Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

"March to Battle!", March Battleship Contest.

Discussion in 'General' started by Skeloton, Feb 25, 2014.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    i want to ask something.

    can we reattach things? like the whole ship?..


    i want to add 1 block wide in the middle from nose to tail.. is there a way to do this?
     
  2. plaYer2k Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,160
    You mean like cut the walls on both sides and paste them 1 block farther away from the middle? Nope sadly no.
    It would be very cool to have a feature that would allow you to copy/cut an entry and then simply paste it onto a solid structure like a lego set. But that doesnt work .. (yet?)
     
  3. Skeloton Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,069
    If you use the SEtoolbox/importer you can convert a ship to a station then cut it up then cut and paste the pieces further apart then fill the gaps then convert it back into a ship.
     
  4. plaYer2k Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,160
    Oh right, good point!
    But i dont know how it works with docked entries (landing gear), rotors and a rotated ship as stations are always fixed in space along the universes X/Y/Z-axis
     
  5. radam Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,207
    Well you better duplicate your save anyway, and try se toolbox mirror function.

    Also a general suggestion for anyone having problems with fps. Convert or build the ship as a station. Convert back when you want to take screenshots. or even just take screens of a station. Saying that power is off...


    As i think the physics is having problems.
     
  6. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    mirror function works for this one.

    solved it that way.

    thanks all
     
  7. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    i am coming in hot!! :D - work in progress

    after the cancellation of my steampunk battleship project i rebuilt one of my old ships as battleship.

    Pendragon Class Battleship - Draconia

    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=236799860

    After the fall of Draconian Empire (SD 10785.28.05) what is left from its colossal armada spread along the galaxy. While being hunted down by Navy of The Empire Of Myr and countless bounty hunters, Captain Uther and his fleet (what is left of it) managed to pass the borders of the Empire. Many others ended up in Myrrian torture chambers...

    Tired of 35 cycles of service, Cpt. Uther was determined to retire to a remote system and keeping a low profile. So he did.

    Now another 25 years have passed. Peaceful settlers of Gardenia slowly tries to forget their violent past and enjoy the sounds of their newborn children instead of gunfire, screams and blood.

    But things are about to change for them.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Stonewolf Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    776
    Landing gear works same way on stations and ships. I have rotated stuff in place and turned it into a station before, just to start a station oriented the way I want. So both, should not be a problem.

    Well my entry is there. not happy about it. But I give up. Don't have enough time to give it the normal inside detailing I like to do. Gravity torpedo loading system is still little buggy. Sometimes the torpedoes just go off on their own. BOOM!!!! :eek Not smart to to travel with explosives. On my larger torpedoes this was never a problem, but then again the loading system in 'Battleship Grimson' is new. It would required more tweaking to be perfect. But since the torpedoes are just ammo for the main gun (gravity cannon) and rocks work fine, I'm not gonna worry about it. She is a flying brick. Wont go fast and turning, well mind as well plan for a coffee break if you want to go the other way :rolleyes: Over all its waste of good blocks. But was change to add my newer turret to something with gravity torpedoes. Haven't yet combined these 2 weapons on any ship. Oh and in the world, there's my newest little ship as well 'M.U.W.' So not total waste of world :p This will be the largest ship Ill do for awhile. I just simply do not like them. Gravity deflector shield was canceled due to lag. I was getting 3 FPS at the end. buildable but no fun.

    Good luck everyone. :cool:
     
  9. REDSHEILD Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    888
    So, my entry will be submitted tomorrow, but overall I'm not happy with it.

    The design I like, but the interior no longer really fit by the end and it's also 92 million kg, so, it's far too large.
     
  10. Skeloton Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,069
    you still have 10 days before the poll goes up.

    I begin validating after I finish work today so in about 6-10hrs I'll start, then you have until the 20th. Be warned the later you enter less chance I might have time to validate it.
     
  11. Conradian Moderator

    Messages:
    2,596
    Right good, I wanted to enter a battleship but haven't got one complete, glad to hear there's a bit of time left.
     
