1189 replies to this topic

[Zakatak]

Also, I forgot. About that sci-fi story I was planning on writing up, I think I got the protagonists ship down for statistics. This is after being refitted with non-human upgrades. How would this stack up to other universes (since this ship is supposed to be a decent reference point). I'll try and draw it out, scan it, and post it. How would it compare?

- Coilcannon:
800000m/s (muzzle velocity)
25kg slug (144 slugs)
8000GJ (variable)
72 rounds per minute

- AIM-216 Missiles:
1325m/s^2 acceleration
56 second burn-time
40 kiloton yield (1 gram antimatter warhead)
24 missiles in total
Straightfire/serpentine/scatter modes

- Pulse Lasers:
2 on top, 1 on bottom
60GW each (variable)
6 second discharge (8 second cooldown)
Anti-missile/ship, or can designate targets

- Dimensions
66.8m long
37.4m wingspan
19.9m height
250000kg

- Sensors
Doppler Radar (only limited by enemy size, 75000km generally)
Infrared (3000km range, mainly for combat)
Magnetoscopes (detects EM-fields, 10000km)
Subspace pulse (10 per hour, requires 100GJ, instantaneous)

- Armor
30cm weave of...
Titanium...
Carbon nanotubes...
Graphene...
Diamond vapour-dispotion...

- "Dimensional Spacetime Swapping Device"
FTL travel (81000c cruise, 10 minute charge, 15GJ/s)
Energy shield, infinite durability (instant, 300GJ/second^2, 5 seconds between uses)
Kinetic shield, infinite durability (instant, 300GJ/second^2, 5 seconds between uses)
Cloak, flawless (90 second charge, 600GJ/second)
(device of unknown origin, swaps spacetime surrounding ship with that another dimension, changing the laws of nature inside)

- Capabilities
625m/s^2 acceleration (crew only feels 33% of it)
25m/s^2 reverse thrusters
1.6 seconds for 180 degree turn
Atmosphere capable
Requires 4000ft runway to land
17.5GW fusion reactor
3-5kg of antimatter for propulsion (in combo with fusion rocket)
1200TJ capacitor (determines combat endurance, 20 hour charge)

Edited by Zakatak, 17 February 2012 - 01:47 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Jack Gammel, on 06 February 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

I know about the weight mistake. I already edited my post. It's never wise to take cold medicine while internet surfing late at night (don't do it kids).

I seem to recall reading somewhere that extreme ranges in BT are approx. 500 miles. Mass Effect dreadnoughts can engage at thousands (plural) of kilometers (the main gun on a dreadnought firing a 20 kg projectile at a velocity of 4025 km/s), and I know that BT is much more limited in terms of range. Anyway, around 500 miles sounds right. And remember that those ranges would be at the far end of the spectrum, and it limits the accuracy of those weapons significantly.

However, I was obviously mistaken to think that BT and BSG FTL technology were similar. BT ships simply can't jump like the ships I was watching in those videos. Therefore, I don't see any reason why a Battlestar couldn't jump into close-quarters ranges to remove BTs range advantage. That would also assume that BSG ranges are limited to under 10 miles, which I have trouble believing. I was interested in the computer screens on the Galactica in Caprica video. It looked like their "radar screen" was limited to detecting Cylon basestars in orbit around the planet itself. That would be an oddly limited sensor range, considering rl equivalents.

Anyway, if we assume that Battlestars can use their FTL technology to negate any possible range advantages enjoyed by BT, effectively placing both ships within optimum weapon ranges, then it would all come down to mobility and weapon strengths. BT WarShips aren't the most manuverable boats in space, but I haven't seen anything in those videos to suggest that Battlestars are significantly more adroit. Maybe they are (and certainly their ability to hop around like rabbits would come in handy). I really believe that comparative weapon strengths are going to be the clincher in this vs. match.

At least when it comes to fighter vs. fighter, BT absolutely wins, which would give BT WarShips with larger fighter compliments a major advantage over BSG ships. I would give the win to BT here based on what I saw in those videos. Both the vipers and Cylon raiders seemed to carry rather limited ordinance (and were really really small...I would think a space fighter would be at least as big as a modern day jet fighter). Those BSG fighters might be of a relative size and have similar firepower of a BT light aerospace fighter (light aerospace fighters having about the same number of weapons and probably similar speed and acceleration capabilities), but medium and especially heavy aerospace fighters would completely outgun their BSG rivals.

