blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 13, 2017 17:13:21 GMT
Micro counter laser laser drones are exploitation of current bug/incorrect setting though.
But then that also depends on how micro is this.
|
|
|
Post by samchiu2000 on Apr 13, 2017 17:26:33 GMT
Micro counter laser laser drones are exploitation of current bug/incorrect setting though. But then that also depends on how micro is this. Is 1.3 kc, 75 kg micro? Maybe no, but that's small enough~ and I still not very sure if it is a bug, but I am sure that small laser can kill much large laser IRL~
|
|
blkcandy
Junior Member
Burn complete. Crawling back to bed.
Posts: 78
|
Post by blkcandy on Apr 13, 2017 17:40:10 GMT
Micro counter laser laser drones are exploitation of current bug/incorrect setting though. But then that also depends on how micro is this. Is 1.3 kc, 75 kg micro? Maybe no, but that's small enough~ and I still not very sure if it is a bug, but I am sure that small laser can kill much large laser IRL~ That's not micro. That's nano. My smallest drone is 13.5kc and 603kg with 1MW weapon. And I consider it to be a micro. My laser interceptor is 218kc and 11.4t with 30MW laser. What is the output and intensity at 1Mm of that drone anyway? Mine is 1.27MW with 451kW/m2 at 1Mm and I still feel it is too weak.
|
|
|
Post by teeth on Apr 13, 2017 18:00:58 GMT
1. The Venus-Class carrier is my main ship, 4.15 kt and 15.3 Mc. It carries 74600 Tunguska anti-ship missiles meant for taking out laser-defended targets, and 459 Ida-class drones used for point defense. 2. Methane for capships and drones, decane for armored missiles. 3. My Tunguskas have a dual warhead design, a heavy casing light propellant one for a low angle anti-armor effect, and a light casing heavy propellant one for high angle radiator destruction. The Idas have a 10 MW laser with 1 MW/m^2 of intensity at 1000 km. When distributed targeting is here I think ballistics will be better than lasers for point defense, especially if we get super small single use controllers and can make guided ammunition. 4. I prefer lots of small ships for high redundancy 5. Capitals have 8 km/s of delta-v, missiles have 4 km/s delta-v with drop tanks and 2 km/s delta-v in the attack phase for a total of 6 km/s, point defense drones have 4 km/s delta-v. Speaking of distributed targeting, I think we desperately need it in the next patch qswitched
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 13, 2017 19:13:31 GMT
how massive are the tunguskas? teeth
|
|
|
Post by teeth on Apr 13, 2017 19:54:20 GMT
how massive are the tunguskas? teeth 6.66 kg, about 75 credits each. They have 4.5mm of nitrile rubber armor.
|
|
|
Post by samchiu2000 on Apr 14, 2017 10:09:04 GMT
Is 1.3 kc, 75 kg micro? Maybe no, but that's small enough~ and I still not very sure if it is a bug, but I am sure that small laser can kill much large laser IRL~ That's not micro. That's nano. My smallest drone is 13.5kc and 603kg with 1MW weapon. And I consider it to be a micro. My laser interceptor is 218kc and 11.4t with 30MW laser. What is the output and intensity at 1Mm of that drone anyway? Mine is 1.27MW with 451kW/m2 at 1Mm and I still feel it is too weak. 100w per square meter at 1Mm, output~3.5Kw, and it kill enemy laser at 1Mm~ BTW there is no need to used 30Mw to kill enemy laser, 100 kw with a 10cm radius aperture should be enough~
|
|
|
Post by jasonvance on Apr 14, 2017 11:39:02 GMT
