some firepower calcs (not mine)

It's not my "reasoning" -- it's a stated fact... read the weapons statistics definitions in your Victory Streak manual.

I, personally, would go with nJ as MilSpec and GJ as civilian... although that seems to make the physics people cry.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
It's not my "reasoning" -- it's a stated fact... read the weapons statistics definitions in your Victory Streak manual.

I, personally, would go with nJ as MilSpec and GJ as civilian... although that seems to make the physics people cry.

This makes me sob with horror... The idea that military weapons with many times more firepower than their civilian counterparts can POSSIBLY draw nanojoules of energy... A nanojoule, even if released in only a femtosecond, is still a nanojoule, even though it has become a gigawatt of power, it's still not got enough ENERGY to knock a child on his ass. And when damaging shields, it's ENERGY that's the name of the game, not power.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
I tried to post to the SpaceBattles forum, but they've got some idiotic system where you need to be manually confirmed first -- it's been 24 hours now...
Luckily, we know how to run a message board here (G) So here was my intended reply...

i think the confirmation comes in your email. anyway i will send your reply to the board.
 
Originally posted by TC
i think the confirmation comes in your email.

Theoretically, yes. In practise, however, TyeDyeBoy, LOAF and myself are all confirmation-less.

TC

Perhapse it could be because of efronts problems. i will have to ask an admin. if it is somthing wrong with the site im sure an admin will fix it.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
*Any* armor is probably an exotic alloy -- but the SpaceBattles people seem to ignore that (G)

yes, but the rules of conservitive estimates use iron (whose properties are known) instead of whatever material (whose properites are unknown) to get low end calcs.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
... but we *do* know the properties of tungsten (G)

yes but what about materials that are weaker than tungsten? spacebattles is a all sci-fi, lotsa fantasy and anime board so things cannot be so simple as when dealing with one universe. eg, the pre "efront exodius" thread stormtroopers armour vs roman armour. here the closest things will get to that is WC1 laser vs Nephilm manta armour.
 
Originally posted by TC
Except, that thread is dealing with Confed weapons vs Confed armour.

TC

but the rules are allready there. they are there to lessen flaming between rival groups. ie the cult of the connie and the deciples of wong. they would both be arguing that the others calculations are wrong becouse of some unique property of the metal used as armour.
i am really out of my field here though. untill reciently i was a newbie there and i am still learning some of the rules and why they exist. (the unofficial rules that is)
 
But... we know the reletive values of the other WC armors *compared* to tungsten -- and we know the reletive values of *real* armors compared to tungsten... thus, tungsten can be used to accurately compare WC armor to anything.
 
Maybe you should ask the people who created the WCU what they were thinking, its not like loaf wrote Victory Streak and Waypoint!
 
Execpt that then by your reasoning 1 Heavy Plasma Cannon can only take out 22 cm of armor, yet I can take out an enemy fighter with only 1 shot.

If you’re referring to Prophecy, then you need to keep in mind that damage, shield, and armor stats are not expressed in the durasteel standard, but simply in “damage points”. So yes, a single shot of a Heavy Plasma Cannon is enough, according to the stats, to take out any alien fighter save for the Ray Node, Manta, and Devil Ray.

A nanojoule, even if released in only a femtosecond, is still a nanojoule, even though it has become a gigawatt of power, it's still not got enough ENERGY to knock a child on his ass. And when damaging shields, it's ENERGY that's the name of the game, not power.

Maybe it’s just a matter of concluding we still don’t know a lot about the “mechanics” of the various guns.

To take a very rough example, say I fire off a single shot from a handgun. There are at least four different energy stats that collectively describe the act. First, the energy my body, in particular my hand uses in pulling the trigger. Second, the potential energy that builds up in the gun’s hammer. Third, the energy initially released when the so-called propelling charge “detonates”. And fourth, the energy imparted to the bullet as it leaves the barrel.

For each stat, that particular amount of energy can be said to be “used” or “required” for a single shot. But from no single stat can we presume to know the total amount of energy expended or involved, let alone how the gun works overall to produce its final deadly force.

In short, when a manual says X-amount of nanoJoules or gigaJoules is used or required per shot, it’s hard to say what, exactly, we’re being told. (Though the references to the use of nanoJoules in KS, WC3, WC4, and Prophecy sound like only “trigger” energy.)
 
Fenris Ulfric has replied to the march 17th reply i sent over. unfortuantly BDJ has not yet informed me if there is any errors preventing email. soon i am probably going to ask johan.
********************************************************
Originally posted by Fenris Ulfric
Very informative, and i'll take that into reconsideration to formulate a more accurate model.

However, the 1.8cm as of WC3 *must* be a typographical error. Elsewhere, under the weapon stats themselves, they state penetration in CM of armor, not damage units, and that said weapon (in this case the laser) does 18cm damage. Likewise, a ship with 3000cm equiv. shields and 1000cm equiv. armor would take eons to punch through even with tachyon cannons, which would do a mere 7cm damage. an Excal could only dish out 28cm damage per strike with its main guns, meaning it would take 8-9 shots to down a Vaktoh's shields. Considering it only takes one, plus one more to kill it, clearly this is not the case. Similarly, it would take a long time for an Arrow to down a Darket's 60-80cm (IIRC) equiv shields with only 9.6cm equiv damage per volley, not to mention a Paktahn.

Also, the weapon power has increased dramatically since WC1, meaning it would be logical for the blast radius to increase too. If it does remain at 50 meters, then yes the power drops, but it makes it hard to see how you could cause significant armor damage to a ship over ten times as long. However, I am not going to dismiss this latter point and will consider it in future approaches.
 
Heya,
Still no confirmation from SpaceBattles...

I've gone over everything again, on the chance that my mind might be playing tricks on me... but I can find no evidence in any official source that the laser does 18 cm of damage -- everything is fairly clear about listing the value in either armor units or centimeters... The fact that the 1.8 cm or 18 damage units number (with the corresponding explanation as to the meaning of damage units) appears in every guide and manual cast doubts as to whether or not it's a typographical error (G) Privateer's weapons list gives the statistics in only centimeters -- but it lists 1.8 as the value...

Anyway, gun power really hasn't increased all that much since WC 1 -- the only increase since that era is in range -- 4,800 km in WC1 versus 5,000 km in WC3 (and, of course, a corresponding power increase -- 9.6 for the WC1 Mk 30 laser, 10 for the WC3 variant). I don't really see any reason *why* the damage radius would increase -- ship sizes didn't increase, so there's really no reason to assume when we've already been graced with a stated fact (G)

As for the translation of gun damage values into the engine -- this is just like the 'quadrants'; which is to say, it's another case of gameplay being made 'fun' rather than following the 'universe' values correctly... and afterall, isn't the damage value in the game variable, depending on what level of gameplay you choose?
 
No, they clearly intentionally converted the previous centimeter data into 'armor units'.

Accidently typing "Penetration. Armor/shield penetration expressed in tenths of a cm (0.1cm = 1 armor unit)" and then listing the previously given numbers multiplied by ten in ten different manuals and books is a pretty unusual typographical error. :)
 
Back
Top