Another thing to look at would be round velocities and impact energies for non-lightspeed/relativistic weapons.
As quoted previously from Total Warfare, one space turn represents one minute - 60 seconds.
One HGR round - a 500kg mass with no significant friction or gravity acting on it - would travel ~864,000 meters (the weapon's extreme range) in 60 seconds (one turn), would it not?
This would give us an upper limit for HGR muzzle velocity of approximately 14,400m/s, yes?

Such a weapon - one of the biggest and most powerful a Warship can mount - would then have an impact energy on the order of 5.184*10^10 joules, equal to 51.84 gigajoules... or 12.39 tons of TNT.

By contrast, a single Colonial Viper Mk.II fighter can carry eight HD-70 missiles in addition to two 30mm KEWs... and each one of those eight missiles can carry a 50 megaton (equivalent of 50,000,000 tons of TNT) nuclear warhead.
The newer Viper Mk.VII fighter fighter carries three KEWs (of unstated caliber) and can be fitted with an unstated-number of missles.
Additionally, the Raptor multi-purpose vehicle can carry multiple missile launchers (including nukes) and bomb racks, and is also FTL-capable.

The Raptor masses 50 tons, on par with the lightest of medium Aerospace fighters, while the Vipers are probably on par (mass-wise) with the light AeroSpace fighters (probably the lighter end of that spectrum, at that).

A Mercury-class Battlestar carries 50 Raptors and 200 Viper Mk.VII fighters, in addition to its own armaments.
A Leviathan-class WarShip carries 300 AeroSpace fighters (mass not given) in addition to its own armaments.

Additionally, both ships are physically similar in size - Mercury-class ships are is 1,789.8 meters long, versus the Leviathan-class's 1,700 meters.

I will concede that the BT ships have the advantage in number of guns, and maybe an advantage in armor (with a greater disparity between small crafts of equivalent mass than between the capital ships), and that the Leviathan has the advantage in terms of capital firepower (and range) and number of fighters.

However, I think the BSG ships could win through tactics and use of the smaller ships.
For example, why wouldn't the Mercury sit several thousands of kilometers away (or even at the other side of the star system?) and have all of its Raptors simultaneously jump in, launch their nukes (presumably the same size and yield as those carried by the similarly-sized Vipers) at the Leviathan, and jump out and back to the ship to rearm - then repeat until the Leviathan is destroyed (or they run out of Raptor-sized nukes)?
Or even execute just a couple of Raptor strikes, then have the Mercury itself jump in and finish the (now-stricken) Leviathan with its own batteries and missiles (while the Mercury's point-defense guns and Vipers together deal with the Leviathan's AeroSpace fighters)?
(Same goes for Galactica vs McKenna...)

[Logan Solo Sinclair]

Voted Battletech 'cause thats why were here. Agree with all above posters who mentioned B5. Anyone who knows Battletech, is likely aware of Babylon 5, and it seems suspicious that it was omitted... *Good old standard 'lets snub B5'. Haha twist the knife hahaha. 'Nobody like Narns anyway'... I'd like to be a Narn Mechwarrior. Whatever 'mech I had would have PPC's, and in my cockpit, in my holster would be a PPG.

Look into Picard... He's always looking back...

...And he sees 4 lights.

*Pure sarcasm.

[Jack Gammel]

Strum Wealh, on 06 February 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

Another thing to look at would be round velocities and impact energies for non-lightspeed/relativistic weapons.
As quoted previously from Total Warfare, one space turn represents one minute - 60 seconds.
One HGR round - a 500kg mass with no significant friction or gravity acting on it - would travel ~864,000 meters (the weapon's extreme range) in 60 seconds (one turn), would it not?
This would give us an upper limit for HGR muzzle velocity of approximately 14,400m/s, yes?

Such a weapon - one of the biggest and most powerful a Warship can mount - would then have an impact energy on the order of 5.184*10^10 joules, equal to 51.84 gigajoules... or 12.39 tons of TNT.

