Author Topic: Adjustable Armor Density  (Read 3397 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 381654729 (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • ?
  • Posts: 40
Adjustable Armor Density
« on: April 20, 2014, 08:06:27 PM »
After failing (see post: AMM doesn't need warhead) to suggest an acceptable idea to balance overpowered small missiles, I now have another idea.

Instead of each armor box being the exact same density as every other armor box, which I think is not as realistic as it could be, let the player adjust the "density" of each armor layer.  An armor box with a density of 2, for example, would weigh as much as 2 layers with a density of 1.  How does this make a difference?

I suggest that missile damage done on the armor box is divided by the box's density. This also involves changing how beam weapons work (as I will eventually explain), so this idea may not end up being acceptable, either.  But I'm not suggesting a solution, only an idea.

The downside to having higher density armor is that the armor is thinner.  If you have 2 layers of armor compacted into 1 layer, it could only protect 1 layer. Against weapons that only damage 1 layer of armor, your armor will be more effective.  Against a weapon that damages more than 1 layer, your ship could suffer internal damage with a substantial amount of armor still left on the hull.  I will illustrate my point using the following example:

Suppose there are two ships, one with two layers of density-1 armor, one with one layer of density-2 armor.

Code: [Select]
SHIP 1                            SHIP 2

1   |1   |1   |1   |1             2   |2   |2   |2   |2
1   |1   |1   |1   |1

Now I let each of them suffer 4 hits from WH1 missiles.  For convenience, I will assume the missiles hit in a 1-2-1 pattern, in other words, causing the same damage profile as a single WH4 missile.

Code: [Select]
SHIP 1                            SHIP 2

1   |0   |0   |0   |1             2   |1.5 |0.83|1.5 |2
1   |1   |0   |1   |1

Ship 1 suffered the same damage as one would expect.  On ship 2, the damage done was a bit different.  The first hit on each box resulted in 0. 5 damage each:
Code: [Select]
1(damage in that square)/2(density of armor in that square)=0.5And the second hit on the middle box resulted in 0. 67 damage:
Code: [Select]
1(damage in that square)/1.5(density of armor in that square)=0.67 (to two decimal places)


Clearly, the double-density-half-thickness armor is superior.  But now I let the ships get hit by a single WH-4 missile in the same spot:

Code: [Select]
SHIP 1                            SHIP 2

1   |0   |0   |0   |1             2   |1.5 |1.5 |1.5 |2
1   |1   |0   |1   |1             1 pt internal damage

The regular armor did not allow internal damage, but the thinner armor, though tougher, did, because it is too thin to protect the ship from the two-layer-deep missile blast.

This raises the question of what happens when damage hits armor with lower density than the amount of damage.  I think the extra damage should simply "fall through" to the next available layer.  So if 1 damage hits the plate of 0. 83 density armor in the above example, it would do
Code: [Select]
1/0.83=1.2 damage, destroying the square of armor, and have
Code: [Select]
1.2-0.83=0.37 damage continue working to the next layer.  If the next layer is the ship's internals, then it represents a 37% chance to inflict 1 internal damage.


Without providing additional examples, I think the conclusion is that denser armor performs better against "sandblasting" tactics but worse against one big hit.  I pictured in my head 1 layer of density 8 armor vs 8 layers of density 1, against 49 WH1 missiles vs 1 WH49 missile as an example, but this is too tedious to type here.  This balance change represents what I want to see (though I have not done any math to determine the best numbers).


Beam weapons, however, should work differently.  It would not make sense, for example, for a laser to penetrate armor when there is still armor in the layers above, because the armor is not transparent.  Therefore I suggest that beam weapon damage is not divided by armor density, and this:
Code: [Select]
OLD 6-PT LASER DAMAGE             NEW 6-PT LASER DAMAGE

XXX                                 1 4 1
 X                                 
 X                                 
 X                                 
The 1 4 1 means 1, 4, and 1 damage on adjacent columns.  If the 4 hits a density-3 armor piece, it will destroy it entirely (damage not divided by density for beams) and 1 point of the next layer.


With all these changes I suggest, which I realize requires major effort to implement, I suggest one more thing: make armor a player-designed system.

It will be possible to research "maximum armor density", and the player will design the armor:
Code: [Select]
Layer 1:
  Material: High-Density Duranium (tons per 1-density square: (no idea what))
  Density: 2
  Thickness: 2

Layer 2:
  Material: x
  Density: y
  Thickness: z

Layer 3:
  none

...


Research cost: XYZ
Armor Cost Per Square: ABC


Now I must stop myself, before I suggest even more radical changes that can't be implemented. . .  comments?
 

Offline NihilRex

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • N
  • Posts: 188
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2014, 10:15:28 PM »
Unfortunately, I think this is far too complex.

It would require major changes to damage and shipdesign code.
 

