|
Post by doctorsquared on Oct 16, 2018 2:01:13 GMT
The Corvette makes me wonder if you were intended to broadside and rotate the ship (there's Sniper Coilguns and Autofire Railguns on each 'side') so that you can keep putting undamaged armor in front of the enemy?
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Oct 20, 2018 19:55:38 GMT
Couldn't you charge the cap partially as well? I can't say I actually know. I think they work by building up enough charge to travel the gap between the dielectrics, and go off the moment that happens, so would be throttleable in rate of discharges but not magnitude... unless you could make one that changes in height?
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Nov 30, 2018 1:45:57 GMT
Personally I think the hivership is actually an in universe boondoggle.
I mean, it has a fancy armor composition that looks good on paper and isn't shared by anything else.
It has railgun drone which looks impressive but they honestly suck at long range attack because of the lack of turret which is exactly what they are built for.
And the nuke cannon while impressive was generally useless in ship to ship combat.
I think the hiveship was actually made for intimidation and demoralisation and well, weapons made for exactly that purpose then to suck.
I think the Siloship made later on is the successor of the hiveship as it fully focused on using missile to deliver nuke more effectively to enemy ships and stationary installations.
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Nov 30, 2018 7:39:40 GMT
Personally I think the hivership is actually an in universe boondoggle. I mean, it has a fancy armor composition that looks good on paper and isn't shared by anything else. It has railgun drone which looks impressive but they honestly suck at long range attack because of the lack of turret which is exactly what they are built for. And the nuke cannon while impressive was generally useless in ship to ship combat. I think the hiveship was actually made for intimidation and demoralisation and well, weapons made for exactly that purpose then to suck. I think the Siloship made later on is the successor of the hiveship as it fully focused on using missile to deliver nuke more effectively to enemy ships and stationary installations. And the sillyship is also a boondoggle. Devastators suck horribly and not only do they have no delta-v to speak of, but they are incredibly hazardous to the launching ship - exploding launcher is pretty much guaranteed to destroy any similarly sized ship and even if you manage to minimize the risk of launcher being hit, the missile itself packs enough touchy monoprop to send the ship into deathspin if it bumps into the hull - even if it doesn't penetrate the armour or burst the tankage. Their ultra-thick armour also doesn't contribute that much to their survivability, only to their pitiful delta-v, and they are large enough that its poor anti-kinetic performance matters. To top it all, you can make far superior missiles even from stock components and sharing the warhead (around 4km/s delta-v, similar mass/price range, single missile usually capable of reaching a gunship from standstill - to the point where launching too many can be a problem as they may collide and fizzle just before reaching the target). They will be noticeably larger, but still suitable for straight replacement on Siloship. Also, why does it have so many Autofires when at most it can fire one? As for the Hiveship, the main problem with nuke cannon is that it's huge, weakly armoured and easily snipeable - put it on small, extruded, thickly armoured turret, preferably with detached shared magazine and you have already tackled many of the Hiveship's problems (also allowing nose forward nuke spam), but even just giving it convex armour reinforces the structure enough to let it survive ammo explosions. The Lancer's main problem is that stock 200kW RG is just so inaccurate (even though it's more accurate than most stock RGs) and it fires slowly - has anyone tried to give it stock 200 kW CG (or 5 for redundancy), everything else being the same, and see how it performs? It's all around inferior to stock 200kW RG except for being quite accurate.
Couldn't you charge the cap partially as well? I can't say I actually know. I think they work by building up enough charge to travel the gap between the dielectrics, and go off the moment that happens AFAIK this is only how you ruin your dielectric (at least if it's a solid one).
|
|
|
Post by gedzilla on Jul 16, 2019 18:15:40 GMT
New entry guys
|
|
|
Post by AtomHeartDragon on Jul 16, 2019 19:37:22 GMT
New entry guys IMO Cutter seems like a pretty no-brainer PD escort ship. It's pretty much the only thing it does and it can actually do it quite well for a stock design. It's main drawbacks (aside from poor manoeuvrability, weak kinetic armour and usual - read: immediately lethal to the crew if destroyed - location of decoy launcher) are single propellant tank (making it easy to mobility kill and prone to being spun and flung on unpredictable trajectory out of battle) and no roll capability (making it unable to easily reorient if it loses all the turrets on one side*). Edit:
*)
Of course, chances are that if it comes to that it will already be reorienting randomly due to burst propellant tank.
|
|
|
Post by gedzilla on Jul 17, 2019 8:07:04 GMT
New entry guys IMO Cutter seems like a pretty no-brainer PD escort ship. It's pretty much the only thing it does and it can actually do it quite well for a stock design. It's main drawbacks (aside from poor manoeuvrability, weak kinetic armour and usual - read: immediately lethal to the crew if destroyed - location of decoy launcher) are single propellant tank (making it easy to mobility kill and prone to being spun and flung on unpredictable trajectory out of battle) and no roll capability (making it unable to easily reorient if it loses all the turrets on one side*). Edit:
*)
Of course, chances are that if it comes to that it will already be reorienting randomly due to burst propellant tank. Do you think i was fair to it in my quick analysis ?
|
|
|
Post by gedzilla on Mar 12, 2024 14:12:12 GMT
Is this forum dead ?
|
|
|
Post by sage on Apr 3, 2024 17:00:17 GMT
I have been asking myself this same question for some time now. I seem to be the only one that still post, form time to time.
|
|
|
Post by peasant on Apr 9, 2024 15:54:58 GMT
I have been asking myself this same question for some time now. I seem to be the only one that still post, form time to time. I'm still reading old threads here, from time to time.
|
|