Sounds about right, though to be perfectly honest I think that 864,000 meters would be pushing beyond the limit. I got something closer to ~850,000 meters for extreme range. As for the impact energy solution, you could tell me it was "ponies*magical friendship^1000" and I wouldn't know better. There's no way a history major is working his way through the Joule formula. Of course, at ~12 tons of TNT the HNG would only be a little more powerful than a conventional MOAB...which just seems dinky.

Quote

By contrast, a single Colonial Viper Mk.II fighter can carry eight HD-70 missiles in addition to two 30mm KEWs... and each one of those eight missiles can carry a 50 megaton (equivalent of 50,000,000 tons of TNT) nuclear warhead.

Why wasn't this mentioned at the very beginning?

Eight 50 megaton nuclear devices on that thing? It's about the same size as my car. I don't want to sound like I'm complaining, and the entry on BattlestarWiki is very clear, but that sounds like fantasy. The Shrimp device used in the Castle Bravo shot was about as big as the Viper II (it weighed around 10 tons as I recall), and that device was only 15 megatons.

The fluff is what the fluff is, and I concede that in the future technology would allow for any number of advances in miniturization, but for some reason this bothers me. How the heck are they getting eight 50 megaton nuclear devices onto a weapons platform about as big as a Camry? Furthermore, why aren't they using these devices exclusively? It almost feels like the story is cheating...

Regardless, BT doesn't have anything that even remotely touches this. The most powerful ship-to-ship weapon in the BT universe is the Santa Ana variant of the Killer Whale capital missle, and that device is only 50 kilotons.

I envision two Victorian gentlemen dueling for the love of a lady. Both are skilled swordsmen with unique traits that give them certain advantages. Then one of them pulls out an uzi and starts laying down some hot lead. Game over.

Edited by Jack Gammel, 07 February 2012 - 07:28 AM.

[Jack Gammel]

Zakatak, on 06 February 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

Also, I forgot. About that sci-fi story I was planning on writing up, I think I got the protagonists ship down for statistics. This is after being refitted with non-human upgrades. How would this stack up to other universes (since this ship is supposed to be a decent reference point). I'll try and draw it out, scan it, and post it. How would it compare?

- Coilcannon:
800km/s (muzzle velocity)
25kg slug (144 ammunition)
8000GJ (variable)
72 rounds per second

This actually seems pretty tame. A conventional minigun fires around 5,000 rounds a minute (~80 rounds/s). At 800 km/s it would be on pretty equal footing with BT in terms of range.

When you say "144 ammunition" what do you mean?

I assume that this coilgun is essentially a railgun-minigun hybrid. I like the general concept.

Quote

- AIM-216 Missiles:
1325m/s^2 acceleration
56 second burn-time
40 kiloton yield (1 gram antimatter warhead)
24 missiles in total
Straightfire/serpentine/scatter modes

I like this. 40 kilotons is a pretty serious payload and a limit of 24 seems like a reasonable number. From what I'm seeing this ship is a smaller craft, so 24 missles strikes me as a fair armament.

You're using anti-matter, so achieving that level of power output isn't crazy.

Quote

- Pulse Lasers:
2 on top, 1 on bottom
60GW each (variable)
6 second discharge (8 second cooldown)
Anti-missile/ship, or can designate targets

- Dimensions
66.8m long
37.4m wingspan
19.9m height
250000kg

- Sensors
Doppler Radar (only limited by enemy size, 75000km generally)
Infrared (3000km range, mainly for combat)
Magnetoscopes (detects EM-fields, 10000km)
Subspace pulse (10 per hour, requires 100GJ, instantaneous)

- Armor
30cm weave of...
Titanium...
Carbon nanotubes...
Graphene...
Diamond vapour-dispotion...

- "Dimensional Spacetime Swapping Device"
FTL travel (81000c cruise, 10 minute charge, 15GJ/s)
Energy shield, infinite durability (instant, 300GJ/second^2, 5 seconds between uses)
Kinetic shield, infinite durability (instant, 300GJ/second^2, 5 seconds between uses)
Cloak, flawless (30 second charge, 600GJ/second)
(device of unknown origin, swaps spacetime surrounding ship with that another dimension, changing the laws of nature inside)

By infinite durability do you mean that they can't be taken down?