Micro counter laser laser drones are exploitation of current bug/incorrect setting though. But then that also depends on how micro is this. Is 1.3 kc, 75 kg micro? Maybe no, but that's small enough~ and I still not very sure if it is a bug, but I am sure that small laser can kill much large laser IRL~ This is more a limitation the game of engagement ranges than anything else. Making the assumption that the minimum burning intensity to destroy enemy optics is 100w (which your lasers are optimized for at 1Mm). A laser which is 100Mw at 1Mm could begin engagement of your drones from 100Mm and start attempting to fry their optics since it will be within effective kill range. Lens caps or placing them on the rear / internal / behind armor until deployed could attempt to combat this but it would lose engagement efficiency as you would always have to turn into the beam to attempt to counter and would likely be burned out before alignment could be completed. (This is a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post though) Realistically speaking the "best" laser setups would be the strongest you can build it until light lag and targeting issues start to become major issues (which would have distances measuring in the light second category). Larger installations would still be useful beyond that as many targets (planets, orbital stations, etc.) are mostly predictable and could be still targeted beyond a few light seconds effectively (also a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post). Limited as the game is to 1Mm max engagements (unless you add on one of those cheesed coil / railgun designs) a weird optimization game starts for cost effectiveness on burning lasers and their counters. I haven't dove into micro drones to counter because they aren't a realistic approach (though if mp ever does come along in some form and the game stays in its current state they would be a staple I would guess). On a side note I do have some doubt as to if 100w spread over 1m^2 would be enough intensity to realistically damage an optic but I am not a laser physicist and too lazy to go look up the formulas required for that if someone actually wants to do the math that would be cool. I am however, fairly certain the game damages them far more quickly than would be the case in actuality and it would require a fairly long sustained contact if that amount of energy is actually enough to deform or mar the mirror, which would give the stronger laser an advantage in the sense that it can burn out the lower powerful laser's optics faster than it can be burned out itself.
|
|
|
Post by samchiu2000 on Apr 14, 2017 11:42:42 GMT
Is 1.3 kc, 75 kg micro? Maybe no, but that's small enough~ and I still not very sure if it is a bug, but I am sure that small laser can kill much large laser IRL~ This is more a limitation the game of engagement ranges than anything else. Making the assumption that the minimum burning intensity to destroy enemy optics is 100w (which your lasers are optimized for at 1Mm). A laser which is 100Mw at 1Mm could begin engagement of your drones from 100Mm and start attempting to fry their optics since it will be within effective kill range. Lens caps or placing them on the rear / internal / behind armor until deployed could attempt to combat this but it would lose engagement efficiency as you would always have to turn into the beam to attempt to counter and would likely be burned out before alignment could be completed. (This is a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post though) Realistically speaking the "best" laser setups would be the strongest you can build it until light lag and targeting issues start to become major issues (which would have distances measuring in the light second category). Larger installations would still be useful beyond that as many targets (planets, orbital stations, etc.) are mostly predictable and could be still targeted beyond a few light seconds effectively (also a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post). Limited as the game is to 1Mm max engagements (unless you add on one of those cheesed coil / railgun designs) a weird optimization game starts for cost effectiveness on burning lasers and their counters. I haven't dove into micro drones to counter because they aren't a realistic approach (though if mp ever does come along in some form and the game stays in its current state they would be a staple I would guess). Agree, but i think that it may be a bit too hard to aim anything when you are ~10Mm from the enemy ship...
