|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 21:50:13 GMT
A mix is best. All have weaknesses when applied alone. Agree 100%. Every weapon has advantages and disadvantages. No one size fits all.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 21:29:57 GMT
My opinion is really changing regarding missiles/ drones. It seems like for cost they are very hard to defeat.
If sent in large swarms they give even the most powerfully armed laser or gunned ships a real challenge.
I think I want to try making defensive drones that are heavily armed and high in delta v which have the job of just defending ships against missiles and drones.
Something I want to try.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 21:25:47 GMT
But coilguns are superior sandblasters, especially if you use the new-added in materials. ...wait, what new materials? And I don't know enough about railguns to make that determination, honestly. I do have a very nice 10 MW snub-nosed coilgun accurate to around 15 km on enemy flak missiles that fits into a two-meter box, though, so they're great for space. Screen shots please!
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 21:21:34 GMT
I think overall lasers are probably the most versatile ship mounted weapon, although I still voted for coilguns.
Even if you design a coilgun or railgun that reaches out to 1000km, the turret becomes problematic that aiming speed is slow, and also due to the low angle range esp against drones and missiles.
Also although the power requirements are low compared to lasers for the power of the weapon, by the time you power the turret/momentum wheels, the power requirements become very "laser like".
So overall perhaps lasers are the most versatile weapon overall.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:41:07 GMT
coilGUNS and railGUNS are a non factor? THe "humble railgun" at 30km/s lol? The Ranger and the Corvette (mostly only armed with "guns") are second only to the Drone Carriers and the Siloship itself. Speaking of modified designs you can check out some of the awesome things many have done with coilguns and railguns. Consensus where? On this blog and many others that discuss realistic space combat there are plenty of advocates of guns over missiles and lasers. About the rest, saying negatives of lasers are off, okay if you say so. I hear your points and they are well taken. I don't think we are having the same conversation. So far I feel like you are just focused on disputing everything I write without offering anything in return. Do laser have any drawbacks in your mind? I feel like you just want to argue how great lasers are, so maybe make some posts showing your laser designs compared to the best of the coilgun and railgun designs. Also maybe post some science lit showing that the modeling of the lasers in the game is wrong. Thus far there has nothing that has been shown that will convince me that coilguns and railguns with current or near current tech don't have their place. If you want to display some videos or something showing your sims that show otherwise, would love that. Edit: Oh jeez, you took down your post!? Ah screw this, I'm not taking down this one, I put too much time into this one.
Admittedly, this website mostly.Helps that there's a guy who really knows his laser stuff there, Luke Campbell. Here's a couple online calculators modelling the effects of lasers. I believe QSwitched used them too, but he generally expected far lower powers, and far higher wavelengths than what we ended up coming up with. Here they are: My favouriteAlso usefulI apologize if it sounds like all I do is dispute; it's a classic internet geek trap where people pop in to discuss things they feel are not quite correct while failing to mention anything and everything they agree with. There's an entire blog post on this somewhere lol. Consider everything I don't dispute to basically be what I more or less agree with; I'll try to point out things I agree with more. Back to the topic at hand, that's the thing. They are second to the drone and missile carriers. I mean, I've noticed that in combat between two stock fleets in orbit, it is difficult to get missiles up to the same velocity as railguns and coilguns, but in interplanetary combat such as in the Jovian Grand Tour, they are basically at such velocities by default, and with an MPD drone with sufficient delta-V I can get them to retrograde intercepts. Not to mention that even with stock ships, if it wasn't because arranging for missile intercepts is so absurdly tedious, I would just missile always. Lemme take a few screenshots. Drawbacks of lasers as they currently stand are as follows: 1. Stupidly huge radiators needed. Dear god, if one aligns them any way other than edge on, they make one's ship into an incredibly huge target. 2. Can be overwhelmed, cost effectively, by missiles. At least, as things currently stand. 3. Is also weak to lasers. Lasers vs lasers I imagine to be like the push of pike - really nasty, really ugly and sucky, as lasers fry each other. Also, as for my general skepticism of guns, the biggest problem I've had with them so far is that they are really, really, really easily completely sniped off by lasers before they can get into combat range. Plus, for the delivery of a kinetic payload, a flak missile can also do that and not be as easily wiped out. Admittedly, I have yet to face any well-armored gun designs - but I did just recently cook up a 27km/s amorph carbon coilgun, and amorph carbon can eat lasers a lot more, so maybe this will soon change... If only I can figure out how to get around its ammo's painful price! Oh, just for clarification, I am NOT saying lasers displace guns. I am saying missiles displace guns. Given a choice between missiles and guns, I pick missiles in nearly every situation bar incredibly niche ones which I don't think are likely to happen. I claim missiles can fulfill every single role guns have, and do it better, barring niche roles which I am desperately trying to find at the moment. Addendum - actually, guns as missile defense is one area I am looking into quote heavily. The most useful configuration there as far as I may discern is cheap gundrones where even shooting down one missile results in a cost effective exchange. Due primarily to targetting issues, this is far less effective than I'd hope for, but that can be said of missiles too. Screenshots: Mailman drone. Consider its entire delta-v to be the intercept velocity of the incoming missiles.My usual no-mod laser workhorse. Most of its cost comes from its armorMore on this workhorseIf we allow real but modded in materials, it starts to get absurd.Here's a small drone laser with the same output as my large laser. Yeah, high efficiencies get insane.