Also, when you say that the cloak is flawless does that mean that there's no way at all to detect them? Even Star Trek cloaks aren't 100 percent perfect.

I'm only asking because I think this aspect of your ship design is critical. Giving your ship xenos technology can be fun and interesting, making your protagonist's vessel a clear cut above the rest while creating an air of mystery about just what the strange technology is really all about (especially considering that the device seems to manipulate parallel dimensions), but giving your ship "magic" tech risks making things boring.

Quote

- Capabilities
625m/s^2 acceleration (crew only feels 33% of it)
25m/s^2 reverse thrusters
1.3 seconds for 180 degree turn
Atmosphere capable
Requires 4000ft runway to land
17.5GW fusion reactor
3-5kg of antimatter for propulsion (in combo with fusion rocket)
1200TJ capacitor (determines combat endurance, 20 hour charge)

Anyway, for a ship powered by M/AM technology it looks pretty good. The only two suggestions I would make would be:
1. the coilgun seems almost underpowered to me in terms of range considering the strengths of your other weapon systems.
2. describe the alien device in greater detail and avoid super-tech that would remove the possibility of real conflict. I only say this since you mentioned that you were interested in using this ship concept in a story. While there are examples of overpowered protagonists in popular scifi/fantasy (Paul Atreides/God-Emperor Leto/Anasurimbor Kellhus) these are the exception to the rule, and they always risk becoming boring once the reader understands that nothing can reasonably stop them.

From what I'm seeing this ship would generally fall somwhere a little above Mass Effect in terms of technology (with significantly longer combat endurance), which works just fine for me. Obviously, your ship uses M/AM instead of an imaginary Element Zero (or some equivalent...*coughnaquadahcough*), which is cool.

I have just one more question. Does the ship have artificial gravity?

Edited by Jack Gammel, 07 February 2012 - 07:33 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Jack Gammel, on 07 February 2012 - 06:02 AM, said:

Sounds about right, though to be perfectly honest I think that 864,000 meters would be pushing beyond the limit. I got something closer to ~850,000 meters for extreme range. As for the impact energy solution, you could tell me it was "ponies*magical friendship^1000" and I wouldn't know better. There's no way a history major is working his way through the Joule formula. Of course, at ~12 tons of TNT the HNG would only be a little more powerful than a conventional MOAB...which just seems dinky.

It's not that bad:
(kinetic energy in Joules) = 0.5 * (mass of projectile in kilograms) * ((velocity of projectile in meters per second)^2)
Then apply SI prefixes and conversions.

← psychology (not to be confused with psychiatry or philosophy!) major with a minor in engineering and a long-time fandom of various mecha franchises

Jack Gammel, on 07 February 2012 - 06:02 AM, said:

Why wasn't this mentioned at the very beginning?

Eight 50 megaton nuclear devices on that thing? It's about the same size as my car. I don't want to sound like I'm complaining, and the entry on BattlestarWiki is very clear, but that sounds like fantasy. The Shrimp device used in the Castle Bravo shot was about as big as the Viper II (it weighed around 10 tons as I recall), and that device was only 15 megatons.

The fluff is what the fluff is, and I concede that in the future technology would allow for any number of advances in miniturization, but for some reason this bothers me. How the heck are they getting eight 50 megaton nuclear devices onto a weapons platform about as big as a Camry? Furthermore, why aren't they using these devices exclusively? It almost feels like the story is cheating...

Regardless, BT doesn't have anything that even remotely touches this. The most powerful ship-to-ship weapon in the BT universe is the Santa Ana variant of the Killer Whale capital missle, and that device is only 50 kilotons.

Well, there is the B83 Nuclear bomb:

Quote

The B83 nuclear weapon is a variable yield gravity bomb developed by the United States in the late 1970s, entering service in 1983. With a maximum yield of 1.2 megatons, it is currently the most powerful atomic weapon in the US arsenal. It was designed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and the first underground test detonation took place on 15 December 1984.

