|
Post by Durandal on Nov 2, 2016 20:40:18 GMT
Ignore range should not be used. I only turned it on for a few moments to take the second screenshot. The shells will only ever fly 1-2 Km before detonating, so turning it on at long range just wastes shells.I have experimented with micro-missiles for traditional ABM defences before, but not for a defensive flak barrage system. The idea of a DFB is to saturate a volume with as much flak as possible. I don't know if guided projectiles will do anything more than raise the cost. I think ABMs work better as a complimentary system to take down heavily armoured nukes, while the DFB deals with swarms of cheaper missiles. Glad to hear. I'LL give it a shot when I'm off work. I think you may have killed off missiles if this works. LET THE BATTLESHIPS REIGN!
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Nov 2, 2016 20:53:15 GMT
It'll be really hard to test how well they really stack up against each other with the current AI though. The AI won't use "ignore range", so it won't fire the flak cannons. On the other side, it also won't fire the kind of missile volleys that can really test its saturation potential.
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Nov 2, 2016 20:55:45 GMT
It'll be really hard to test how well they really stack up against each other with the current AI though. The AI won't use "ignore range", so it won't fire the flak cannons. On the other side, it also won't fire the kind of missile volleys that can really test its saturation potential. I thought he said that they were effective without using ignore range.
|
|
|
Post by lawson on Nov 2, 2016 21:01:54 GMT
It'll be really hard to test how well they really stack up against each other with the current AI though.*snip* On the other side, it also won't fire the kind of missile volleys that can really test its saturation potential. The AI will if you set it to "reckless" and get into tactical combat range. Then the AI happily hits "launch all" at the start of battle. Had to quit a battle because the AI was using some of my ships with a fast launcher with 500 missiles per ship. When I finally killed the game the AI had a reported 1000 missiles in flight, but based on reporting lag, it was more like 3000 missiles.
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Nov 2, 2016 21:02:45 GMT
It'll be really hard to test how well they really stack up against each other with the current AI though. The AI won't use "ignore range", so it won't fire the flak cannons. On the other side, it also won't fire the kind of missile volleys that can really test its saturation potential. I thought he said that they were effective without using ignore range. If the missile is large enough that their targeting range is longer than their detonation range they might be, but against really small missiles, if ignore range is off then the cannon simply won't fire until the missiles have already passed its defense zone.
|
|
hal
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by hal on Nov 2, 2016 21:04:12 GMT
Glad to hear. I'LL give it a shot when I'm off work. I think you may have killed off missiles if this works. LET THE BATTLESHIPS REIGN! Don't write missiles off just yet. A NEFP warhead that can land penetrators on target from over ~2 km away circumvents this defense, though those would still be vulnerable to AMM interception. Whether or not such a warhead can be made reasonably remains to be seen.
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Nov 2, 2016 21:11:34 GMT
High-velocity flak missiles would also theoretically be able to achieve a large enough stand-off detonation that they could detonate outside the flak barrier and still "hit". Though both that and the stand-off NEFP will require better detonators than we currently have in-game.
Also, technically a KKV that loses thrust to flak but is not knocked off-course would still be a threat. That would be contingent on the game continuing to simulate KKVs after they are rendered inert just in case they hit something (maybe a delay before removing them from play, on the assumption that if they're going to hit something they'll do it quickly), and on whether the guidance algorithm had put it on a valid ballistic intercept by that point.
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Nov 2, 2016 21:37:26 GMT
Don't write missiles off just yet. A NEFP warhead that can land penetrators on target from over ~2 km away circumvents this defense, though those would still be vulnerable to AMM interception. Whether or not such a warhead can be made reasonably remains to be seen. I would love for NEFP'S to be able to that do that, but until we get a better targeting algorithm I think flak has a shot**. BUT what's to stop more effective flak from stopping the more effective missiles? A 2km standoff NEFP might still be hit by a 2.1km range flak shell after all. **Note, I haven't tested these shells myself yet.
|
|
|
Post by nerd1000 on Nov 3, 2016 0:02:37 GMT
Don't write missiles off just yet. A NEFP warhead that can land penetrators on target from over ~2 km away circumvents this defense, though those would still be vulnerable to AMM interception. Whether or not such a warhead can be made reasonably remains to be seen. I would love for NEFP'S to be able to that do that, but until we get a better targeting algorithm I think flak has a shot**. BUT what's to stop more effective flak from stopping the more effective missiles? A 2km standoff NEFP might still be hit by a 2.1km range flak shell after all. **Note, I haven't tested these shells myself yet. If the proxy fuses worked better the flak storm approach could work at any range. Ultimately it will be limited by gun muzzle velocity- if the time of flight is too long enemy missiles can jink out of the way. NEFP is probably limited by either accuracy or the fate of the projectile. It is possible that the pusher plate of existing designs is vapour by the time it reaches full speed, but 10kg of gaseous osmium at 4000 kps will still drill through almost anything unless range is long enough to spread out before impact.