|
|
|
Post by jasonvance on Apr 14, 2017 11:57:47 GMT
This is more a limitation the game of engagement ranges than anything else. Making the assumption that the minimum burning intensity to destroy enemy optics is 100w (which your lasers are optimized for at 1Mm). A laser which is 100Mw at 1Mm could begin engagement of your drones from 100Mm and start attempting to fry their optics since it will be within effective kill range. Lens caps or placing them on the rear / internal / behind armor until deployed could attempt to combat this but it would lose engagement efficiency as you would always have to turn into the beam to attempt to counter and would likely be burned out before alignment could be completed. (This is a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post though) Realistically speaking the "best" laser setups would be the strongest you can build it until light lag and targeting issues start to become major issues (which would have distances measuring in the light second category). Larger installations would still be useful beyond that as many targets (planets, orbital stations, etc.) are mostly predictable and could be still targeted beyond a few light seconds effectively (also a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post). Limited as the game is to 1Mm max engagements (unless you add on one of those cheesed coil / railgun designs) a weird optimization game starts for cost effectiveness on burning lasers and their counters. I haven't dove into micro drones to counter because they aren't a realistic approach (though if mp ever does come along in some form and the game stays in its current state they would be a staple I would guess). Agree, but i think that it may be a bit too hard to aim anything when you are ~10Mm from the enemy ship... The current aiming wiggle added was 2.5m at 1Mm so following the same inverse square laws it would be about 25m of wiggle room at 10Mm. Hitting a 1m bullseye within 25m might be a little challenging, but time is on your side, they have 9Mm to close before they can attempt to fire back odds are pretty good of the kills occurring during that travel time. The odds of a ship closing that distance without being hit is astronomically low even if the inaccuracy cone was increased 10 times. This is of course under the assumption of no stealth in space so you know the trajectory etc. (another can of worms which has been beaten to death in other threads). Remember the light "projectile" is really really fast we are talking about a projectile that will travel 10Mm in ~0.0333 seconds so dodging won't really be a thing you just have to rely on targeting inaccuracy as you won't be able to move out of the way of a shot. You will also have no warning of incoming fire until the ships are being hit (not that it would really make much difference since you can't dodge it anyways).
|
|
|
Post by samchiu2000 on Apr 14, 2017 12:01:59 GMT
Agree, but i think that it may be a bit too hard to aim anything when you are ~10Mm from the enemy ship... The current aiming wiggle added was 2.5m at 1Mm so following the same inverse square laws it would be about 25m of wiggle room at 10Mm. Hitting a 1m bullseye within 25m might be a little challenging, but time is on your side, they have 9Mm to close before they can attempt to fire back odds are pretty good of the kills occurring during that travel time. The odds of a ship closing that distance without being hit is astronomically low even if the inaccuracy cone was increased 10 times. This is of course under the assumption of no stealth in space so you know the trajectory etc. (another can of worms which has been beaten to death in other threads). Alright got it
|
|
|
Post by shiolle on Apr 14, 2017 14:35:42 GMT
Sorry for off-topic post. Making the assumption that the minimum burning intensity to destroy enemy optics is 100w (which your lasers are optimized for at 1Mm). A laser which is 100Mw at 1Mm could begin engagement of your drones from 100Mm and start attempting to fry their optics since it will be within effective kill range. Lens caps or placing them on the rear / internal / behind armor until deployed could attempt to combat this but it would lose engagement efficiency as you would always have to turn into the beam to attempt to counter and would likely be burned out before alignment could be completed. (This is a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post though) I think this doesn't take into account a couple of factors: - Less powerful lasers with multiple turrets protected by armor/shutters will still be an effective strategy. This doom laser is going to focus on only one spot. When you are close enough to deal damage to the opponent's optics, just fire through the turret that is not being focused at the moment. This also means your armor has to last until your laser is in range, which depends on the ratio between your laser power and enemy laser power. You should still be able to kill doom lasers with systems one or two orders of magnitude less powerful.
- In reality lasers can also blind optical sensors at about 10 times the range where they can deal damage, if we are to believe Atomic Rockets. This also means that two small ships with weak lasers have an advantage over a large ship with a powerful laser, because both can't be blinded at the same time. Of course, you still need multiple sensors to replace those burned permanently burned by the laser. You can also set up lenses on your sensors to have additional protection against enemy laser by making lenses opaque at the frequencies of the laser (usually high frequencies) but still transparent in red/infrared.
- Pulsed lasers are much better for counter-fire than continuous wave lasers since peak intensity can reach much higher values (you are trying to make his mirrors non-reflective instead of burning the whole mount into a slag of metal). Of course, then the enemy will likely employ pulse lasers as well, but with pulse lasers, much like with electromagnetic accelerators, you can still match your adversary laser in power even if you don't have powerful reactor by lowering your rate of fire.
