blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 26, 2017 13:50:57 GMT
Thinest possible doesn't neccessary thin. It could be a km thick and still be 'thinest possible'.
Also we cannot fire the captains. They are president's sons/daughters/grandchildren.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 26, 2017 10:29:08 GMT
USF wants a flat unsloped armor though. Because their captains has a habit on turning broadside toward the enemy.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 26, 2017 9:00:13 GMT
Yeah, I already read that thread. Armor plan in that thread seems a bit too thick. I want to find minimal effective armor plan to update the stock ship armor. Might also use it as my side/rear armor.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 26, 2017 7:24:10 GMT
Honestly though, I don't think stock weapons (USTA) can represent user designed weapons (RFP new gen weapons.), which is why I added "The armor test specification may subject to changes.".
But if it can defense against these weapons with flat surface, it might, just might, be effective against user designed weapons with sloped armor design.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 26, 2017 7:18:03 GMT
Dear, all armor manufacturers.
USF current armor plans are becoming obsolete against RFP new generation weapons. The USF Advanced Research Projects Agency (FARPA) is sending request to all armor manufacturers to develop new armor plans for USF with following requirements:
1. The armor must be withstand direct hit on a flat armor surface from a right angle from following attacks:
1.1 Laser: The armor must withstand standard 300MW Near IR laser from 50km distant or less for more than 5 seconds.
1.2 Nuke: The armor must withstand at least 3 direct hits from standard 2.45kt Pure Fission Nuke.
1.3 Flak: The armor must withstand at least 3 direct hits from standard flak missile. The intercept velocity of the missile must be higher than 2km/s during the test.
1.4 Heavy Cannon: The armor must withstand at least 3 direct hits from standard 120mm cannon. The intercept velocity of the shooter must be higher than 500m/s during the test.
1.5 Hyper Velocity Weapon: The armor must withstand at least 3 direct hits from standard 39MW 11mm Scatter Railgun. The intercept velocity of the shooter must be higher than 500m/s during the test.
The last armor layer must not be penetrated to qualify as withstood the attack.
2. FARPA requests armor plans to be designed based on 2 categories:
2.1 Armor plan which uses only current generation materials which are already being mass-produced. (Stock materials only) 2.2 Armor plan which uses next generation materials which are not yet in mass-production. (Modded materials allowed.) 3. The armor plan should be lightest, thinnest, and cheapest possible. With weight as highest priority, followed by thickness, and cost. Please submit the test armor with report to FARPA Titan Research Station before J2260.0
PS.: The armor test specification may subject to changes.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 20, 2017 12:04:00 GMT
Useful laser star isn't that hard to build. You just need a giant ass reactor strapped on a giant ass laser with giant ass mount and a giant ass radiators. It don't even need much thrust or armor. You are not bringing laser star into kinetic combat range.
It is how to deploy them against AI counter lasers. That can be done by simply deploying you own counter laser drones to disarm enemy lasers before activating your laser star. You should not activate your laser star before ensuring that you are safe from counter lasers.
As for low dV, try resistojets if you are not planning on using much combat maneuvering. That could give you more dV at a sacrifice of thrust and combat maneuverability. I use resistojets. My power generation isn't even enough to power both the resistojets and weapons at the same time, but the resistojets are only for navigation and combat facing. I don't burn in combat. I don't dodge. I just turn.
Also check your armor planning, you could be over armored. I was too. Now my front is sufficiently armored. My side is very fragile though. It could deflect glancing hits, but any direct hit from a real weapon could pierce through it in one shot. But my ships/drones aren't suppose to expose their sides.
But low dV is not too much of a problem iif you manage your tanker support. All of my combat units have low dV of 3~4. Minimal fuel, smaller size.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 17, 2017 14:22:46 GMT
Well, my long range laser cannot survive kinetic combat range with lens open, and my kinetic weapons cannot hit anything but my CPU at laser range. Even if I have enough power, I can't use them anyway.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 17, 2017 11:34:29 GMT
Play those Star trek/ Wingcommander games I always wondered why those ships weren't given enough power generation to run all systems at full power. But now playing CDE I find myself doing the same thing with making under powered ships, since power generation is really expensive, and ships don't really need to be able to accelerate and shoot at the same time. I don't see them as expensive, but the radiators are really heavy giant weakpoints. Less power gen, less radiator, easier to protect them.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 17, 2017 3:21:09 GMT
Everything is better as drones. Crews take ridiculously large space and thus make the ship a fatter target. My fleet has only three types of manned ship: supercarrier, forward command ship (laser/missile frigate with reserve defense needle flak railguns), and tanker.
Front-line kinetic fighter? Capital drones. Defense laser and counter laser? Smaller laser drones. Laser star? Capital drones.
Also how does anyone else design their power supply / consumption? My ships and drones has minimal power generation for its weapon. They can only either power their 'long-range weapons' (lasers), 'short-range weapons' (railguns), or thrusters at a time They are incapable of powering all three systems at the same time, not even two systems.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 16, 2017 0:42:47 GMT
Hey, someone like to minimize everything. Minimal weight/cost for everything.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 15, 2017 8:12:54 GMT
Something I've been wanting to do is teach the AI how to actually use high delta-v missiles. There's a variable for what percentage of delta-v they should use to get an intercept but it doesn't seem to change anything. You've got 15 km/s KKVs, you don't want to fire them at 0.6 km/s! Especially when that high dV is from paperthin droptanks. It is designed to burn all propellant in the droptanks before entering laser effective range.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 15, 2017 7:56:15 GMT
I use selenium for defense flaks. They are dirt cheap. Cheaper than dirt. Less dense also mean more flak pieces and longer payload per weight(for railgun).
They are less effective against player capital armor, but still strong enough to destroy softies like missiles, drones, radiators, turrets, and stock armor.
My selenium flaks are needle flaks, but I think I can make heavier area denial flak with selenium.
Osmium is for anti capital ship sniper weapon only.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 15, 2017 7:30:05 GMT
Osmium flak is a bit expensive. Won't chaper materials works? Missiles aren't heavily armored against kinetics anyway.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 14, 2017 6:19:47 GMT
All of our designs were min-maxed. Many were less than 0.01% away from total catastrophe.
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 13, 2017 17:48:00 GMT
And talk about cheap lasers, those lasing rods are too damn expensive.
The cheap 30MW laser of mine cost 731c and has 904kW output. The optimized 30MW one cost 109kc and has 1.27MW output.
About half a time stronger at more than hundred times the cost. Just... no.
|
|