FC Forums

WIP and unnamed. Thoughts / comments / criticism? Also, i'm back (for the time being, at least).

Which thruster design looks better? just a rectangle or slightly rounded?

It's... boxy. Really, really, really... boxy. I recommend immediate application of smoothing.

Also, all your guns so far seem to be on the top, with none on the sides or bottom. In space, the enemy can approach from any direction. I also can not discern what that massive heap of brown and yellow is.

Vinczhechov wrote:It's... boxy. Really, really, really... boxy. I recommend immediate application of smoothing.

Also, all your guns so far seem to be on the top, with none on the sides or bottom. In space, the enemy can approach from any direction.

I am working on making it less boxy / uniform. Guns for front / side / back / bottom are coming later.

I also can not discern what that massive heap of brown and yellow is.

I'm trying to build a "runway" (so smaller ships can land on it for repair / refuel / break from the fight). Judging by images from google it needs a lot of work (i might just scratch it and build some platforms instead)
It's yellow and brown because vanilla minecraft has no plain black blocks
I'm trying to rebuild it in gray and white right now, but as it turns out it's too short to fully replicate a normal runway, so we'll see how it ends up.

Why do you need a runway in space?

Vinczhechov wrote:Why do you need a runway in space?

I don't know, I just build one
...its too short anyway, so I replaced it with landing zones. I hope these look better.

But any ships would be sitting ducks up there! Even with shields, they're still massive targets.

Vinczhechov wrote:But any ships would be sitting ducks up there! Even with shields, they're still massive targets.

The ship isn't supposed to engage directly in battle (more like a mobile supply / repair bay), so
a) the large hostile ships are too far away,
b) the small, fast enemy fighters that come close enough get teared up by the flak mounted on it (it currently has 9 quad-cannons on each side, and I'm going to mount more) and
c) this isn't supposed to be a standalone-destroys-everything-in-its-path ship; it will (like todays aircraft carriers) have a group of other ships accompagning it to deal with anything else.

craftqq wrote:a) the large hostile ships are too far away,
b) the small, fast enemy fighters that come close enough get teared up by the flak mounted on it (it currently has 9 quad-cannons on each side, and I'm going to mount more) and
c) this isn't supposed to be a standalone-destroys-everything-in-its-path ship; it will (like todays aircraft carriers) have a group of other ships accompagning it to deal with anything else.

A) There isn't really such a thing as "too far away" in a space battle, especially if you're close enough to provide support.
B) Isn't that why you (should) have flak ships?
C) Of course it isn't. No (sanely designed) ship is. *Cough* Novus *Cough*. Supercaps, which would seem to be designed to take on whole battlegroups, requires a support fleet to not get shredded by bombers, missiles, KKWs, and really anything else that massive turrets/fixed canons can't hit easily.

I could engage in a long extended rant over why the ship design is bad, but Vinyl already did that, so instead I'm giving you some constructive criticism on how to make it somewhat better without shredding the whole design:

1) mount some turrets on the bottom, you don't want to leave yourself vulnerable there, space is three-dimensional after all.

2) maybe replace a few of those quad flaks with high-precision CIWS, to get rid of long-range missiles and torpedoes

3) do install /some/ weapons capable of taking out foes of similar size, even the best battle plan can go wrong, and if you want to do more than one engagement with this thing, I wouldn't bet on Murphey's Law being absolute bullshit.

4) for the same reason I advise moving the landing pads inside, maybe make the main hull bulkier and add additional engines if that's neccessary.

5) put some kind of protection around those engines. The Nacelles look too much like an obvious weak point for me to not try and get a torpedo frigate right behind you.

Vinczhechov wrote:A) There isn't really such a thing as "too far away" in a space battle, especially if you're close enough to provide support.
B) Isn't that why you (should) have flak ships?
C) Of course it isn't. No (sanely designed) ship is. *Cough* Novus *Cough*. Supercaps, which would seem to be designed to take on whole battlegroups, requires a support fleet to not get shredded by bombers, missiles, KKWs, and really anything else that massive turrets/fixed canons can't hit easily.

It is a flak ship / fighter support ship, so it shouldn't go against the bigger ones (what I meant with too far away), but I guess should isn't whats going to happen. (being sleepy makes me get some dumb ideas {which, unfortunately, stick around until I'm not sleepy anymore})

Ivan2006 wrote:1) mount some turrets on the bottom, you don't want to leave yourself vulnerable there, space is three-dimensional after all.
Like I said, I'm going to mount more turrets later
2) maybe replace a few of those quad flaks with high-precision CIWS, to get rid of long-range missiles and torpedoes
At least 8 (4 front&back/top&bottom) are planned.
3) do install /some/ weapons capable of taking out foes of similar size, even the best battle plan can go wrong, and if you want to do more than one engagement with this thing, I wouldn't bet on Murphey's Law being absolute bullshit.
Will do. Good advise is one reason why I post my stuff on here
4) for the same reason I advise moving the landing pads inside, maybe make the main hull bulkier and add additional engines if that's neccessary.
There isn't much space inside, but I'll see what I can do (and I'm going to move the power for the turrets inside - who's bright Idea was it to have it exposed on top?
5) put some kind of protection around those engines. The Nacelles look too much like an obvious weak point for me to not try and get a torpedo frigate right behind you.
Engine armor (and shape) was/is a question I was going to ask. will look into possible armor solutions (might have to move the engines some)

Working on moving the landing pads.
the turrets are going to be replaced (1 degree of freedom / under 90° turn radius is...insufficient, to say the least)

Edit:
Done: Next up: armoring / extending the underside and patching the hole on top

Doing better. Perhaps bulk out either side and then divide the landing pads (not literally halve them, 4/2=2 not 1/2=0.5) between the two sides, using the new segments to better house them.

Vinczhechov wrote:Doing better. Perhaps bulk out either side and then divide the landing pads (not literally halve them, 4/2=2 not 1/2=0.5) between the two sides, using the new segments to better house them.

That's a better idea than what I was planning on doing. (and just in time, I'm going to work on it now) Thanks

Edit: Now to work on those turrets...

Edit2: Hangar doors:
-make smaller holes in the hull
-free up useable space on top
-can be easily closed
AND look more realistic than a big hole in the top of the ship. TO DO List:
-make better turrets
-mount large front guns
-make ship look less blocky
-mount turrets everywhere (up/down/left/right/front/back)
-add antimissile defenses
-add more engines
-????
-finish ship

The overall design is a little too boxy (already been addressed). But the concept is pretty solid/cool. I think you have too many turrets, and if you're going to make an interior for the ship, then you should give them gunwells so that they don't look like they were just bolted to the top of the ship. But it looks like it's coming along nicely!