|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 19:28:26 GMT
Proximity fused blast launchers on the side of a missile/KKV that fire inert payloads ? High velocity missile with with 160kg of osmium flak in the head and launchers firing nukes with lead flak stuck to the front. The picture actually shows a weaker early version, where the timing was a bit off. The spiral patterns on the outer ring of impacts is only visible for high angle of incident hits now, because otherwise th ship is just cut to shreds, mostly desintegrating in the area where the pattern would be visible. Im calling the missile the NB-HKF M2 "Atlas". NB-HKF stands for Nuclear Boosted High Kinetics Fragmentation, and it's the second model of this type of missile that I designed (though it is technically the first finished design, the M1 is just a prototype at this stage, smaller, but with more armor penetration for its size). The missile itself: The moment just after impact (before the slices fly appart). Theres a total of 5 slices, though 1 is incredebly thing: When physics takes hold again:
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 18:19:08 GMT
Some Gunship destruction with a new missile I'm working on:
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 18:04:12 GMT
Most of you are probably already aware of this, but I just learned this the tedious way (4 hours of trial and error):
Engagement range is measured to the targets center (probably, or at least to its hull diameter), while hard range is measured to its total diameter.
This throws off timings for joint warhead/blast launcher missiles.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 17:52:27 GMT
shiolle , I am perfectly aware of the fact that energy is not turned into damage. The cases I brought up showcase two problems: 1. The large coilgun, firing 5t slugs with 1.5TJ of energy did less damage than rounds with less energy. And it did not bounce, as this would have been visible. The round was always swallowed by the armor, with no internal damage. Notable was the fact that even the firs layer of armor showed multiple impact points, meaning the projectile effectively shattered before impact. Further more, the lack of internal damage or ricochet means all the energy was dumped into the armor. At 1.5TJ of projectile energy, this means that 10m of nitrile rubber can withstand an internal explosion equivalent to 300 tons of TNT, but can't stop a 5kg KKV at 5km/s? While your points are generally valid, it is quite obvious that the nitrile rubber should not be able to withstand that impact. Nor should anything that can't be classed as an asteroid once rendered inert. You've accelerated 5 tons to 774.6 km/s or am i misunderstanding something? 2. The problem with the ricochets on my super high velocity railgun is this: ricochets are occurring at almost 90° angle of incident with rounds traveling above 1% the speed of light. All this happens over a total path length of roughly 15m and the projectile exits with little velocity loss. The problem here isn't loss of energy or momentum. The issue is that the acceleration needed in the armor in order to achieve such a ricochet would cause pressure on both projectile and armor would be in the range of hundreds to thousands of yotta pascals. Just to be clear, this between one to two orders of magnitude beyond the pressure required for electron degeneracy ( ~30TPa according to this book). No collision like this will ever by anything other than almost completely in elastic, because this pressure will not just smash the structure of whatever material the armor or projectile is, it will literally squeeze the electrons off of the constituent atoms. The type of impact qswitched needs to simulate is has nothing to do with the types shown. Rather, what would actually occurs here, apart from plasma shocking, is cavitation. This is a 1 gram projectile in the railgun you've linked, right? As for what's happening in the game: the damage model is fairly obviously based on ray traces causing point damage, with as few rays as possible. I don't think this is the case. I think ray traces can cause area damage. For the coilguns, I believe the game realizes that one ray trace is not enough for 20m diameter disk, and tries to break it up into multiple rays, but on these scales it messes up some how ( I'd venture that there is a max number of rays, which cannot adequately approximate such a large surface). Similarly, I believe that nukes use ray traces to damage. In this case there is probably something causing lower densities of ray casts causing less damage on target or perhaps a problem were some rays simply disappear. I'm not sure what happens with the coilgun, but if you look at your second screenshot, you will notice that the single nuke most likely produced exactly six rays in six directions. -for the coil: v=sqrt(2E/m) for 1.5TJ at 5t that gives you a velocity of about 24.5km/s. The point is moot, however, since the coilgun no longer works, as it was based off of pre capacitor coilguns, which were very obviously broken. -Yes -By point damage I meant that the ray trace hits a point and causes damage in an area (circle in this case) around that point without direct relation to any other ray trace and thus point. For practical in game purpose, this is area damage, but since all calculations are done for the point, rather than the area from an implementation standpoint (thus any errors/bugs/glitches would pertain to the point, rather than the area), it makes more sense to point damage. The difference to true area or even volumetric damage models, is that in these models all ray traces that pass hit/through an area/volume (from one source to all source, depending on how in depth you want to get) may interact and/or be put into relation. For the nuke example, a nuke with true area damage would check what the flow of gas/radiation through an area/volume should be, then applies damage representing that flow to that area either by chopping the area into smaller areas and assigning values to those segements or by ray tracing from the explosion to the area and assigning damage values to the rays depending on where they hit (difference here: damage assigned to rays depending on where they hit rather than damage being assigned to an area by the ray that hits it). -I'll hazard a guess (and this is really only speculation) that the nuke sent out a few more ray traces, but most didn't effect the ship. I can't realy think of any other explanations right now, because having smaller nukes send out more ray traces makes no sense from both a physical and implementation standpoint, as the reason to reduce ray traces would be to reduce lag which only makes sense for weapons you expect to be spamed: small nukes.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 15:01:04 GMT
