Not a member yet? Why not Sign up today
Create an account  

  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
Please criticize my first airship

#1
I made an airship that seems functional but could probably still use a lot of work. The main problems that it has currently include:

No durability whatsoever.
The engine I use is WAY too powerful.
There are some ACBs that I don't know for sure are necessary.
I have extra space in the back. I put some missiles there but they don't do much.
It looks ugly. Not the most pressing issue but it's there.
Finally and possibly most importantly, I have no idea how to make an airship hull so I took a ship hull from a hull dump I found here a while ago and made it float. I don't know if there's a solution to this outside of remaking it.

I actually plan on keeping cram cannons this time, my intended specialization when I made this was supporting against battleships and I don't know if I have the space to make an APS system that can outshine the current cram cannons I have at that job. While they don't always hit, when they do, it tears hulls open like paper. I doubt that this can solo any battleships that are actually threatening, but it could probably help some. It also has 10 simple lasers as anti-air.

Please help me fix the problems I highlighted and any others you can find.

Edit: I somehow just realized that I forgot to put the blueprint here. Either way, there's an updated version in this thread.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
All the good ideas have already been thought of, so I'll think of bad ideas with hopes that one of them works out well.
Reply

#2
Can't say much about it, because I am at work.

But to adress some of your Problems:

1) This looks kinda big, the main thing to go big and cut down on energy cost is using dediblades. If you set them to always up (at least those supposed to lift your craft) it probably won't drop out of the sky even after losing the majority of it's structure.

However, you need internal space for that. check the Erie or the heavy air ships of the Grey Talons (Warlord is mah favorite Big Grin) for inspiration. I recommend thrusters only for stabilizing on big craft, not as a main lift source.

2) Motor-Drive 10 dediblades need some good power, calculate in shielding and LAMS for defence, also helps with Point 1).

3) Can't look at that right now, sorry. Smile

4) Space will be eaten, LAMS Needs some, dediblades (if you choose to use them) need quite a bit. Moar guns? Big Grin

5) Superstructure is missing, Haliburd makes some nifty air ship stuff, check it out. Tip: Air ships can have dorsal and ventral superstructure, they don't need a real displacement body that is hydrodynamic.
(2018-03-12, 05:51 AM)Chunkblaster Wrote: @Lord O' Talons What Anime is that?

(2018-03-12, 01:22 PM)Lord O Talons Wrote: BM effects and docking stations.

---lolwhat Big Grin
Reply

#3
(2018-06-04, 12:32 PM)Tyr3n Wrote: Can't say much about it, because I am at work.

But to adress some of your Problems:

1) This looks kinda big, the main thing to go big and cut down on energy cost is using dediblades. If you set them to always up (at least those supposed to lift your craft) it probably won't drop out of the sky even after losing the majority of it's structure.

However, you need internal space for that. check the Erie or the heavy air ships of the Grey Talons (Warlord is mah favorite Big Grin) for inspiration. I recommend thrusters only for stabilizing on big craft, not as a main lift source.

2) Motor-Drive 10 dediblades need some good power, calculate in shielding and LAMS for defence, also helps with Point 1).

3) Can't look at that right now, sorry. Smile

4) Space will be eaten, LAMS Needs some, dediblades (if you choose to use them) need quite a bit. Moar guns? Big Grin

5) Superstructure is missing, Haliburd makes some nifty air ship stuff, check it out. Tip: Air ships can have dorsal and ventral superstructure, they don't need a real displacement body that is hydrodynamic.
Thanks for the suggestions, I'll check out those ships and try switching to dediblades. I'll also try shielding it and I'll probably try replacing the missiles with room for dediblades.
All the good ideas have already been thought of, so I'll think of bad ideas with hopes that one of them works out well.
Reply

#4
be careful with the top-mounted guns. if you dont set restriction angles or the LWC addon thingies right, it might shoot itself when trying to engage a boat thats very close.
on that topic, you could add bottom-mounted guns to better engage close targets, or downfacing torpedo racks to engage submarines
Once in a while I decide to do something stupid and try to perfect it. That is how some of my strongest designs were created.
Reply

#5
(2018-06-05, 12:13 AM)CubeMaster_1 Wrote: be careful with the top-mounted guns. if you dont set restriction angles or the LWC addon thingies right, it might shoot itself when trying to engage a boat thats very close.
on that topic, you could add bottom-mounted guns to better engage close targets, or downfacing torpedo racks to engage submarines
Yeah, I have had the turrets shoot themselves on the occasion. I made the barrels longer to try helping but it's still not perfect. For the bottom gun, would it be okay if I put the entire thing on the bottom? There's not too much room left inside the ship.
All the good ideas have already been thought of, so I'll think of bad ideas with hopes that one of them works out well.
Reply

#6
A bottom gun will likely take more fire than the top-mounted guns, so swapping the space used (make one top turret self-contained, and the bottom one use the now open space) might be a bit better option. For a bottom gun, a more anti-ship weapon would make sense, since top-mounted guns can fire at aircraft better. Perhaps swap one of the CRAMs on top out for an APS minigun and then put that CRAM on bottom?
(2017-04-20, 06:54 PM)Hikari Wrote: I made something that has an impact of a type 1a supernova. The projectile already breaks laws of physics by going way past the speed of light.

