|
Post by uberdude9001 on Mar 25, 2017 3:12:27 GMT
Sawed in half Is there a reliable way to get the nose pointed to my craft? Sadly I haven't been able to get the AI to do that, so I order the ship to point its nose at the target and let it shoot me. EDIT: Is there any way to create custom Enemy behavior?
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Mar 25, 2017 3:19:57 GMT
I'm confident that a NEFP would punch through it if the plate actually hit. The main obstacle in that case is likely to be that with the small cross-section that a nose-on profile provides, the plate will tend to miss the ship and go flying off into space. In that situation you should see an improved performance from going smaller and cheaper, simply because firing a larger quantity of smaller missiles lets you "roll the dice" more to get a handful of good solid hits out of it.
Of course, for high-yield warheads it's also a good idea to test them against a large stationary target before putting them into service. You want to make sure that it's actually forming the penetrator, and not just vaporizing the plate.
|
|
|
|
Post by uberdude9001 on Mar 25, 2017 3:27:41 GMT
Very low incidence hit Oh wow, how heavy are those projectiles and how fast are they going?
|
|
ndeo
Junior Member
It's not a flashlight... It's a High-frequency relativistic boson cannon
Posts: 67
|
Post by ndeo on Mar 25, 2017 3:30:40 GMT
5.93ms x 100 guns - 2.41km/s 3g projectiles Quite cheap too
|
|
|
Post by uberdude9001 on Mar 25, 2017 3:33:11 GMT
5.93ms x 100 guns - 2.41km/s 3g projectiles Quite cheap too Interesting, I notice you have a lot of angular velocity as well. Is this combined with the low velocity of the guns allowing you to attack the sides?
|
|
ndeo
Junior Member
It's not a flashlight... It's a High-frequency relativistic boson cannon
Posts: 67
|
Post by ndeo on Mar 25, 2017 3:46:28 GMT
5.93ms x 100 guns - 2.41km/s 3g projectiles Quite cheap too Interesting, I notice you have a lot of angular velocity as well. Is this combined with the low velocity of the guns allowing you to attack the sides? I think it's just the AI targeting one of the railguns and the remaining bullets hitting the sides. The ship design is in the other thread if you want to test it by yourself, just be mindful of the framedrop it makes
|
|
|
Post by nerd1000 on Mar 25, 2017 9:57:46 GMT
The damage model in CoaDE seems to be heavily based on probability for kinetic attacks. I'm yet to find any armor scheme that's immune to a swarm of cheap gun drones, purely because they rain so much lead on the target that eventually the dice roll enough times that the plate is penetrated.
As an example, consider the stock 33mm cannon. Its 5g DU bullets are more like sheets of thick metal foil than real AP rounds and should struggle to get through even fairly modest amounts of armor due to low cross sectional density. In practice however enough of them will kill anything.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Mar 25, 2017 14:37:24 GMT
The damage model in CoaDE seems to be heavily based on probability for kinetic attacks. I'm yet to find any armor scheme that's immune to a swarm of cheap gun drones, purely because they rain so much lead on the target that eventually the dice roll enough times that the plate is penetrated. As an example, consider the stock 33mm cannon. Its 5g DU bullets are more like sheets of thick metal foil than real AP rounds and should struggle to get through even fairly modest amounts of armor due to low cross sectional density. In practice however enough of them will kill anything. Unfortunately, this is not true. A hundred gundrones firing at either my S rank or EX rank targets have been left on continuous fire for over an hour. When I return, no penetrations have occured. Penetrations from DU foil occur because repeated hundred KJ impacts have a tendency to fracture reasonable armor; bulk monolithic armor (as found on modern tanks) do not fail to this kind of attack but imposes a much higher mass penalty.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 25, 2017 15:31:59 GMT
modern tanks do not have monolithic armour, they have a composite of various ceramics and metals designed to stop HEAT and APFSDS rounds, old tanks have monolithic armour (M60A1, T-62 and the likes)
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Mar 25, 2017 16:01:45 GMT
I mostly design my ship's armor around lasting long enough to finish the fight, or not.
10 to 30 seconds of constant fire was a success to me and I generally use laser and flare drone to disable missiles.
This makes them light enough to be filled with payload of drones and missiles but generally, they probably won't last long in a real fight.
The armor is mostly just for the crew to feel safe, and for the parade.