Offline Erik L

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5654
  • Thanked: 366 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2014, 08:34:43 AM »
Would that not be the same as increasing the armor layers from 1 to 2?

Offline 381654729 (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • ?
  • Posts: 40
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2014, 10:18:36 AM »
Quote from: Erik Luken link=topic=7003. msg71760#msg71760 date=1398087283
Would that not be the same as increasing the armor layers from 1 to 2?

Not against missiles, and that is the entire point.  Compacting armor denser would make it more resilient to damage but on that layer only: because the 1 point of damage would get divided by two (the density), resulting in only half a point of damage per hit.  But it also vacates the layer beneath it entirely, so if the missile damage pattern is more than 1 layer deep, it doesn't protect against the second layer at all.

Against beams, it works like you say.

(actually if there is additional armor outside the compacted layer, it should save some cost and tonnage since there's less surface area for the outer layer to cover. )
 

Offline Charlie Beeler

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1381
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2014, 10:55:39 AM »
First, as is well known I'm of the opinion that there is no issue of small missiles being overpowered.  For details look up the discussion that was eventually locked March of last year.

Second, Steve has stated several times over the years that fractional damage is a non-started.  Basicly because the code complexity to support it does very little to enhance game play. 

With that in mind, please do continue to discuss the possibilities knowing that the likelyhood of them being implemented is quite low.
Amateurs study tactics, Professionals study logistics - paraphrase attributed to Gen Omar Bradley
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2822
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2014, 03:48:02 AM »
I think the idea was pretty sound and think it would add some interesting depth. Armour does not behave very realistic and this would provide a rather easy step in the right direction.

I would not mind armour that also have different capacity to resist different types of damage but that might make it just a bit too much.

I do think there still are a slight problem with missile sizes, especially when you go the rout of box launchers and/or reduced size launchers. As long as armour is destroyed point for point this problem will linger on and only you as a player may choose to exploit this or not.
 

Offline 381654729 (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • ?
  • Posts: 40
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #6 on: April 23, 2014, 10:22:27 AM »
... As long as armour is destroyed point for point ...

Against missiles, armor is not destroyed "point for point", unless I misinterpreted what you mean. Armor density divides the (always one point) of missile damage by the density. A 1-point missile hitting density-8 armor, as an extreme example, only does 0.125 damage. The next hit against the now-density-7.875 armor would only do 0.127 damage. Sandpapering away a single spot of density-8 armor would take 34 1-point missiles.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2822
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #7 on: April 23, 2014, 11:22:31 AM »
I was not referring to your suggestion, I was referring to the current rules and how they work.  ;)
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1240
  • Thanked: 153 times
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2014, 03:18:15 PM »
I think a more simple suggestion would stand greater chance of being implemented.

For example 1 "absorption" being added for every X layer of armor a ship has ( perhaps with amount of layers needed being reduced by a separate technology ranging from for example 10 down to 5 ).


While it would likely lead to less variation in how many armor levels ships have it would add similar variation to missile design, since you can't know how many points of dmg will be absorbed.

It also makes common sense that a strong armor could shrug of minor damage without a scratch.



Another option is adding some new kind of shields that provide this kind of protection ( partial absorption/reduction of each source of incoming damage before it is applied ).
 

Offline Sharp

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • S
  • Posts: 51
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #9 on: April 23, 2014, 03:40:05 PM »
wow alex, I actually wrote up and then scrapped that idea a few times already and then scrapped overall because it just sounded a bit nit-picky vs sandpaper attacks (which I am recipient off more often then not)

Pretty much my thing was every 5 layers of armour you need to do more then 1 point of unshielded damage to actually damage the armour, although adding a 5% chance for attack to still damage armour anyway so it turns sand paper attacks of 100 1WH missiles as very ineffective but 10 10WH missiles will be devastating. Was also thinking of changing shock damage to apply like that as well so more layers will be less likely for shock damage but a few layers would have more, so a 1-100 armour ship hit by a 10 point damage attack would have internal damage but also a lot more shock damage while a 20-100 armoured ship would feel it as a minor knock.

Of course it would make meson cannons and microwaves even more powerful.
 

Offline HartLord

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Surrender... or die trying.
Re: Adjustable Armor Density
« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2014, 05:50:33 PM »
Where's the thumbs up button when you need it for the OP? lol

I really like this idea.  One person brought up a complaint about decimals, but the same effect can be achieved by bumping everything else up to places, e. g.  1 becomes 100.



Grr, laser penetration model drives me nuts.  Must not go off topic.  Although I guess it kind of is on topic. . .  Railgunsshouldhavethepenetrationmodellaserscurrentlyhaveandlasersshouldhaveapenetrationmodelsimilartothemissilemodel;railgunsinthiscasewouldonlyfireoneshotpervolleylikelasers.

There, said it.