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Nov 3, 2016 2:49:11 GMT
Hmm, what about putting timed flak cannons on a drone flying at high speed toward an enemy, firing a few shots and then trying to impact as a KKV?
That would be quite a large cloud of hypervelocity debris, and such a cloud couldn't be stopped once it's been launched.
|
|
|
Post by nerd1000 on Nov 3, 2016 5:03:56 GMT
Hmm, what about putting timed flak cannons on a drone flying at high speed toward an enemy, firing a few shots and then trying to impact as a KKV? That would be quite a large cloud of hypervelocity debris, and such a cloud couldn't be stopped once it's been launched. It won't work especially well in-game because flak clouds only last a fraction of a second (much to my dismay- if they lasted longer I could manually detonate my flaks at a distance and get a good spread that way). IRL however I don't see any reason it couldn't work other than the fact that it's essentially the same as using a flak missile (which could probably produce the same number of hits for less weight and cost).
|
|
|
Post by redmars on Nov 3, 2016 5:21:30 GMT
Hmm, what about putting timed flak cannons on a drone flying at high speed toward an enemy, firing a few shots and then trying to impact as a KKV? That would be quite a large cloud of hypervelocity debris, and such a cloud couldn't be stopped once it's been launched. It won't work especially well in-game because flak clouds only last a fraction of a second (much to my dismay- if they lasted longer I could manually detonate my flaks at a distance and get a good spread that way). IRL however I don't see any reason it couldn't work other than the fact that it's essentially the same as using a flak missile (which could probably produce the same number of hits for less weight and cost). I've noticed some fragmentation clouds lasting quite a few seconds, actually. I think it's probably to do with the cloud's mass and the rate at which it disperses. re: the end of missiles, I've managed to increase survivability simply by layering a few millimetres of boron onto a missile design.
|
|
hal
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by hal on Nov 3, 2016 5:37:33 GMT
Don't write missiles off just yet. A NEFP warhead that can land penetrators on target from over ~2 km away circumvents this defense, though those would still be vulnerable to AMM interception. Whether or not such a warhead can be made reasonably remains to be seen. I would love for NEFP'S to be able to that do that, but until we get a better targeting algorithm I think flak has a shot**. BUT what's to stop more effective flak from stopping the more effective missiles? A 2km standoff NEFP might still be hit by a 2.1km range flak shell after all. **Note, I haven't tested these shells myself yet. I would think that the advantage would go to NEFPs at further distances, as the warheads could be spaced further apart at the time of detonation while the flak missiles still produce the same cone of effect regardless of distance. While flak missiles could be distributed to cover the wider area, this would result in progressively thinner and therefore less effective flak clouds. This may only have an appreciable effect at standoff distances that are too difficult or impractical to obtain, however.
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Nov 3, 2016 13:08:05 GMT
So I managed to impliment a good copy of these flak guns last night, and after a bit of fiddling got them to have 2.7-2.9 range against stock flack missiles. My Gunship Advanced, which previously relied on its main cannons and direct missile to missile intercepts (and died often if I let missiles get to closing ranges) was able to survive multiple waves of flak from a stock gunship but still took hits. That was with 12 flak guns mounted in three 6-gun rings in and around the radiators.
I had to get to bed before I could do more, but I'm thinking having two or more different fuze settings to create multiple rings or zones of flak might help. I will say, the low cost and crew requirements for these cannons are a major positive. I haven't messed around with conventional guns much and I was quite surprised by this.
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Nov 3, 2016 13:11:19 GMT
So I managed to impliment a good copy of these flak guns last night, and after a bit of fiddling got them to have 2.7-2.9 range against stock flack missiles. My Gunship Advanced, which previously relied on its main cannons and direct missile to missile intercepts (and died often if I let missiles get to closing ranges) was able to survive multiple waves of flak from a stock gunship but still took hits. That was with 12 flak guns mounted in three 6-gun rings in and around the radiators. I had to get to bed before I could do more, but I'm thinking having two or more different fuze settings to create multiple rings or zones of flak might help. I will say, the low cost and crew requirements for these cannons are a major positive. I haven't messed around with conventional guns much and I was quite surprised by this. I could see NEFPs still being a threat but direct anti-missiles can still form the first line of defense. On a larger ship I think greater masses of flak might be even more effective than they are mere upgraded gunship.
|
|