Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: December 27, 2013, 07:57:44 AM »real jobs pay the bills
Playing poker also pays the bills but now my wife and I are both awake at the same time
. Anyway I am still in poker, just working for the house now Playing poker also pays the bills but now my wife and I are both awake at the same time
. Anyway I am still in poker, just working for the house now Posted by: ollobrains
« on: December 26, 2013, 07:49:29 PM »real jobs pay the bills 
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: December 04, 2013, 07:00:51 AM »Any chance NA would be continued? =D
Would play it even if there was only railguns, lasers and missiles. That's more or less good enough to do everything.
There is a chance. Just had a lot less free time since I stopped playing cards and got a real job again
Steve
Posted by: jseah
« on: December 03, 2013, 07:26:24 PM »Any chance NA would be continued? =D
Would play it even if there was only railguns, lasers and missiles. That's more or less good enough to do everything.
Would play it even if there was only railguns, lasers and missiles. That's more or less good enough to do everything.
Posted by: Bremen
« on: July 23, 2012, 06:57:38 PM »On the other hand, the defender might just fire high power lasers in the direction of any potential target, all the time.
With no limit in range, they are bound to hit something.
Damn, combat's gonna get complicated.
Unlike railguns, though, lasers do have a range limit (when their damage drops below 100 MJ/m²). Inside that limit they'll be far more accurate, though, so I suspect lasers will be the premier anti-missile/anti-fighter weapon, with railguns being the weapon of choice for taking out large, well protected ships.
Posted by: UnLimiTeD
« on: July 23, 2012, 06:12:04 PM »On the other hand, the defender might just fire high power lasers in the direction of any potential target, all the time.
With no limit in range, they are bound to hit something.
Damn, combat's gonna get complicated.
With no limit in range, they are bound to hit something.
Damn, combat's gonna get complicated.
Posted by: jseah
« on: July 23, 2012, 01:19:39 PM »^When I said salvoes, I meant something more like 10+ ASMs travelling from the same firing ship on slightly divergent initial vectors. They could essentially travel together, yet be far enough apart that you can't nuke them all. 100km separation is nothing in Aurora.
Also, ASM + Escort AMMs in attack groups ala the ones I posted about in the Tactics thread would also be a massive headache to deal with without multiple interception chances. There will probably be less groups than a pure ASM bumrush that we see now in TN Aurora, but the saturation of TN Aurora-style salvoes will mean you will need multiple interceptions anyway.
NA's missiles being able to change accelerations and generally act more intelligently would radically change missile warfare. But some things stay the same. Like saturation. ToT salvoes are even easier, with missiles being able to make minor course correction burns (the ahead ones slow down a bit and the behind ones speed up), don't even need the TN Aurora hack of multiple slightly slower designs.
Also, ASM + Escort AMMs in attack groups ala the ones I posted about in the Tactics thread would also be a massive headache to deal with without multiple interception chances. There will probably be less groups than a pure ASM bumrush that we see now in TN Aurora, but the saturation of TN Aurora-style salvoes will mean you will need multiple interceptions anyway.
NA's missiles being able to change accelerations and generally act more intelligently would radically change missile warfare. But some things stay the same. Like saturation. ToT salvoes are even easier, with missiles being able to make minor course correction burns (the ahead ones slow down a bit and the behind ones speed up), don't even need the TN Aurora hack of multiple slightly slower designs.
Posted by: UnLimiTeD
« on: July 23, 2012, 07:37:59 AM »On the other hand, they likely won't come in salvos as a single nuke can blast them all.
After all, they need to hit more of less the same target.
A sandblaster should be an option there.
The most dangerous ASMs in my book as Laser Rod Warheads and Shrapnell, set off at a distance of a few kilometers.
Lower hit/Kill rate, but way harder to intercept as well.
After all, they need to hit more of less the same target.
A sandblaster should be an option there.
The most dangerous ASMs in my book as Laser Rod Warheads and Shrapnell, set off at a distance of a few kilometers.
Lower hit/Kill rate, but way harder to intercept as well.
Posted by: jseah
« on: July 22, 2012, 07:18:10 AM »Yes, but follow up intercepts for leakers is rather important. Assuming interception rates are roughly the same as in TN Aurora, you're going to want many interception chances.
