Post your designs here!

Sure thing, side note back when I did 1cm base tests it did get decent times so I should've tried it.

Is it better to have one big nuke or multiple smaller nukes (on one missile) to destroy missiles?

The payload gets more cost effective as they go up in size. So for crushing the AI one big missile is probably best.

If you wanted to think about possible intelligent counters though you have to remember that missiles can't choose their engagements they are locked into whatever runs into them. The enemy could throw a single missile ahead to intercept your nuke and there isn't really anything your nuke can do outside of burn delta-v and try and dodge (that only works if it has more thrust than the enemy missile) then get back on target to the missile swarm. The interception process can be repeated until the missile runs out of delta-v and becomes useless.

The AI won't do any of those meta-game tactics so you can just use 1 big nuke against missile swarms there. If you wanted to simulate playing against an intelligent opponent though you would have to make a missile that either has enough thrust and delta-v to cost effectively burn out enough interceptors from the swarm to be cost effective and have enough payload to be threatening enough to merit interception. Since you are likely to get intercepted by individual missiles keeping the cost of the payload as low as possible would be preferred there (so really low yield).

It gets trickier with individual missiles though as well since if you fired 10 missiles in cascade all 10 missiles would need to dodge each interceptor so they win 10:1 on delta-v expenditure per interceptor. Dodging with the first missile to have the missile behind it destroyed doesn't really accomplish anything.

In my opinion the best way to do interceptor missiles is to use a missile that can trade 1:1 cost effectively and basically counter a missile swarm with a cheaper missile swarm. The only way to force the attacker into a defensive position is for them to not be able to cost effectively trade which flips the table on who has to burn delta-v to try and dodge.

It's pretty neat but not going to lie 30 some meters for a torpedo seems excessive and you could probably drop a lot of cost not using RCC as an armor layer.

Also which dimension exactly is 2520mm? the torpedo is 2240mm in diameter?

I still waiting for the day when we could attach a payload directly to the ships do we could release them like bomber.

Cool, thanks for the suggestion guys, now my torpedo downgraded to a 2220mm, just slightly cheaper and lighter.

i should probably find another propulsion system due to this:

The Decane NTR taking up more that 50% of the cost and slightly more than 25% of the mass of the torpedo.

No need, for our engineers have greatly optimized the propulsion system.

After extensive modification, the Type 5 Torpedo is born


Even though it has only 2/3 the range of its predecessor, it is 1/5 as costly, 1/4 as heavy and about half the size with the same effective warhead.

However, a new platform to deploy these torpedoes had to be developed, leading to the creation of the Umikaze Class Destroyer


Capable of deploying 30 Type 5 Torpedoes, it can strike fear in those that fear the torpedoes. Lightly armored, it is incapable of taking any heavy barrage, instead preferring to strike from long range. A useful design utilized was the addition of a backup RTG which can allow the vessel to operate without its main reactor, albeit without any offensive motives, which is most often used in times of peace.