|
Post by deltav on Mar 19, 2017 6:01:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 19, 2017 5:22:20 GMT
Late to the party, but I had a thought. What if it's the IR seeker that's being burnt out on the laser, not the optic itself? Perhaps the seeker is placed on the focusing mirror that extends over the lading cavity and this is what is being damaged, mission-killing the laser. Durandal I think you are onto something. Lasers used in lightshows or special effects (not even weaponized) are known to burn out camera sensors. photofocus.com/2013/09/14/beware-lasers-can-kill-your-cameras-sensor/Plus lasers would use a different targeting system than guns would. Guns seemed to be sighted visually perhaps using ships cameras+sensors mounted separately from the weapon itself, hence the need for all the tracers. But weaponized lasers (at least in 2017) use small mini lasers beams+sensors built inline with the main laser inside the turret to target enemies, needed because laser beams are hard to track until they hit the target itself.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 19, 2017 4:47:38 GMT
I thought this was just luck at first, but after seeing a cluster of 6 lasers survive multiple rounds - including the parent ship being ripped to shreds - it looks like they're actually invulnerable. To replicate just use add some lasers without turrets to a ship and subject it to some high-velocity kinetics. Hey check this out. Tried to kill a bunch of mounted lasers w/ only kenetics. Edit: Also fixed laser mounts seem almost useless. Maybe they work on drones?
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 19, 2017 4:20:42 GMT
I just visited the project rho website and find after a spacecraft achieve Terra escape velocity , it can go to mars with only 2 km/s dv , and when you reach LEO , you already achieved Terra escape velocity... Here the link~ go to 'interplanetary section~' For probes and other unmanned craft no problem, absolutely, but for humans? (Maybe if you waited decades for the perfect launch window/ planetary alignment). You can get around the solar system with little baby pinkie sized deltav budgets, but gosh it takes FOREVER like decades. And it makes your approach/ attacks/ patrols super predictable even decades in the future. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interplanetary_Transport_Network
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 19, 2017 4:18:47 GMT
I've been trying some sandbox scenarios, and apparently the game does not like it when I set both fleets to AI. Crashes: 1.2.3.Speaking of crashing I'm still hoping we get to minorly tweak AI actions of the Enemy side like firing drones/missiles. Gosh Qswitched's work is never done. I really hope he keeps KSP in mind in all this in that it took 6 years to get to where it is now. Don't give up Qwitched!
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 19, 2017 2:56:19 GMT
Found this looking for laser vs laser sniping, but relevant here. Some new Drone mounted antiLaser systems out there, one is called called Helios, uses weak lasers to confuse/disable stronger Ship/Ground mounted lasers. Edit: Thought of a solution to the enemy jamming the commands of our drone fly-by-wire pilots... instead let's use these...
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 19, 2017 2:18:44 GMT
Thought this would be good to have. COADE factions and history in jpg form. (If you save it or open it in a new window it is clear.)
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 17, 2017 11:46:35 GMT
I think one thing you guys are forgetting is that the thing of value might not be inside the ship, it might be the ship itself. Sounds like Space Pirates....
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 17, 2017 11:30:11 GMT
Man that's racist! Think of the Indian, man! They would sooner kill off all the Pakistanis than having RFP being called as Space Pakistani! You dont think the very real threat of extinction as the planet dies around them might bring them together, besides, it isnt called space Pakistan, thats just what it basically is I think dragonkid11 is joking I was just thinking... India and Pakistan were 1 country before they split over religion. But there are still millions of Muslims in India, and millions of Hindus in Pakistan. Guess they would work it out somehow...
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 17, 2017 5:31:56 GMT
From "Infolinks" and 2017 data (facts) in blue, plus my guesses/opinions in red... ~ Tiny fraction of 1000 million humans escaped total.~RFP = India + Indonesia + Pakistan + Philippines.~ Most initial direct deaths @cataclysm from flooding + tsunamis, coastal areas wiped out.~ Almost all Indonesians + Filipinos live on or near Islands + the coast, 90% died right away.~ Half of Indians live on or near Islands + the coast; 70-50% died right away.
~ Only 10% of Pakistanis live in or near the coast; "only" 20-10% died right away. ~ 60% or more of Pakistanis live in rural agricultural areas; would have their own crops/food nearby.
~ Of these only Pakistan + India had skyhooks; most RFP from these 2, they were closer + more of them survived flooding.~ Pakistan has 1/5th pop of India, more skyhooks per person than India, and more time to get their people to them.~"Pakistan" means "Nation of the Pure People", pretty close to "Nation of the Free People".~Lastly this. So I think RFP is basically "Space Pakistan".
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 16, 2017 20:52:18 GMT
deltav Why you consider moons of gas giants as "juicy"? lol... odd word choice I know, but that's how I talk I guess. Oxford Dictionary juicy
ADJECTIVE
1.2informal Temptingly appealing.
‘the promise of juicy returns’
COADE "Infolinks" In parentheses mine..."The USTA (Space Russia) was the first faction to evacuate straight to the outer solar system... to dump their people on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn... rushing for the resource rich (read: temptingly appealing aka 'juicy' ) fields of ice and methane...""...most of the other factions... (besides RFP aka Space Pakistan are) fighting over the resource rich (yeah you know it, read it as ' juicy' lol) moons of the four gas giants."
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 16, 2017 4:40:49 GMT
Yea, broken. It appears that the back EMF is not accounted for. A superconducting launcher with no magnetic losses would consume energy equal to the projectile kinetic energy. It also seems that the mechanical strength of the launcher rails was assumed sufficient at whatever launch speed would be present. Congrats, you broke that assumption too. (Note: railguns have substantial magnetic losses) Qswitched work is never done...
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 16, 2017 4:06:21 GMT
For suggestions to improve future videos please PM me. Been adding videos to just this post until more people add videos. Thanks. Edit: No storyline at all in this one, just a quick video trying to make ships that dodge laterally per bigbombr 's idea. One was really dodging all over the place.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 16, 2017 0:24:28 GMT
Did Q fix the behavior where all RCS thrusters burn continuously when attempting to hold a steady course? I have a large capship that uses large-scale NTRs for course corrections that still burn continously unless deactivated. RCS Thrusters work but they have to placed them very carefully almost as if you were moving a slider on a laser or railgun you are designing. It's almost not really worth it, can you can't hardly see anything because of all the propulsion wash. The only advantage is more 360 degree armor coverage. A COADE propulsion tester that would let you see how your placement affects maneuver would be great. I'll be posting a demonstration soon. Edit: Durandal Check it out childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/post/17605/thread
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 15, 2017 14:39:31 GMT
It would be interesting if engines could be mounted on extruded turrets like weapons could and didn't sperg out when tasked with RCS tasks. I haven't using proper RCS thrusters in a while though. Do the work better with the update? RCS Thrusters work awesome. I'll be posting a demonstration in a few days. Plus you can get tiny holes that don't compromise armor, but have to forget the gimbals, instead go Space Shuttle Style and carefully place them at the nose of the ship in the right number and orientation. They allow you to have a ship with no big open space in the rear and armor covering almost all angles. Edit: The "turnabout time" isn't accurate when it comes to RCS Thrusters. You have to go in Sandbox and run "change orientation" tests with different thruster orientations and a version of your ship with regular gimbals on the rear and no RCS thrusters and see how fast they turn.
|
|