open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked This just hit me hard: EVE's weaponry is over the top
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic

dexington
Caldari
Baconoration
Posted - 2011.08.03 14:54:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Tippia
…and a lot of it isn't automated.


The Gallente Federation may have a large population but the average citizen is not inclined to join the Federal military. Moreover, the pressures of the first Caldari-Gallente War led the Federation to invest heavily in automation and military drones. This tendency has continued ever since, and the Gallente Navy has always ensured that their vessels are highly automated so as to allow them maximum use of their relatively tight personnel pool.

Seems like it is more back story then usable facts, but it sounds like automation is a possibility. I always believed that AI would have been invented, and with robotics, nano engineering, etc ship crews was at an minimum.

Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari
Emminent Terraforming
O.G.-Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.03 15:00:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: Viktor Fyretracker on 03/08/2011 15:22:16
I think the range limit is for the server load.


some ships in EVE though can technically shoot out past 250km as their optimal(Sniper Rokh on paper with bad ammo can reach 300 something km optimal)

and actually the fact bullets hit instant in EVE is a bigger flaw than all of our gun sizes and power usage. but again that is likely for ease of coding and tracking, etc. because many guns shoot faster than launchers of equal range if you had a whole fleet of arty ships and had to track each shell as it went down range it would be more unneeded server load on already stressed nodes during a siege.

also keep in mind our battleships are undergunned compared to the amount of "Dakka" a battleship should have.

Real Battleship...
Quote:
Armament:
9 × 16 in (406 mm)/50 cal Mark 7 guns
20 × 5 in (127.0 mm)/38 cal Mark 12 guns
80 × 40 mm/56 cal anti-aircraft guns
49 × 20 mm/70 cal anti-aircraft cannons


of course Tranquility nodes would explode if our BS had that much shooting out of them at one time.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.03 15:27:00 - [33]
 

Edited by: stoicfaux on 03/08/2011 15:27:10

What's truly over the top is that Projectile weapons hit out to 250km nearly instantly.

If we assume 0.1 seconds to hit a target at 250km, then the round is traveling at 2,500km/s. As I understand it, the velocity of the expanding gas from the burning propellant is limited to the speed of sound in the gas. In RL, using a hydrogen light gas gun, a velocity of 11km/s has been achieved.

In theory, the plasma from an exploding 1 megaton nuke can reach 10,000km/s.

So what kind of propellant are these zero cap "projectile" rounds using to accelerate cannon shells to such extreme speeds?



E man Industries
Posted - 2011.08.03 15:34:00 - [34]
 

Quote:
<Cro_Magnus> what I don't get is why people bother with "mm" as a caliber after 1000... I mean... 1400mm, why not call it "Mobile car launcher" and have done with it?
<Cro_Magnus> 1400mm shells basically equate to the ship firing volksvagens at high speed
<Cro_Magnus> knowing minmatar that's probably what they *are* firing too
<Wrangler> except they are projectiles, not cars, and explosive
<Cro_Magnus> car @ several thousand meters per second = projectile
<Cro_Magnus> car loaded with fuel impacting ship = explosive
<Cro_Magnus> your point?
<Fenria> GAAAAH Captain... there is a beetle heading our way at 18kps
<Wrangler> OMG! We're being attacked by volkswagens!"!
<Fenria> DAMN THOSE GERMANS
* Wrangler fires counter measure trabants



But ya guns are huge but so are the ships...just a shame the turret models are tiny on battle ships.

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Posted - 2011.08.03 15:36:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Edited by: stoicfaux on 03/08/2011 15:27:10

What's truly over the top is that Projectile weapons hit out to 250km nearly instantly.

If we assume 0.1 seconds to hit a target at 250km, then the round is traveling at 2,500km/s. As I understand it, the velocity of the expanding gas from the burning propellant is limited to the speed of sound in the gas. In RL, using a hydrogen light gas gun, a velocity of 11km/s has been achieved.

In theory, the plasma from an exploding 1 megaton nuke can reach 10,000km/s.

So what kind of propellant are these zero cap "projectile" rounds using to accelerate cannon shells to such extreme speeds?





