Warship general

>>51759478
Anyone have any good Halo-UNSC type battleships? Really dig that aesthetic

File: adennaman_concept_by_daemoria-d5nv08g.jpg (611KB, 2179x1855px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 2179x1855px

>>51759854
Is this halo-ish enough? I don't have any actual Halo ships.

If your sailors don't hate life it's not realistic.

Can some list off some good tabletop ship battle games?

All I have are
>Star Wars: Armada
>Firestorm: Armada
>Halo Fleet Battles
>Dropfleet commander
>Jovian Wars

Boys the genre seems so.... sparse.

>>51764801
Full Thrust
Attack Vector
Babylon 5: Wars (OOP)
B5: A Call to Arms (OOP)

>>51764801
>Star Wars: Armada - a couple of people play it
>Firestorm: Armada - nobody plays it
>Halo Fleet Battles - nobody plays it
>Dropfleet commander - nobody plays it
>Jovian War - nobody plays it
>Full Thrust - nobody plays it
>Attack Vector - nobody plays it
>Babylon 5: Wars (OOP) - nobody plays it
>B5: A Call to Arms (OOP) - nobody plays it
>Battlefleet Gothic (OOP) - nobody plays it
>AeroTech - nobody plays it

Liking to play with spaceships is suffering.

So, I have never seen the anime or played the game, but apparently there's a miniatures game for "Star Blazers", which is apparently just localized Space Battleship Yamato. I have a blister pack of a ship from it that I got during a yard sale, does anyone know if the game is good?

>>51765822
Man I miss that feel of ramming tyranid hive ships into imperial navy

File: IMG_8769.jpg (395KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 720x720px

>>51765822
Indeed it is, anon. Indeed it is. There's a reason I have a shitton of B5 stuff for all four of the major young races and a small fleet of Raiders. If nothing else, I can bop somebody on the head and teach them, or play solo.

File: IMG_8770.jpg (350KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 720x720px

>>51766830
I wound up with one in a lot of ships I'd bought to use as raiders and civvy objectives. I've got what is apparently a Gamilon carrier that's an Revenge (Upgraded) according to a wiki.

File: img1708l.jpg (304KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1024x683px

>spessbump

>inb4 someone posts shipgirls

File: drazi grumpy.jpg (13KB, 122x162px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 122x162px

>TFW nobody wants to talk about spess ships.

File: TauSympathizer.png (188KB, 419x461px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 419x461px

>>51759478
>tfw want to play battlefleet gothic
>tfw only have paper models
>tfw no one near me plays, or has any interest in playing

>>51764801
>Halo Fleet Battles

That looks a bit fun. Is it?

>>51772535
It's the same basic rulesset as Firestorm Armada. If you like FA, or by extension Dystopian Wars, then you'd probably think Halo was fun.

>>51772348

Nobody cares about big ships. Space fighters are where it's at. That's why Xwing is such a more popular and thus better game.

>>51773398
Different strokes for different folks. Some people love WW2 dogfighting INNNN SPAAAAACE, others love age of sail broadsides/WW2 battleships INNNN SPAAAAACE.

>>51773437
>others love age of sail broadsides/WW2 battleships INNNN SPAAAAACE.

If those people mattered, then they'd have a popular game.

File: benoit-godde-weyland-yutani-shuttle-failed-escape-from-lv-426.jpg (304KB, 1920x1020px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1920x1020px

I'd be a lot more interested if I could find a more grounded setting. But then again, realistic space combat is essentially mutually assured destruction: nuclear powered rocket jousting edition. I'm not really sure how to spin that into a decent game.

It would probably need to end up just being some sort of broad spectrum simulation game that covers a whole lot more than combat in order to have any real depth.

More Revelation space, Blindsight; less Star Wars and Halo.

File: bscap0023.jpg (187KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1920x1080px

>>51766830
I recently binged Space Battleship Yamato 2199, the modern remake, and it was actually pretty fantastic.
The sequel's coming out later this month, too.

File: _099.png (3MB, 1304x1695px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1304x1695px

As always the question is, what is best in life?

Also, thread visual/audio stimulant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqFpEfpj_Ns&t=4s

File: shippu.png (53KB, 1151x1330px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1151x1330px

>>51759478

FILL IT, ANONS, I FUCKING DARE YOU.

File: 27064zathras1[1].png (920KB, 932x477px) Image search: [Google]

920KB, 932x477px

>>51773846
Done.

>>51773596
Attack Vector at least has rules for proper Newtonian physics. That'd be a huge start right there. Otherwise, go outside miniatures and do solo type games in the vein of The Hunters.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/113873/hunters-german-u-boats-war-1939-43

>>51773793
The closest would be a mash up of Realistic and Armor. I like functional looking ships. Each part has its place. You can point to any piece and know exactly what its use is and why it is there. There is nothing extra, no thought given to looks. Just pure functionality.

File: 1484262347405.jpg (2MB, 2234x1200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2234x1200px

>>51773925

Thanks.

>>51765822
I would kill for BFG to be restarted again, given a bit of an update (can be as simple as making it I go, you go instead of one person moving everything first) and given support and life. It seems like it could actually do well.

>Star Wars: Armada - a couple of people play it
The sad thing is, while it is the only one that is even somewhat played, it isn't nearly as enjoyable or well put together as most the rest of the games on that list.

>>51773925
>The Hunters
I prefer Silent Victory, personally. Mainly for simply having more stuff. Like sub vs sub encounters, which are fun except when they end in a draw after a three-day engagement where you expended 14 torpedoes, scored 10 hits, and had all of them be duds.

remove buord REMOVE BUORD

File: My Ship.png (1MB, 1156x1313px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1156x1313px

>>51773846

>>51766830
The game is old school. Grognards will approve. Good is entirely by preference.

>>51776768
>pixy as a pilot
Enjoy getting V2'd after he inevitably defects.

>>51759478
Did Starblazers 2199
AKA Battleship Yamato 2199
The recent really good remake,

...get dubbed?

I can't find an english dub of it fucking ANYWHERE, but wikipedia says making the dub started back in 2013.

I swear to god I watched it spoken in English, and now I can only find subbed.

I'd ask /a/, but it's a shit board

>>51779486
IIRC, the company that license it stopped after the first few episodes due to sales. As for if it was dubbed or not I can't recall though I think it was suppose to be.