  12. Stonewolf Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    776
    Wait, we have till 20th, if we knew we were going by the rules or just didn't care? Seems I misunderstood that, but its ok. :cool:
     
  13. damoran Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    608
    Doing my best to make the 20th deadline, most likely by the skin of my teeth.

    Build sort of went Rogue now it's just out of my control...
     
  14. plaYer2k Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,160
    Yeah lets see if/when i can finish mine ... as i cant launch SE due to technical reasons since last week. Hopefully i can continue working on my ship in 2 or 3 days *fingers crossed*.
     
  15. Skeloton Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,069
    Well that's all recent entries in/validated today.
     
  16. ablaze1989 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    10
    wow i so missread the main post lol i thought the 10th was the deadline......well i have more work and testing to do on my battle ship hahaha
     
  17. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    heres the currrent situation

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  18. ablaze1989 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    10
    heh thats a cool ship sungur vary Klingon looking i love it,
     
  19. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    latest progress

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    and my first ever custom turret is installed... though i ll work on the shape of turret...

    [​IMG]
     
  20. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    latest progress

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    and my first ever custom turret is installed... though i ll work on the shape of turret...

    [​IMG]
     
  21. NutterChap Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    163
    Sungur, you spambox... :p

    I am still chugging away on my design as well, yet I am not posting this page full.
    Despite the amount of time it took you to do so, I still think I will finish my entry later then you.

    Still missing my escape pod bays, power plants, secondary turrets and their ammo stowage, barracks, bridge, command centres, lighting, barracks, grav gens, and I still need to actual close the hull. Comparing that with your effort Sungur, it seems you are very nearly done :(
     
  22. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    lol Nutter,

    after the 2nd custom turret i'll raise the rear bridge in a more warhammer 40k way /thats 3rd bridge front upper, front lower, rear.
    custom turrets re-design
    i'll have a emergency tactical room,
    4x med bays,
    lower hangar entance,
    lots of big containers,
    lower hangar entrance control / observation room,
    the huge space between the crew compartments is the hangar. so the crew when took of from their chambers will see 6 fighters & at least 2 drop ships locked to the pads hanging from the ceiling.
    oh bridges, stairs, ladders to be added.
    engineering bay,
    repair bay (not a refinery),
    airlocks for humans,
    maybe a motorised hangar door for the ships (i dont like motors in the game nor i know how to use them)
    oh btw i am also TRYING to design a "large ship" drop ship no more than 5 blocks wide and who has a meaningful design, not just a box attached some engines,
    some more standard turrets, 2 more custom turrets to the front-sides (one barelled maybe),
    recreation rooms for crew, a disco with colored lights attached to a rotor lol, long live the disco :)

    all critical doors, entrances, are guarded by auto-turrets and i think this is important; all these critical entrances will be designed in an endirect way to create kill zones for the intruders.

    i dont believe some open chambers or long corridors with a auto turret and half or full covers... there must be kill zones that an intruder -in order to get in to the guarded zone- MUST pass. putting full or half covers only will create ....well... covers FOR intruders to hide during a firefight...

    btw i am pleased with my new bridges... they are influenced by star destroyer bridges

    [​IMG]


    these are things just came to my mind in this early hours of a working day.:D

    lots to do, no time...
     
  23. Volthorne Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    487
    You know, Sungur, for someone who was just recently putting down (and not physically putting it on a desk either) Starcraft, that looks very.... Starcraft. Specifically the Terran Battlecruisers. Right down to the oft-described "huge, dorsal-mounted Yamato Cannon" (granted the ones mounted to Terran Battlecruisers can't turn without turning the whole ship, but still). All it is missing are the port and starboard... pods? Batteries? Engines? Whatevers.
     
  24. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    actually it is a rebuild of my February Carrier contest entry.

    and careful eyes can see that it is not derived from SC ships. proportions, layout is totally different. my ships front-side extensions are housing engines.

    you can see that layout in many of my ships though the front extensions are bigger this time because of the extra weight of heavy armor. this ship was designed for light armor.

    btw the Yamato Cannon in SC fires from the nose. although in SC2 that design is changed slightly but still it is firing from the nose.

    oh i thought about a nose firing cannon (not a gravity torpedo) because i dont like custom turrets or things like that. later i changed my mind not because of any similarity but because i think it is impractical in combat conditions.

    as for putting down the SC. i loved SC and played it for years. i was playing Terran & Zerg.

    i bought SC2... finished single player campaign.. started multi player... and saw that the units in multiplayer & single are different... that means theres a HUGE balance issue in the game... balance was EVERYTHING in that game... so i quitted...

    thats a resume ofcourse...so i keep my position. SC is great but SC2 sucks.

    but thats just me...
     