In fact, given that missiles tend towards one-hit-one-kill, AMM defense is pretty much compulsory. Beam only defense gets one shot on the final approach, and a full salvo of ASMs will very likely leak at least one. (remember that ASMs can do evasive maneuvers too, and they have a tiny cross-section to displace)
In fact, given that missiles tend towards one-hit-one-kill, AMM defense is pretty much compulsory. Beam only defense gets one shot on the final approach, and a full salvo of ASMs will very likely leak at least one. (remember that ASMs can do evasive maneuvers too, and they have a tiny cross-section to displace)
Posted by: mikew
« on: July 21, 2012, 10:53:53 PM »The point was that you know the angle the projectile must approach and so you can camp your ships along that line to spot the incomings. And likely, NA will force very large missile sensors, due to the range you need to react properly. (AMMs take forever to get to decent speeds)
If we are talking a pure newtonian setting, then time to accelerate your AMMs shouldn't have any (well, much anyway) bearing if you are on or relatively close to the line of flight of the missiles you are intercepting. Absolute speed has no impact on maneuverability (a newtonian missile in a vacuum doesn't care at all about its "absolute velocity" or velocity relative to its launcher as far as maneuvering goes), so all you have to consider is closing velocity and "sideways speed," i.e. relative velocity normal to the intercept velocity, which becomes zero if you are on an intercept path. Launching AMMs early gets you standoff distance at intercept (which in practical "real" terms can mean that you have time for followup intercepts or that you are far enough from the resulting explosion to not have to worry about blast, shrapnel, or radiation effects), but kinetically there should be no improved capability to intercept. It can even be argued that intercepting farther out and at higher velocities decreases the likelihood of a successful intercept- timing becomes trickier for a warhead which must detonate within a certain distance of the target, and distance and delta v from the launcher results in less signal strength from the launcher's active sensor, and more doppler shift to deal with.
Mike
Posted by: jseah
« on: July 18, 2012, 01:41:02 PM »The point was that you know the angle the projectile must approach and so you can camp your ships along that line to spot the incomings. And likely, NA will force very large missile sensors, due to the range you need to react properly. (AMMs take forever to get to decent speeds)
Eg. in my proposed defense tactics, I do mention having multiple groups carrying their own size 25 sensor (1250tons) for missile detection.
Eg. in my proposed defense tactics, I do mention having multiple groups carrying their own size 25 sensor (1250tons) for missile detection.
Posted by: sublight
« on: July 18, 2012, 07:21:15 AM »Ok, this is where my familiarity of Aurora is going to crimp my ability in the first few games. I just don't know how far out I will be able to see the slugs. I expect to see the ships a long ways off. It looks like you don't see missile (much smaller) until they are considerably closer. I just don't know how far off you will be able to see the slugs.
If sensors designed to see missiles (something measured in meters) are a fair factor less efficient than those used to see ships (which is what it looks like) - how effecient are they going to be when used to spot a (assuming just a 1kg ball of copper) slug about 5-6 cm/2" across closing at what may be 10K km/s? If you have minutes, you can spot that little pup a long ways out (over half a million km's?).
If that little ball of metal is even harder to see than the missiles - I am afraid your response time will be measured in seconds.
I think jseah is talking about passive thermal sensors. If you know where all the enemy ships are, you know any projectiles the fire will have to be roughly on the intercept line from their possition to your projected position at a speed no greater than the enemy vessel's closing speed + 100km/s. If the thermal energy spike generated from firing is vissible (no clue if it would be) then you also know when they fire. For all of this actualy seeing the projectile isn't required.
For active detection no Standard Aurora knowledge is needed: the sensor system is being redone for Newtonian.
Using the new rules, the sample 150 ton resolution-1 missile detection sensor can spot a 4-ton missile 2.2m km out. If our 1kg projectile has the same density as a missile, then it has 1/4000th the mass and volume, 1/16th the radius, and 1/252 the cross sectional area. This gives a detection range of... 35km. Even at a standard firing velocity of 60 km/s, you have less than 1s reaction time. With 5s increments odds are the projectile would pass an advance scout without ever getting noticed. You may as well assume projectiles are undetectable and not waste processor time checking.
There is no indication that a resolution smaller than 1 is possible, but lets see what things would look like if there was a projectile sensor. Say, a 0.01 resolution sensor, sized to optimally detect 4 kg objects. This would have a maximum detection range of 220k km for a 150 ton sensor. A 1kg projectile would be seen at 35k km for a 1,000x improvement. Even a projectile accelerated to 3.5k km/s would still leave a 10s detection window.
Posted by: procyon
« on: July 17, 2012, 10:25:13 PM »Quote from: jseah
Post a small projectile detection sensor along the expected angle....
Since we assume your DSTS can see enemy ships jumping in and out, you know the bearing the slugs are coming by to incredible accuracy....
You'll have a few minutes warning.
Ok, this is where my familiarity of Aurora is going to crimp my ability in the first few games. I just don't know how far out I will be able to see the slugs. I expect to see the ships a long ways off. It looks like you don't see missile (much smaller) until they are considerably closer. I just don't know how far off you will be able to see the slugs.
If sensors designed to see missiles (something measured in meters) are a fair factor less efficient than those used to see ships (which is what it looks like) - how effecient are they going to be when used to spot a (assuming just a 1kg ball of copper) slug about 5-6 cm/2" across closing at what may be 10K km/s? If you have minutes, you can spot that little pup a long ways out (over half a million km's?).
If that little ball of metal is even harder to see than the missiles - I am afraid your response time will be measured in seconds.
But I don't know how far out in standard Aurora you can see a rail gun slug (if there are any...).
Quote
Obviously, in NA, you'll probably have tractor beams or tugs or some suitably cheap low-powered thing to move it on/off the planet.
Sounds good. And if it works for the stations - will it keep me from using fuel to take my ships off from a planet?
