Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
2017-10-12, 09:22 AM
Post: #1
Question Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
In recent updates, we've seen huge buffs to metal, as well as a price increase of alloy. For early game, metal is pretty expensive, but wood is much of the time inadequate. What do people think about a new type of block, perhaps ironclad or something? It would have a price of 3, have a lower AP of 7 or 8, and only have a bonus of half explosive damage, instead of quarter damage as metal gets.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 09:47 AM (This post was last modified: 2017-10-12 09:48 AM by Richard Dastardly.)
Post: #2
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
You could even call it stone.

Or less facetiously, expand stone& call it composite or ceramic.

Poke my boat! mostly pre-2.0 learning & catalogue thread - Heavy tanks 20/10/17. 6 ships made 2.0 aware. If it's not AotE I can't do it regularily - post processing gives me eyestrain at sea.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 10:47 AM
Post: #3
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
Metal reinforced wood maybe?

There is always a weak-spot if you search Hard enough.

If you fire enough AP at that shield, at some point you're going to come through.

There is no "best" I wouldn't even say there is anything universally good, Good is subjective, I find everything bad even if it's in theory good against this or that.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 12:21 PM
Post: #4
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
(2017-10-12 09:47 AM)Richard Dastardly Wrote:  You could even call it stone.

Or less facetiously, expand stone& call it composite or ceramic.

Stone is very heavy and doesn't have a particularly good AP, as well as having no bonus against explosives. Also, no sloped blocks to build ship.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 12:42 PM
Post: #5
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
(2017-10-12 12:21 PM)Shaun Wrote:  Stone is very heavy and doesn't have a particularly good AP, as well as having no bonus against explosives. Also, no sloped blocks to build ship.

Stone has an AP of 7, just like you asked for - it also has a price of 2, which is even less, and it has 50 less health than *metal*, it's more than alloy. It doesn't currently have an explosive damage reduction ( but again, has a lot of health ) but has complete EMP protection instead. It has the same weight & bouyancy as metal. The question is do you want to trade EMP protection for explosive reduction.

Shaped blocks is irrelevant - you wanted an entire new material which would have to have shaped blocks created anyway, it could just as well be done for composite.

Poke my boat! mostly pre-2.0 learning & catalogue thread - Heavy tanks 20/10/17. 6 ships made 2.0 aware. If it's not AotE I can't do it regularily - post processing gives me eyestrain at sea.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 12:57 PM
Post: #6
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
Arent composite armors more expensive? Since theyre made of multiple layers of materials of which one is often steel?

There is always a weak-spot if you search Hard enough.

If you fire enough AP at that shield, at some point you're going to come through.

There is no "best" I wouldn't even say there is anything universally good, Good is subjective, I find everything bad even if it's in theory good against this or that.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 12:59 PM
Post: #7
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
(2017-10-12 09:22 AM)Shaun Wrote:  have a lower AP of 7 or 8, and only have a bonus of half explosive damage, instead of quarter damage as metal gets.

HE damage is a function of armor, there is no special reduction stat.
As Richard Dastardly already said: you just described a weaker stone variant.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 03:21 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-10-12 03:21 PM by Richard Dastardly.)
Post: #8
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
(2017-10-12 12:57 PM)Skyer Wrote:  Arent composite armors more expensive? Since theyre made of multiple layers of materials of which one is often steel?

Composite covers all sorts of materials - there's a big difference between Chobham armour & CFRP, for instance. There seems to be some interesting ideas about composite-metal hulls which is worth some thought ( we can already do that by using different blocks of course but as a single layer it might be an idea ). What I had in mind was some sort of ceramic mix with something to stop it shattering so easily ( so it's still pretty heavy ) but looking around at materials, ceramic reinforced fibre materials are generally used on things like spaceship heatshields or lining the combustion chamber for jet engines, so that might be a bit overkill Tongue

Straight-up carbon fibre is being used for some ships but it's not really anything like stone - lighter, quite strong & tough ( look at how strong aircraft parts made of it are ) but reinforced plastics fracture rather than bend, so I suppose that would translate to fairly low health and high AC. Which is exactly what alloy is already. Along with the low radar return.

So, maybe metal-composite, less health than pure metal, weighs less, less AC ( more brittle ), technically it'd cost more but we can just say it's thinner or something, is still EMP proof.

Or, just make a full range of stone blocks & accept making ships of stone is something that happens Tongue

Poke my boat! mostly pre-2.0 learning & catalogue thread - Heavy tanks 20/10/17. 6 ships made 2.0 aware. If it's not AotE I can't do it regularily - post processing gives me eyestrain at sea.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 05:59 PM
Post: #9
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
Tacking on EMP-proofness to a metal-metal composite seems like shopping list construction--it makes no sense with the fluff, and I think it a good thing that passive EMP construction requires nontrivial tradeoffs.

Also, because of how stacking works it is problematic to introduce materials with HP/AC ratios very different from metal (which we already see with stone where cost is more important than weight)--if costed for their own stats they can become OP in layered armor.

Allr andask.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-10-12, 06:34 PM
Post: #10
RE: Should there be a midway between wood and metal?
I can't find precise details of what they're trying, but it's not metal-metal composite - more like non-metallic fibre material ( ceramic or cf or something else, no idea ) & metal sandwich in some way. Whether that's metal plate & coating layers or something more like tank armour with metal weave layered in, I don't know, but it would seem that it should at least have a good chance of not being conductive. Also probably quite low radar return, I'd imagine.

I'm actually trying to come up with a modern material that feel close to stone stats with interesting properties, rather than thinking what stats ultramodern experiments would have. Even if it's just a cosmetic rebranding so we feel less silly using the blocks Smile but there may be something more interesting and ideal around.

Poke my boat! mostly pre-2.0 learning & catalogue thread - Heavy tanks 20/10/17. 6 ships made 2.0 aware. If it's not AotE I can't do it regularily - post processing gives me eyestrain at sea.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)