txt. Behold, a nuke for 2.26 credits: I read that as 12.3Mt then was really disappointed when I relized it was only 12 tons |
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Apr 28, 2017 4:38:56 GMT
In what is sure to be further optimized once people have given it more thought: you can make really small and cheap nukes now, if you edit Limits.txt. Behold, a nuke for 2.26 credits: I read that as 12.3Mt then was really disappointed when I relized it was only 12 tons The yield / cost ratio is similar to the common 95t micro nukes (though a bit more expensive). You can also change the limits on the other way and create nukes with yield on the range of Gt, but it looks like it becomes more difficult to convince your nuke to not go critical so the cost isn't as favorable. |
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Apr 28, 2017 4:40:33 GMT
Also playing with Limits.txt, I made an actual sandblaster. Really fine sand. 
Note that this requires changing the limits on bore radius and mass.
RailgunModule 150 MW 1mm Internal Railgun
UsesCustomName false
PowerConsumption_W 1.5e+008
Rails
Composition Aluminum Copper Lithium
Thickness_m 0.066
Length_m 8.6
BarrelArmor
Composition Boron
Thickness_m 0.17
Armature
Composition Osmium
BoreRadius_m 0.00034
Mass_kg 1.3e-005
Tracer Gadolinium
Payload null
Loader
PowerConsumption_W 1e+008
ExternalMount false
InternalMount true
TargetsShips true
TargetsShots false
|
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Apr 28, 2017 4:45:41 GMT
Also playing with Limits.txt, I made an actual sandblaster. Really fine sand.
Note that this requires changing the limits on bore radius and mass.
RailgunModule 150 MW 1mm Internal Railgun
UsesCustomName false
PowerConsumption_W 1.5e+008
Rails
Composition Aluminum Copper Lithium
Thickness_m 0.066
Length_m 8.6
BarrelArmor
Composition Boron
Thickness_m 0.17
Armature
Composition Osmium
BoreRadius_m 0.00034
Mass_kg 1.3e-005
Tracer Gadolinium
Payload null
Loader
PowerConsumption_W 1e+008
ExternalMount false
InternalMount true
TargetsShips true
TargetsShots false
Is that a lightsaber? Looks great! lol Bonus: Hydrogen/Boron-11 fusion makes great torch drives brighter than the sun.  |
|
