|
Post by AdmiralObvious on Jul 26, 2017 19:59:43 GMT
Considering i had to erase my user designs (again) after the tourney, i'm going to need to completely redo everything i've done before. Though tentatively, i should have a 9mm machine gun that can work, and a sandblaster that could work as well, all without mods.
|
|
|
Post by zorbeltuss on Jul 26, 2017 20:31:01 GMT
No turret is desired/required and we have 3MW and 2m length to work with? Luxury! (Microdrones are my current area of research...) Are multiple-instance single submissions OK? I have a 16mm cannon that might fit multiple in that space alongside each other, and it'll definitely fit more than one of the 10.5mm gun. Hm, and the small railgun would fit... What's your scoring metric exactly? Multiples are allowed. Scores will be remapped to -10 to 10 and run through a sigmoid function, then the resulting -1 to 1 scale will be divided by two and have 0.5 added to it. Of course sustained fire will have to be capped since both lasers and some guns have a much longer sustained fire than a reasonable combat length for a drone and since it's rather hard to map a scale of 0 to infinity to -10 to 10 and have any reasonable results, I wont say the exact number it will be capped to since then all guns will probably have exactly that time of sustained fire but I can say it will be measured in seconds.
|
|
|
Post by zorbeltuss on Jul 26, 2017 20:46:04 GMT
Is the weapon's effectiveness not measured? Because I imagine that a conventional cannon that shoots thousands of potassium flakes per second would win in all of the current objective metrics. I'd doubt it would get the most likes but I'm up to be proven wrong like always, I would have a range metric, but it is kind of hard to apply to missiles and blast launchers though I could cap that to the highest other weapon. The likes is the closest currently to actual combat metric. Edit: Also I'm not liking posts in this thread because I don't want to contaminate my numbers.
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jul 26, 2017 21:01:57 GMT
The likes is the closest currently to actual combat metric. Edit: Also I'm not liking posts in this thread because I don't want to contaminate my numbers. Would it be counted if we like our own posts? Because we can do that...
|
|
|
Post by zorbeltuss on Jul 26, 2017 21:07:18 GMT
The likes is the closest currently to actual combat metric. Edit: Also I'm not liking posts in this thread because I don't want to contaminate my numbers. Would it be counted if we like our own posts? Because we can do that... Well if you can do that then I'm assuming the minimum will be 1 like instead of 0 which will make no difference in scoring, unless someone makes a submission they do not like themselves and no one else likes it either. Edit: I will however make that clear in the main post, so that no one misses it.
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Jul 26, 2017 23:04:33 GMT
This is a 10 km/s flak railgun, with 2 MW of power attached (radiators not included) for a fire rate of 930 RPM. The railgun can take up to 8 MW of power (3700 RPM) before encountering overheating issues. 4500 ammo rounds included. 412 mc cost for firing 1 second's worth of ammo. Needless to say, with an energy of 57.8 kJ for each shot, a human could not take the recoil of firing it (or the radiation of the reactors...) Code: View Attachment(uses my standard flak rounds and standard 1.01 MW reactor) Dammit Apophys, I thought I was done looting your designs for ideas! On a semi-unrelated note, does anyone remember where that modded Blackbox module for the astronaut was posted?
|
|
|
Post by Dhan on Jul 27, 2017 0:05:25 GMT
Is the weapon's effectiveness not measured? Because I imagine that a conventional cannon that shoots thousands of potassium flakes per second would win in all of the current objective metrics. I'd doubt it would get the most likes but I'm up to be proven wrong like always, I would have a range metric, but it is kind of hard to apply to missiles and blast launchers though I could cap that to the highest other weapon. The likes is the closest currently to actual combat metric. Edit: Also I'm not liking posts in this thread because I don't want to contaminate my numbers. The thing is that missiles and blast launchers are already not competitive given the scoring metrics. Missiles can't compete with a conventional gun that launches 1000 1 milicredit rounds per second. The way to somewhat balance this would be to weigh the metrics differently, but that seems like a tall order. Perhaps we could also add a kinetic energy per projectile (or per second) metric to rule out the potassium flakes I mentioned earlier. And yeah the post likes would be the only measure of effectiveness currently but it's not a very good one as people can like for many different reasons.