No, what's truly over the top would be the kind of abomination fit you'd run to fire projectiles at 250km. Razz

Uuali
Posted - 2011.08.03 15:58:00 - [36]
 

What is truly amazing is how these ships can keep a stable orbit while firing. You know, equal and opposite reaction and all that. Would use a lot of fuel to fire retro rockets, stabalizers and whatnot.

Uuali
Posted - 2011.08.03 16:01:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: McRoll
And yet we cannot fire those weapons further than 250 km for the biggest long range guns. I wish CCP designed the game to simulate real ranges we could use those weapons with. Feels pretty ridiculous to fire a 1400mm artillery mounted on a spaceship at 50 km range. In space the projectile would travel infinite ranges limited only by the time it takes to reach the target and the maneuverability of the enemy ship to dodge it.

When you read some sci-fi novels the space ship combat feels way more immersive and credible than in eve- missiles being fired on hundreds of thousands of kilometers range, counter measures, ships maneuvring and firing energy weapon broadsides... when I think about how much better and more interesting the combat in this game might be if CCP forgot space barbies and console shooters... just makes me sad.



I'm wondering when all those missiles from Amarr are going to reach Jita. But, I'll ponder that in my new slacks that instantly appear in my hangar upon podding.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.08.03 16:01:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Uuali
What is truly amazing is how these ships can keep a stable orbit while firing. You know, equal and opposite reaction and all that. Would use a lot of fuel to fire retro rockets, stabalizers and whatnot.
DuhRazz

Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari
Emminent Terraforming
O.G.-Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.03 16:06:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Uuali
Originally by: McRoll
And yet we cannot fire those weapons further than 250 km for the biggest long range guns. I wish CCP designed the game to simulate real ranges we could use those weapons with. Feels pretty ridiculous to fire a 1400mm artillery mounted on a spaceship at 50 km range. In space the projectile would travel infinite ranges limited only by the time it takes to reach the target and the maneuverability of the enemy ship to dodge it.

When you read some sci-fi novels the space ship combat feels way more immersive and credible than in eve- missiles being fired on hundreds of thousands of kilometers range, counter measures, ships maneuvring and firing energy weapon broadsides... when I think about how much better and more interesting the combat in this game might be if CCP forgot space barbies and console shooters... just makes me sad.



I'm wondering when all those missiles from Amarr are going to reach Jita. But, I'll ponder that in my new slacks that instantly appear in my hangar upon podding.


I am guessing all projectiles and missiles have some kind of self destruct that after a certain travel time they blow up.

as for lasers who knows but a laser beam even in space loses its kick after awhile so by the time it could hit anything during a miss odds are it would be just light without much of if any of its energy left.

But yes technically anything shot in space will keep going. until it hits something or until it gets pulled on by enough gravity wells to orbit something.

Ehranavaar
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.03 16:46:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
What's truly over the top is that Projectile weapons hit out to 250km nearly instantly.

So what kind of propellant are these zero cap "projectile" rounds using to accelerate cannon shells to such extreme speeds?



i believe the propellant is called unobtanium Razz

talked to a guy who designed the m777 howitzer amongst other guns and he made some incredibly cherry assumptions for being high tech. his best guess is that a 3500 mm arty would be only slightly larger than the battleship it's supposed to be attached to. his reaction to the ship carrying 8 of them is best left to your imagination. you also don't want to know just how big a single 3500 mm shell would be.




stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.03 16:49:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker

But yes technically anything shot in space will keep going. until it hits something or until it gets pulled on by enough gravity wells to orbit something.


Errr no. Maybe. Missiles have an upper speed limit, much like our ships do. Which would imply that missile engines are similar to ship engines, implying that missiles would slow down to a stop once the engine cuts off.

OTOH, no one has actually been able to turn off a ship's engines in Eve, so we don't know what would happen. (Setting the speed to zero isn't the same as turning the engines off.)


Cpt Greagor
Caldari
Liquid Relief
Posted - 2011.08.03 16:51:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Ehranavaar
...you also don't want to know just how big a single 3500 mm shell would be.


