Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: UnLimiTeD
« on: April 28, 2010, 03:45:27 AM »

Still a question wouldn't hurt.
Thats not a bad direction, btw., instead of automatically calling a 0-WH missile an AMM, why not call it a decoy?

If you want sensor missiles, as long as they can't redirect surrounding sub munitions, you'd probably go for buoys or drones anyways.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: April 28, 2010, 03:26:20 AM »

Quote from: "UnLimiTeD"
I think the main problem here is that a 0-warhead missile is automatically classed as an AMM.
Maybe there should be a warning or something when creating a 0 warhead missile without submunitions.
You can create missiles with sensors that have no warhead or even decoy armoured missiles, so no warhead isn't necessarily indicative of a bad design.

Steve
Posted by: UnLimiTeD
« on: April 26, 2010, 10:47:22 AM »

I think the main problem here is that a 0-warhead missile is automatically classed as an AMM.
Maybe there should be a warning or something when creating a 0 warhead missile without submunitions.
Posted by: AndonSage
« on: April 26, 2010, 05:45:15 AM »

This nifty utility might be of some use to you: OpenOffice spreadsheet for easy missile design. He's also got an Excel version available. Check out the thread and download the spreadsheet if you find it useful.
Posted by: Hawkeye
« on: April 25, 2010, 10:48:00 PM »

AMMs need at least a strength-1 warhead. As you AMMs deal 0 damage, they can´t kill anything.

Other than that, they look ok except for fuel, way too much! My AMMs have between 0.01 and 0.03 fuel.
Posted by: laz
« on: April 25, 2010, 09:28:45 PM »

Hello there

Had a rather amusing fight with a single prescursor ship the other day

I had a fleet of 5 ships armed with my first attempt at using missile techs. I don't know whether the design's themselves were at fault or whether the prescursor tech is so high that I was basically hoping for too much out of my technology for what I got anyway. My tactic was to approach the prescursor and deflect its main means of attack which is basically a series of 22 size 3 missile salvo's. By simply overwhelming it with ships stocked up with tons of size 1 AMM's

Basically My AMM's did their job 1/3 of them managed to intercept the precursor's missiles. I then got the message that the warheads were insufficient to kill the incoming missiles  :shock:

This is my Shield Class Anti Missile Missle. First mistake I spotted in this design is ive got far too much fuel on it for a closer range AMM. Thought I might be able to have them intercept at a longer range but my zero resolution sensors are the limit lesson learned.

Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 1 MSP  (0.05 HS)     Warhead: 0    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 26
Speed: 50000 km/s    Endurance: 20 minutes   Range: 60.0m km
Cost Per Missile: 1.2333
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 1300%   3k km/s 416%   5k km/s 260%   10k km/s 130%
Materials Required:    0.9833x Gallicite   Fuel x500
What is a nice ideal compromise between Engine, Fuel, Agility and Warhead strength for such designs. This missile had the following ratio when I designed it

Warhead 0.1
Engine    0.5
Fuel        0.2
Agility     0.2

What way can I improve the design and go back to hammer this lone precursor ship?