Realistically speaking the "best" laser setups would be the strongest you can build it until light lag and targeting issues start to become major issues (which would have distances measuring in the light second category). Larger installations would still be useful beyond that as many targets (planets, orbital stations, etc.) are mostly predictable and could be still targeted beyond a few light seconds effectively (also a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post). Why do you think these lasers will be able to reach such distances? What input power would a diffraction limited laser require to remain an effective weapon at 1 light second?
|
|
|
Post by jasonvance on Apr 14, 2017 16:40:34 GMT
Sorry for off-topic post. Making the assumption that the minimum burning intensity to destroy enemy optics is 100w (which your lasers are optimized for at 1Mm). A laser which is 100Mw at 1Mm could begin engagement of your drones from 100Mm and start attempting to fry their optics since it will be within effective kill range. Lens caps or placing them on the rear / internal / behind armor until deployed could attempt to combat this but it would lose engagement efficiency as you would always have to turn into the beam to attempt to counter and would likely be burned out before alignment could be completed. (This is a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post though) I think this doesn't take into account a couple of factors: - Less powerful lasers with multiple turrets protected by armor/shutters will still be an effective strategy. This doom laser is going to focus on only one spot. When you are close enough to deal damage to the opponent's optics, just fire through the turret that is not being focused at the moment. This also means your armor has to last until your laser is in range, which depends on the ratio between your laser power and enemy laser power. You should still be able to kill doom lasers with systems one or two orders of magnitude less powerful.
- In reality lasers can also blind optical sensors at about 10 times the range where they can deal damage, if we are to believe Atomic Rockets. This also means that two small ships with weak lasers have an advantage over a large ship with a powerful laser, because both can't be blinded at the same time. Of course, you still need multiple sensors to replace those burned permanently burned by the laser. You can also set up lenses on your sensors to have additional protection against enemy laser by making lenses opaque at the frequencies of the laser (usually high frequencies) but still transparent in red/infrared.
- Pulsed lasers are much better for counter-fire than continuous wave lasers since peak intensity can reach much higher values (you are trying to make his mirrors non-reflective instead of burning the whole mount into a slag of metal). Of course, then the enemy will likely employ pulse lasers as well, but with pulse lasers, much like with electromagnetic accelerators, you can still match your adversary laser in power even if you don't have powerful reactor by lowering your rate of fire.
Realistically speaking the "best" laser setups would be the strongest you can build it until light lag and targeting issues start to become major issues (which would have distances measuring in the light second category). Larger installations would still be useful beyond that as many targets (planets, orbital stations, etc.) are mostly predictable and could be still targeted beyond a few light seconds effectively (also a whole different can of worms for a potentially different post). Why do you think these lasers will be able to reach such distances? What input power would a diffraction limited laser require to remain an effective weapon at 1 light second? 1 light second (300Mm) is actually pathetically short range for what is possible in space. This proposed planetary defense laser array (using 70GW) could operate effectively out to 10au (or roughly 1.5 Trillion meters) (which would require a lot of materials, but is actually build-able with today's technology, though ungodly expensive to send it all to orbit). Remember there is very little in space to get in the way of the beam and knock the photons off course the main limiting factor is focusing the beam so it has as small of a cone as possible. (source) www.deepspace.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/SPIE-Optical-Engineering-Towards-Directed-Energy-Planetary-Defense-Lubin-at-al-2014.pdfJust as a fun side note if this was built in orbit around Earth it could destroy orbital facilities around Titan (one of Saturn's moons) which is right on the edge of its range.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 14, 2017 17:18:04 GMT
can't use it against ships much beyond a light minute though
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Apr 14, 2017 17:22:01 GMT
can't use it against ships much beyond a light minute though With that kind of range, you can fire it continuously and have your opposition expend their delta-v weeks before they're close enough to use their own weapons.
|
|