Would it be about 3500mm by chance?

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.03 17:01:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Ehranavaar
you also don't want to know just how big a single 3500 mm shell would be.



3.5 meters in diameter and a millimeter tall? This is space, so you don't need to limit yourself to a bullet shape.

I'm guessing that the warhead and the inertial dampeners are the only real constraints on the minimum size of an artillery round, not counting the propellant.


Cpt Greagor
Caldari
Liquid Relief
Posted - 2011.08.03 17:08:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Ehranavaar
you also don't want to know just how big a single 3500 mm shell would be.



3.5 meters in diameter and a millimeter tall? This is space, so you don't need to limit yourself to a bullet shape.

I'm guessing that the warhead and the inertial dampeners are the only real constraints on the minimum size of an artillery round, not counting the propellant.




The bigger you make it, the harder it hits them.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.03 17:29:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Cpt Greagor

The bigger you make it, the harder it hits them.


Not in Eve. Ramming doesn't do damage in Eve regardless of ship size.

Which probably explains why Eve railgun rounds have exotic warheads (e.g. anti-matter) instead of just being a solid slug of nickel that relies on kinetic energy to do damage.


Harry Potter magic and Eve physics. Are they really so different?

pcjitapc
Posted - 2011.08.03 17:31:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Sphit Ker
425mm is roughly 16.75 inches. Here, depict a real 16 inch naval shell:

http://www.combatreform.org/16inchbattleshipshell.jpg

In EVE, 425s are pretty much machine guns. We're spitting these monsters by the dozen like they are peas.

We're insane! Twisted Evil


so basically we shoot little children.....epic

Sergio Ling
Posted - 2011.08.03 17:34:00 - [47]
 

need the quote about 1400's essentially firing a vw van at people

Khira Kitamatsu
Posted - 2011.08.03 17:41:00 - [48]
 

This is a better example of the size of these ships.

EVE Ship Size - the island in Crysis is 8km x 8km. If you have played Crysis you will have a good summation of just how big these ships really are.

Which brings us to the point - the guns are tiny compared to the ships themselves. A Rifter is the size of a 747! That is huge!

Which brings us to the hanger in the station. We should have some way to gauge the size of our ships. Maybe CCP could add a maintenance platform with people on it approach the ship and we could see that the ship really is 1km long or whatever. The maintenance people should be tiny as they work on the ship. This would help give us a better perspective to the size of these vessels.

dexington
Caldari
Baconoration
Posted - 2011.08.03 17:43:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Which probably explains why Eve railgun rounds have exotic warheads (e.g. anti-matter) instead of just being a solid slug of nickel that relies on kinetic energy to do damage.


Antimatter does have mass, don't know if it's anything close to tungsten which have been used to test railguns. Add to that that 1kg antimatter releases around the same amount of energy as the largest nuclear bombs tested.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.08.03 17:47:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: stoicfaux
Originally by: Ehranavaar
you also don't want to know just how big a single 3500 mm shell would be.
3.5 meters in diameter and a millimeter tall? This is space, so you don't need to limit yourself to a bullet shape.

I'm guessing that the warhead and the inertial dampeners are the only real constraints on the minimum size of an artillery round, not counting the propellant.
…also, there's a good chance/possible explanation in that the diameter of the barrel and the size of the actual projectile don't match — we're flying heavily armoured vehicles, and the use of sabots is a quite popular way of getting more penetration out of whatever it is you throw at the enemy.

Stitcher
Caldari
Posted - 2011.08.04 12:03:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: McRoll
And yet we cannot fire those weapons further than 250 km for the biggest long range guns. I wish CCP designed the game to simulate real ranges we could use those weapons with. Feels pretty ridiculous to fire a 1400mm artillery mounted on a spaceship at 50 km range. In space the projectile would travel infinite ranges limited only by the time it takes to reach the target and the maneuverability of the enemy ship to dodge it.


It's not about the ability of the round to travel indefinitely - if it misses, it does - (RUINING SOMEBODY'S DAY SOMEWHERE, SOMETIME) it's about whether or not the round is going to hit what you're shooting at.

