StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Just got finished with a new design. Let me know what you think.

I like the form of it. Blocky but not ugly, either. And even then it manages to look fast, too.

What did you make it with?

I'm just using the free version of Sketchup

Question: Are the spikes in the front barrels?
Anyways I like it and it is good.

Well, now I'm really impressed. I certainly couldn't do anything like that in SketchUp.

I mean, I have a couple buildings that are pretty intricate, but nothing as detailed as that. Making anything besides a building can be a pain in that program...

Well, you see those six big turrets on it? The spikes are forward facing, fixed barrels. The idea is that the ship uses the font guns while closing in and for sieging.

Worst gun layout since Babylon 5? lol.

It is purely artistic.....I was going for intimidation. 99% of all sci-fi ship designs are wholly impractical anyways.

Grahf: Seeker Of Power wrote:It is purely artistic.....I was going for intimidation. 99% of all sci-fi ship designs are wholly impractical anyways.

If you want intimidation, make it wider. Your enemies only see the front.

Stark wrote:Worst gun layout since Babylon 5? lol.

why? as far as i can tell all the guns can shoot directly ahead with nothing blocking them.

Look at the waist guns.

Having heavy weapons positioned at the outer edges is probably foolish anyway.

Crossroads Inc. wrote:

Stark wrote:Worst gun layout since Babylon 5? lol.

why? as far as i can tell all the guns can shoot directly ahead with nothing blocking them.

They almost looked like fighters at first. That would make a nice concept(Night Caller from the EU varient) if those were not guns but strap on fighters.

The Destroyer/Cruiser whatever has a front upper missile deck plus forward facing dual missile bulges. Toss in twenty point defense looking turrets and it could fit into a dozen universes just fine. However giant pointy laser triangles strike me as odd. The spars on the front? Sensor arms, this is a forward facing assault ship.

Overall, I say it looks good, minus the Triangle Guns

Revision 1

Looks like an assault ship now. Without the triangle guns the quad's amidships looks like their FOF would interfere with each other.

Upside down view?

Oh, the point defense turrets. They are more geared toward the side arcs. I figured with the oblique angles that are possible in space that they would rarely interfere with each other.

I meant the Box turrets in the middle of the ship topside.

He's talking about the turrets that should be replaced by fewer, larger, better-positioned ones.

Stark wrote:He's talking about the turrets that should be replaced by fewer, larger, better-positioned ones.

That or you could move the rear set of the quad turrets to the side of the ship somewhere on that same panel to engage forward or engage anything coming up behind. The lack of side turrets looks right because I can in my mind rationalize that away as effective arch and armoring. If you don't have turrets breaking up the outline the slab tilted sides are armoring. The unbroken side makes it even better armor wise.

I'd say put some kind of spine structure rising from the fore to the fatter aft area, put the guns on that for optimal arcs (all superfiring with coverage over from 235 degrees, up etc), and mirror it on the other side if you really, really want. Four times the turrets to get coverage is daft when you can just roll the damn ship, and engaging multiple targets simultaneously is probably inferior to having significantly larger weapons that can switch targets or split fire.

Is this somewhat like you were thinking...

Revising and old design to fit in with this new one:

Forward facing Hanger screams MASSIVE WEAKPOINT or alternatively, Shoot here for massive damage!
Even worse when you consider any Hanger should have red illumination lights to guide pilots in. You would literally have a blinking red light on your spaceship that screams "shoot here"

Despite the Hanger however(And even with the Hanger) it looks like a good ship. And they look good next to each other.

Well I moved the hangar from the bow to the ventral surface and added spikey things up front....

Congratulations your 1/5th of the way to your own Homeworld Race with it's own distinctive ship style. Bottom hangers make as much sense as top hangers.

Graph, I was suggesting mounting the guns inline and superfiring along an angled level to give a single battery wide coverage. For example, mounting heavy guns on the centreline of an ISD - the hull slopes upward so they can all be superfiring, they can bear to either side, back a bit, forward, up and down a bit, and you don't need double the turrets for better coverage.

ie instead of this

o------ o
-O -O
o------ o

do this
-----------
-O -O -O
-----------
Three heavy turrets that can cover the entire area the six other turrets could, but with perhaps more firepower and perhaps less mass. Basically, having turrets on the same 'horizontal' plane is fucking retarded because they obscure each other, and simply designing the ship so they can all superfire gives you better coverage and less redundant turrets.

Remember, 1890s hexagonal battleship layouts WERE STUPID. Less guns + superfire = better all round.