The Terrans

AgentZero · #1 January 6th, 2005, 07:13 PM

Fyron: You're perfectly right, although the smaller Terran ships would be manoeverable enough to keep their armor facing the enemy, and the LC & CR can hide behind said armor while delivering broadsides to the enemy. That said, the Last three in the series will have the armor on the top and bottom, with only a comparatively small gap for weapons to poke out. That way the only really vulnerable bits are the front and rear, but hey, you can't have everything.

AT: Praise from Caesar, I am honoured. Although I would say if someone's going to be flinging depleted uranium and other nasties at me, I want the biggest shield you can give me.

ZeroAdunn: I'm not sure what 'steampunk' is, but I'm gonna take that as a complement. So, thanks!

Suicide Junkie · #2 January 6th, 2005, 07:22 PM

A mere three enemy ships at linearly independent vectors can make the ship vulnerable no matter what orientation it is in.

In any large combat, the plates would be of little use. Just spread out, and pick off the ships you have a clear shot at... if they try to angle towards you, somebody else in your fleet will get a shot.

Phoenix-D · #3 January 6th, 2005, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Suicide Junkie said:
A mere three enemy ships at linearly independent vectors can make the ship vulnerable no matter what orientation it is in.

In any large combat, the plates would be of little use. Just spread out, and pick off the ships you have a clear shot at... if they try to angle towards you, somebody else in your fleet will get a shot.

On the other hand, doing that will also likely put your ships out of mutual support range and make defeat in detail more likely.

Consider a cruiser firing missles at your fleet. Would you rather have those ships close enough to ALL engage the incoming missiles with PDC, or spread apart so only the targeted ship could hit it?

Suicide Junkie · #4 January 6th, 2005, 11:53 PM

With realistic combat being fought at reasonable distances, sure.
I was thinking more along the lines of the overlapping formations and dogfighting I see in SE4 combat...

BTW, in the example there, I'd rather have at least that one ship be able to return fire effectively, rather than none of them.

AgentZero · #5 January 7th, 2005, 09:14 PM

Don't worry Aiken. In art, as in life, I refuse to succumb to the demands of reality. And as a matter of fact, the original design I had for these ships actually had the armor plates wrap all the way around the ship so only the front and rear would be exposed, but it ended up looking, well, alien. And when you're making a shipset for humans, if it looks alien, you've failed in your design concept.

AgentZero · #6 January 7th, 2005, 10:17 PM

I decided I didn't quite like the look of the Cruiser, so here's an updated Version. Improvement, yes or no?

NarfsCompIsBack · #7 January 7th, 2005, 10:39 PM

I like the new look better.

Kamog · #8 January 7th, 2005, 11:22 PM

The new one is definitely better.

Suicide Junkie · #9 January 7th, 2005, 11:24 PM

What's with the two shield plates facing each other in the center of the ship?

Aiken · #10 January 8th, 2005, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Suicide Junkie said:
What's with the two shield plates facing each other in the center of the ship?

Well, if the first engine will be destroyed in battle, inner armor could protect second engine of explosion consequences.

note on ship: it's a nice one, but due to mirror effect the hull itself seems translucent in some places.