There's more factors than just "how much time the target has to react", there are also factors like the physical tolerances of the weapon. at 250,000 meters, a deviation of, say, 0.1 degrees in the trajectory of the bullet will introduce a change of... hang on...

C = θ/360 × 2 × π × r
C= 0.1/360 x 2 x 3.14159 x 250000
C= 2.78e-4 x 2 x3.14159 x 250,000
C= 0.0017453278 x 250,000
C = 436.332 meters

So, if your gun's aimed even a tenth of a degree off true thanks to sensor latency, the limits of its' precision or some other factor, then at 250Km your round is off-target by nearly half a kilometer.

I find that much more credible than being able to hit a target the size of a house from the moon. yes, okay, Earth-based observatory lasers are capable of hitting reflectors on the moon the size of a double bed, but that's under controlled, calm, experimental circumstances where such precision is plausible and the movement of that reflector is known right down to the millimeter per second. Such precision would be utterly impossible in an actual battle.

Chrysalis D'lilth
Posted - 2011.08.04 12:35:00 - [52]
 

Have you not considered the amount of energy required to reduce the strength of reinforced shielding?

If you work that into your equations you'll realise that our big guns are necessary.

Rico Minali
Gallente
Sons Of 0din
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.08.04 12:41:00 - [53]
 

I think the very serious issue that the highly intelligent posters on this thread are missing is simply:

This is a science-FICTION game.

As a sci-fi writer I personally claim the ability to make things up on a regular basis, anti inertia fields to compensate for G-forces, anti gravity and artificial gravity, weaponry that can tear worlds apart, you think it up, you can have it. This is fiction guys and so far in advance of todays technology that trying to put some context on by todays tech level is actually idiotic.

Wise up and enjoy this fictional game for what it is.

Kyle Yanowski
Posted - 2011.08.04 13:05:00 - [54]
 

McRoll,

I think you are confusing maximum range with maximum EFFECTIVE range. Granted, the rounds being fired will travel farther (much) in a vacuum; it doesn't mean that the electronics backing the munition up in the system firing it would be accurate to anything further than that range.

From a physics background, the combat mechanics in the game seem pretty realistic.


Krystal Vernet
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.04 13:25:00 - [55]
 

This topic is missing a link to this speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLpgxry542M

Kijo Rikki
Caldari
Point of No Return
Waterboard
Posted - 2011.08.04 13:44:00 - [56]
 

Comparing a frigate to a 747 is about right, having seen a naval frigate docked in port. I would even say current naval frigates are a little bigger than a 747, not counting the wingspan.

Ehranavaar
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:26:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Cpt Greagor
Originally by: Ehranavaar
...you also don't want to know just how big a single 3500 mm shell would be.


Would it be about 3500mm by chance?


think volume.

Ehranavaar
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:33:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: dexington
Antimatter does have mass, don't know if it's anything close to tungsten which have been used to test railguns. Add to that that 1kg antimatter releases around the same amount of energy as the largest nuclear bombs tested.


1 gram of antimatter = 42 kilotonne explosion. a whole kilo would be a 42 megatonne bang.

antimatter has mass depending on what it is. anti hydrogen is very light anti lead would uhm not be very light.

Ehranavaar
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:41:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Kyle Yanowski
McRoll,

From a physics background, the combat mechanics in the game seem pretty realistic.




there are many words that could be applied to eve physics but "realistic" would not be one of them.

if the game was "realistic" the mins would be the entirely pitiable slave race yet. ac's and arty would not be used as any sort of actual weapons as they would be virtually useless. ranges would be 100 to 1000 times what they are. could argue that ecm and stealth cut ranges down hugely. one look at the ships of eve kills that argument as stealth certainly wasn't a design consideration.

dexington
Caldari
Baconoration
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:41:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Ehranavaar
1 gram of antimatter = 42 kilotonne explosion. a whole kilo would be a 42 megatonne bang.


The largest ever test nuclear weapon was the russian AN602, or Tsar bomb, which was a 50 megaton hydrogen bomb. 1 kg of antimatter less powerful, but still close.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only