I erased my comment because I didn't want to get into a tit for tat. You made good points, and about the facts I think you are right for the most part. I was just trying to say, if you know better great share something helpful to everyone. Don't just disparage. That was all I was trying to say.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:31:05 GMT
I do have to question just how fast a 40kt lump of dense rail material is 'shot away' by relatively low powered weaponry though... sure, damage it fast as it would be under high stress during firing... but to actually vaporise it is a bit of a big ask IMO. I'm with you. A 82kt rail gun is basically an almost completely solid huge hunk of the strongest materials we use in game. Hard to imagine what would destroy that in any reasonable time. No matter the power, something like that is probably the strongest part of any ship. Maybe the working parts are vulnerable though.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:25:31 GMT
I may soon be forced to eat my own words with my own actions, because I just made an amorphous carbon based coilgun weighing at just a couple dozen tons, can hit capships at 410km, shoots 20g slugs at 52km/s, has 10cm of amorph carbon barrel armor and whose combined ammo and gun cost is slightly less than my equivilent laser and radiators setup. No tests yet, and I suspect equivilent cost missiles are still a far better investment, but for the ranges we currently deal with in game, this could be rather useful. I was used to railguns scaling horribly with their mass and cost for higher velocities. Mostly due to a lack of barrel bracing. Turns out coilguns are probably the answer there. What are you using it against though? If it's just stock ships then sure you will blast them away, but try testing against 1 Mm 1 GW equipped laser ship and see how long your guns lasts. Of course if we had better barrel armouring options or embedded cannons inside the spine of the ship+protective shutters coil guns would be better off, currently the laser still holds the advantage. "Of course if we had better barrel armouring options or embedded cannons inside the spine of the ship+protective shutters coil guns would be better off..." Suggestion thread time! You know I wonder how long it takes before some clever programer starts making mods. I really hope Qswitched really stays on tops of listening to our suggestions and making them happen. If modders start fooling around with the program it could be a bad thing although it might be for the best.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:21:37 GMT
What are you using it against though? If it's just stock ships then sure you will blast them away, but try testing against 1 Mm 1 GW equipped laser ship and see how long your guns lasts. Of course if we had better barrel armouring options or embedded cannons inside the spine of the ship+protective shutters coil guns would be better off, currently the laser still holds the advantage. That's the thing. I haven't tested it yet. I intend to pit it against my own 1gw lasership sometime soon. Given its composition and armor thickness, I am highly optimistic of its chances against my own lasership. Of course, I have yet to actually test this, so I'll get back to you on this. Update: Well, that was incredibly anticlimatic. Following a consistent failure to get my laserstar to actually target the coilguns only and not shread the much weaker rest of the test ship's armor, I used a stock laser frigate instead which, when allowed to get close, used its violet laser on the coilguns. 10cm of armor bought about 10 seconds worth of time only, so while it did far better than every other gun I've ever made against lasers, it still didn't hold a candle to even stock lasers. The biggest problem with guns remains how easily they are sniped off by lasers it seems. Followed by how they are outcompeted by missiles. How in the world did a stock laser frigate get anywhere close to a ship armed with a coilgun with a 400km plus range? In my sims with the long range coilguns/railguns (500km plus) , only missiles and drones were a problem sent in a large enough swarm.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:15:00 GMT
I may soon be forced to eat my own words with my own actions, because I just made an amorphous carbon based coilgun weighing at just a couple dozen tons, can hit capships at 410km, shoots 20g slugs at 52km/s, has 10cm of amorph carbon barrel armor and whose combined ammo and gun cost is slightly less than my equivilent laser and radiators setup. No tests yet, and I suspect equivilent cost missiles are still a far better investment, but for the ranges we currently deal with in game, this could be rather useful. I was used to railguns scaling horribly with their mass and cost for higher velocities. Mostly due to a lack of barrel bracing. Turns out coilguns are probably the answer there. Post screenshots! Nerd porn.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:12:48 GMT