>>51779486
>i'd ask /a/, but they'd rightfully bully me for inquiring about shitty dubs

fix'd.

>>51779457
Honestly more worried about the shit Sienar and Mordin come up with than the eventually V2ing but that's what part of the fun.

File: 60f691a78cb804745c148142796973be.png (15KB, 904x283px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 904x283px

R8 my battlecruiser.

>>51781568
Not-a-badnaught/10

http://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/449/badnoughts-experiment

>>51773437
>WW2 battleships INNNN SPAAAAACE.

So getting sunk like bitches by carriers in space?

File: Haruzuki.jpg (238KB, 2244x1303px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 2244x1303px

>our destroyers are basically light cruisers
>half our battleships are really heavy cruisers
>our cruisers get to be there

>>51786174
>lets order one of those newfangled battlecruisers from britain
>what should it be like?
>she should be both slower and worse armored than her british counterparts and carry casemate guns in an arrangement that will render half of them useless due to excessive wetting

>>51781568
What's that from?

>>51786409
Rule the Waves

>>51786428
Is it any good?

File: land battlecruiser goeben stats.png (14KB, 924x324px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 924x324px

>>51786436
Do you want to mash your diseased creations against computer's fisherian nightmares?

File: nagato_aft_kure_42.jpg (460KB, 2500x1765px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 2500x1765px

>>51786298
To be fair, they also gave us this.

>>51768782

>B5 is by far your favorite sci fi IP
>there will never be new content

Truly suffering

My mom bought me a B5 tabletop game as a kid and I only got to play a few games with it

>>51787945
>tfw there will never be more B5
>tfw there will never be a remake or reimagining

>>51759478
it bothers my inner autist that there is no "up" or "down" in space.

>>51790599
The enemy's gate is down.

>>51790766
So basing for naval miniatures... plain clear plastic, opaque figured sea surfaces, colored translucent bases, or translucent bases with waves figured and painted onto it? What are your preferences, /tg/?

File: Turn05_03.jpg (225KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 2048x1536px

>>51791252
Thin card bases with water effects on top.

I don't like my ships sitting half a cm above the regular playing area.

File: gloriousUSNtorpspam.jpg (327KB, 932x698px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 932x698px

Post best DDs.

>>51773437
>tfw no dreadnought-era battle lines beating the fuck out of each other INNNN SPAAAAACE

>>51793176
>TFW no legend of galactic heroes style line infantry tactics in SPAAAAACE wargame.

File: 1456606443176.jpg (345KB, 2383x1500px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 2383x1500px

>>51759478
I like the way you think.

File: unsc_gladiator_class_light_cruiser_by_splinteredmatt-d4d554e.png (124KB, 1280x410px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1280x410px

>>51759854

File: 1468255057385.gif (903KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 900x600px

>>51785974
Nips only took out two US BBs.
US BBs took out most of the jap airforce.

>>51795226
This, guided missiles, not airplanes, are what killed the battleship. A combat ready battleship with adequate AAA is more than a match for WWII era aircraft. Moreso if it has air support of it's own.

And even to the extent that missiles killed the battleship, it wasn't that large ships were particualarly vulnerable, but rather that missiles allowed smaller ships to carry the same amount of firepower. Battleships weren't cost effective anymore.

>>51795805
Eh, it's more arguable that the flaw in WW2 era aircraft is staying power rather than damage. If the full Fast Carrier Task Force had hit Kurita's Center Force in the early stages of Leyte Gulf instead of less than a third they'd probably have sunk several of the BBs rather than just Musashi, but the fleet would still be able to get through.

>>51796542
Japanese BBs didn't have anywhere near as much AAA as american ones did. Like holy fuck, all those 5 inch twin turrets you see slapped onto american Cruisers and BBs, those are DP guns that can fire radar triggered proximity detonating shells.

File: Tivvay.jpg (96KB, 1125x413px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1125x413px

>>51773793
Traditionalist

File: image.jpg (50KB, 658x333px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 658x333px

>>51793093

>>51797117
>Vauquelin-class
>not Le Fantasque
do you even gofast

>>51794590
Well there's one, but it's jap and imho could have been better.

File: 1487362046427.png (1MB, 1151x1330px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1151x1330px

>>51773846

>>51773464
How about Battlefleet Gothic? Still popular despite having no official support.

>>51776768
>Saint Mattis
>Doc Chakwas

Patrician taste, anon

>>51773464
>WW2 battleships INNNN SPAAAAACE
Does Dropfleet Commander count?

>Ctrl+F
>Starfire
>Aurora
>0 results

An Autist-free thread: Excellent!

Now for the important part:
Anyone know of any (true) mass fleet-scale Space-battle rules out there?

Like: fast-moving, with lots of ships and bucketfuls of dice - for example.

File: Albion.jpg (182KB, 900x404px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 900x404px

Haha time for Universal Century

File: Nahel_Argama_0096.png (244KB, 640x411px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 640x411px

>>51798809

File: Ra-cailum.jpg (358KB, 1150x600px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1150x600px

>>51798815

File: General-revil-topside.jpg (136KB, 800x353px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 800x353px

>>51798829

File: Grey-phantom.jpg (183KB, 1000x349px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1000x349px

>>51798851

File: Cloop_class_UC.png (67KB, 395x200px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 395x200px

>>51798865

File: Alexandria.jpg (152KB, 800x451px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 800x451px

>>51798878

File: IrishClass.png (280KB, 800x458px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 800x458px

>>51798895

File: Argama.jpg (167KB, 800x290px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 800x290px

>>51798905

>>51798905
>>51798895
>>51798878
>>51798865
>>51798851
>>51798829
>>51798815
>>51798809
They look like Firestorm RSN stuff

>>51798926
Yeah there is a lot of similarity. I'm assuming that the guys who made Firestorm borrowed some of the designs from Gundam seeing as Gundam's designs came out first.

>>51798978
neat, had no idea
thanks bro

>>51798851
>16 catapults on a 48 MS ship
WHY

Also,
>bring back a Dogosse Giar for Unicorn
>all it does is job
Feels bad man

File: Arashi just wanted to help.jpg (7KB, 300x159px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 300x159px

>>51793093
>That sure is a nice 1st CarDiv you have there, would be a shame if someone were to accidentally lead the enemy right to it.

>>51776768
Good taste, ultra civilized, even if your engineer looks a little rapey.
>>51797351
Privateer detected.

