|
Post by dwwolf on May 26, 2017 12:54:36 GMT
Yes, me.
Like I said...I can get destruction like that as well..... It just needs 1 target and 1 missile in a combat instance. This makes a warhead teleport into the target.( old bug ).
If that plate is a rad shield you can forget about it immediately. Apparently non explosive components are deleted immediately if the nuke (or another explosive) goes off.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 26, 2017 10:23:24 GMT
Just to be clear folks, I realize that this is a Children of a Dead Earth forum, but please take my statements and data in the context of science fiction in general. I try to describe the concepts to remain valid all the way from retro 70's Scifi to the softest edges of hard SF in the far flung future. With that in mind, we can generally state that a Casaba Howitzer will always be relatively powerful but short-ranged compared to a laser weapon, and you'll always be able to cram enough NEFP warheads into a cargo bay to rival a big laser in terms of mass/cost over destructive capability. So, responding to apophys , if we applied the materials and nuclear technology used to construct that laser drone to a NEFP, then I can easily see the warhead approaching a 25TJ/kg limit and extracting between 20 and 50% of that energy in a projectile. A 50kg near-maximum-energy-density fusion warhead might produce about 1PJ of energy and propel a 5kg metal plate to 3% of the speed of light. The drone, according to this calculator, can go through 10mm/s of aluminium at 10000km. An equivalent technology-level NEFP can cross that distance in just over a second and deliver enough energy to vaporize a crater 48 meters deep in solid steel. Note that the lasers in-game are not supremely high tech: they have terrible efficiency due to gain medium and gas options being limited. My example has 3.91% efficiency. This could certainly be improved upon without much/any change in mass (in fact, the radiator requirement would decrease). With a hypothetical 25% efficiency and 77 nm wavelength (achievable in-game with modded Ce:LLF lasers), that calculator tells me the 10 mm/s aluminum benchmark sits way out at 89 Mm distance. Free-electron lasers should extend that range further when/if they get modeled. Reactors also have room for improvement, since I'm not using ceramic-encapsulated liquid uranium pebbles. TL;DR: The theoretical limit of a NEFP is not comparable tech to the example I provided. Regardless, I was comparing to the plasma Casaba-Howitzer, not to a NEFP, and I doubt that NEFP projectiles can be made accurate enough to hit a target 10 Mm away or more. They arent quite like projectiles....more like tight cones. The aiming requirements are basically the same as for any fixed gun.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 26, 2017 5:54:43 GMT
I noticed they only worked if you had a single entity in an instance.
Most likely a teleporting warhead ( old bug ) with (slow) flak being left behind at the missile location.
I did some testing in one of the more recent NEFP tests.
The second you had 2 more missiles in an instance the ,supposed, NEFP effect never occured.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 25, 2017 11:25:14 GMT
The body is mainly meant to push 200kg nukes @ ~5kms dV.
These light loads make it as far as ~7kms dV. Hmmmmm I wonder what 150kg flak material with 50kg of HMX does.....
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 24, 2017 18:01:51 GMT
My heavy missile body uses 6 in the flak config. 1x 1 kg/1kg frag with a minimal radius. 1x 2.5kg/245g frags 10m radius. 2x 3.5 kg/50g frags 20m radius. 2x 3.5 kg/15g frags 40m radius. 1x 10 kg/1.25g frags 100m radius.
100m detonations produce nasty ragged holes.
Ohh and thx for the 3x fixed engine tip. Works pretty darn good.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 21, 2017 16:45:05 GMT
40m beam not big enough ?
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 21, 2017 15:17:11 GMT
Nahh it just means I have to take down 1 missile as opposed to 200 1.4 Mt ones.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 21, 2017 12:33:30 GMT
That's not a missile; it's a capship with a nuke in it. doesn't help when the nuke is a kiloton and a half in mass. Whats the point when you can put 1.4 megatons in 200 odd kg.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 21, 2017 12:30:57 GMT
Why? Because they obliterate reality itself. ... They crash the game. Behold. My stupidest design ever. Given that it got worse when I tried to make them more accurate by adding more engines, it's safe to say that those decane NTRs (which guzzle fuel quickly to produce hideous thrust) are the problem. That acceleration. How effective are they as weapons? I have no idea, they've never actually hit anything I fired them at! Before the extra NTRs turned these into a guaranteed crash, it never hit even a stationary Gunship. I just then managed to score a kill on a Cargo Station by firing a swarm of twenty and got one single impact on the exposed crew compartment. Is it me or is there a serious problem with the targeting for faster missiles? Does anyone use pure KKVs and see good results from them? Can you honestly say there's any reason to not add a little explosive flak? By the way, these were originally supposed to be giant explosive-formed penetrator missiles, but I decided to see if I could make giant KKVs instead. It's not an optimized design, its "warhead" is just a chunk of osmium armor, I was messing around and find it amusing that I made a missile that can kill the game instantly but can't hit anything. No wonder it doesn't hit.....not enough burn time for even 1 180 degree turn.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 19, 2017 12:14:39 GMT
I still dont think so. Because you still get the slowdown if you focus on an empty sky.
Or the FoV culling must truly be horrendously bad.
The same happens if you get tons of rounds fired from lots of different turrets.
Guidance and turret tracking are quite expensive, computationally.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 19, 2017 11:04:23 GMT
Not likely unless this game engine is extremely inefficient at drawing stuff.
I think its more likely that the simulation is slowing things down.
Space sims are pretty much ideal fro gfx cards....no terrain rendering.
Only models.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 19, 2017 6:16:17 GMT
I assume you mean threads because the highest cored Ryzens out ATM are 8c/16t.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 19, 2017 5:32:00 GMT
Does anyone have experience with CoADE on more than 4 cores ?
I know its capable of pulling 100% on my 4 core CPU.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 11, 2017 16:42:03 GMT
Well that depends on the propellant. It might count as a mission kill though.
Furthermore that still leaves the chance of the missile hitting the radiator and that puts the functioning of whatever that radiator was cooling at risk.
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on May 11, 2017 16:12:16 GMT
A*** retentive obsession ?
|
|