|
Post by subunit on Apr 9, 2017 2:35:12 GMT
I think the question is now less "is this a bug" and more "what the hell kind of bug is this/how many bugs are represented in this one weapon". Actually according to project rho , it could be not a bug as a 1KT NEFP (Yes,NEFP) can accelerate a metal cone for up to 3700km per second.... Can it accelerate the metal cone backwards through the warhead? Does the effectiveness of the round change depending on whether it's alone or in a group? Does the effectiveness of the round vary massively with the warhead reflector material if yield is kept constant? It's clearly bugged.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 9, 2017 2:22:43 GMT
I think the question is now less "is this a bug" and more "what the hell kind of bug is this/how many bugs are represented in this one weapon".
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 9, 2017 0:14:32 GMT
URrgggh. Fleets of SBs behave totally differently than single SBs. If I launch 5 SBs and detonate them one at a time (bizarrely, the others in the fleet tend to survive the next-door 10Mt detonation), I don't get the bisection kill shot until the very last SB, whereas a single SB is now consistently giving me those bisection shots. This makes no sense whatsoever.
edit: OK, yeah. I tweaked my target vessel's 1mM laser power down to the point where the unshielded aft end of the missile could withstand lasing at 1mM. Single missiles will still 1-shot a target vessel with 10m of diamond armor facing 180 degrees away from the target. This does not work detonating individual missiles in a fleet of missiles, which is why I didn't see this before. Thing is bugged.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 8, 2017 23:17:26 GMT
Tested "Silver Bullet". Appears to be bugged- I still score hits on targets that are 90 degrees off the nose of the round. I also get very different results- big patches of hot armor but few penetrations, same at all ranges. No ship bisections. It may not matter the direction that the nose is facing nessesarily. The momentum of the missile and direction of travel that the missile is in "could" act to keep the rounds on target if that makes sense...but it wouldn't really be an NEFP/casaba howitzer. As much as I love this concept I still feel this might be a bug. Hmm. I just tested a fleet of 5 SBs rotated 180 deg from target vessel (need a fleet to keep the 1mM laser from burning out the backside of single SBs) and intercepting at 150m/s- after detonating one of these, scored zero hits. Then I tried another SB rotated 90 deg from target vessel intercepting at 150m/s and scored a bisection. Intercept velocity doesn't seem to matter (150m/s should not give momentum enough to cross 1mM perpendicularly in one frame, presumably), but orientation appears to, at least to the extent that you don't get frags coming out the backside of the missile. I'm getting wildly different results with multiple vs single target ships. Something is weird here but I don't think its a guaranteed-hit fragment teleportation bug.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 8, 2017 22:48:25 GMT
Tested "Silver Bullet". Appears to be bugged- I still score hits on targets that are 90 degrees off the nose of the round. I also get very different results- big patches of hot armor but few penetrations, same at all ranges. No ship bisections.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 8, 2017 22:47:00 GMT
If you believe the inclusion of Hawaiian terms into idiomatic English is universal... you might be an American. Hawaiian? "Aloha" is the Hawaiian greeting roughly cognate with the semitic SLM (salaam/shalom). In the context of an English idiom, it's about as distinctive a regional Americanism as they come.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 8, 2017 20:51:58 GMT
I think that saying is pretty much Universal because its mocks the "Alahu Akbar" line that gets used alot if you have ever watched some Jihadi vids. Its certainly was the first word play that came to my mind when I first saw some of those vids. If you believe the inclusion of Hawaiian terms into idiomatic English is universal... you might be an American.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 8, 2017 20:28:00 GMT
I am old enough to remember US service personnel using the term to mock Iraqi jihadis a decade ago.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 8, 2017 19:50:41 GMT
Did you get this from /r/The_Donald ? /r/The_Donald got it from grunts returning from Iraq.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 8, 2017 17:25:07 GMT
So- is the physics system here bugged, or is the very large yield of the warhead overcoming the lack of shaped charge effects to produce a legit CH? These seem unreasonably effective, but it's hard to say what's going on.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 1, 2017 20:39:12 GMT
So is propellant consumption from station keeping modelled?
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 1, 2017 20:14:39 GMT
If you don't turn the trajectory mode on, there'll be no gravity perturbation effects. What do you mean "trajectory mode on" ? I think the implication is that if you're not manipulating a burn node with the trajectory tool, the displayed/actual trajectory is without n-body effects from non-SOI bodies? That's weird though because I've never seen any indication that the required burns are automatically being made, so.. n-body simulation is just deactivated when you have a completed orbit and you're not fiddling with a burn node..?
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 1, 2017 8:05:09 GMT
Fair enough, feel free to use the thread for such issues. I would be interested in hearing what kinds of limits people are hitting with various weapons systems anyway, and whether anyone's been able to sort out if eg. dodging or other AI behaviours is having a significant impact, or whether the performance issues have got worse since the last update.
On a related note, if anyone can explain why after a certain number of projectiles, tracers stop rendering, I'd be interested to know. It seems like the projectiles are still being simulated, and with low FPS the GPU's not doing much anyway, so it doesn't seem like a performance-saving measure, but I'm not sure.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 1, 2017 7:49:22 GMT
remember that those buckets had to survive reentry as well subunit Yep- I want to model a Soyuz as built.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Apr 1, 2017 1:37:24 GMT
So, after a little googling, I found a site (http://metallicheckiy-portal.ru/marki_metallov/alu/) with the compositions of the aluminum alloys the Sovs used in spacecraft construction. Soyuz apparently used AMr-6. Does anyone know if there are drawings or specs of old spacecraft floating around that would give things like capsule thicknesses? I guess you could estimate it by subtracting the ~ mass of equipment from reported capsule masses.
|
|