|
Post by caiaphas on Jan 15, 2017 4:40:56 GMT
Basically what it says on the box. I've noticed that on a lot of the asteroids we fight around in-game, 1000 km covers a good percentage of the map.
So what if you stick a few killsat constellations (10GW laser, stupid amounts of armor, maneuvering NTRs and propellant) in orbit around one? Could it potentially be a cost-effective way of keeping enemy ships from approaching?
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Jan 15, 2017 4:49:36 GMT
Killsat is certainly cheaper and easier to maintain than warships, since they are stationary, does not require much fuel and is close to the supply line (The planet it's currently protecting).
The problem was, just like static defense in real life, they are inflexible and to protect an entire planet, you probably need more than just a few stations.
But it will still make it a pain in the ass for invading fleet to attack.
So no, they don't have tactical use. They have strategic use.
Oddly enough, we don't see much of them in game for...some reasons.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 15, 2017 4:53:14 GMT
Killsat is certainly cheaper and easier to maintain than warships, since they are stationary, does not require much fuel and is close to the supply line (The planet it's currently protecting). The problem was, just like static defense in real life, they are inflexible and to protect an entire planet, you probably need more than just a few stations. But it will still make it a pain in the ass for invading fleet to attack. So no, they don't have tactical use. They have strategic use. Oddly enough, we don't see much of them in game for...some reasons. Well, stock laser station sucks. The gigantic laser is sure of a sweet target for the attackers while itself cannot turn to face the attackers. I am sure that the player-made defense stations will have more roles.
|
|
|
Post by jasonvance on Jan 15, 2017 4:53:18 GMT
Yes there likely would be, but I would recommend a different approach. Just store your laser drone fleet in orbit around tactically significant targets and use them when required (they already have the power, and laser). You could even build a focusing array of extra optics to take in each individual beam and reflect / focus it into a single powerful beam capable of much much larger intensities (and thus longer range) than a single laser could create. The laser drones themselves could provide the pumping by firing into the focusing array. This would also help avoid the problem of creating a really large costly slow moving target for KKVs.
|
|
|
Post by caiaphas on Jan 15, 2017 5:22:16 GMT
Yes there likely would be, but I would recommend a different approach. Just store your laser drone fleet in orbit around tactically significant targets and use them when required (they already have the power, and laser). You could even build a focusing array of extra optics to take in each individual beam and reflect / focus it into a single powerful beam capable of much much larger intensities (and thus longer range) than a single laser could create. The laser drones themselves could provide the pumping by firing into the focusing array. This would also help avoid the problem of creating a really large costly slow moving target for KKVs. In fairness, at the power levels and intensities we're playing with, it's probably feasible to deflect KKVs at range just by zapping them for a second.
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Jan 15, 2017 5:24:27 GMT
It could stop scenarios like the mission Force Projection where you have one ship sent out just to be annoying. There's a minimum defence level one must maintain so the enemy can't get away with silly things.
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Jan 15, 2017 5:39:32 GMT
Wasn't the idea behind Force Projection, that tension was building up, and one ship decided to harass a sparsly defended territory and the protagonist was the closest ship to intercept?
My bad I was thinking of False Flag. Or Predatory Opportunism, both have that idea.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 15, 2017 6:13:30 GMT
I would build killsats with *some* mobility; you're already paying for ludicrous laser energy, why not an MPD when you're not firing your death beam? And they'd be defended by a small drone constellation. childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/post/8778/threadAt 17 miligees, you're not dodging missiles at close range, but with such ludicrous beam output (and intensity) you could pop the attacking carrier at potentially light seconds.
|
|
|
Post by kitten on Jan 15, 2017 6:32:50 GMT
I would build killsats with *some* mobility; you're already paying for ludicrous laser energy, why not an MPD when you're not firing your death beam? And they'd be defended by a small drone constellation. childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/post/8778/threadAt 17 miligees, you're not dodging missiles at close range, but with such ludicrous beam output (and intensity) you could pop the attacking carrier at potentially light seconds. IMO you're using the wrong type of thrusters. Combat manoeuvres is a niche for resistojets, fuel efficiency isn't a concern since we're only talking microburns to dodge potential impactors whereas thrust definitely is.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 15, 2017 6:41:47 GMT
kitten The Killsat as-posted cannot survive accelerations (assuming we're taking structural properties into account which COADE does not) above a few dozen milligees. It's laser power is sufficiently high that it can kill anything other than a large heavy (and thus laser-resistant) projectile at high speed, but such a projectile should be detectable from a significant distance, and thus dodgeable even with milligee acceleration.
|
|
|
Post by kitten on Jan 15, 2017 6:53:56 GMT
Yes, acceleration stress would be a concern, I grant you that. Although I'm not sure how early such projectiles could be detected, since they don't necessarily have a significant heat signature of their own—detecting anything that emits is very easy but detecting "passive" objects is relatively hard, which is we haven't mapped all the solar system's rocks IRL.
