Follow the public design rules. That's it. Anything goes!
You have no defined aesthetic requirements at this stage. I suggest you confer amongst yourselves and decide on one if more than one of you will be designing ships.
Don't forget you need to include red markings on your ships!
Ed: Please remember to include blueprints and working with your downloads so we can doublecheck things more easily.
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:20 am
by vidboi
SMscreen09.png (1.6 KiB) Viewed 11445 times
SMscreen08.png (5.84 KiB) Viewed 11445 times
couple of realistic horsemonsteresque meta build ships i've been working on. first would be a light frigate/reconnaisance ship, the second a heavier destroyer/cruiser. neither is finished (markings... =/ ) , especially the second, where i plan to rebuild the nose as i'm not too happy with it (and it needs to be a bit larger, it has about 400 mass worth's of armour only ^^;)
not sure what you guys think, whether we should go for something like this or something different
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:25 am
by Cynsye
Never mind, Arca broke it.
Spoiler!
Its tiny but its cheap and damn fast. FEAR IT!
Now to find where the hell I put the design notes to actually tell you what the power core and engines are on the thing.
Could we perhaps have each commander design his own ships and comprise his fleet out of a majority of those? If it gets too complicated, we could always limit the faction to two or three shipbuilders max and rely on those for the entire fleet. Your thoughts, guys?
From a design standpoint, I want to stop nothing short of victory. The ships I'll build will m/p be incredibly spindly to minimize their frontal profile. They'll be supported by practically unarmed COCKBLOCK shield ships that sidle up to the enemy and serve only to take damage (and spew debris).
Askold-class
Scorpion-class
Keter-class
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:38 am
by Da_Dooley
When you say "public design rules", I assume you refer to the metagame building rules v3.14?
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:40 am
by Arcalane
Da_Dooley wrote:When you say "public design rules", I assume you refer to the metagame building rules v3.14?
Correct.
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:20 am
by Rugdumph
Got a free day tuesday so I'll try and pump out something then, but I'm really liking what you guys have done so far.
@STARSTRUCK: I like that idea, will definitely give the sense of a coalition without (hopefully) being too complicated.
Ed: Oh and bravo to whoever made the custom rank bars!
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:40 am
by vidboi
well, i've finished my first fully compliant ship for the CC. i've decided on using greek god/city state names, so of course, THIS IS SPARTA!
SMscreen010.png (2.65 KiB) Viewed 11400 times
DD Sparta-Class
it's a size 80, longish range ship that packs a pretty hefty punch in combat
Specs:
Size - 75
Used Mass - 4705/5625
Used Power - 370/850
Core - Light
Engines - Light (1)
Armament - Heavy Autocannon (2), Autocannon (1)
Armor Total - 2050
I heard artillery was good. So I stuck artillery on it. Big sections in front to soak artillery splash, hopefully. Might need to shift some speed/accel over to turning if its having a hard time keeping its front pointed at stuff.
Please don't flank me.
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 2:10 pm
by STARSTRUCK
Battle-ready Scorpions and Askolds all up in this bitch.
Armament
6x Heavy Autocannon
1x Artillery
2x Drone Bay
EDIT: New, overhauled versions of the ships have been uploaded. This should improve their survivability from all directions... somewhat >_>
EDIT2: SCREENSHOTS 404'D DUE TO ME BEING A RAGING FAGGOT ON IRC
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:27 pm
by Cynsye
Another pretty fast ship, the Aucrett.
-Armament not final... thinking HAC's would probably be more effective.-
Ditched the vulcans, slapped myself for failing at math and put a smaller engine on it. Overall works quite well. Those 2 CIWS modules do a damn good job clearing up artillery fire. Possibility for a small dedicated CIWS platform? *experiments*
EDIT: There may be some odd parenting in them somewhere... ill have to inspect.
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 2:15 am
by vidboi
okay, plenty of variants of the sparta and the corinth for you to play around with and see what works best as a fleet
key to suffixes:
As - Assault: designed for taking on capital ships
GI - Gunboat Interceptor: designed for attacking small fast vessel such as frigates and corvettes that could pose a risk to other vessels in the fleet
FS - Fire Support: armed with long rnaged weaponry to soften up enemy vessels
Re: Crimson Coalition Blueprint Databank
Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 3:21 am
by Droid
Trying something more rule-abusive...tournament style.
Spoiler!
Size: 100
Used Mass: 10000/10000
Energy Consumption: 850/850
Core - Light
Engines - Standard(1)
Armament - Autocannon(20)
Armor Total - 4555
Speed - 1.406
Acceleration - 0.0335
Turning - 0.5215
But ma, so little HP!
Worry not, the ship's only important sections have 2270 HP apiece. The rest consist of 1-HP "sections" to make it have the correct size (and so it actually looks like a ship and not a pair of sections on a core, but 99% of the time that's what it'll actually be.)
Donno how good it actually is, or if its even legal haha.
158 effective DPS.
I wish I had deflectors, then this thing would be invul (it'll lose all its 1-hp sections and perma-deflector its two remaining ones \o/)