Bump for spaceships

>>51799306
Tbf she only did them a favor by letting Americans to put crippled conversions out of their misery.

>>51799168
Because the Federation is fucking incompetent.

>>51764875
The B5 games were so good they got me to watch the show.

>>51796625
The IJN just refused to cut down on dedicated secondary batteries to fit more 127mm Type 89 emplacements into their designs. By the time the 100mm Type 98 came around it was probably too late to retrofit their capital ships with them, despite the fact that they were genuinely quite good.

And their light AA was a joke.

File: aerial_battleship_by_waffle0708-d4std0z.png (582KB, 1117x605px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 1117x605px

>Not meeting halfway between space and naval ships.

File: IMG_20170219_140822908.jpg (191KB, 1296x728px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 1296x728px

Have an updated work in progress. GHQ 1/2400 Nagato in her final camouflage scheme, based on colorized photos, documentary research, and painting schemes reproduced by Japanese modeling manufacturers. Still on the fence about ink-washing her, and how to base her.

>>51802882
I promise an ink wash, or even just some very selective inking will help make things like the secondaries and small details really pop, especially if you go back and hit the barrels or high bits with your highlight color.

>>51773630
>The sequel's coming out later this month, too.

Really? You know what time this month it comes out?

>>51801331
>>51788872
I've got a off of the core 2E book I feel no compunctions at all about posting. Will do when I get back tony files tomorrow. My copy of Powers and Principalities is watermarked though, so if you want that, it's off to go find a torrent for you. I may have some other resources I can post too.

>>51776768
kek, The Doctor is the nurse

>>51801572
Funny how most of the time you can pretty much tell an allied capital ship from an axis vessel simply by looking at its side armaments:
>no dedicated anti-ship secondaries but shitload of dp-guns=probably an allied vessel
>awkward mix of dedicated anti-ship secondaries and dp/aa-guns=probably an axis vessel

File: Zeta-mechanic-file-dogosse-giar.jpg (253KB, 985x697px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 985x697px

Dogosse Giar in action

>>51803960
Anti-ship secondaries are a joke in WWII. You don't need 6 inchers to kill destroyers. And anything bigger is a target for your your main guns. 5 inch DP is the logical extension of the dreadnought philosophy.

>>51804414
It fits considering how ill equipped axis navies were for a world war.

>>51804414
5"/38Cal Mk28Mod0 was not a "logical extension" of dreadnought design, it was a break from the practice of maintaining a dedicated secondary anti-surface battery. Calling Yamato a "logical extension" makes more sense, as she had a secondary anti-surface battery in rotating enclosed turrets instead of casemates.

Panamax boats clearly depart from dreadnought design.

File: 1456809847615.jpg (113KB, 850x682px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 850x682px

For some reason I love it when spaceships have a conning tower.

>>51804607
>Having more than two tiers of guns is Dreadnaught design.

Lolno.

>>51804607
>as she had a secondary anti-surface battery in rotating enclosed turrets instead of casemates.

A practice that was more or less limited to 2nd rate navies like IJN and Kriegsmarine when WW2 started.
>USN=DP guns
>RN=DP guns
>fucking marine nationale=(shitty) DP guns

>>51804654
Almost all ships considered "dreadnoughts" and "super-dreadnoughts" had more than two types of secondary guns, usually differentiated between a secondary battery and their dedicated heavy AA batteries. All the standard types, the IJN ships, most of the RN designs after Dreadnought herself...

>>51804800
>the last IJN capital ship before Yamato was completed in the early 1920's
And the USN didn't remove the casemate guns from the Colorado-class ships until after the shooting started. The Regia Marina had to refit their capital ships as well, and the RN's KGV's were brand spanking new at the start of the war.

The IJN's older designs were *old*, and by the time it was becoming clear to everyone else exactly how much better all-DP designs were the focus had to be on rebuilding their carrier task forces. Not saying it was BETTER, just that it's the result of easily understandable factors.

>>51804826
Dreadnought philosophy is about not wasting tonnage on redundant weapons systems. The 10 inch guns used by pre-dreadnoughts were only really useful against cruisers, which could just as easily have been dealt with using the primary armament.

For Fisher's era, dreadnought philosophy meant big guns, with a secondary battery of dedicated anti-destroyer weaponry. Cutting out the middle man.

In world war two, this meant big guns, AAA guns, a DP battery that can be used against destroyers or aircraft. A separate battery of 6 inch guns that can only be used against destroyers and light cruisers, is as redundant in WWII as the 10 inch batteries were in WWI.

>>51803801
Sauce?

>>51804947
The entire point to a DP gun was that it could hit surface targets, and ALL Japanese capital ships had them. Instead of ripping out the secondary battery (which was still relevant in the sort of surface battles the Japanese expected to use their battleships in), laying them up for who knows how long, and replacing those perfectly serviceable weapons with the (mediocre) Type 89 DP they focused on building carriers. Especially after they started losing them four at a time.

The 100mm Type 98 may have been worth it, but by then the IJN was REALLY in the shit.

tl;dr nobody started off the war with adequate DP guns except the navies that put capital ships in the water right before the conflict with them.

>>51803498
Space Battleship Yamato 2202 starts on the 25th

File: WNBR_45-45_mk1_Renown_pic.jpg (53KB, 842x485px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 842x485px

>>51805403
>tl;dr nobody started off the war with adequate DP guns except the navies that put capital ships in the water right before the conflict with them.

Brits seemed to have managed to glue decent amount of them onto their WW1 vintage boats before the war started.

>>51805403
>The entire point to a DP gun was that it could hit surface targets

Yeah, that's the point, they make single purpose secondary batteries obsolete. You don't need 6 inchers to kill Destroyers, and anything with enough armor to shrug off 5 inch shells is fodder for the big guns.

Big guns for big armored things, and small guns for small fast things that might try to torpedo you. That's the dreadnought philosophy. Anything in between is wasted tonnage.

>>51805792
>Anything in between is wasted tonnage.
Stop conflating dreadnoughts and treaty/fast battleships. They were built with different considerations in mind.

All-DP guns turned out great for the Americans because the 5"/38 was absolutely a winner. The Japanese didn't have a good DP gun until 1942, and as I have said before they had much bigger problems to deal with than streamlining the secondary batteries on their battleships by that point. Especially when the mixed secondary batteries worked fine for the engagements the IJN was trying to prepare for.

I don't know why this is a contentious point for you.

