Author Topic: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS  (Read 12103 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline iceball3

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 374
  • Thanked: 30 times
    • View Profile
Re: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS
« Reply #30 on: March 03, 2016, 01:16:27 AM »
still remember probability from Uni, so I understand hit chance. What I was saying is that*, that no matter how superior your technical capabilities are, you Base Hit chance will always  be 50% (since tracking\ECM can only reduce it ** ) which means that your base chance to hit would be 75%, 87.5%, 94% (ROF 1,2,3)

Those numbers aren't encouraging, especially if you have a volley of more than one missile coming your way, in which case the chance to take them all down plummet.


*I was, assuming that formula is correct
** I haven't checked if grade\moral is can range above 1, but if it does it would be weird that all my Empire expertise can't improve my autonomous system hit chance but my crew feelings can :/
You understand they're commercial designs, right? If you want near-100%-accurate turrets with arbritrarily high tracking speeds, you're going to have to make a military design instead, and utilize 5 HS gauss turrets. It's the only way.

The point of CIWS is not to stop a missile bombardment dead in it's tracks, it's to filter damage from said bombardments. Which is why they need to be paired up with armor to be worth it's grain in salt.

If you want an actually effective anti-missile defense, you're going to have to dedicate an entire naval military doctrine to it. Anti-Missile missiles, area defense turret escorts escorting in their parent ships at range to increase the missile-engagement envelope available to them, and accurate final-fire systems.
 

Offline Mor

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 305
  • Thanked: 10 times
    • View Profile
Re: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS
« Reply #31 on: March 03, 2016, 02:15:59 AM »
You understand they're commercial designs, right?
Surely you realize that a "commercial" designation is meaningless, based on the arbitrary definition we use for convenience sake, and in this case just away to offer our "commercial" vessels a defensive capability. I assure you that a Phalanx CIWS on a military "commercial" replenishment ship and a Destroyer will function just the same, or we would have a military design as well.

The point of CIWS is not to stop a missile bombardment dead in it's tracks
The point of CIWS is to have an automatic, self-contained system. No one said it should be impervious, I just pointed out that according the formula above, if true, you can't improve a single CIWS hit chance no matter how advanced your technology is.
 

Offline iceball3

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 374
  • Thanked: 30 times
    • View Profile
Re: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS
« Reply #32 on: March 03, 2016, 10:07:32 AM »
Surely you realize that a "commercial" designation is meaningless, based on the arbitrary definition we use for convenience sake, and in this case just away to offer our "commercial" vessels a defensive capability. I assure you that a Phalanx CIWS on a military "commercial" replenishment ship and a Destroyer will function just the same, or we would have a military design as well.
The point of CIWS is to have an automatic, self-contained system. No one said it should be impervious, I just pointed out that according the formula above, if true, you can't improve a single CIWS hit chance no matter how advanced your technology is.
Technically, you can. See: Rate of fire. I think tracking time might work too, and since you can put size 1 resolution 1 active sensors on commercial vessels, you may get even further bonuses if you see the missile coming.
 

Offline TheDeadlyShoe

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1155
  • Thanked: 44 times
  • Dance Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS
« Reply #33 on: March 03, 2016, 10:33:49 AM »
Quote
I just pointed out that according the formula above, if true, you can't improve a single CIWS hit chance no matter how advanced your technology is.
there's no practical difference between how this works for CIWS and how it works for anything else; your actual to hits will never be 100% on _any_ missile defense system, except against missiles that are so crappy that they arn't a realistic threat to anything.

TL3 missile:24000 km/s
TL3 CIWS: 12,000 km/s tracking ~size 7.5, 2x3 shots:  25% hit chance, 36,000km/s of 'intercepts', chance of a total miss: 18%
TL3 laser turret: 12,000 km/s tracking, 2x size4+FC: 50% hit chance, 24,000 km/s of 'intercepts', chance of a total miss: 25%
 

Offline Mor

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 305
  • Thanked: 10 times
    • View Profile
Re: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS
« Reply #34 on: March 03, 2016, 06:07:38 PM »
That is exactly the point, according to that formula it doesn't matter how crappy those missiles are. If I strap on a warhead and charge a state of the art CIWS using nothing but my spacesuit thrusters, a war cry in my throat and hands spread to the side because of some misguided notion that it looks cool. The Ciws will still have only 50% base hit chance...

Mind you, i understand why it is mechanically and the reason for it, and how its balanced with higher tech = less HS-> you can put two CIWS. But it just make less sense to me, especially if that fully automatic, self-contained system will enjoy crew grade\moral on military ships...
 

Offline iceball3

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 374
  • Thanked: 30 times
    • View Profile
Re: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS
« Reply #35 on: March 04, 2016, 03:11:33 PM »
That is exactly the point, according to that formula it doesn't matter how crappy those missiles are. If I strap on a warhead and charge a state of the art CIWS using nothing but my spacesuit thrusters, a war cry in my throat and hands spread to the side because of some misguided notion that it looks cool. The Ciws will still have only 50% base hit chance...
Well, you'll probably miss the ship entirely at that rate.
It's not the targeting system that makes it likely to miss, it's the gun itself. If you really want that 100% chance, use an escort ship with full size gauss or turreted mesons or something. That's really all there is to it. Lets you protect multiple ships at once, too.
 

Offline 83athom

  • Big Ship Commander
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1229
  • Thanked: 80 times
    • View Profile
Re: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS
« Reply #36 on: March 07, 2016, 02:10:05 PM »
If I strap on a warhead and charge a state of the art CIWS using nothing but my spacesuit thrusters, a war cry in my throat and hands spread to the side because of some misguided notion that it looks cool. The Ciws will still have only 50% base hit chance...
But they fire two shots at 50%, statistically one will hit and the chance for two is there while a system that fires one at 100% can only hit one. Also, even though base hit chance is 50%, I've seen CIWS hit chance at 70% from just crew grade modifiers not including the tracking bonus you get on missiles in combat. Now I will concede the fact that because half size gauss makes it so the base hit is always 50% you can never improve that with tech. You can, however, improve the rate of fire with tech which increases overall hit chances.
Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 

Offline iceball3

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 374
  • Thanked: 30 times
    • View Profile
Re: Part 11: Summary of Beam Weapons and CIWS
« Reply #37 on: March 07, 2016, 02:22:40 PM »
But they fire two shots at 50%, statistically one will hit and the chance for two is there while a system that fires one at 100% can only hit one.
You might be misunderstanding probability a bit, though, I don't think it's a bad thing that CIWS gets 50% chance to hit.
Going based on gauss cannon Rate Of Fire tech:

2 shots at 50% accuracy, without bonuses:
Have a 25 % chance to hit zero shots.
Have a 50 % chance to hit one shot.
Have a 25% chance to hit both shots.

1 shot at 100% accuracy, without bonuses or penalties:
100% chance to hit one shot.

That said, I still think CIWS should still exist as they are, specifically because I feel the military maintenance of a full sized gauss cannon is the cost of having such an accurate weapon system.
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51