-----

The bomb is 12 feet (3.67 m) long, with a diameter of 18 inches (457 mm); the actual nuclear explosive package, judging from published drawings, occupies some 3 or 4 feet (90 to 120 cm) in the forward part of the bomb case. The bomb weighs approximately 2,400 pounds (1,100 kg); the location of the lifting lugs shows that the greater part of the total mass is contained in the nuclear explosive. It has a variable yield: the destructive power is adjustable from somewhere in the low kiloton range up to a maximum of 1.2 megatons (1.2 million tons of TNT).

1.2 megatons = 5.0 petajoules (5.0x10^15 joules; five quadrillion joules)
50 megatons = 210 petajoules (210,000,000,000,000,000 joules)

If the 1970s/1980s US can create a 1.2 megaton nuke in a package that size, it stands to reason that a society that can fit a hyperdrive into a ship not much smaller than the main fuselage of a UH-1 should be able to enhance a warhead of approximately similar size (or slightly smaller!) into the tens of megatons range by adding some tylium (the same stuff they use for fuel).

Quote

Refined tylium has a tremendous enthalpy to the order of approximately half a million gigajoules per kilogram, or about 6 times greater than Uranium-235 and 81% that of deuterium fusion.

1 ton of TNT = 4.184 gigajoules
500,000 gigajoules ("half a million gigajoules") per kilogram = equivalent of 119,502.868 tons of TNT per kilogram of tylium

Even if it was a typo in the source book for the wiki article and it's supposed to be 50 kilotons for the HD-70s, the point still stands with regard to the battlestar's tactical options and the effectiveness of said options, yes?

(Also, it seems, given the capabilities of the modern B83, that BT nukes are actually vastly underpowered, does it not? )

Jack Gammel, on 07 February 2012 - 06:02 AM, said:

I envision two Victorian gentlemen dueling for the love of a lady. Both are skilled swordsmen with unique traits that give them certain advantages. Then one of them pulls out an uzi and starts laying down some hot lead. Game over.

A Gentlemen's Duel, indeed...

[Zakatak]

Jack Gammel, on 07 February 2012 - 07:09 AM, said:

I have just one more question. Does the ship have artificial gravity?

To start? No, just diamagnetism (look it up). Eventually it is upgraded to literal artificial gravity. Although it isn't omnidirectional since it comes from emitters. Basically the cockpit section (seats entire crew of 12) has another set of gravity generators that face laterally to somewhat offset the G's.

I think you read it as 800m/s and 72 rounds per second. What I meant to say was 800km/s and 72 rounds per minute. Each shot being around 2kt at max (or 144kt per minute). I'm not sure if you would consider that tamer or more powerful.

I kinda wanted a different approach to shielding/cloaking/etc. Rather then blasting the viewer with technobabble, I just say "lol different dimensions". Instead of having a shield that is up at all times, and degrades as it takes fire, I wanted it to be something with high risk/reward. If you had your energy shielding on for 30 seconds, you will have drained 1/4 of your power reserves (needed for the coilgun/lasers/defenses/etc).

Oh, and this device isn't exclusive. Most ships carry one, as it is needed for FTL, this evens out the odds I suppse. Humankind doesn't even have FTL here, but the protagonists are whisked to the Pinwheel Galaxy by some strange unexplanable event. They are the only humans there at the time.

Edited by Zakatak, 07 February 2012 - 04:39 PM.

[Jack Gammel]

Strum Wealh, on 07 February 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

It's not that bad:
(kinetic energy in Joules) = 0.5 * (mass of projectile in kilograms) * ((velocity of projectile in meters per second)^2)
Then apply SI prefixes and conversions.

← psychology (not to be confused with psychiatry or philosophy!) major with a minor in engineering and a long-time fandom of various mecha franchises



Well, there is the B83 Nuclear bomb:


1.2 megatons = 5.0 petajoules (5.0x10^15 joules; five quadrillion joules)
50 megatons = 210 petajoules (210,000,000,000,000,000 joules)

If the 1970s/1980s US can create a 1.2 megaton nuke in a package that size, it stands to reason that a society that can fit a hyperdrive into a ship not much smaller than the main fuselage of a UH-1 should be able to enhance a warhead of approximately similar size (or slightly smaller!) into the tens of megatons range by adding some tylium (the same stuff they use for fuel).