>>51806021
So in other words what you are saying is that the Japanese didn't have good battleships and shouldn't have went to war with america.

Because I'm not disagreeing with that at all.

File: __gaza_c_and_gwazine_gundam_and_zeta_gundam__d5f1f5470a6102afd23910a87b697e04.jpg (381KB, 3027x2147px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 3027x2147px

More Gundam

File: __zanzibar_gundam_and_mobile_suit_gundam_drawn_by_janome_gochou__e1d115ad9dda73e47452db266e9c7e23.jpg (104KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 800x800px

>>51806158

File: __guncannon_rx_78_2_and_white_base_gundam_and_mobile_suit_gundam_drawn_by_i_t_o_daynamics__d3b07caec90f3f428ea5f329b48ab1c6.jpg (288KB, 1200x669px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1200x669px

>>51806179

File: __zaku_ii_gundam_and_mobile_suit_gundam_drawn_by_janome_gochou__9fc66bc1f7b938851cb8c27343e8c57b.jpg (124KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1000x800px

>>51806199

File: Fubuki.jpg5.jpg (95KB, 1280x333px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1280x333px

>>51806131
>Japanese didn't have good battleships

Picking on their battleships and battlecruisers is pretty nitpicky when most non-destroyer nip boats were thoroughly mediocre at best and utter crap at worst.

>>51806131
No, you moron. I'm saying that the Japanese lacked the resources and manufacturing capacity to both replace their wartime losses AND modernize or replace their fleet of predominantly older but in some cases still serviceable battleships the way other navies did. And that's why they shouldn't have gone to war with America.

>>51806262
They were thoroughly stuck in the mode of fighting the last war, partly due to resources and partly due to the early dominance of battleship admirals and Mahanian doctrine.

The Nagatos were serviceable aside from the lack of proper DP guns they shared with every other ship their age which was never addressed. The Yamatos were big and fancy and designed to dominate a fight they were never destined to get into, impressive on paper but of limited use. Every other capital ship they had was hopelessly overworked, and even their widely-touted destroyers suffered from small production runs, a dearth of replacement parts, and design flaws that were passed on from one generation to the next. The only ones they really got "right" both in terms of execution and intended use were the Akizukis.

>>51806890
Well I'm not disagreeing with any of that either, I think you just want to argue, you seem to be repeating my points back to me in a slightly more belligerent tone.

They didn't have good DP guns or light AAA until it was too late to matter. Their ships were state of the art for the previous world war, but unable to survive the multi layered threat environment of the current war. They then took this outdated navy, and decided to get into a fight with the most technologically advanced nation in the world with an industrial capability that far surpassed their own. By the time they realized things were going wrong, it was too late to modernize.

That's all I've been saying, but feel free to misread any of that and continue making yourself look like a jackass.

>>51807171
I wouldn't really call Fusous or Ises "state of the art" for any world war desu.

>>51807215
Well, I still like the Kongos, even if they aren't real battleships. And the Nagato was pretty cool. I agree that Ise and Fusou are ugly pieces of crap. I'd also say that the Yamato was an inelegant monstrosity that would have fared poorly against an Iowa, even if the Japanese did get their conventional battleship duel. But that's debatable.

But the real point is, the Japanese lacked the technology to protect their battleships against air attacks. 6 inch single purpose batteries were as obsolete in WWII as 10 inchers were in WWI. Japan hoped for a battleship engagement, but were unable to protect their own battleships.

>>51807171
The entire discussion began with the assertion that 5"/38Cal was the "logical evolution" of the dreadnought, which I disagreed with because that was one of a suite of characteristics that marked a new design paradigm distinct of the dreadnought and its associated mentality.

Panamax boats and other fast battleships were a different breed from a dreadnought, full stop. THAT was the argument I was trying to make before everyone concerned got bogged down in quibbling.

>>51807374
Kongous were decent enough Lion derivatives, their 6 inch casemate arrangement could had been better and they probably could had used another inch of belt armor but other than that by WW1 anglo-style battlecruiser standards they're decent.

>>51807531
I just sortie them as if they were superheavy cruisers on the tabletop.

>>51807563
It's basically how the IJN ended up using them anyway.

>>51807499
The Panamax fast battleships were to the Japanese "Fast Battleships" what the Dreadnaught was the the Pre-dreads. If follows the same philosophy of cutting out redundant mid-caliber guns in favor of speed and efficient firepower.

Dreadnought philosophy is about re-evaluating dogma and cutting waste. Any definition that hinges upon the technical specifications of the dreadnought, rather than it's inclusion of new technologies and omission of redundant systems misses the point.
In that way, the panamax BBs are closer to Fisher's vision than anything the Japanese built. By world war two, six inch casemates on battleships were wasted tonnage. If those were the best secondaries the Japanese could build, then they simply weren't ready for the war.

>>51807653
Again, you're thinking treaty ships. Dreadnought designs were firmly grounded in the expected role of the battleship and maximizing its effectiveness IN that role. You change the paradigm, you change the role, you get a different type of ship.

It's not a question of technical specifications, which by the way a focus on "new technologies and redundancies" is. It's about a shift in combat paradigm and the changes in design paradigm that prompts: the IJN built dreadnoughts and used them as dreadnoughts. The USN, at least after the Colorados, didn't. If you can't understand that basis for classifying fast battleships differently from dreadnoughts then this is all pointless.

>>51808457
I suppose that's a good point.

Anyways, how do we bring this back to space? What makes a space dreadnought? Spinal mount cannons with a secondary battery of DP/point defense lasers, and no intermediate weapons?

>>51808516
Limited arcs of fire and extreme vulnerability to fighters?

Honestly, I think it gets used in sci fi settings mostly with the connotation of size and firepower rather than any specific configuration, since anything familiar as being a "battleship" wouldn't really be great once you add the Z-axis into the equation.

>>51808516
I've thought about this a bit, wouldn't they be sort of close to LotGH ships? long range guns frontally mounted since wing guns at best are used 50% of the time, so just have all your long range anti capital ship guns in the prow, and put point defense guns and launch bays on the flanks, focus all the armour and shields in the prow section too to maximize protection to weight.

>>51808651
The laser point defenses have full 360x360 firing arcs, fighters and missiles that get anywhere near it will be lasered to death unless there are enough of them to over-saturate it.