2000mm HE Dakka Enthusiast
Reply

#7
(2018-06-05, 01:11 AM)MizarLuke Wrote: A bottom gun will likely take more fire than the top-mounted guns, so swapping the space used (make one top turret self-contained, and the bottom one use the now open space) might be a bit better option. For a bottom gun, a more anti-ship weapon would make sense, since top-mounted guns can fire at aircraft better. Perhaps swap one of the CRAMs on top out for an APS minigun and then put that CRAM on bottom?
I'll probably do that at some point, although currently I'm pretty bad at making miniguns.
All the good ideas have already been thought of, so I'll think of bad ideas with hopes that one of them works out well.
Reply

#8
I have updated the airship and addressed some of the problems.

I added a heavy armor control room because I dislike dying.
I added some dediblades.
I added some cram cannons with bomb barrels on the bottom.
I shielded the sides and bottom.
I removed the missiles.
I added torpedoes to try fighting subs with and put a sonar buoy on one of them so that my main cannons can contribute some.
I added flares.

Obviously, there's still plenty of problems.

It's incredibly vulnerable to missiles.
It still has a hard time fighting subs.
It's still pretty ugly.
It takes a while to get balanced and it will sometimes randomly get thrown off balance.
It have no chance against fast vehicles farther than 500 meters away.
Things that fly higher than it can shoot without being blocked by shields.

Anyway, here's the new blueprint.


Attached Files
.blueprint   Dediblade Cram Airship Proto .blueprint (Size: 257.5 KB / Downloads: 10)
All the good ideas have already been thought of, so I'll think of bad ideas with hopes that one of them works out well.
Reply

#9
A far projected shield in the middle on 2-way turret is always turns toward the enemy.

A simple laser on a 2way turret with both a ciws controller (max distance 700m) and a weapon controller (max distance 500m) will pick down missiles (if you have passive sonar/radar/munition detectors) and when no enemy missiles/torps are around, they pick on near targets.
Subobject it and sprinkle your unit.

For balance it's the best if it is more-or-less balanced without a PID system, and only then pit on the PID balancers.
Check upon the pid interface, and the force showing in build mode (key is printed at the bottom left, for me it's "Í").
From the Depths english playlist starts here, before that it's hungarian:
https://youtu.be/Ltdx0yVI9cA?list=PLImar...ZokVtdBa73
MULTIPLAYER!

[Image: 6yFiDvF.jpg]
Reply

#10
Alrighty, took a look at the new version and here are my thoughts.

-For the general look of it, the turrets and cram bomb attachment are super boxy.
-Additionally, for the cram cannons I personally think they are a bit too closely mounted to the center which leaves a substantially less amount of area to work with.
- Personally I'd turn the cram cannons into single or double mounts but add more turrets to keep the amount of cannons the same. Doing this would take up less room width wise in terms of both the magazine and turret. This would make moving the turrets further apart more seamless without the turret top hanging bits off the side of the hull. By taking up less room inside the hull itself you can up armor the area around it or just add more stuff in.
+I think a classical 3x2 turret arrangement would be fine where the 2nd turret super fires over the 1st and the 3rd is positioned rearward of the superstructure/center of mass.
-I'd shift the majority of the internal dediblades to the middle to increase stability during later stages of damage. This would also allow you to move your weapon systems further to the bow and stern.
-Also I think dediblades do better in terms of roll and pitch control. Adding a little winglet with a dediblade prop inside of it, or an external prop array (Like on a lot of GT fliers or the Atlas) on both sides controlled by ACBs (the roll control options) would probably fair better for active stabilization than roll thrusters. Also could add a bit of aesthetic flare to the outside. As for pitch, keeping two internal dediblades at the far ends of the bow and stern can help with that.
- With the space available now in the middle of the ship I'd put a super structure there for the style points. I would also cut the 2 simple lasor mounts into smaller mounts and line the super structure with them as if they were WW2 AA guns.
- A neat idea for the bottom cram bombs would be to stylize the mountings as if it were a ventral super structure. However do to the nature of the vessel, (I presume it's an Orbiter and not a bombing run vessel) I would actually just remove them and maybe just use some external turreted missile racks or a cheap and small APS gun turret.

The hull itself is fine, especially if you're going for the flying warship shtick that I'm so fond of. Changing from stablization thrusters to dediblades is an easy aesthetic fix and is probably more effective as well in regards to stablization, survivability and power usage. Complementing it with some small dediblades on winglets could help if you want a less jittery cruiser. As for making it more effective, that's not my thing sadly. I just throw guns onto something till I can't see the target anymore.
^ *Has a serious problem when it comes to building.... Can never bother to change out of the wood building blocks*
Also loves making things fly..... Even if they really shouldn`t.
Makes the dirtiest, grimiest, Cringeworthy ship related puns ever.
[Image: aq47WXu.png]
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)