Questions regarding military roles and warship development

Please ask your questions here and have the most common questions taken to the official F.A.Q page.
1. I have been accepted into the empire under a full time military role, is there a possibility that I could work part time in the IDR specifically to develop fighters/strike fighters and warship hulls and their armament? I believe that I am well qualified for this task as I have experience designing and fighting with star destroyers and fighter interceptors on Space Engineers servers.

2. I understand and respect the preference for fighters that look similar to that of the Galactic Empire’s which do have some practical function that is hard to see unless you have used them in a game like Space Engineers. My question and concern is how far will this strive for aesthetics stretch in a scenario that making a design more visually appealing decreases performance and/or survivability?

3. I have seen in other posts that the Empire has plans for a rather luxurious destroyer which was described as a “city”. Will there be warships similar to the imperial class star destroyer (not necessarily the same size) that are smaller but more focused on performance to unit/operation cost?
1. You are able to be in both as long as your personal preferences don't stand between designs, as well as keeping the knowledge and projects you are doing in the IRD secret. The IRD and Military have a little separation for security reasons.

2. Aethstetics are just as important as efficiency in many cases, especially while not in a combat situation, designs are created to not only influence but also to be as efficient as possible. For the wing size of the fighters, this is used intentionally to make them visible, we want people to know there is a presence of protection. This is used to help with controlling very large populations and to act as a deterrent most of the time, although they serve to be very useful while not in combat, work is being done to make them more practical in combat while retaining that stance that they generate.

3. The Luxury destroyer that is mentioned would be the Royal Destroyer, a massive end-goal for the Empire which will only be developed when stability is constant and we need more challenges, it may take years to complete but it will be the size of a continent and act as a portable capital. Smaller and more cost-effective destroyers would do the opposite when being produced, although the courier design is a smaller version of a destroyer in many ways that fill both the roles of a light vessel and transport/lander.
2. Aethstetics are just as important as efficiency in many cases, especially while not in a combat situation, designs are created to not only influence but also to be as efficient as possible.
It's good to hear that aesthetics are part of your consideration. I'd imagine that creating the most optimal ship design is almost exclusively about balancing surface area (Turret Placement), Extraneous Armor (Protecting thrusters and other vital exterior only components) and volume (Primary Armor/Hull, Part Redundancy, Interior space, etc.). Taking this into account, the most optimal combat ship design is actually just straight tubes or tube-like structures. They have the best balance for surface area to volume (leaning more on volume and thus providing redundancy). Though it would be the most efficient, it's not exactly elegant.

Who is online

In total there are 0 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 0 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 62 on Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:37 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests