|
|
Post by samchiu2000 on Feb 8, 2017 10:00:13 GMT
Anyone have a missile that is designed to kill enemy's one? Because i find out that both gun and laser are not cost effective against missiles, i think that tiny missiles (~3 to 5 kg) maybe a good way for missile defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by samchiu2000 on Feb 8, 2017 11:29:26 GMT
Just make a good interceptor missile~ (Copy one rocket design from someusername6 ,then set its terminal stage to pure pursuit~)    |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 8, 2017 16:45:29 GMT
Nuclear missiles can kill enemy missile real good
|
|
|
|
Post by bdcarrillo on Feb 8, 2017 19:38:39 GMT
Nuclear missiles can kill enemy missile real good Yup, even the pocket nukes give a decent kill radius. |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Feb 8, 2017 19:53:15 GMT
Rather than an interceptor smaller than its target, a lower number of larger interceptor missiles have economy of scale on their side (especially due to an invariably nuclear payload) while the anti-ship missiles are necessarily as small as possible because both large numbers and minimal size are required to penetrate point defence.
|
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Feb 8, 2017 20:01:12 GMT
Nuclear missiles can kill enemy missile real good I would not attempt to kill any but the largest attacking missiles with a kinetic micromissile; hit probability with missiles against targets with the agility of a missile is really awful. Nukes all the way. A single kiloton range warhead can wipe out and entire wave of attackers. |
|
|
|
Post by shiolle on Feb 8, 2017 20:08:37 GMT
I have to ask this because I really don't see the effectiveness of small nukes against missiles myself. Does the effectiveness of nuclear warheads against missiles remain the same if you remove 'target shots' option from the payload of the missiles you are targeting?
|
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 8, 2017 20:14:22 GMT
I have to ask this because I really don't see the effectiveness of small nukes against missiles myself. Does the effectiveness of nuclear warheads against missiles remain the same if you remove 'target shots' option from the payload of the missiles you are targeting? No, missiles are "Shots" if you remove that the warhead fails to go off |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 8, 2017 20:15:34 GMT
Nuclear missiles can kill enemy missile real good I would not attempt to kill any but the largest attacking missiles with a kinetic micromissile; hit probability with missiles against targets with the agility of a missile is really awful. Nukes all the way. A single kiloton range warhead can wipe out and entire wave of attackers. I have used Megaton range warheads aganist my new missiles and have seen a max of 8/20 killed, and 5 of them hit other friendly missiles and survived the nuke |
|
|
|
Post by shiolle on Feb 8, 2017 20:24:41 GMT
No, missiles are "Shots" if you remove that the warhead fails to go off How does that answer my question? Maybe my post wasn't clear enough. I mean that it is only easy to destroy other missiles with small nukes (like pocket nukes) if your target is set to detonate on contact with enemy shots. In this case indeed smallest of nukes (actually anything) will make whole volleys go off. If they only detonate on contact with ships, than suddenly same missiles become much harder to destroy. Of course your interceptors will have this option turned on in both cases. |
|
|
|
Post by xenophon13 on Feb 8, 2017 21:01:37 GMT
Are people using their anti-missile missiles to intercept incoming missiles while en-route, or after they've managed to intercept your capships? Because in the latter case, it seems like pocket nukes launched from a coilgun might be cheaper and at least equally effective.
|
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 8, 2017 21:02:30 GMT
No, missiles are "Shots" if you remove that the warhead fails to go off How does that answer my question? Maybe my post wasn't clear enough. I mean that it is only easy to destroy other missiles with small nukes (like pocket nukes) if your target is set to detonate on contact with enemy shots. In this case indeed smallest of nukes (actually anything) will make whole volleys go off. If they only detonate on contact with ships, than suddenly same missiles become much harder to destroy. Of course your interceptors will have this option turned on in both cases. Hmm I don't know, I do know that only drones and missiles are considered shots, you won't see lasers shooting coilgun shots |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 8, 2017 21:04:01 GMT
Are people using their anti-missile missiles to intercept incoming missiles while en-route, or after they've managed to intercept your capships? Because in the latter case, it seems like pocket nukes launched from a coilgun might be cheaper and at least equally effective. I intercept while they are in route, I have no control over what others do |
|
|
|
Post by shiolle on Feb 8, 2017 21:27:28 GMT
Are people using their anti-missile missiles to intercept incoming missiles while en-route, or after they've managed to intercept your capships? Because in the latter case, it seems like pocket nukes launched from a coilgun might be cheaper and at least equally effective. I tried both, and now I mostly experiment with the latter. Undoubtedly en-route intercepts are effective, but tedious because AI often starts evading with missiles and your intercepts turn into constant adjustment of maneuvers. Also, I begin to think that the way AI works now forces us to make a clear design-time choice whether we want particular missiles be interceptors or not because multi-purpose missiles will target interceptors even when you want them to go for enemy ships. |
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Feb 9, 2017 3:46:26 GMT
Are people using their anti-missile missiles to intercept incoming missiles while en-route, or after they've managed to intercept your capships? Because in the latter case, it seems like pocket nukes launched from a coilgun might be cheaper and at least equally effective. Somewhat OT, but nice avatar. |
|
