Missiles - ouch!

Callas · Post by **Callas** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:06 am

Missiles are quite a bit more powerful - I had one after me, was expecting to lose one energy bank (a la 48k Spectrum) but instead, I blew up!

I think I lost two energy banks and I might have lost a full shield, too.

This is quite different to the original. I approve, because I think missiles were so puny in the original, they really weren't worth worrying about.

Arexack_Heretic · Post by **Arexack_Heretic** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 6:27 pm

yes. kinetic energy also plays parts.

that is:
damage is done in a sphere, decreasing in strength towards the outside.
This means if you fly towards a missile and it is heading towards you, you will end up closer to the center of the detonation and thus get dealt more damage.

Captain Hesperus · Post by **Captain Hesperus** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:13 pm

Arexack_Heretic wrote:
yes. kinetic energy also plays parts.

that is:
damage is done in a sphere, decreasing in strength towards the outside.
This means if you fly towards a missile and it is heading towards you, you will end up closer to the center of the detonation and thus get dealt more damage.

I concur. On occasion, my rusty (mpak) Python has had a nose-to-nose collision with a Hardhead and been spread across the stars even with full (boosted) shields, but the game I just played, I took two Hardheads in the aft, the first stripped my aft shields (no energy bank damage), the other impacted and didn't even chip the shields!!

Captain Hesperus
"The first one to say I prefer to take it up the aft gets a lesson in EVA without a suit...."

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 8:03 pm

That reminds me… while testing today (trying to track down one of those bugs that’s only there when you’re not looking for it), I shot down a hardened missile.

With a regular missile.

At range.

Callas · Post by **Callas** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:04 pm

Arexack_Heretic wrote:
yes. kinetic energy also plays parts.

that is:
damage is done in a sphere, decreasing in strength towards the outside.
This means if you fly towards a missile and it is heading towards you, you will end up closer to the center of the detonation and thus get dealt more damage.

I think this rather debatable.

Certainly, there is a kinetic component. If you fly directly into a missile (assume it is non-explosive, a kinetic weapon only) then the combined speed is obviously higher and so more destructive than a missile which catches up with you after a tail chase.

However, the kinetic aspect you have described is not really kinetic at all - you're actually talking about proximity to the explosion of the warhead. You're talking about the speed of the target relative to the missile at the moment of impact.

I think this cannot be a major factor. The speed of the ship will be so low compared to the speed of the expansion of the explosion that the ship will travel a negligable distance during the period where the explosion is intense enough to cause damage.

To illustrate the point; if you're driving a tank, which does 40mph tops, and someone fires an APFSDS round, which does something like 1.7 kilometers per second, whether or not you're driving toward or away from the incoming round really doesn't much difference.

Furthermore, with HEAT rounds, the jet the round releases upon impact travels at about Mach 25. Once the round has hit, the action of the round occurs, and that is so fast that target movement is negligable.

Captain Hesperus · Post by **Captain Hesperus** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:17 pm

Ahruman wrote:
That reminds me… while testing today (trying to track down one of those bugs that’s only there when you’re not looking for it), I shot down a hardened missile.

With a regular missile.

At range.

Smartarse.

Captain Hesperus

Callas · Post by **Callas** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:27 pm

Captain Hesperus wrote:
Ahruman wrote:
That reminds me… while testing today (trying to track down one of those bugs that’s only there when you’re not looking for it), I shot down a hardened missile.

With a regular missile.

At range.
Smartarse.

Captain Hesperus

Ha! More like if( 0 == strcmp(player_name,"Ahruman") ) enemy_missile_propulsion_infested_with_tribbles_flag = RAISED;

;-P

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:50 pm

No, ’s true an’ all. Also, strcmp() wouldn’t be very happy given an NSString.

Callas · Post by **Callas** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:34 pm

Ahruman wrote:
No, ’s true an’ all. Also, strcmp() wouldn’t be very happy given an NSString.

But the first member the name string, right? :-)

Arexack_Heretic · Post by **Arexack_Heretic** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:24 am

@ callas: (kinetic) '

I know. I just think it sounds more poetic the way I said it. :p

(the 'kinetic' collision damage from something as small as a missile is insignificant at normal speeds, using WFIS though even a cargocontainer can kill an ironassed ship.)
(even if the ship's nose has in fact been reinforced with pig-iron).

Killer Wolf · Post by **Killer Wolf** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 11:22 am

"I took two Hardheads in the aft"

crikey, that sounds like some of the spam headlines we get 8-|

Callas · Post by **Callas** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 1:05 pm

Arexack_Heretic wrote:
(the 'kinetic' collision damage from something as small as a missile is insignificant at normal speeds, using WFIS though even a cargocontainer can kill an ironassed ship.)

It's all a bit weird. The Cobra is supposedly, according to the wiki, doing up to 0.3 c. It the missile is doing even a minute fraction of c more than the Cobra, the kinetic energy will so massively dwarf any explosive energy which could be carried that you wouldn't bother with anything less than a nuclear warheard.

Arexack_Heretic · Post by **Arexack_Heretic** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:52 pm

That is because real-physics have no part to play in the Ooniverse.

Anyway, it is near impossible to physically hit a moving target with a missile. (intentionally, because of the AI)