Other capital ships are engaged at far enough ranges that the spinal mount cannon can easily be aimed by pointing the ship. Seagoing battleships had many cannons to make up for inaccuracy, but with the ranges encountered in space, and modern fire control, a single really large gun makes more sense. Remember mass drivers and particle accelerators should be as long as possible to accelerate the projectile/particles efficiently.

Lasers on the other hand, benifit from having lots of surface area, and redundant laser projectors. They make more sense in a broadside arrangement.

>>51808725
Pretty much. Another idea would be to use a broadside arrangement, and make the ship as thin as possible to prevent a narrow profile to the enemy. The space battleships posted at the start of this thread are very tall, and that seems like it would make armoring them difficult. Remember real battleships can get away with a narrow belt because most of the citadel is underwater.
Here's what I'm thinking.

Destroyers are the first space warships, and consist of missile launchers strapped to engines. Can be produced with very low tech, but still remain a threat far into the future thanks to their simplicity. Destroyers may or may not have FTL drives.

Cruisers are more advanced multi purpose spacecraft, equipped with powerful reactors and engines. The same reactors that power the engines also power directed energy weapons, but cruisers also have the capacity to carry missiles or small amounts of cargo including marine shuttles and even small non-ftl capable Destroyers. Because of their powerful reactors, Cruisers have large radators and tend to be built wide and flat like blades. In combat they will try to present their long-narrow side to maximize firepower and minimize the target.

>>51808949
And lastly, Dreadnoughts are giant space dildos capable of fucking planets to death with their spinal mounted cannons. They also feature a secondary battery of broadside lasers for point defense, and use a combination of internal heat sinks and folding radiators to manage heat, keeping them folded up when enemy attack is expected.

Dreadnoughts do not typically carry missiles or fighters in order to maximize the tonnage available for weapons and armor, however Battle-cruisers and Carriers might also exist, trading armor for speed and cargo capacity.

I'm not sure what a pre-dreadnought would look like in this situation, Perhaps a very large cruiser with heavy armor and turret mounted raillguns.

File: 159558f80a3c76138f158dcf1da4f352.jpg (87KB, 1024x564px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1024x564px

>>51809037
>Perhaps a very large cruiser with heavy armor and turret mounted raillguns.
Just call it a battleship.
Main battleship of the line sounds good.

>>51805139
It's from the recent cgi Captain Harlock movie. God-tier space battles, but the plot is almost incomprehensible on the first viewing. Typical Jap "everyone betrays everyone over and over" sort of stuff.

>>51809853
I mean like, in terms of form factor. It's an intermediate design between the knife shaped cruisers and dildo shaped Dreadnoughts.

>>51809901
So did I.

>>51809952
Problem with turret mounted raillguns Is I just can't see them competing with lasers and spinal mount mass drivers when it comes to range.

>>51810323
Trust me they do because spinals are a bitch to line up and lasers are next to useless.

>>51810344
>spinals are a bitch to line up
The small child in me loves the idea of a fuck huge spinal gun. But unless you are shooting at a stationary target (like a planet or station(heh)), they really are just a waste of resources on a ship you want to be somewhat multipurpose.
If you must have big planet or station killers, make them a separate class of ship, then you can put truly massive mass-drivers on them.

>>51811270
Don't get me wrong, I like them just in case, and there is the chance that it can work. (anyone who tells you something that we will definitely do in space is a damn liar)

I like how Logh,Halo, and ME did spinals.
Logh had basically rank and file warfare with several guns, although I wish they showed off the broadsides more.
Halo, had a lot of smaller ships pounding bigger ships.
ME had that exteme range thing going on, but again wish they showed off broadsides more.

>>51811270
If the ranges are long enough, you can easily aim the gun by turning the ship, or make micro adjustments in the magnetic fields accelerating the projectile. You can also use a spinal mount mass driver to launch missiles.

Turreted guns on the other hand are going to be severely limited in range and power due to their relatively smaller size. Maybe good for killing smaller things at close range, but at that point lasers would do better.

That's my argument against turreted raillguns.

>>51811477
Just make big turrets.

>>51811510
That just makes you a bigger target. Sooner or latter somebody is going to make a ship that's just as big as yours, only with a spinal cannon. And that ship is going to kill you with relativistic projectiles from outside your maximum range.

>>51811596
Maybe.

>>51814213
What are those things attached to the top of the turrets? Life rafts?

>>51814273
Yes.

>>51803519
http://www.mediafire.com/file/x7u7s4aal7t0s56/A_Call_to_Arms_2nd_Edition_%281348913%29.pdf

http://www.mediafire.com/file/4s95zs79zhblleq/Fightercounterbase.pdf

Second link is some counters for Tiger and Badger Starfuries I'd made a long time ago, since there were never any included in the books.

There are some minis still available on eBay, some on Shapeway, but best of all you can still get a tremendous portion of stuff from the guy that did all the B5: Wars stuff.

https://agents-of-gaming.myshopify.com/

The bad thing is you'll still have to chase down some of the Mongoose original stuff like Marathons and Chronos on eBay or elsewhere.

>>51816719
>look through current iteration of the AoG store
Hell, there's all the new shit too. Guess I missed that. Now my fucking wallet is itching.

File: mike-hill-retribution-3-qrter-open-2500.jpg (415KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 1920x1080px

God help me, I actually like the ship designs in Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare.

File: dclxOjt[1].jpg (122KB, 1024x646px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1024x646px

>>51793093
>Totally a destroyer

File: U_V flotilla.jpg (590KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

590KB, 1000x750px

>>51791252
Painted matboard, easy-ish to work with and I have tons of scrap on hand from framing pictures. Not quite as thick as MDF, but still has some standoff from the table unlike >>51791316

File: Izumo-class Destroyer.jpg (190KB, 1510x1000px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1510x1000px

>>51820046
The Japanese have always had a very loose definition of ship classifications.

>>51820189
If you're gonna circumvent treaties by calling your carriers destroyers then you might as well go and build a proper +100k ton nuclear aviation destroyer instead of messing around with helicopter destroyers.

>>51816719
>https://agents-of-gaming.myshopify.com/
>>51816781

teh fuck

I had no idea AoG was still even a thing ? (even if it's just a dude with a garage full of leftovers)

File: Acheron.jpg (204KB, 1420x768px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1420x768px

>a jillion examples of dreadnoughts in space
>autism intesifies

everything about them bothers

File: BN-NL657_0408ye_J_20160408071907.jpg (99KB, 959x639px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 959x639px

>>51820415
>you might as well go and build a proper +100k ton nuclear aviation destroyer instead of messing around with helicopter destroyers.

