Armor plating

Well when I posted in the texture pack thread I came with an idea:

The ships require protection, and a smart engineer knows where and how place armor plating. We start by dividing the weapons into 3 types: Plasmatic , ballistic, Photonic (You could add more or change them, it doesn't matter). Now we add some new blocks such as thermal steel plating or titanium plating with different resistance stats for each type of weapons.

When a weapon hits the plating and the weapon is not powerful enough to break through, it absorbs the damage, preventing the weapon from breaking blocks. but looses some of it's armor points (Lets say a plasma charge with 10 DMG hits a thermal steel block with 15 AP against Plasma. Weapon is fully absorbed and the AP is now -75% from the DMG or 7.5 now. You can also add another stat - Durability which decides this % ).

When a weapon hits the plating and the weapon is powerful enough to break through, the block breaks apart. but the weapon looses it's DMG so the blocks behind may survive (Lets say a plasma charge with 15 DMG hits a thermal steel block with 10 AP against Plasma. The weapon destroys the block but it's DMG now is DMG-AP or 5 ).

OFC some materials will have high resistance to some weapons, or maybe even all of them, but what prevents the players from making a 10x10x10 cube of armor around a 3x3x4 ship ? Weight ! Each type of block will have different weight. When you place those blocks on the ship the weight is added to a global variable. Engines will have a limited amount of weight they can carry. The more armor you add, the more engines you need and the bigger you ship will be , makes sense isn't ?

Iv121 wrote:

Big wall of text wuz here

OFC some materials will have high resistance to some weapons, or maybe even all of them, but what prevents the players from making a 10x10x10 cube of armor around a 3x3x4 ship ? Weight ! Each type of block will have different weight. When you place those blocks on the ship the weight is added to a global variable. Engines will have a limited amount of weight they can carry. The more armor you add, the more engines you need and the bigger you ship will be , makes sense isn't ?

I don't think weight matters very much in space (Correct me if I am wrong) the only part where you would care about weight is when you launch your ship into your atmosphere and then on into space. It might not go very fast but any engines could power any ship. It IS space, there is no friction or anything like that. So you could you to your small baby fighter rip out the engines and replace them with your dreadnaught's and then the dreadnaughts with the fighter's. The fighter would most likely get ripped apart and the pilot would die, but the dreadnaught would go along merrily... just it might take a few million years to reach Earth. XD

You are right, there is no weight in space, but there is MASS that effects acceleration, and you do want to enter atmospheres ... If your ship is too big for your engines you won't be able to accelerate and stop well ... Otherwise I'm sure NASA's shuttle will do just fine with a cup-sized engine ... Maybe that's why they close the shuttle project and take a ride on the Russian ships .

It's cause people are so damn obsessed with there petty little entitlement, so the funding for NASA got cut off

hell, we'd be on mars if it wasn't for the Vietnam war

The billions spent into NASA were part of the cold war between the USA and the USSR. If the Russians launch a satellite into space, they can also launch a bomb into space - that's how space travel began . As the Russians are no longer a threat, the founding is cut and NASA has to think twice before launching into space, and lets face it - the Russian ships are cheaper , they don't need repairs and they can carry more stuff. Why should you keep your own ships if the Russians are nice enough to let you catch a ride on their pocket ?

Back on topic - any other comments about the idea ?

Ehh, sense of national pride, but that doesn't really exist here anymore

and yeah I know that, I just wanted to rage about it

also it should have the 1/8 blocks and such, to correspond to IRL Armour plating in 1/2 inch, etc.

did that make sense?

I think that 1 block wide armor is just fine couse making now 1/8 blocks etc. is probably too much work. It also adds some challange to the engineer - why won't he stack 8 1/8 of all possible sorts of protection ? It's a bit OP. Now he needs to think where and what to place, keep 2 blocks around central points like engines and 1 block around the less important things. ..

hmm, good point

Iv121 wrote:

You are right, there is no weight in space, but there is MASS that effects acceleration, and you do want to enter atmospheres ... If your ship is too big for your engines you won't be able to accelerate and stop well ... Otherwise I'm sure NASA's shuttle will do just fine with a cup-sized engine ... Maybe that's why they close the shuttle project and take a ride on the Russian ships .

Why would I want to enter an atmosphere in a big ship? I have shuttles to get to the planet's surface. A Star Destroyer can't land. Even if it could find a place big enough to set down in, think about the landing gear it would need. Where would I find tires 14 stories tall?

If we have weight as a factor, we will have to think about streamlining eventually, and in Minecraft, that will hurt. I think you should have to think about engine size, but not necessarily because of the size of your ship. Larger engines will be faster/more efficient/better than small ones, but small ships won't be able to use large engines. A fighter couldn't use the dreadnought engines because a fighter is 5x3x3 and dreadnought engines will probably be around 100x20x20, for really large ships. That said, armor plating is and excellent idea. It could be a block, or it could be something that you place like a painting, but on any side of a block (even if there is already an armor plate in that space, but on a different side). Or maybe it could be both. Either way, it will be important.