Please upload stream videos so we can watch your content even if we don't catch you live. Will do, as soon as I have time to fully use my bandwidth. Be warned though, I'm a terrible streamer at the moment, because I just started.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 14:58:01 GMT
Adding nukes to manned spaceships is an easy way to test effects..... It isn't, because the game treats damage to the ship from itself differently than damage from an outside source. editIn some cases, as seen with shrapnel caused by a ship breaking not damaging other ships. It's impossible to tell if there is a difference or not unless qswitched tells us, so until we know I'll test weapons with these effects to ensure accuracy in tests.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 14:43:26 GMT
shiolle , I am perfectly aware of the fact that energy is not turned into damage. The cases I brought up showcase two problems: 1. The large coilgun, firing 5t slugs with 1.5TJ of energy did less damage than rounds with less energy. And it did not bounce, as this would have been visible. The round was always swallowed by the armor, with no internal damage. Notable was the fact that even the firs layer of armor showed multiple impact points, meaning the projectile effectively shattered before impact. Further more, the lack of internal damage or ricochet means all the energy was dumped into the armor. At 1.5TJ of projectile energy, this means that 10m of nitrile rubber can withstand an internal explosion equivalent to 300 tons of TNT, but can't stop a 5kg KKV at 5km/s? While your points are generally valid, it is quite obvious that the nitrile rubber should not be able to withstand that impact. Nor should anything that can't be classed as an asteroid once rendered inert. 2. The problem with the ricochets on my super high velocity railgun is this: ricochets are occurring at almost 90° angle of incident with rounds traveling above 1% the speed of light. All this happens over a total path length of roughly 15m and the projectile exits with little velocity loss. The problem here isn't loss of energy or momentum. The issue is that the acceleration needed in the armor in order to achieve such a ricochet would cause pressure on both projectile and armor would be in the range of hundreds to thousands of yotta pascals. Just to be clear, this between one to two orders of magnitude beyond the pressure required for electron degeneracy ( ~30TPa according to this book). No collision like this will ever by anything other than almost completely in elastic, because this pressure will not just smash the structure of whatever material the armor or projectile is, it will literally squeeze the electrons off of the constituent atoms. The type of impact qswitched needs to simulate is has nothing to do with the types shown. Rather, what would actually occurs here, apart from plasma shocking, is cavitation.
As for what's happening in the game: the damage model is fairly obviously based on ray traces causing point damage, with as few rays as possible. For the coilguns, I believe the game realizes that one ray trace is not enough for 20m diameter disk, and tries to break it up into multiple rays, but on these scales it messes up some how ( I'd venture that there is a max number of rays, which cannot adequately approximate such a large surface). Similarly, I believe that nukes use ray traces to damage. In this case there is probably something causing lower densities of ray casts causing less damage on target or perhaps a problem were some rays simply disappear.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 8:36:23 GMT
Thinking back, the games damage model seems to have problems with ultra high energy weapons. I have had problems with issues like this before (see childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/thread/1261/energy-loss-super-high-impacts and I don't know why, but this design doesn't seem to work unless I'm missing something. With a 5 ton payload, 5 MW wouldn't do much, so I thought it had to be at least 550 MW. Screenshot the page with the sliders if you get a chance. It would be cool if it works. Wattage is a measure of energy per time. The coil gun is over 500m long. Assuming constant acceleration, that would require to an acceleration of 571,210m/s² (or about 58Kg 0) and a force of almost 3GN. This leaves us with an acceleration time of 0.042s. Since the energy of the projectile is about 1.5TJ, this means the coil generates a ludicrous 35TW of power, using only 5.5MW giving it an efficiency of 6,493,506%. So yes, it breaks physics. On the topic of breaking stuff, I may have figured out what was happening with the armor. Even without wippel shield, the projectile seems to break up before hitting the armor, leaving multiple spots of glowing armor on hits. even penetrations or deflections have this effect, despite the projectile apparently remaining intact. Also, penetrations don't seem to leave entry holes or exit holes. Over all, little of the energy of the projectile seems to be damaging the armor at all, even if it is completely absorbed.