It isn't just the treaties that can be a an issue there.

File: Totally a Destroyer - JS Hyūga.jpg (100KB, 1024x588px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1024x588px

>>51820189
Yup, just us destroyers, no carriers here.

And it's not like Japan are buying VTOL aircraft like the F35...

>>51820526
The dude with the leftovers is the sculptor as well, and he'd made some more B5 related stuff that he'd made available for sale separately. His page is down currently, but it was at
>http://www.b-3designs.com/

>>51798726

Full Thrust. Free rules and a metric fuckton of homebrew from the even-now active community.

Not the deepest system, but enjoyable as fuck.

File: Cfbattlepainting_(Retouched).jpg (155KB, 800x482px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 800x482px

I've just released a pretty simple naval wargame set during WW1, it's up on WargameVault as pay what you want, feel free to check it out.

http://www.wargamevault.com/product/205460/Fear-Naught--Quick-Naval-Wargaming?src=hottest

>>51820189
>>51820880
To be fair, the Hyugas are pretty much helicopter destroyers with an extra emphasis on helicopter, but still part destroyer. They've got VLS and torp tubes, unlike normal helicopter carriers.

Izumos are totally helicopter carriers, though.

And F-35s can't STOVL off of either, the exhaust would melt the deck.

>>51824026
>And F-35s can't STOVL off of either, the exhaust would melt the deck.

Guess that flaw will be fixed in the next class of totes not carriers.

>>51823017
I feel like it still needs some proofreading and play-testing. In the movement speed section you have Dreadnoughts listed as having 4 inch movement, when it should say pre-dreadnaught.

It also says that hull mounted torpedo tubes have a 45 degree firing arc from the bow, but that only applies to submarines, battleships often had hull mounted torpedo tubes that fired broadside. You should also consider that some submarines had rear firing tubes as well.

And lastly, you have depth charges being dropped off of the bow of ships, typicaly they were either dropped off of the stern, or launched off the sides.

>>51820577
>Ragging on not!Leonov
>Going autismo on a show that actually incorporated Newtonian physics as compared to its contemporaries and predecessors

>>51824094
No? The JMSDF knows what role it will play if there's a war; hunting subs and contributing ships to US formations. That's why they're never going to make the helicopter carriers STOVL capable, because they don't need to spend money to add capabilities they'll never use.

Besides, Japan's already got quite a few unsinkable aircraft carriers. inb4 Climb Mount Narodnaya

File: SRW V English Ad.jpg (781KB, 1452x2048px) Image search: [Google]

781KB, 1452x2048px

>>51773630
not to mention it's Super Robot Wars debut is coming out in less than 48 hours(including a SEA English version);

https://youtu.be/18otfdWJlLI

https://youtu.be/KhBMd4YbIzk

https://youtu.be/J0qXRy9rwSc

>>51825118
>YAZAN MOTHERFUCKING GABLE
YES

Bump for spaceships

File: SS Atlantic Conveyor.jpg (69KB, 800x636px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 800x636px

>>51824026
>And F-35s can't STOVL off of either, the exhaust would melt the deck.
Not like that can be reinforced like the marines are doing with their landing pads.
I mean, it's not all that hard to make a deck you can take off from with SVTOL, pic highly related (seeing as it's not even a warship)

File: F98ELYG.jpg (363KB, 1024x700px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1024x700px

>>51833309
>Swear to god them damn seagulls better not crap all over my ship again.

File: 192c857a6fccbcbba9738cabeef5fe98.jpg (54KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 640x426px

>but a-anon my propellers are showing

File: HMAS Australia lewds.jpg (129KB, 700x1000px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 700x1000px

>>51833913
>watching them screwing really gets a ship going

File: (yes).jpg (21KB, 321x322px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 321x322px

>>51773596
>Revelation Space
>Blindsight
mein negro of superlative taste

File: 38295372959b91e00bb0df971cca43a4.jpg (37KB, 610x270px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 610x270px

>>51759854
>>51760046
TEC ships - mainly the capital ships and rebel Titan - from Sins of a Solar Empire fit the bill pretty well, although they have a few more fiddly (and shooty) bits than Halo's.

>>51836640
>German experiments with underwater cannons

>>51839670
>14 inch autism the boat

>>51839767
I like how the twin turret is just, there. Like you could remove it and nobody would notice.

What are some good systems for historical naval battles?

>>51840743
Because god forbid you have a turret with an odd number of guns.

File: 4B1A4784.png (507KB, 1088x768px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 1088x768px

>>51838485
http://www.combinedfleet.com/atully04.htm

>>51842357
It is a british boat, their capital ships went through multiple periods when their designs looked pretty weird.

>>51842409
>We aren't sure about this superfiring thing the Yanks are proposing, so instead we'll just put 12 inch wing turrets on our new Dreadnaughts.
>Hrm, it seems putting twice as many turrets on everything is too heavy for battlecruisers. Maybe we should try putting them in the centerline or something.
>Fuck that, we'll just stagger our wing turrets and then just leave a gap so they can fire across the deck, risking damage to the ship's superstructure while also providing a smaller angle of fire.

>>51842366
Sexy.

>>51842039
What period?

>>51842366
>muv-luv ships
>pseudo-stealth hullform
>CIWS

for what purpose
BETA don't use missiles
and >taking on a proper navy with BBs

For those interested, Naval War has received a small content update, mainly a lot of datacards for new ship classes for the US and JP. For those who wanted to try some late-war engagements you should be good all the way up to Leyte.

>>51843471
Neptune & Colossus classes probably were strangest looking brit boats of their day
>1 pair of superfiring turrets in the aft
>2 mid ship turrets probably in across the deck type arrangement
>1 turret in the bow

It is like this awkward hybrid caught between two worlds.

>>51846775
>>pseudo-stealth hullform
Probably because they thought they would look cool.
Also post-BETA war """"""""future-proofing"""""""" because the humans in muv-luv think they're ever going to stop fighting the BETA. dude 10^37 ayy lmaos.
>>C1IWS
They're used against BETA in TDA ep 00.

>>51848779
They will stop fighting them, once the inevitable extinction of humanity happens.

File: 29215BB6.png (985KB, 1440x1200px) Image search: [Google]

985KB, 1440x1200px

>>51850272
Well at least the bratty savior has prevented that from happening on Earth for about 30~ years.