Remember that unlike in atmosphere, in space going fast generates no heat on its own, so if the KKV gains its speed from being launched out of a coilgun, or it jettisoned its engines, it becomes difficult to spot until its apparent diametre is large. Which means it's probably too late to dodge with milligee acceleration.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 15, 2017 7:09:08 GMT
Yes, acceleration stress would be a concern, I grant you that. Although I'm not sure how early such projectiles could be detected, since they don't necessarily have a significant heat signature of their own—detecting anything that emits is very easy but detecting "passive" objects is relatively hard, which is we haven't mapped all the solar system's rocks IRL. Remember that unlike in atmosphere, in space going fast generates no heat on its own, so if the KKV gains its speed from being launched out of a coilgun, or it jettisoned its engines, it becomes difficult to spot until its apparent diametre is large. Which means it's probably too late to dodge with milligee acceleration. My god. It took days of arguing to get Shurugal to accept stealth is extremely difficult to achieve in space, especially with the industrial infrastructure necessary to fly around with multikiloton spacecraft. (See this thread which our debate dragged extremely off topic. Please read all of it before continuing this arguement, since multiple highly intelligent individuals wrote pages of well-reasoned thoughts.) The acceleration burn of a high speed heavy projectile can be detected from extreme distance, defense can be accomplished against normal missiles (high thrust) by catastrophic damage to internal components utilizing giant death laser, vs impractically armored missiles (basically artifical asteroids) defense can be accomplished by dodging. The weakness of a static laser station is that it is always possible to throw a sufficiently massive object at it that it cannot kill the missile before it collides. Even 17mg of acceleration is sufficient to remove this obstacle.
|
|
|
Post by kitten on Jan 15, 2017 7:24:12 GMT
The acceleration burn could realistically be masked by various ways (intervening objects, whatever) if the situation allows for it or you could just launch a big projectile out of a huge electromagnetic launcher with an initial velocity in the hundreds of km/s.
Also, of course, detection infastructure would be vulnerable which makes it hard to assume you can scan space for objects not emitting significant light on their own. A spaceship would have a lot of trouble operating stealthily (handwavium aside—very efficient fusion reactors, for instance, would make stealth less unattainable, but they require fundamental breakthroughs beyond the foreseeable future tech level of CoaDE), but it could launch stealthy projectiles.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Jan 15, 2017 7:52:37 GMT
The acceleration burn could realistically be masked by various ways (intervening objects, whatever) if the situation allows for it or you could just launch a big projectile out of a huge electromagnetic launcher with an initial velocity in the hundreds of km/s. Also, of course, detection infastructure would be vulnerable which makes it hard to assume you can scan space for objects not emitting significant light on their own. A spaceship would have a lot of trouble operating stealthily (handwavium aside—very efficient fusion reactors, for instance, would make stealth less unattainable, but they require fundamental breakthroughs beyond the foreseeable future tech level of CoaDE), but it could launch stealthy projectiles. Did... you even read the thread? Literally every argument you've just made has been said before on it... This is the first time my feelings about a particular person on this forum went beyond 'irritation'.
|
|
|
Post by kitten on Jan 15, 2017 7:58:52 GMT
The acceleration burn could realistically be masked by various ways (intervening objects, whatever) if the situation allows for it or you could just launch a big projectile out of a huge electromagnetic launcher with an initial velocity in the hundreds of km/s. Also, of course, detection infastructure would be vulnerable which makes it hard to assume you can scan space for objects not emitting significant light on their own. A spaceship would have a lot of trouble operating stealthily (handwavium aside—very efficient fusion reactors, for instance, would make stealth less unattainable, but they require fundamental breakthroughs beyond the foreseeable future tech level of CoaDE), but it could launch stealthy projectiles. Did... you even read the thread? Literally every argument you've just made has been said before on it... This is the first time my feelings about a particular person on this forum went beyond 'irritation'. There's 8 pages of it and I have no idea where the discussion you're referring to is in those 8 pages, so no. I may do so later as it's probably quite interesting on its own
|
|