There should be no trouble with simple math action such as adding. You don't have to process each block , only once when it's placed ... As I was corrected we should refer to that as mass. I think that the mass is important to balance the ships. It's illogical that a Dreadnought will have less armor than a cruiser that is equipped with 5 blocks wide armor...

This will make everything really difficult because Lasers and Plasma must heatup The ship when they GEt Absorbed and Ballistik weapons Must Move The Blocks and so on

Not rly, you look at them as variables with numbers, there is no need of thinking about different effects such as heating etc. that somehow effect the block. If you have a hit reduce the AP, if there is no enough AP break and reduce DMG...

In reality, this is all techno slang for how hard it is to make things go boom-boom.

Tiel wrote:

Last_Jedi_Standing wrote:

A Star Destroyer can't land.

*cough* Ghorman Massacre *cough*

The Wookieepedia article on the Ghorman Massacre mentions 'Tarkin's vessel'. It does not say it was a Star Destroyer.

I still need to amend my statement, however. Most Star Destroyers can't land. Venator-class can. They're the only ones that I know of.

I read it in this one Star Wars chronological dictionary. Tarkin's ship was a Victory class Star Destroyer. If you want to get technical, he only hovered above the protesters and crushed them with the repulsor lifts, so your point still stands.

Tiel wrote:

I read it in this one Star Wars chronological dictionary. Tarkin's ship was a Victory class Star Destroyer. If you want to get technical, he only hovered above the protesters and crushed them with the repulsor lifts, so your point still stands.

You're right. Victory I-class can enter an atmosphere. Victory II-class can't. I still can't find any references to Tarkin commanding one, but if he did, and it was a Vic-1, he could have done what your say.

Re-amended statement: Ships as large as or larger than an Imperial-class Star Destroyer in general cannot enter an atmosphere.

Let's leave this to frostbite (I think he is the one who works on planets ) ... Mass is to limit armor size not landing capabilities anyway ...

Last_Jedi_Standing wrote:

Tiel wrote:

I read it in this one Star Wars chronological dictionary. Tarkin's ship was a Victory class Star Destroyer. If you want to get technical, he only hovered above the protesters and crushed them with the repulsor lifts, so your point still stands.

You're right. Victory I-class can enter an atmosphere. Victory II-class can't. I still can't find any references to Tarkin commanding one, but if he did, and it was a Vic-1, he could have done what your say.

Re-amended statement: Ships as large as or larger than an Imperial-class Star Destroyer in general cannot enter an atmosphere.

In Battlefront I & II Star Destroyers and other capital ships are seen in the atmosphere. In addition, Acclamators are more or less over half the size of an Imperial II class and are perfectly capable of deploying on the surface.

II generally denotes space superiority over landing capabilities, but you probably already knew that.

Tiel wrote:

Last_Jedi_Standing wrote:

Tiel wrote:

I read it in this one Star Wars chronological dictionary. Tarkin's ship was a Victory class Star Destroyer. If you want to get technical, he only hovered above the protesters and crushed them with the repulsor lifts, so your point still stands.

You're right. Victory I-class can enter an atmosphere. Victory II-class can't. I still can't find any references to Tarkin commanding one, but if he did, and it was a Vic-1, he could have done what your say.

Re-amended statement: Ships as large as or larger than an Imperial-class Star Destroyer in general cannot enter an atmosphere.

In Battlefront I & II Star Destroyers and other capital ships are seen in the atmosphere. In addition, Acclamators are more or less over half the size of an Imperial II class and are perfectly capable of deploying on the surface.

II generally denotes space superiority over landing capabilities, but you probably already knew that.

ImpStars are seen orbiting a very long way away. They can get into the outer shell of atmospheres (such as when preforming a Base Delta Zero operation), but that's a long way from landing or real atmospheric flight.

Yes, Acclamators can land. That's what they're for (mostly). However, they are not as large as or larger than an Imperial-class Star Destroyer, and they're not really Star Destroyers at all.

wookiepedia 'Like most other Star Destroyer models, the Imperial-class was capable of entering atmospheres and supporting ground operations directly.'

It's cited, too, if you want proof.

Tiel wrote:

wookiepedia 'Like most other Star Destroyer models, the Imperial-class was capable of entering atmospheres and supporting ground operations directly.'

It's cited, too, if you want proof.

I don't see that. What page is it on?

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_I-class_Star_Destroyer

Open the Contents box and go down to 'Complement'.

Tiel wrote:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_I-class_Star_Destroyer

Open the Contents box and go down to 'Complement'.

Alright. I found it, and I concede the point. But, the same paragraph states that AT-AT barges and landing craft are used to deploy ground forces. This implies that ImpStars support the ground forces by smiting the resistance from low orbit, and are still incapable of landing on the surface.

Yeah, just trying to prove that they can go in atmosphere

Heaven knows what I will do when this mod comes out and I can't get my planet crackers in atmosphere.