|
|
|
Post by treptoplax on Jul 27, 2017 1:34:46 GMT
Well, I'm not sure what I ended up with was so much a gatling gun as directional flak, but here you go: That's a 8000-round magazine. Using the full 3.5Mw available, we get... er, something like 157kRPM, which will empty the magazine in about 1/20 second (not enough time to overheat). Turning the loaders all the way down to 1w it will last about four minutes. Probably more reasonable, 2400 RPM, let's call that the entry for this post. FWIW: 679mc per round, 27.8 credits/s. You can jack up the credits per second as high as you like by powering up the loader
|
|
|
Post by AdmiralObvious on Jul 27, 2017 1:43:05 GMT
Well, I'm not sure what I ended up with was so much a gatling gun as directional flak, but here you go: That's a 8000-round magazine. Using the full 3.5Mw available, we get... er, something like 157kRPM, which will empty the magazine in about 1/20 second (not enough time to overheat). Turning the loaders all the way down to 1w it will last about four seconds. Probably more reasonable, 2400 RPM, let's call that the entry for this post. Note: I liked this post because it is the first conventional gun entry.
|
|
|
Post by Dhan on Jul 27, 2017 2:16:58 GMT
Here's my totally reasonable and legitimate submission. Please make sure to like this post
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Jul 27, 2017 2:52:44 GMT
Here's my totally reasonable and legitimate submission. Please make sure to like this post Well folks, that's it. Game over. Shut it all down. We now have potato guns in space.
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Jul 27, 2017 3:09:42 GMT
Entry with modded Limits.txt, in order to allow subgram projectiles -- 100mg projectiles. Tiny coilgun with a reload time of 180 μs, which will take more than a second to overheat. RPM of 5555.6, so 5556 MMG rounds are included. Cost per unit is 969 c, cost per (100 mg) round is 52.7 mc -- so cost per second is 292 c. CoilgunModule 3.50 MW 1mm Internal Coilgun UsesCustomName false PowerConsumption_W 3.5e+006 Coil Composition Gamma Titanium Aluminide WireRadius_m 0.00492 NumberOfTurns 1 NumberOfLayers 1 NumberOfStages 200 BarrelArmor Composition Graphite Aerogel Thickness_m 0.0893 Armature Composition Magnetic Metal Glass BoreRadius_m 0.000556 Mass_kg 0.0001 Tracer Iridium Payload null Loader PowerConsumption_W 50000 ExternalMount false InternalMount true AttachedAmmoBay Capacity 5556 Stacks 1 TargetsShips true TargetsShots true
|
|
|
Post by treptoplax on Jul 27, 2017 3:14:50 GMT
Hey, Dhan's potato gun may be a joke but stick a remote control and a steering engine on that puppy and blast launch it out of a drone closing at 8Km/s and it's a whole other thing...
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Jul 27, 2017 3:30:49 GMT
Here's a .50 caliber machine gun. Simple and effective for around 300 years and counting.
|
|
|
Post by zorbeltuss on Jul 27, 2017 7:31:24 GMT
I'd doubt it would get the most likes but I'm up to be proven wrong like always, I would have a range metric, but it is kind of hard to apply to missiles and blast launchers though I could cap that to the highest other weapon. The likes is the closest currently to actual combat metric. Edit: Also I'm not liking posts in this thread because I don't want to contaminate my numbers. The thing is that missiles and blast launchers are already not competitive given the scoring metrics. Missiles can't compete with a conventional gun that launches 1000 1 milicredit rounds per second. The way to somewhat balance this would be to weigh the metrics differently, but that seems like a tall order. Perhaps we could also add a kinetic energy per projectile (or per second) metric to rule out the potassium flakes I mentioned earlier. And yeah the post likes would be the only measure of effectiveness currently but it's not a very good one as people can like for many different reasons. Per second seems more reasonable since that means that lasers will not automatically lose, because that gives a result in watts, however, it instead seems to give an unfair advantage to nukes, that may be offset by the cost per shot and cost per unit of nuke launchers however, and how would I calculate fragmentation on this? I'm not saying I'm against it though, I'm just saying that I need more input from more people. So how would I judge fragmentation against this and is it okay that nukes would almost guaranteed be victorious in this category?
|
|