1 ton of TNT = 4.184 gigajoules
500,000 gigajoules ("half a million gigajoules") per kilogram = equivalent of 119,502.868 tons of TNT per kilogram of tylium

Even if it was a typo in the source book for the wiki article and it's supposed to be 50 kilotons for the HD-70s, the point still stands with regard to the battlestar's tactical options and the effectiveness of said options, yes?

(Also, it seems, given the capabilities of the modern B83, that BT nukes are actually vastly underpowered, does it not? )



A Gentlemen's Duel, indeed...

Ah, so there's a "magic" element in BSG. Tylium.

And yes, BT is underpowered in a lot of ways, but I think its important to keep in mind that a lot of this fluff stems from the 80's. In any case, even if we were to assume that the Santa Ana is actually 50 MEGAtons, it still wouldn't help them. The Santa Ana is relatively rare, and while a BT ship equipped with Santa Ana capital missles would be a danger to BSG ships (assuming 50 megatons) capital missles are designed to take out rival capital ships. They lack the guidance systems and mobility to be effective against fighters. Since it looks like BSG can mount eight 50 megaton missles on each fighter, and they have dozens of fighters, this would be constituted as overwhelming force.

[Jack Gammel]

Zakatak, on 07 February 2012 - 04:37 PM, said:

To start? No, just diamagnetism (look it up). Eventually it is upgraded to literal artificial gravity. Although it isn't omnidirectional since it comes from emitters. Basically the cockpit section (seats entire crew of 12) has another set of gravity generators that face laterally to somewhat offset the G's.

Cool.

Quote

I think you read it as 800m/s and 72 rounds per second. What I meant to say was 800km/s and 72 rounds per minute. Each shot being around 2kt at max (or 144kt per minute). I'm not sure if you would consider that tamer or more powerful.

Must have misread it. It looks fine. I guess I looked at the armament on the ship, saw that there was only one coilgun, and assumed that it was meant to be a "main gun." It only looks kind of small for a main gun, but then the ship itself isn't big to begin with.

I can't put my finger on why it looks small to me. I could be totally off-base here.

Quote

I kinda wanted a different approach to shielding/cloaking/etc. Rather then blasting the viewer with technobabble, I just say "lol different dimensions". Instead of having a shield that is up at all times, and degrades as it takes fire, I wanted it to be something with high risk/reward. If you had your energy shielding on for 30 seconds, you will have drained 1/4 of your power reserves (needed for the coilgun/lasers/defenses/etc).

Ok, so the shield is something that is fairly limited in terms of the amount of time it can be activated?

Also, are you a fan of the Orphans of Chaos trilogy? Just wondering. If you haven't read those books you might enjoy them.

Quote

Oh, and this device isn't exclusive. Most ships carry one, as it is needed for FTL, this evens out the odds I suppse. Humankind doesn't even have FTL here, but the protagonists are whisked to the Pinwheel Galaxy by some strange unexplanable event. They are the only humans there at the time.

So kind of Farscape-esque. So the human ship gets this device after they end up in the Pinwheel Galaxy?

Edited by Jack Gammel, 07 February 2012 - 07:38 PM.

[ManDaisy]

sorry I'm gonna let this thread die, sorry.

[guardian wolf]

it's ok, it was a good argument for a while

[Polymorphyne]

Here are some size charts.....



I would say the star wars imperial navy would win at first... until the 40k Imperial Navy and Eve Online fleets turned up.
The star wars fleets have some serious numbers, firepower and sheer size compared to the other sci-fi games (other than 40k/eve)
When the Eve Online Fleets turned up.... Eve Online fleets number in the thousands, and thats not thousands of fighters, thats thousands of battleships, each battleship the size of a star destroyer, and packing alot more punch, armour and shields, and the 40k Cruisers (their common ships of the line) are all over 5 kilometres long with a crapton of firepower. (40k Cruisers by themselves are capable of rending a planet inhabitable in a short space of time by using virus bombs and cyclonic torpedoes).
The eve ships then get considerably bigger than battleships- They have Carriers and Dreadnaughts that make star destroyers look like corvettes, and titans that are each the size of the executioner class star destroyer, except theres only one or two executioners, and a few hundred eve titans.

