Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: New music for Galatia Academy (06/12/24)

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Dwarfslayer

Pages: [1]
1
Bug Reports & Support / Damage texture bug
« on: March 02, 2016, 10:18:27 AM »
I've just tried to install 0.7.2 RC2 and as soon as combat started I noticed that the ship damage textures don't seem to be confined to ship bounds. After any kind of damage, ships just start turning into "damage rectangles" completely covered in the damaged texture overlay.

This is a really obvious graphical bug, impossible to miss if it happens. I've tried uninstalling, reinstalling, re-downloading the installer etc etc multiple times.

Interestingly I also went back and reinstalled 0.7.1 and the problem disappears, seems to only be the most recent build?

2
Bug Reports & Support / Insane flux from beams
« on: February 10, 2015, 04:18:20 PM »
There seems to be a bug with High Energy Focus and beam weapons.

Equip any HEF capable ship with some tactical lasers or burst PD.

Fire the beams and all seems normal, but activate the HEF and beam flux buildup goes bananas. Effect persists after system deactivates.

3
Suggestions / Crippling Crew Levels
« on: October 27, 2014, 04:58:05 AM »
I recently took a couple of ill-advised fights against a large bounty target. I managed to walk into a few torpedoes and lost most of my fleet. However the proportion of crew I lost did not appear to be in line with the capacity of the ships I was working with.

I started the battle with a fleet of an Eagle, a Falcon, a Wolf and one Tug. I deployed the Eagle and Falcon, losing them both and subsequently announcing a retreat. I successfully disengaged with the enemy only to find my burn speed reduced to 0 (although I could still move slowly) as what appeared to be a bizarre clowns-in-car scenario arose where I had over a hundred and fifty crewmembers packed into one Wolf and a Tug.

The fleet I had just lost to then repeatedly ran me down and harassed me but wouldn't force an engagement as it thought I could escape. After a couple of minutes of repeatedly clicking through harassment dialogue my logistics of 0 eventually destroyed my last ships and I escaped the cycle, though not before the Wolf was destroyed by a critical accident leaving 99 crew (significantly more than half) still standing around on my tug alone.

I'm not sure how crew is really handled, but I would guess that when my cruisers were destroyed I lost crew close to their normal operating capacity, rather than some amount proportional to how many people I could support with my fleet. To be clear I wasn't significantly overcrewed (or at all iirc) when entering the fight either.

4
Bug Reports & Support / Maneuvering Jets permanent flameout
« on: October 09, 2013, 09:49:59 AM »
Was running a couple of simulations with a Conquest when I noticed that my engines were permanently busted. After a couple of tries I managed to get the situation to repeat pretty consistently.

Basically if maneuvering jets are active when a flameout occurs, the system will get stuck in 'active' mode, leaving one jet constantly on, with the rest of the engines disabled forever.

Got this to occur pretty easily using a Condor and just eating pilums to the ass. Also works with a Falcon-class.

5
General Discussion / Weapon Damage and IRL Comparisons
« on: May 23, 2013, 09:47:36 AM »
Greetings! I decided to make this post to check out the relative power of some Starsector weaponry. Before I start, I'll just say hi and that the devs are all doing brilliant work and you guys on the forums are great.


Okay let's start off with some examples of current-day technology and the kinds of power they produce.

For example: the most powerful man-made detonation on earth is generally considered to be the soviet test of a 50 megaton (fifty million tons of TNT) nuclear weapon, for perspective the combined yield of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki devices used in WW2 is estimated to have been at most 40 kilotons (forty thousand tons of TNT) and probably more comparable to 25 or 30 kilotons.

As a non-nuclear reference: modern conventional (read: non-nuclear) weapons tend to range from below a single ton up to 11 tons for one of the United States' most powerful conventional weapons, the GBU-43/B MOAB. (a very large unguided bomb deployed by aircraft)

For a non-explosive comparison, the ~1100 kilogram inert shells (read: kinetic weapons) fired by the massive 16 inch caliber Mark 7 United States naval gun on their Iowa-class battleships has a total energy of approximately 350 megajoules, converting to roughly 0.08 equivalent tons of TNT.


Also, I have hopefully correctly done the sums and the amount of energy required to boil an Olympic sized swimming pool is about 7.2 terajoules or 1.7 kilotons of TNT (to put that in perspective, the Large Hadron Collider can use enough energy to boil two olympic pools... every second). In order to just raise the water from swimming pool temperature to boiling point takes considerably less energy (about a factor of 10), probably 750 gigajoules or 180 tons of TNT.