>>51845833
Probably WWII I guess? Maybe interwar?

File: Duca-degli-Abruzzi.jpg (100KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 640x480px

>>51850543
If you make your way on over to /hwg/ and look in the OP for the Naval mf. You'll find Victory at Sea and (VAS:OOB) and General Quarters 3, which are both WWII systems. There's also Naval Thunder, but I've never played it, so can't comment. There's also the first edition of Grand Fleets which is WWI and interwar, and there's an anon that's been writing a quick play system called Fear Naught which you can find further up this thread. >>51823017
Also in the Naval MF is Ship Blows Up!, which is another /tg/ original, and hearkens from the old naval generals we had before /hwg/.

Lastly, check out Naval War, it's a free system that's still in development, but has a sizeable amount of content available, and is quite a lot of fun. All you gotta do is make a forum login to get access to the files.

https://www.naval-war.com/

>>51830604
This was a good story

File: Navigatori_Antonio Da Noli_Venice.jpg (248KB, 1598x1020px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1598x1020px

>>51851222
>Conte di Cavour

Muh fellow spaghetti eater

File: novorossiysk_14.jpg (424KB, 1795x1300px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 1795x1300px

>>51851352
Have another (ex)-pastaboat.

>>51848084
It just bothers me that they were afraid superfiring turrets might damage the ship, so they went with an arrangement that had a potential to do even more damage to the ship. While at the same time taking up more space and offering narrower firing arcs.

File: lYGwUm9.jpg (203KB, 1450x750px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1450x750px

>>51851923
Superfiring turrets would damage the other turrets and kill their crews because they hadn't figured out how to blast-proof the roofs yet, which seems like a worse alternative to damaging the superstructure a bit. They did stop using those layout pretty quickly, though.
And I don't know if the Brits thought of it as well, but the Germans were reluctant to adopt superfiring turrets simply because the design bureau was afraid that a single shell would knock out both turrets (which actually happened twice on Seydlitz and once on Derfflinger, although in Derfflinger's case it was more due to human error.)

Also, sexy picture of Seydlitz.

>>51852305
The oubvious solution here would be to just put turrets in the center-line. Three centerline turrets would have nearly as much firepower as most dreadnaughts, for a fraction of the weight.

Of course, I understand that might make the machinery space a bit cramped.

Where's a good place to get clear bases online? I'm thinking about 100mm x 30mm.

I'm on my phone, could somebody post some Soyokaze?

File: tfw no all centerline BC.jpg (95KB, 743x721px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 743x721px

>>51852590
Just took a look at the competing designs for Seydlitz. One design actually featured 5 turrets in an all-centerline arrangement, like on the König-class or the British Orion-class. According to a military assessment that design, IVe, was actually structurally superior to the other competing designs and had more protection, but Tirpitz and the other Admirals favoured the cross-deck firing design IIc.

Fuckin' Tirpitz.

>>51853654
Tirpitz, all the retardation of Fisher but none of his vision.

>>51853341
>never heard of
>look up
Huh. Gonna have to watch this anon, thanks!

File: get along.jpg (49KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x480px

>>51855043
Great show

File: Soyokaze.jpg (204KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1280x800px

>>51853341

>>51853654
Yeah, don't heavy wing turrets make you more vulnerable to torpedoes hitting your magazine? And make you more likely to capsize? You'd think you want all heavy/vulnerable stuff in the center, with maximum flotation on the sides.

>>51854924
Never understood why French quads couldn't be fired in left/right pairs given that the turrets were already divided on the inside anyway. I know late war Richlieu had some mechanical timing added that delayed the inner two barrels just a hair. Would there have been no way to do this outside of local control?

>>51855078
Is this the Ciaphas Cain anime?

>>51855043

You're gonna have a fun time anon.

>>51855154

Thank you!

>>51860195

No, that's the first officer of the Soyokaze under the command of the anime's eponymous Irresponsible Captain Tylor .

He's the "Strait Man" who is constantly (inadvertently?)trolled by his commanding officer who is either a genius asshole or an incredibly lucky idiot.

>>51860468

Aww fuck, I wrote strait instead of straight, goddamn homonyms are my Achilles' heal.

Anyway...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8W7eF49xv4

How the hell is this thread still alive

File: 2c9460aa2d8c0ce52e679a81cdd9f9f3.jpg (18KB, 564x346px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 564x346px

>>51861913
Do you not know how warships stay afloat?

>>51861913
Naval wargame generals and spaceship generals both have decent staying power. They update fast enough to stay bumped, but not too fast that they autosage. This thread is both.

>>51773630
>humans win thanks to plotpower
>aliens lose even though they have better plans
>human characters are garbage

Shame that the story is so poorly written.

>>51863943
>humans win thanks to literally saving their capital city
>aliens lose because they decide "fuck this shit, our leader is dead, he tried to kill us all, the humans saved our ass, and our grand fleet is annihilated. Might as well put this conquest shit on hold for now while we sort everything out"
FTFY

>human characters are garbage
Won't argue with that

>>51863973
I'm talking about the naval battles and not the clusterfuck ending I didn't even finish.

>>51863943
>>51864081
It's because the Yamato is a ship, and ships are girls (except the Russians, I think?), and her name means she's obviously peak yamato nadeshiko, which means she only does what's proper, and winning is proper, ergo she wins.

File: IMG_20170223_154806370.jpg (1MB, 2592x1456px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1456px

>updated WIP
Lighting isn't cooperating, but the inking pulled out a bit more definition around the 14cm/50 and 12.7/40 batteries. Didn't really do much for the decking, which I had to go and touch up.

Basically on to basing now.

>>51867753
Looks good anon. All that tan from the temporary base and table makes the decking kind of get lost, but once it's based the whole ship is gonna look great. The inking helped your secondaries pop quite a bit from last wip.

>>51867627
>yamato is a ship

Are you sure? I was led to believe that she was a hotel.

>>51816793
I'd say they were more boring than offensively bad. Which is more than I can say for the story.

File: my dumb faggot CO.png (201KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 640x480px

Every fucking day. Every single fucking day when i report for duty my CO just sits there and gives me this stupid look on his face. What should i do about him? Ideas?

>>51874793
Its obvious he wants the D.

File: Irresponsible Captain Tylor Fighter Battle.gif (4MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 480x270px

>>51875174

Destroyer?