Armor scheme is 3mm Boron, 50cm graphite aerogel, 3mm amorphous carbon and 0.5mm diamond with decently pointly nose and thin cross-section.
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Mar 25, 2017 16:46:35 GMT
I mostly design my ship's armor around lasting long enough to finish the fight, or not. 10 to 30 seconds of constant fire was a success to me and I generally use laser and flare drone to disable missiles. This makes them light enough to be filled with payload of drones and missiles but generally, they probably won't last long in a real fight. The armor is mostly just for the crew to feel safe, and for the parade. Armor scheme is 3mm Boron, 50cm graphite aerogel, 3mm amorphous carbon and 0.5mm diamond with decently pointly nose and thin cross-section. I use an almost identical armor scheme. Heavier ships may get a second layer of graphogel-diamond. It's good for high angle deflections, but heavy rounds at flat angles go right through it. Still light and resistant to nukes/lasers.
|
|
|
Post by gedzilla on Mar 25, 2017 18:51:00 GMT
I've seen many people here claim it was impractical (both cost and mass wise) to armor ships against kinetic attacks. For a long time I agreed with them since I was unable to do so with any of my designs. Even relatively weak weapons like the 33mm cannon mounted on stinger drones could poke holes straight through my ships, even if I put so much armor on them they could barely move. I then realized that it was my design philosophy causing this, and that it would have to change if I wanted ships with armor. The first issue was my use of Hydrogen Deuteride as fuel for my NTRs. My rationale for carrying it was to maximize delta V. Sadly, its low density makes it impossible to armor adequately while maintaining this advantage. The second was my insistence on broadside engagements. In theory a ship that has its engines perpendicular to incoming fire will be able to evade more easily, but even with massive thrust-weight ratios these ships would still be hit and easily penetrated and disabled by incoming fire. These designs also require much more surface area to armor and cannot be as heavily sloped as the nose of the craft. The third was my use of 1GW lasers with 4m radius apertures. These these are huge and result in a massive ship profile that must be armored. They also require a reactor of similar size. The worst thing about these are the massive radiators both the reactor and laser itself require which simply cannot be armored in any way. Even if you place them on the opposite side of the ship that is expected to be shot at, they will still be blown off by nearby nuclear detonations. I also had other issues, such as my excessive use of boron in some places UHMWPE, that made the ships vulnerable to thermal damage, their hulls could even be cut through by lasers. My ships also mounted a large number of weapons, such as missiles and railguns in addition to their laser armaments, these increased the crew requirements and tended to increase the surface area of the ship. My solution was to switch to decane, it is very dense so allows for high mass fractions even with thick armor. My new ship would also be designed for frontal engagements, minimizing the profile that was required to be armored. I also dropped the laser armament entirely, favoring accurate and high velocity railguns designed for dual purpose point defense and anti-ship use. The resulting ship is below: So far it is limited only by the inability to mount composite armor on the turrets. The hull is immune to pretty much every stock gun I've fired at it from the front and even my KKVs have proven ineffective against it (441kgs at 9.31km/s). The radiators can take a rather shocking amount of nuclear detonations to remove. I've only been able to kill it by blasting through the relatively less armored turrets and hitting the radiators and killing the crew with acceleration from near-contact nuclear detonations. Does anyone have something that can penetrate the frontal armor? Also, can anyone spot anything physics breaking about this? Resisting half-ton penetrators at almost 10km/s seems somewhat suspect to me, even with the 80 degree slope of the frontal armor. Aside from carrier and laser star designs, the way you just designed that ship is basically the only reasonable way to do so (now that we have side mounted foward facing guns). Its how I design all my ships, and allows for the greatest survival in battle. Its also probably how real space warships will be designed in the future. Slanted armor is OP. And decane is great, you can also make decent resistojets and MPD's with decane. Check the overall armor thread if you want armor ideas
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Mar 25, 2017 22:26:21 GMT
modern tanks do not have monolithic armour, they have a composite of various ceramics and metals designed to stop HEAT and APFSDS rounds, old tanks have monolithic armour (M60A1, T-62 and the likes) Apologies, my terminology was applied incorrecrly. What I meant to say is that some tanks have solid, massive amounts of armor, equivalent in mass (more, for tanks with DU layers in armor) and protection to over a meter of steel.
|
|
|
Post by Pttg on Mar 26, 2017 7:55:31 GMT
Sawed in half Is there a reliable way to get the nose pointed to my craft? What weapon were you using?
|
|