Starter questions

[UnLimiTeD]

Or negative armor.
Isn't the chance to destroy the missile dmg/armor?
So, 4 dmg/-2 armor is a -50% chance of destruction.
That'll break it, I'm sure.

Hey, back when I discovered ECM was broken, I had a missile with 100 (1 size, max tech) ECM and 150km/s speed, versus a target above 100k tons with a speed of around 300.
The CIWS ALL missed despite eccm 10 because they couldn't hit the missiles, after which the missiles all magically vanished with an error report, which went completely unnoticed and is probably not fixed yet.

Play around with it.
It'll allow you some awesome RP.
You know, technically, a size 100 missile should contain enough explosives in a shaped charge warhead to split a small planet.
Or create a temporary black hole.

But yeah, it is cheating yourself.
Unless it's part of the RP.

[Vynadan (OP)]

O.O

Guess balancing out the negative agility with the to hit chance is tricky enough for it not to be 100% cheat, but sensor and armour's too much even for my, um, relaxed view on that kind of thing.

How is ECM broken? The search didn't turn anything up for me

[Brian Neumann]

Or negative armor.
Isn't the chance to destroy the missile dmg/armor?
So, 4 dmg/-2 armor is a -50% chance of destruction.
That'll break it, I'm sure.

The chance to destroy a missile with armour is (dmg/(dmg+armour)) So for 1 point of armour a 1 point weapon has a 50% chance to kill the missile (1/(1+1)).  A 2 point damage vs 1 armour is a 66% chance (2/(2+1)), even with 3 points of damage (a 10cm laser at pointblank range) is only giving a 75% kill rate.  That is 75% of the shots that hit will kill the missile. 
Missile armour is more important vs anti-missiles than it is against most beam weapons.  The exception being the 10cm railgun and the gauss cannon which only do 1 point of damage.  As only 50% of interceptions actually will destroy the incomming missile this means that for a anti-missile setup to garuntee a kill it will take twice as many missiles as normally would be needed.  You can see how this could mess up a missile defense doctrine pretty quickly.

Brian

[UnLimiTeD]

Well, it's also an additional hullsize.
Like back when 2 sizes of ecm would make a missile invincible.
For that space, you could have fitted 30 more warhead.

I actually think this possibility should stay.
Players can only cheat themselves, and it grants some awesome possibilities for RP. (Sad small missiles aren't allowed anymore).

[Vanigo]

(Sad small missiles aren't allowed anymore).

My fault, I'm afraid. I designed a size 1 missile with a hundred tiny, warheadless submissiles to swamp enemy point defense. And there was really no reason it couldn't have been a million.

[UnLimiTeD]

Your only cheating yourself.
Now, to swamp enemy point defense you create a mirv that splits into another mirv and so one, avery single submunition being 0.1 smaller.
More work, but no difference.
Actually allows you to spread it out.

[Vanigo]

That wouldn't work that well. 0.1 fuel and engines isn't enough for the bigger ones. I suppose you could get it working by exponentially reducing the size of the submissiles, though.

[Vynadan (OP)]

With the whole retooling and elligible class thingy ... I just designed a PDC with enormous costs (large beam defense PDC) that was just about 50k tons. Due to its costs however, almost all other ship designs I had were elligible classes ... ?
Turning the PDC into a ship design lowered the costs and reduced the amount of elligible classes, but with now tooling to this 38,5k tons 'ship' I can build 10 different ship types without having to retool my shipyard.
This 'ship' now is of course impractical and useless, but this way I could build a large amount of classes in a shipyard? So far I had trouble even designing a geo and a gra survey to be ellible although they were both the same tonnage and costs.

[Vanigo]

With the whole retooling and elligible class thingy ... I just designed a PDC with enormous costs (large beam defense PDC) that was just about 50k tons. Due to its costs however, almost all other ship designs I had were elligible classes ... ?
Turning the PDC into a ship design lowered the costs and reduced the amount of elligible classes, but with now tooling to this 38,5k tons 'ship' I can build 10 different ship types without having to retool my shipyard.
This 'ship' now is of course impractical and useless, but this way I could build a large amount of classes in a shipyard? So far I had trouble even designing a geo and a gra survey to be ellible although they were both the same tonnage and costs.

You tooled a shipyard to build a PDC? I didn't think you could do that... Or were you looking at the box on the class design window?

[Vynadan (OP)]

I was looking at the box in the class design menu, then I made a copy of the design and switched its status from PDC to ship. All PDC components were removed, reducing the tonnage by about 12k tons and lowering the BP a bit - It still had most of my other designs as elligible to build.

[UnLimiTeD]

Well yes, that's another way of "cheating yourself".
Or a nice sideeffect.

[mingmong]

How do Sorium refining ships work?  They get Sorium from a gas giant, refine it onboard and then store it as fuel?  So they need to have big cargo holds as well?  Or do they dump it for a freighter to pick up like roid miners?

[Charlie Beeler]

How do Sorium refining ships work?  They get Sorium from a gas giant, refine it onboard and then store it as fuel?  So they need to have big cargo holds as well?  Or do they dump it for a freighter to pick up like roid miners?

This is covered in several posts that a search for "Sorium Harvester" will reveal. 

Short answer:  A Sorium Harvester ship must have at least one Sorium Harvester module and at least one fuel tank, not cargo module, to store refined fuel.  Park this ship next to a gas giant that has Sorium available and the ship does the rest.  Tag the harvester ship as a tanker to make transfers of fuel easier. 

[Steve Walmsley]

This is an bug/exploit - the values are how much of the missile's mass should be devoted to the corresponding system.  You should put it into the category of "cheating at solitaire". :-)

Yes, it is a bug. I have fixed it for v5.30

Steve

[mingmong]

My fault, I'm afraid. I designed a size 1 missile with a hundred tiny, warheadless submissiles to swamp enemy point defense. And there was really no reason it couldn't have been a million.

How come this is cheating?  Isn't is basically like taking the defensive countermeasures used today (tiny bits of foil to create thousands of radar contacts) and using them in an offensive role?