File: 3f86406bf897e37789b2562901d8554e.jpg (41KB, 564x637px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 564x637px

>>51871464
I looked on the wiki and was irrationally mad when I found out the only classes were carrier, destroyer and 'super carrier'.

>>51876447
So more or less, real life, except they stopped calling small destroyers "Frigates" and large destroyers "Cruisers"

File: 90eaa42d73f413dc6154c4e3da93a0c1.jpg (46KB, 564x414px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 564x414px

>>51876608
You do know modern destroyers are really cruisers right?

>>51876823
I suppose you are right, but the introduction of the guided missile means that ship size is only really important for range and sea-keeping ability. Every warship that isn't a submarine or carrier goes 30+ knots, has a 5 inch gun, helicopter, torpedoes, CWIS, and missiles.

The only reason to make anything big anymore is seakeeping ability. Maybe if we're lucky they'll end up calling the nuclear powered Raillgun/Laser equipped warships of the future "Cruisers." But these days even an Aircraft carrier can be a destroyer if the politicians say so.

File: 1473108017766.jpg (147KB, 1024x688px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1024x688px

>>51877398
This hurts me.

>>51876447
To be fair, that's pretty much the current USN once you put the "cruisers" back with the destroyers where they belong.

fucking cruiser gap REEEEEE
TICOS ARE DDS

>>51877398
The only reason why carriers probably aren't yet reclassified as a type of destroyers outside of Japan is probably because making up a decent sounding designation for large nuclear aviation destroyers (DDVNB? DDVBN? hell even a DDVB is pretty awkward sounding) would probably be a pain in the ass.

>>51877710
Well, corvettes tend to lack 5 inch guns and helicopters, and are easier to stealth than frigates and destroyers. If anything missile corvettes are the only real DDs left.

>>51816793
>hey lets put missile tubes and gimp our airwing capacity for reasons

>>51759585
>>51759627
>>51759840
>>51763745
What's recovery operations like for the fighter craft on these things?

>>51882274
Stall speed ain't much of an issue out in space, so they just sidle up and have a crane haul 'em in.

File: 1415956203069_Image_galleryImage_2ba3f822a57130744b13d8c83.jpg (35KB, 306x408px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 306x408px

>>51833781

File: 6e73da1ff97b90def09cd66ac155217e.jpg (90KB, 912x608px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 912x608px

Favorite dead systems, or dead systems you'd like to give a try?

B5:ACTA for the former, and Renegade Legions for the latter for me.

>>51879062
IIRC the things sticking up from the deck are part of the FTL, not missile doors.

>>51882274
>>51882441
So exactly the same as with floatplanes on seagoing battleships.

>>51883945
How does that work?

>>51884251
Though presumably without having to stop for fifteen minutes.

>>51825118
I'm starting to play through this right now. I'm not familiar with Yamato, but combined with the changes they've made to how spirit commands work AND those Ex-Commands or whatever that are unique to battleships, it's a goddamn beast holy hell.

And they give the Yamato to you right off the bat.

File: jf4NFV8.jpg (220KB, 800x516px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 800x516px

>>51879062
Not that this makes it a better idea.

>>51886290
It is Russia, their boats have always been prone to have weird design decisions.

>>51885123
Moreso than the Nadesico in J?

>If you put it on defense, it's virtually indestructible.
>If you allow it to counterattack it will steal everyone's kills.
>Enemies can't resist attacking it if it's in range.

SRWJ would be so much harder without the Nadesico.

File: 1474265749139.jpg (39KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 640x480px

>it's modeled after a paper airplane

>>51890849
>the Kaiser granted the newest and fanciest ship in the fleet to one of his subordinates as a reward for valor on the field of battle instead of keeping it for himself
Reinhard was truly based.

>>51882274
As I recall there were a few occasions when they just opened a door on the underside (like the big door on a cargo plane) and let all their fighters out. Presumably if they need to let a bunch back in at once they could do something with that.

File: A Good Laugh.gif (2MB, 360x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x270px

>>51797351
Absolutely disgusting.
Well done.
Oh and what do you know someone other than me that knows BloodRayne exists.

>>51811696
What? No maybe that's what'll happen.
Do you even physics?
Turrets look great but no amount of turrets will out range a spinal gun on account of spinals can be constructed so much bigger.

>>51892946
Spinals also don't make the ship spin around when you fire them.

>>51892946
Do you even space? Cause here's the funny thing about space, we don't know shit about space, aside from a select few, if anyone says anything about how space works, they're talking out their ass.

>>51892946
>range mattering in space
Accuracy's the limiting factor on engagement ranges, and turrets are able to be aimed more easily.

But missiles are going to be the master race.

File: Tachi gunship.png (371KB, 654x798px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 654x798px

>>51893375
Torpedo boat best boat

>>51893375
At the ranges encountered in space, turrets are superfluous. You might as well point the whole ship in the general direction, and then just make fine adjustments by applying tension to the barrel. We're talking infinitesimal fractions of a degree here.

Of course, the best solution is guided projectiles launched via a mass driver to reduce the amount of propellant required.

File: image.jpg (211KB, 900x350px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 900x350px

>Our last, best bump for thread

>>51776768
>No Federation officers on the science team.
>No Federation officers on the engineering team.

It's like you don't even want to solve your problems with bullshit deus-ex-machina technobabble solutions.

>>51875062
Okay, so how big would the gas-envelopes/bags/whatever they're called have to be in real life to support all these runways & big guns & such?

>>51902871
Pretty damn huge.

>>51902871
In a best case scenario, about a thousand cubic metres per ton of mass you want to keep in the air. That'd be a cube with a side of ten metres.

So for something like a double WW2 carrier with a bunch of battleship guns, uhm, probably well past fifty million cubic metres. A kilometer long, half that wide, a hundred meters tall.

Increase by lots and lots as we move from ideal case near sea level to a more realistic case at higher altitudes. Obviously it'll hit "impossible" well before we hit "realistic".

>>51774480
they are reviving BFG aren't they? I'm pretty sure they said they're reviving specialist games.

>>51903562
Is it theoretically possible for a gas to exist that's lighter than hydrogen?

>>51903702
Just go full vacuum?

>>51905845
I prefer H.M.S. Camden Lock, myself: - https://youtu.be/Rz-1c2o1Dxw

>>51759478
Why isn't it warship admiral?