I just made a railgun that shoots 113 km/s that can hit capital ships at about 1000-800 km, and missiles at about 200-100 km. The numbers look less, but in war games the ranges are higher. Of course it costs 1.82 Gc, weighs 80kt, and uses 1Gw of power. What is the longest range anyone has gotten with a gun of any type? You were not around when coiguns were laughably overpowered, if i remember correctly we were getting speeds of several dozen Mm/s (1000 km)/s, the ranges were downright inter orbital with you being able to shoot down enemy ships in LEO from low lunar orbit, by that point they were not really coilguns, more like particle beam weapons. Of course this was exploiting physics loopholes this is before we even got the GW reactors going. It was basically the first (broken) meta With that in mind do you think the weapons the way they are configured now is more realistic? Is this possible this change just made weapons even more imbalanced in favor of lasers?
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:08:48 GMT
the poll says damage over range which means coilguns or cannons because they can punch big holes in ships and lots and lots of little holes What I meant by "damage over range" is not just long range, but having power to take out ships at that range. At least that's how I meant it. For instance a 300MW stock laser that takes an hour to destroy a ship isn't damage over range even if it can reach 100 km. Railguns, cannons, coilguns, and lasers all have that ability. No?
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:01:40 GMT
see, GW railguns massing kilotons compared to a 154MW coilgun massing less then ~100 tons (I think) Post screenshot please.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 20:00:28 GMT
I have made a gun that shoots 10 kg flak rounds, it shreds the gunship within seconds! Post screenshots please. Seeing is believing and way more interesting to. Anyone can make any claim. Pics are way better.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 19:57:53 GMT
I just made a railgun that shoots 113 km/s that can hit capital ships at about 1000-800 km, and missiles at about 200-100 km. The numbers look less, but in war games the ranges are higher. Of course it costs 1.82 Gc, weighs 80kt, and uses 1Gw of power. What is the longest range anyone has gotten with a gun of any type? My railgun *ship* has a 129km/s gun, "some" delta-v and all neccessary crew and equipment to support the weapon for 1.04Gc and 73.5kt. Cross section is 846m^2, smaller than most stock capitals, but 3 times the size of my common line of ships. There was a slightly faster no-spread 134km/s type in the optimisation group but it was too heavy for my tastes (overall something like 79.5kt, and with pitiful turn rate). Half the ship mass is reaction wheels for the gun... makes me wonder whether a non-turreted gun and the same reaction wheels wouldn't work better for the whole ship Traverse rate is 0.193dps, but the reaction wheels use much more power than the rails do to get this - turn around time of 4 minutes from thrusting is only slightly better than a third of the traverse rates... so I might have overcooked something in there... It will reach out to beyond 1.2Mm against the solar lance, and to beyond 1.1Mm vs the fleet carrier, and gunship/laser frigates. Accuracy is 'adequate' with no misses against the hull of a steady target within range when working over turrets, and fairly rapid removal of turrets and other 'bulk' items. Seeing is believing. Please post a screenshot of the details/ stats. Maybe can leave out the settings shot with the "formula" how to make the gun if you don't want to share. Not that I don't believe you, but pics a ton better than just claims.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Jan 26, 2017 19:51:29 GMT
What's the power consumption if the momentum wheels of it? 0.03°/s still sounds like a lot considering the small size of the turret. Is it also up to a GW? Talking about me? If so yeah it's the momentum wheels that take most of the power. That's the fastest I could get them to move with 1GW of power. Without them, the power consumption is only like 30 MWs. Since the guns uses a ton of power no matter what I raised the loader and other figures to use just as much power to get the best possible performance. The thing is the gun weighs 82 ktons. So the power is crazy if you want a good rate of movement in the turret. I tried to not have a turret, but the gun won't lock on or fire without the turret. I would love if someone would show how to get a gun to work without a turrent. I haven't been able to do it.
|
|