Quote
Mini-fiction EDIT:
The battle destroys a few PDCs and the retreating enemy ships fired a barrage of rounds (or at least they appeared to). A few bases cannot land due to lack of space and a desperate defence is mounted. Round after round detonates on the thick cloud of dust placed in the way, escort ships spotting a seemingly endless shower.
Ten grueling hours, desperate hours, later, one freakishly lucky metal pellet misses enough sand and a railgun base disappears in a brilliant flash of light, thousands of men and a fine officer didn't even know they were hit before the entire base vapourizes. At the speeds the rounds travel, a hit explodes like a thermonuclear device, even though nothing in the target or round is explosive. It is the only one to make it through, the huge clouds of sand are already dispersing, but for the next decade, ships approaching the colony are restricted to sub 1000 km/s speeds or require shields due to the orbiting dust.
Alternatively:
The system commander (aka. you) could decide that defending the bases isn't worth risking the lives of crew and officers. Abandon the bases to their fate and evacuate!
I like your story. Very nice.
As long as I have ammo left or a population in danger - I would mount the defense.
If the base is empty, I may decided to devote my attention and effort elsewhere.
(My apologies to the fine crew. 'The needs of the many... and such.')
Posted by: jseah
« on: July 17, 2012, 07:03:33 AM »The game will be the best place to find out.XD Post a small projectile detection sensor along the expected angle. You won't know the time they come, but if the enemy ships just leave, your system defence frigates near your colony (you have some there right? right?) can go hang around on the correct bearing a couple of million km out.
And I expect to have a lot of fun finding out...
Since we assume your DSTS can see enemy ships jumping in and out, you know the bearing the slugs are coming by to incredible accuracy. Compared with interplanetary distances, a couple of million km gives you a comparatively large error tolerance (you can miss the angle by half a degree and it probably won't matter) thus you have alot of wiggle room to put your ships.
You'll have a few minutes warning.
As for landing your stations in PDC hangars, depending on how the game mechanics bear out, it could be instant deploy. >.> Which uh, would be hax.
A TN Aurora version of this scheme (with long range drones) could land the railgun base instantly. Obviously, in NA, you'll probably have tractor beams or tugs or some suitably cheap low-powered thing to move it on/off the planet.
Lol, if we could land ships in PDCs instantly, energy weapon battles against enemy bases became pointless. The bases could recharge on the surface where railguns and lasers can't reach them, then pop up to fire.
<Needs fixing.
Mini-fiction EDIT:
The battle destroys a few PDCs and the retreating enemy ships fired a barrage of rounds (or at least they appeared to). A few bases cannot land due to lack of space and a desperate defence is mounted. Round after round detonates on the thick cloud of dust placed in the way, escort ships spotting a seemingly endless shower.
Ten grueling hours, desperate hours, later, one freakishly lucky metal pellet misses enough sand and a railgun base disappears in a brilliant flash of light, thousands of men and a fine officer didn't even know they were hit before the entire base vapourizes. At the speeds the rounds travel, a hit explodes like a thermonuclear device, even though nothing in the target or round is explosive. It is the only one to make it through, the huge clouds of sand are already dispersing, but for the next decade, ships approaching the colony are restricted to sub 1000 km/s speeds or require shields due to the orbiting dust.
Alternatively:
The system commander (aka. you) could decide that defending the bases isn't worth risking the lives of crew and officers. Abandon the bases to their fate and evacuate!
Posted by: procyon
« on: July 16, 2012, 08:55:34 PM »Quote from: jseah
Depending on how thick the atmosphere of your colony is, it might not cost all that much to bring the station back down into a PDC hangar.
I am completely unfamiliar with any previous version, so taking an orbital station down into a PDC is new to me. Could be very useful in this instance. I don't know what this entails so I will be going on faith here. It ought to take a healthy amount of fuel to keep moving between orbit and the surface though. I don't know what the mechanics are for this at all.
Quote
Secondly, you do know where the slugs are coming from if you see the enemy ships (and if your colony can't see them, then why are you building these guns?). Your planet and station aren't going to move, so necessarily their incoming rounds are going to be limited in firing arc. Very limited.
I didn't say you wouldn't have a pretty good idea where they would be coming from. Again, I have no familiarity with Aurora and how good the sensors are. I am assuming they are far enough away you can't detect the gun firing. If you can detect the firing from interplanetary distances then you will have a very good fix on the origin - if not just which target.
The trick is unless you know the ship design that is firing at you - you will have no clue when they are going to show up. You can take a guess, but when talking about the distances I envision an error of a hundred km/s could make the first slugs showing up anywhere in a couple of hour timeframe.
And if you don't know exactly when they are going to show up, and can't see them very far out, it may be difficult to stop them effectively. Again, my lack of any familiarity with aurora means I have absolutely no idea what is possible in this area.
The defense will have to be very effective though if you have strings of slugs coming at you over a span of eight or so hours. Again, one screw up shooting them down and it could be over.
The game will be the best place to find out.
And I expect to have a lot of fun finding out...