[guardiandashi]

Longsword, on 17 February 2012 - 12:38 AM, said:

the only issue you run into is that size is NOT everything

I can talk about a universe "rifts" where you could pull out a mechanoid mother ship which is ~89,000km long and yet even though is has millions and "billions" of SDC is constructed in such a way that even a crossbow, or a sword can cause damage to the ship granted its not enough damage to "notice" and you and 10000 of your friends could be hacking away at the ship for an entire lifetime and not even deplete a "section" but you could hack through a hull plate or something (and kill yourself) Vacuum sucks that way...

and on the other hand a DS9 runabout could fly by it and fire a salvo of torpedos or a full up federation starship could fire a set of tricobalt demolition charges and take an entire section off through "spacial rips" because the ship is not protected against that.

plus the last time I looked the canon power levels dictated in EvE are so low that battletech can match or exceed their power outputs.and any of the major universes tend to look at them and laugh.

the only place battletech would actually compete (and likely kick arse) would be in star wars up against fighters and smaller combatants as soon as they start fighting capital ships ... well unless they can get in close... they are in trouble.

now if you want to talk serious energy generation there was a small series of novels by an author (Thorarinn Gunnarsson)
that had starships and fighters that ran on "conversion" reactors that took water in as the fuel and broke it down by convertign the water directly to energy and operated at close to 100% efficiency IMO its the only (semi conventional) power source that could outperform antimatter but only because you don't need the volitile antimatter contained, so you don't have that energy budget.

they also had ships that were ~3km long and 1km wide. and their biggest weapon took kilograms of water "converted it to energy" and directed that energy bolt at their target.

[Zakatak]

Does a 26GW power output sound about right for a 70x32x18m sized frigate? I was thinking for power generation, that human ships would run off pure Helium-3 + Helium-3 fusionbut with "Muon breeders" just to make "fusion of large particles possible on a small scale". Does that seem overly technobabblish or scientifically wrong to you? Muon's are basically giant "super electrons" by the way, real particle created in labs but only for microseconds at a time.

Edited by Zakatak, 17 February 2012 - 01:41 AM.

[Polymorphyne]

Quote

the only issue you run into is that size is NOT everything

It is when 90% of that huge size is covered in firepower and armour. Also, the fact that a navy has the technology and resources to build ships of these incredible sizes is a big indicator.

Also, Eve ships are actually far more advanced than those in any other setting. They can pilot a ship the size of a 747 with little more than a single pilot, have weapons that fire antimatter at their enemies, have hulls and armour that adapts on the molecular level and self repairs using nanobots at a considerable rate (40k, star wars, battletech.... these all lack nanotechnology, and in star trek when you put a hole in a ship it stays there. In eve, when you put a hole in a ship its gone within a few moments depending on whether you are an armour tank or not). The tech level in Eve Online is just so far in excess of the others (except perhaps star trek.... but star trek warships are a bit of a joke.)


Here is an example. Say that a star destroyer fights an eve battleship.... lets say an amarr Abaddon. The star destroyer has lots lasers yes, but the Abaddon has really, really powerful lasers. The star destroyer is of a similar size to the Abaddon, but a single little fighter craft hitting the star destroyers bridge or another vital component when its shields are down is enough to cause the entire thing to go down, and a single EM cannon shot can disable it. If a fighter craft rammed an Abaddon, it wouldnt really bother it at all. Also, once the fight began, any damage to the star destroyer is permanent. Any hits to the Abaddons armour plates or even its outer structure are immediatly regenerated.


Here is another example of superior Eve technology- during one Sansha Incursion, a single players nightmare (battleship) was able to survive several hundred battleships pounding on it at the same time, simply because it was being remote repaired by its fleet. A star wars or star trek ship cannot repair a friendly ship without docking with it, and even then they can only make minor repairs- an eve ship can be repaired while it is being shot at at a fast rate that is only limited by how many repair ships you have.

Edited by Longsword, 17 February 2012 - 03:33 AM.

[Catamount]

Longsword, on 17 February 2012 - 03:25 AM, said:

It is when 90% of that huge size is covered in firepower and armour. Also, the fact that a navy has the technology and resources to build ships of these incredible sizes is a big indicator.

No it isn't.

