Maybe we can get a sub-forum for them on the Armory or something? Just a suggestion.
stubby wrote:The wiki's better when it comes to making repositories of things, so you don't have to search through long and frequently derailing threads.
Silverdream wrote:Instead of making stats for the drone controller, why not make a simplistic rule:
If blows up, droids blow up. Explosions are cooler and more destructive than simple deactivations.
BrikWars 2010 Rules wrote:BrikWars ... stands in pretty direct opposition to many fundamental elements of the LEGO® philosophy, such as "Not Teaching Kids How Funny It Is to Set People on Fire."
Kirillyos wrote:84. I'm trying to make a thing where a drone operator or robot brain can pilot multiple drones at once (think like the droid control ships from Star Wars), and then destroying the control station would ground all the drones. Would the "Multitasking" ability fit the bill?
stubby wrote:Sure. And it is cheaper than regular flight -- as long as the thrusters are already pointed in the direction you want to go. If you need to buy separate thrusters for turning, then it turns out to be less of a bargain.
Yes, you buy up thrust separately for each thruster. So if you've only got two thrusters and the left one gets damaged, you'll be doing a whole lot of turning left.
Eh, the forward launch that splits off is only 3". Besides, the Lego TIE Interceptor is even larger (if you take the wings into account), though that size is mostly from surface elements. Either way, it doesn't really matter if the other fighters are scaled appropriately.stubby wrote:Well first off, 6" is on the medium-to-large end for a BrikWars vehicle. So this ship might be on the beefy side to be intercepting smaller fighters.
stubby wrote:Thrusters work by you putting a fingertip on one or more of them and pushing in the direction they're pointing, so forward motion is easy but turning with any precision is difficult (unless you also have rotational thrusters).
stubby wrote:That whole section is getting overhauled with better examples and graphics (and removing the majority of the text, hopefully), so it's not super clear right now, I know,.
Kirillyos wrote:Eh, the forward launch that splits off is only 3". Besides, the Lego TIE Interceptor is even larger (if you take the wings into account), though that size is mostly from surface elements. Either way, it doesn't really matter if the other fighters are scaled appropriately.
Kirillyos wrote:Also, going off the function of their real-life inspiration, the point of interceptor craft is to quickly close the distance and engage enemy bombers (which tend to be quite large) and stop them from delivering their payload, not go figher-to-fighter. Cosequently, fighters, having the upper hand in maneuverability against interceptors, were often used to escort bombers and protect the larger, slower craft against interceptors.
Kirillyos wrote:"rotational thrusters"? As in "thrusters sticking out of the sides of the vehicle"?
Kirillyos wrote:stubby wrote:That whole section is getting overhauled with better examples and graphics (and removing the majority of the text, hopefully), so it's not super clear right now, I know.
My apologies if my questions are coming across as dense, but I'm glad the section is getting an overhaul, because I have read it and re-read it numerous times and am still genuinely confused (and I used to launch real rockets as a hobby).
Kirillyos wrote:Just to make sure I got this right: vehicle movement with thrust as the only propulsion bought is perfectly legitimate?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest