Нужен список модов зарание спасибо.

Great fighter.

Just checked out the ship! Nice work! Dig the lateral thruster placement. Cheers

alright sweet, i put the game down for a while and everythings fuzzy, so idk where i got that notion, but if it flows like you say then im good, thank you

been playing since the start and never encountered such an issue. regardless, you can connect cargo containers, connectors, weapons, and reactors all to the same systems. the only question is what will flow through them. make sure you large doors match up with large doors, small with small, etc. im also not sure personally if you can have ammo flow through reactors to connectors on the other side, or uranium through weapons. however, that is something i always try to avoid as i figure if it isn't impossible yet, it probably will be eventually. beyond that, everything should be pretty simple and self-explanatory

A question for you sir, regarding piping for survival. When i first started playing you couldnt have a generator on the same conveyor system as a cargo container, wouldnt even let you connect the parts. Now that i have got back into seriously building a series of ships (starting with the fighters) i find the old habit of not connecting generators and cargos to be severely cramping my style. Did they change this at some point? and if not, do you have a trick for piping small ships with that many reactors?

Hey man I am a big fan of your work and I think you would be awsome in the [UESC] ship building contest! We have one every month with prizes for the top three winners! I hope that you choose to become part of our comunity and have fun purpose to build!
http://gtm.steamproxy.vip/app/244850/discussions/0/627457521175070737/

fixed. the design originally worked, but then i overhauled the conveyor system to be less like the wasp and more efficient, making it easier to build in the Vespid factory. Apparently, in my haste to get that factory working, i failed to take notice of this rather important error... lol

You're welcome. Take a look to the autocannons in front. I think they're not connected to the conveyor system. You need to replace the container below by a conveyor and turn the cannon to match the connectors.

@Lynnuxx and @Dark Lord. Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't sure what was happening in your processes due to the missing cannons but I was pretty close.

thanks for pointing that out. everything is now updated with the HE cannons. unfortunately its a bit more effective than i'd like (mainly against large light armor) but the AP version is very unviable...

Btw., Dark Lord, the Battlecannon mod has been changed, there are 2 different types now (AP and HE ammo). So on your fighters they are missing now, you have to reapply one of them.

yeah, each timer block activates one cannon, while turning off all the rest, so if you have cannon 1,2,3,4, and timer blocks 1,2,3,4 then it looks like this:

timer block 1: turn on 1, turn off 2,3,4, start timer block 2, stop timer block 4
timer block 2: turn on 2, turn off 1,3,4, start timer block 3, stop timer block 1
timer block 3: turn on 3, turn off 1,2,4, start timer block 4, stop timer block 2
timer block 4: turn on 4, turn off 1,2,3, start timer block 1, stop timer block 3

@ Muttl3y: The timer blocks then activate one cannon for one second and cycle through the cannons. So you can only fire one cannon in a one second window then the next one...
I guess this shall give some kind of Gatling effect instead of firing all cannons together with a "huge" recoil and then a "long" reload time.
I just tried it with the rocket launchers. A launcher is firing twice in that one second window, at the beginning and at the end. And then almost immediately the next launcher fires looking as if two missiles were fired at once.
So this "Gatling" effect works only with weapons firing only one shot in one second and reloading faster than 3 seconds.

I have to ask, how did you set up the timed cannons? I've been playing with the blocks and a few rocket launchers, trying to get them to fire as your cannons do or even just in sequence but haven't had much success. #noob problems.

bad question should have looked at your collection first

have u made a carrier for these

very nice

Very impressive. Sleek design that values form and function equally, rather than sacrificing manueverability for a fancy layout.
Nothing worse than blowing up part of your ship with a missile fired during a hairpin turn.

sexy, that's all it is.

TRANSLATED Be sure to drink your Ovaltine.

I was going to rickroll everyone by posting the lyrics to "never gonna give you up" in binary, but it was more than 1000 characters. Well, here's something just as good for you to translate.
010000100110010100100000011100110111010101110010011001
010010000001110100011011110010000001100100011100100110
100101101110011010110010000001111001011011110111010101
110010001000000100111101110110011000010110110001110100
01101001011011100110010100101110

Very Nice How Much

Nice

Nice

Looks amazing, good job!

has to do with personal preference. if you overcompensate your fighter with gyros, then as you say it becomes very twitchy. sure you've got great maneuverability, but when it comes time to fight, you will have trouble aiming. your maneuverability no longer matters at that point, because you lack the precision necessary for a capable offense. i keep my gyros balanced to my personal taste so that my fighters allow me the precision to do what is necessary.

Also, "Small armaments" are simply more realistic, and they also consider sustainability. you can slap tons of guns on your fighter and call it amazing, but how long can you support such with your ammunition storage?

I dont think i've ever made anything resembling a standard geometric shape. Believe it or not, it is very easy to combine aesthetics with function. Why some people refuse to attempt that is beyond me.

Well, people do whatever they want with the game, if you prefer to do heavy armored ugly cubes because it is more PvP efficient, go ahead :)

what is it with the workshop making fantastic looking ships that are functionally useless? There is no use for a light armor fighter that can't turn for shit with a tiny armament. It weighs like 30,000 kg, why can't it turn on a dime? I've got fighters that weigh 90,000+ kg that are so twitchy it's difficult to land them.

look over the previous comments (all of page 2)

How did you get the accelerations? Do you just time it?

This thing is beautiful!

Holy! I haven't played this game for 3 months and here are projects like this! Hehe, awesome!

idk how long it was, i never time this stuff. several hours at least. speed wasnt the main focus for that ship though, so there wasnt really fine tuning, it just came with the design. i knew i wanted something very lightweight and simple because it was to serve as a sniper and not a ship that is going to get fired at

With a mass of : 2,338,734 kg, I am inspired! Nice to see.Its a beautiful ship and has nice spec's! hiow long did it take to get it right was there any testing?

oh i figured with that many engines on such a weight you just had a very large small ship.

no, your acceleration is 11.66 m/s^2 which is indeed quite fast. but as you say, at that point you do have a naked ship.

currently, this is my fastest combat-purposed large ship at 6.21 m/s^2
http://gtm.steamproxy.vip/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=346510291

Well at that configuration. I think the craft is fast. There could be a reduction in lengthen of the vehicle and that could find me more power but it's minimal at best ... This is bare bones large ship. I must add the 14 x rocket launchers and the conveyor system to support to boot, in its defense . But its naked! what do you have spec's wise to compare?

for small ships, acceleration is more important. they are constantly maneuvering which requires they pick up speed quickly from a turn or they will be caught as sitting ducks for larger ships. larger ships, however, cannot hope to match them in manueverabilty, and should invest in armor to compensate

24 small thrusters = 24 x 12,110 N = 290,640 N
8 large thrusters = 8 x 145,500 N = 1,164,000 N
Added together that is 1,454,640 N
1,454,640 N / 899,279 kg = 1.62 m/s^2 which is honestly a fairly slow acceleration.

as far as how much of an advantage acceleration is, that entirely depends on how you design your ship. acceleration is more important the less armor you have, and vice versa. acceleration coupled with firepower is also important, and allows for hit and run tactics. in my opinion, speed is superior to armor. however, this also depends on your playstyle and skill level with that style.

it comes down to tank vs dps phisophies. would you rather endure, or do you believe "kill them before they kill you" is superior? would you rather be slow, but know you can complete the job and see it through, or play a more risky game for the payoff of high risk high rewards that comes with blitzkrieg style maneuvers?

if F is 3x 24 for my (24 large thrusters)? How tdo I add in small thrusters?

Small Ship
Small Thruster = 12,110 N
Large Thruster = 145,500 N

Large Ship
Small Thruster = 100,440 N
Large Thruster = 1,210,000 N

Industrial Thruster = 3x Large Thruster of the respective block size

take Thrust (F) and divide by by ship Mass (M) and F/M = Acceleration

ok...
small Thruster = 100,440 N X 24 =2410560
Large Thruster = 1,210,000 N X 8 = 9680000
F divide by 899,279kg

help :) how to get F?

Help me figure this one out so i can see the math

899,279kg
32 thrusters
8 large
24 small

From game play level, this feels very fast and powerful!

And that's exactly where i am at... At this point its about Armour and what is the purpose of vehicle? Basically, budget takes the wheel at this point... Its great info! I will continue to design fast and maneuverabile space ships.. as always weight/mass will define the speed and maneuverability...

How armored or armed you want the craft to be, will severally impeded its ability to preform in the acceleration!

BUT here is the big question. With in the game parameters... How much does acceleration give you for an advantage??

that entirely depends on how many engines you put on it. there would ultimately be a maximum because your reactors and engines have weight in themselves, but im not going to run the math to find out the perfect proportion. it also means you have a ship made of nothing but engines and reactors

I have to ask what the fastest craft in (m/s^2 ) woudl be at mass 1000000kg?? :0

Its alot to take-in. So give me some time. To apply the math here...
but wow great stuff thanks!

On the other hand, say you have 2 large engines on your ship, and you want to have 5.0 m/s^2 Acceleration

therefore,
2 large thrusters = 2,420,000 N
5 m/s^2 = 2,420,000 N/M
2,420,000 N / 5m/s^2 = M
M = 484,000 kg

you can build your ship up to 484,000 kg in order to have the acceleration of 5m/s^2

another useful equation is d = (1/2)(V + Vo) t
this will tell you the distance your ship travels, and can be used for building a carrier runway and making sure it is long enough for your fighter to reach max velocity

SE's max velocity (V) is 104m/s
if your fighter accelerates at 5 m/s^2, you will reach that velocity in (104/5) 20.8 seconds
therefore:

V = 104
Vo (original velocity) = 0
T = 20.8

D = .5(104 + 0)(20.8)
D = 1081.6 meters

one large block in SE is 2.5 meters, so 1081.6 m /2.5 m = ~433 blocks long for your runway

m/s^2 is meters per second square.

for example, gravity is 9.8m/s^2
therefore, every second you add another 9.8m/s to your current velocity (assuming you are operating free of resistance i.e. in a vacuum)

a 1 second fall you are travelling 9.8 m/s
at 2 seconds you travelling at 19.6 m/s

and so on...

when building a ship, you can use the equation in several ways. for example, if you want a ship that accelerates at 5 m/s^2 you will need your equation A = F/M to be 5 = F/M

if you already know the mass of your ship, say, 100,000 kg, then it looks like this
5 m/s^2 = F/100000 kg
5 m/s^2 x 100000 kg = F
F = 500,000 kg x m/s^2 = 500,000 N

Therefore, your ship needs (assuming we are working with large blocks) 5 small thrusters for 5.0 m/s^2, giving you a total forward force of 502,200 N

of course, thats not factoring in the weight of the engines, so you may need a 6th one to ensure you reach 5 m/s^2

Thanks for that.
What does this mean > "/s^2"?

Aside-
I ask because i am very interested in Acceleration. I have been testing ships technological requirements vs Mass\weight and how I can find the best frame of components, yet enjoy impressive acceleration. So you end up with a stripped down frame of a ship, and through certain development time commitment i find- improve, the target numbers. Like Mass...

So i think i want to use what you have show me here. Acceleration. to use in measuring how well i did with my design Idea's.

To be a good engineer or, code developer..

Measure your freaking ideas to see if your waaay the hell off...or bag on!!

Thank you!