Now that we have a set of references to more or less imaginable firepower, we need to work out the relative yields of the Starsector weaponry. To the best of my knowledge, the codex only provides sufficient information on one weapon to work out its power; the antimatter blaster. The key information is the mass of antimatter used in the projectile, stated to be 10 micrograms (typically positrons). The maximum possible energy released purely from the annihilation of this much antimatter is relatively straightforward to work out: the total energy equivalent in TNT appears to be about 430 tons.

Now that we know the yield of the antimatter blaster, along with its per-shot damage rating, we can work out that 1 damage =~ 0.36 tons of TNT... It should be noted that this is in pure energy terms, not taking account of the sophisticated nature of the explosive weapon design used in other weaponry etcetera, however it should also be noted that this is basically the most generous possible estimate, given that antimatter charges cannot be shaped and will always spread their energy virtually uniformly in a radiating sphere, coupled with the dubious nature of an immediate total annihilation of all the antimatter in a single instant.


So, now that we have a (probably generous) estimate of the amount of punishment involved in a single point of damage, we can start to compare a few weapons other than the AMB:

Kinetic Damage*
Spoiler
Light Autocannon: 50 damage per shot ~ 18 tons TNT
Railgun: 100 damage per shot ~ 36 tons TNT
Graviton Beam: 100 DPS ~ 36 tons TNT per second
Hypervelocity Driver: 275 damage per shot ~ 99 tons TNT
Arbalest Autocannon: 150 damage per shot ~ 54 tons TNT
Storm Needler: 75 damage per shot ~ 27 tons TNT, however the continuous stream makes the DPS important here ~ 270 tons TNT per second

*The sheer difference here from the power in the U.S. naval example should indicate that, for kinetic damage at least, the actual power may be much less while still causing high damage due to concentration of energy.
[close]

High Explosive Damage
Spoiler
Harpoon Missile: 750 damage per shot ~ 270 tons TNT
Heavy Mauler: 250 damage per shot ~ 90 tons TNT
Assault Chaingun : 40 damage per shot ~ 14.4 tons TNT
Hellbore Cannon: 750 damage per shot ~ 270 tons TNT
Cyclone Reaper Launcher: 4000 damage per torpedo ~ 1440 tons (1.44 kilotons) TNT
[close]


Energy Damage
Spoiler
Tactical Laser: 75 DPS ~ 27 tons TNT per second
IR Pulse Laser: 35 damage per shot ~  12.6 tons TNT
Phase Beam: 150 DPS ~ 54 tons TNT per second
Mjolnir Cannon: 400 damage per shot ~ 144 tons TNT
Tachyon Lance: 750 burst damage ~ 270 tons TNT
Plasma Cannon: 2250 burst of 3x750 ~ 270x3=810 tons TNT
[close]


So, I'm probably going to marginalise the kinetic weaponry here as it seems to not fit too well with the metric I'm trying to use and I can't think of a way to compensate for it. High explosive weaponry is probably fairly accurate, depending on the way the explosive force is directed and controlled it could be much less actual power, but would have a similarly damaging impact as it's equivalent amount of TNT just placed against the hull. Energy weaponry is probably also quite well approximated here, although it depends on the nature of the weapon and how it delivers its damage.


TL;DR
As we can see, most of the weaponry on display for starships seems horrendously powerful by modern conventional standards, but are by no means planet-cracking city-levelling nuclear weapon alternatives, a reaper torpedo seems comparable to a very low yield ~1 kiloton tactical nuclear device. However the fact that spaceworthy ships with extremely delicate and dangerous equipment on board can survive hits from these does indicate the incredibly advanced nature of their armour and even speaks strongly about the strength of their hulls; for example the Hound is by no means a massive ship, but can survive a single Harpoon missile even with depleted armour.

Thanks for reading guys, if you question my maths I can post some of the full working (there wasn't that much).

Holy balls that is a very long post I think. I just thought it was quite interesting to get a better idea of the scales people in the universe deal with, the guys in the Lore Corner might like some of this I guess.

All IRL values pretty much obtained from Wikipedia and/or my vague recollection of physics


EDIT: I did mistakenly use a much larger amount of antimatter than I should have (read: one thousand times as much), so these values are actually too high (a thousand times too high?)

Pages: [1]