  25. bacondeity Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    419
    That's where you're dead wrong. You really think Blizzard would screw up balance? Of all companies? No way man... You really think that the game isn't balanced because SP units aren't the same as MP units? You need to give the game another go, homie. They understood that putting perfectly balanced gameplay in SP wouldn't be fun... I mean, Wouldn't you enjoy getting OP or more-powerful-than-average items in your singleplayer games? It makes it feel as though you're the hero, you're the focus of the game, this is for you to have fun. If they just made SP the same as MP but with story, that wouldn't be fun, especially for StarCraft. Hell Heart of the Swarm is even MORE different in SP from WoL and SC1, you control a hyper powerful Kerrigan, and up-gradable OP units...

    But they can't put OP units into MP, for obvious reasons! (Just to note, when I'm talking about multiplayer, I mean competitive multiplayer, not SC Arcade or Custom Games) And bringing back the units from the original to MP wouldn't work for 2 reasons; it would be pretty lame to just re-skin or re-make old units and the other reason is that they would work differently with the new 3D engine compared to ye olde sprites.

    Balancing (roughly) 45 unique units for the game is a feat of precise rocket surgery (and it would be maybe 60 units or so if they brought old units that aren't in SC2 back). And what they did and continue to do is unparalleled by any game out there. There's a reason it's been the longest running e-sport effin' ever. And it'll stay that way BECAUSE of their balancing skill...

    BUT... That being said... If you really think SC1 is de shite, go to SC2 arcade and download StarBow, everythin' free... You can even play it even if you don't own SC2 (you can get SC2 starter edition, the demo basically, and just download StarBow). It's a mod on SC2 Arcade that gets weekly, if not daily updates, and, in a nutshell, is StarCraft 1. And pro SC2 players play it in tournaments too.

    I will not argue your opinion if you don't dig SC2, that's one thing... But going so far as to say that it sucks is something I think is completely unwarranted.
     
  26. Sungur Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    431
    The Bacon Deity,

    lets end this debate here for the sake of not going off-topic, shall we? i respect your view and you respect mine...end of story.

    having said that , if your explanation is the real situation here, i want to express one last opinion of mine about this; Assuming that i would enjoy being OP in single player and balancing the whole game accordingly is...... ridiculous at least...

    again thats just me, i have the game, i bought it when it was at its highest price, i made my contribution to holy blizzard but i am not at the same POI with you mate.

    so back to the topic.

    what do you think of me posting some pictures? am i spamming? is it annoying?

    what do you think of the design?
     
  27. Stonewolf Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    776
    Pictures tell more than thousand words. So personally I like pictures. If posting several tho, would be nice if they were wrapped in
    Code:
     tag, so the texts wont keep jumping for people with slow connections. But either way it never really bothered me.
    
    Ship looks great, shape kinda reminds me of mine, tho mine is more of a floating fortress than a ship. Was planning on gravity to assist on the movement, but it got so laggy on me that I didn't really want to even fix what was wrong with it now. I like the shape so I will return to fix this vessel in the future when the game runs bit smoother. I haven't yet taken closer look at any entries yet.
     
  28. damoran Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    608
    @Sungur

    I prefer pics over walls of text for the most part. Stonewolf makes a good point to put it in code. Although, I can appreciate a good back story I'm more interested in seeing the actual design and different solutions players come up with for different design issues.

    On that note, I'm curious to see more "features" people are adding to their designs outside of....it's got a lot of guns and conveyors.
     
  29. Skeloton Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,069
    Well the ship ive already got built for the Miners May contest has an interesting feature lol.
     
  30. damoran Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    608
    lol, such a tease...

    For the record, if it's "drills" I WILL be disappointed.
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.