An EvE online ship as a range in the dozens of kilometers, with low-yield lasers and kinetic energy weapons.

A Trek ship, on the other hand, can see that EVE ship from lightyears away, warp in, and blast it with hundreds of megatons (as per newer photon torpedoes) a dozen times over from millions of kilometers away before the EVE ship even knew something was engaging it. If we go by the canonical EVE power generation, one of those torpedoes would power an small EVE fleet for hours, if not days (standard TNG yield is 267PJ, iirc, with newer torpedoes vastly outstripping that, and EVE ships generate only dozens or hundreds of megawatts of power).

Many other franchises could equally obliterate them (the Ancients from Stargate, for instance, or the Asgard, in their prime, would likely wipe out nearly any race in most franchises handily).

You're also leaving out numbers. EVE only manages hundreds of thousands of ships across all powers, and many of them are smaller than typical corvettes by the standards of these other franchises, so on the whole, their industrial capacity isn't exactly massive. Trek, which entirely phases out ship classes about every 100 years, is running a fleet that Ron Moore estimated at 30,000 ships, most of them built in or near the TNG era, and few can match their industrial capacity (again, barring the Asgard who have the same technology for replication).


Power generation, ship numbers, exotic tech, sensors, FTL, combat ranges, industrial technology, these all play into any conflict. It is not as easy as saying "oh, X has bigger ships, so they win".

Edited by Catamount, 17 February 2012 - 01:11 PM.

[Polymorphyne]

Quote

a dozen times over from millions of kilometers away before the EVE ship even knew

I go by what ive seen watching star trek, and ive never seen a star trek fight happen outside of visual range.

Eve ships ranges arent in the tens of kilometres, they are in the hundreds of kilometres.

[FACEman Peck]

I like Stargate the most, BattleTech is the most realistic (ish...), and Star Wars is just weird on how everything works out. Being able to blow a planet to little bullet sized pieces is just wrong for Halo. In Stargate, it's awesome how you can travel hundreds of light years in a few seconds, plus huge beam weapons helps with killing anything that might want to scratch you.

[Ilithi Dragon]

Longsword, on 18 February 2012 - 10:32 PM, said:

I go by what ive seen watching star trek, and ive never seen a star trek fight happen outside of visual range.

You've missed a few episodes, then...

ENT "Fortunate Son" - stated/observed range for civilian-operated plasma cannon, 8km

TOS "The Changling" - observed photon torpedo range, 90,000km

TOS "Journey to Babel" - observed phaser range, 75,000km

TOS "The Deadly Years" - stated Romulan plasma torpedo range, 50,000 - 100,000km

TOS "Patterns of Force" - observed phaser range, ~2,000km

TNG "Arsenal of Freedom" - observed range multiple weapons, >200km (Echo Papa 607's opening shots on the E-D are from beyond visual range)

TNG "A Matter of Honor" - stated disruptor range, 40,000+km (Riker suggested holding fire until that range, implied to be much closer than range they would have engaged at otherwise)

TNG "The Wounded" - observed photon torpedo range, 190,000km - observed phaser range, 150,000km - observed Cardassian weapon range, 200,000km

DS9 "The Search" - stated Dominion weapons range, >100,000km (100,000km stated to be well within weapons range)

DS9 "Return to Grace" - observed Cardassian weapons range, 100,000km

VOY "Non Sequitur" - observed phaser range, 5,000km

VOY "Basics, Pt. 1" - observed phaser range, 2,000km - Observed maximum Kazon-Nistrim torpedo range at least 4.5 million km (5,000 - 20,000 times that range more likely)

VOY "In the Flesh" - stated modified photon torpedo maximum range, ~4,000km

VOY "Equinox, Pt. 2" - observed phaser range, 30,000km


That's quite a few episodes where we see weapons fired at ranges in the tens to hundreds of thousands of kilometers, or here statements that weapons are capable of rangees in the thousands to hundreds of thousands of kilometers. They've closed to visual range on a great many occasions, as well, but they have quite frequently demonstrated much longer ranges, and visual rnages have often been noted to be extremely close.

[Polymorphyne]

Ek, teaches me to argue with a trekky, I get a complete list of every episode in which said event happened of the top of his head.