|
Post by RiftandRend on Dec 3, 2017 1:59:52 GMT
Some questions.
Is that the old Tungsten Carbide Cobalt with 5.1 GPa of tensile strength? How heavy is that railgun. What is the cost?
Just looking at that screenshot, I would recommend reducing the capacitor size and trying to make it more efficient. Brute forcing it by adding more power is not an effective strategy.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Dec 1, 2017 18:29:11 GMT
The main issues with your weapon are the propellent and bore radius. TNT is the budget option, while octogen will offer the highest performance per gram. The very low bore radius of your weapons is significantly reducing your efficiency and massively increasing peak pressure. The high pressure requires much thicker barrels than would be normally necessary. By correcting those two issues, selecting slightly more cost effective barrel and projectile materials, choosing better turret armor, and using electric actuators, you end up with this.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 27, 2017 6:41:20 GMT
Thanks RiftandRend. Interesting, that explains it. So is the only way to defeat that nonsense to break up my missile intercept fleets into one or two missiles one after the other? That is going to be a serious pain in the butt. Stock remote modules. So is there a way to manipulate the remote module to overcome this? If you set the "Irradiance Cutoff" to 0% when designing a remote control, missiles using it will split evenly across all targets. This includes literally everything hostile with a remote control or crew module, so you can get less than perfect results with it such as missiles chasing cannon fired nukes with remotes for proximity fuses.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 26, 2017 23:08:51 GMT
Heya guys, I discovered this game on YouTube from Ready Set Rudy's videos and loved it, bought it and have been enjoying the heck out of it. I have worked my way through to Vesta Overkill and am doggedly attempting it with the stock ships. It seems do-able, but: How can I make my missile intercepts more effective? Combat begins with the enemy fleet launching at least two missile swarms and two drone swarms at you. Your fleet's point defenses seem unable to deal with it, so I have been attempting to intercept with missiles. My kill ratios are terrible though, I send 10-20 striker missiles against a swarm of 20 and the AI only manages to kill 3-4 for me. Two or three of the drones move to evade and my whole missile swarm goes for the runners. But I have the distributive targeting set up. Is there a way to get a closer to 1 to 1 kill ratio with intercepting missiles without pulling my hair out? How do I individually assign each missile to a specific target? Distributive homing selects targets based on their heat signature. The default remote controls will not target anything with less than 50% of the signature of the brightest thing. When some of the drones fire their engines, they become bright enough for the static drones to be invalid targets. With stock remote modules, finer distribution is not possible.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 26, 2017 2:19:21 GMT
Mine are graphite aerogel
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 25, 2017 11:26:08 GMT
Polyethylene and boron work very well.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 25, 2017 1:31:54 GMT
The heat signature of ship is not calculated correctly in battle. It assumes that all radiators on a ship are radiating at maximum output. Because of this, adding more radiators without adding any more reactors will still increase the heat signature. These ships have the same powerplant, but one of them is emitting ~400 more MW of waste heat due to it having more radiators. The signature is correctly calculated in the designer, so this should be relatively easy to fix (I.E., cap heat sig. to the value calculated in the designer).
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 22, 2017 10:32:03 GMT
Fancy. I don't see any huge issues with these. I suggest making them up-down symmetrical; There shouldn't be any clear top or bottom.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 21, 2017 5:25:30 GMT
What are you actually describing here? A neutral particle accelerator can be used as an engine on its own but I don't see the point in accelerating remass into the engine core. The tiny portion of the remass you are accelerating would simply run into the rest of the non accelerated propellent, achieving nothing.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 20, 2017 6:44:17 GMT
Didn't we have Borane in this list? I can't find it now.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 18, 2017 22:06:39 GMT
This is the best I could do without knowing the length of your missile. This is near the peak power you can use for this type of railgun without suffering an incredible loss to efficiency. I doubt if a missile can survive 4000000 gee of acceleration I seriously doubt most of our missiles can even withstand their own acceleration.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 18, 2017 5:54:48 GMT
Coilguns work wonders for launching that kind of stuff, you will need a huge capacitor and good luck launching more then 1 or 2rpm, also it sounds counter intuitive but add more coilgun armature and it will go faster Since the patch that fixed coilguns they have lost their payload launching prowess. In order to match the performance of the railgun I posted a coilgun would need 75 kg of Magnetic Metal Glass and would require ~8.5 GJ.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 18, 2017 4:55:20 GMT
This is the best I could do without knowing the length of your missile. This is near the peak power you can use for this type of railgun without suffering an incredible loss to efficiency.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 14, 2017 9:15:26 GMT
I can confirm some strangeness. Increasing the rate of fire with a default "new" coilgun increases muzzle velocity while reducing efficiency. The Coilgun below is 0% efficient, but somehow manages to get 449 joules out of 7.12 Microjoules.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 12, 2017 23:55:26 GMT
Radiators tend to be the most vulnerable part of a ship and usually have a higher cost and mass then the reactors they cool. I recommend making the outlet as high as possible. The savings in radiator mass and cost are usually much greater than the increase in reactor mass and cost for the same power output.
|
|