The strongest 10m thick armor I was able to find was nitrile rubber, which pretty much confirms that this guns interaction with armor is bugged, rather than some actual effect that happens in reality. As far as I can tell, hitting a 10m thick plate of something with one of these slugs should be somewhat akin to detonating a few hundred tons of TnT in the armor, which is obviously not the case. Edit: Hardness and density seem to decide how much damage is done. Soft low density material doesn't even begin to glow while absorbing these shots. The game obviously can't handle impacts at these high energies. )
As far as I can tell the game generalizes volumetric damage as multiple instances of point damage. This seems to work well with small projectiles at reasonable energies. For high energies and large damaging volumes (large nukes/coilguns rounds) the damage model seems to simply break, making massive amounts of energy simply vanish.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 7:20:01 GMT
What's the fluency on the bombs? In theory that would be the primary influence on how "actually" powerful the explosion would be. A low fluency bomb would be basically equivalent to a dirty bomb, while a high fluency bomb would be a true nuke. The fluency can be ignored in this case. Since the explosion is contained within the ship and the energy of the explosion is the same, the damage done should be equivalent. That's not to say it should be the same, but the fact that the larger nuke does so much less damage. Look at it like a giant pipe bomb: provided the container can withstand detonation, the energy imparted is equal, regardless if I us TNT or the energy equivalent of a different explosive. This is true even for nukes. Since the gunship hull stays generally in tact, energy the imparted in both cases should be similar since the explosion energy is the same in both cases.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 4, 2017 5:02:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 3, 2017 21:39:12 GMT
That "Gas ball" is the nuke. I tested it, and nukes seem to have no effect on fragments from flak warheads. all they do is soften armor before impact, increasing armor penetration. Also, you can phase the nuke through the armor as it exploades, allowing it to ignore all armor and cause massive internal damage. Hmm then why the general tightening as well? my flack clouds get a good deal denser and remain that way longer with the nuke than without it? I have no idea. Fragmentation seems to be a bit wierd. You can fragment a missile using a nuke, but those fragments do no damage or interact with other ships in any way. Fragments from flak shells don't seem to be effected by nukes detonating near them, both internaly and externaly as far as I tested it. The only time a nuke did effect seemingly shrapnel of a frag charge in front of it in my tests, the performance actually worsened, though I have been unable to replicate the effect since. One thing that I beliece is true from my tests though, is that nukes loose collision on detonating, but the actuall explosion itself happens a few frames after detonation. One thing I did notice was that these fantom fragments from the missile appeared in tandem with the fragments from the flak warhead, however the fantom fragments were several times faster and more tightly grouped. Over all, I think that most NEFP effects apperent in the game right now are more due to bugs/simulation simplifictions/simulation limits than actually intended effects. To know for sure qswitched would have to give us more insight into the simulation itself (specifically the nature of fragments from flak charges and how nukes work in combat). The only thing I can confirm, is that using a nuke and a flak warhead in the same missile allows the nuke to soften the target if it is sufficiently close, allowing more severe damage from the flak fragments.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 3, 2017 18:49:32 GMT
That "Gas ball" is the nuke. I tested it, and nukes seem to have no effect on fragments from flak warheads. all they do is soften armor before impact, increasing armor penetration.
Also, you can phase the nuke through the armor as it exploades, allowing it to ignore all armor and cause massive internal damage.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 3, 2017 15:23:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 3, 2017 14:49:53 GMT
So I decided to try out streaming, and thought that CoaDE may be fun. I'll anounce begining and end in this thread. Stream is here!
Stream 3/7: Over -Working on NEFP.
|
|
|
Post by omnipotentvoid on Jul 2, 2017 12:18:03 GMT
What if I have unguided submunitions? I understand the problems of collision on turnging, but why shouldn't I be alowed faster rates of fire on unguided munitions? Exception based design takes time, and is rather vulnerable to bugs in a complex system. I wouldn't be surprised if it comes eventually, but you have to walk before you run - best to get it working with solid reliability for the primary case first. Maybe, but I would have had a slider for launch timing and a yellow error for timings that launched faster than the time it took projectiles to leave the tube. This wouldn't require any different implementation, just another variable as a slider instead of automatic and a different UI.
|
|