Speed and Range of Projectiles

[Aeonic]

Given that nothing besides kinetic, blast and developing lasers actively exist, I don't really think anything out there is going to provide 100% reliable information.

Aside from the invisible lasers which are stupid and should be dropped entirely, sounds good. I think you'd end up with a lot less damage types though.

[Fossaman]

Bluesaberist makes a good point, but there's an aspect that's missing: What if there are practical limits to the size of a lasing cavity, or mass driver, or whatever? Eventually you reach a point where you've got power to spare, but nothing to do with it. This would explain the exponentially increasing power requirements for fairly linear damage scaling. (Think about it: Laser to particle beam isn't that huge a jump in damage, but the power change is massive. Same for particle to ion)

So, more advanced weapons are gas guzzlers, wasting a lot of their energy. I'm happy with that.

[Aeonic]

If you count the fact that Transcendence automatically includes resistances in armor and shields based on levels, then the more advanced damage types actually do more damage. They just don't show it, because this game's damage calculation system is really hokey and misleading.

[Arisaya]

NO INVISIBLE LASERS.
Seriously. This is a 2D top-down-shooter set in a fictional universe meant to be played for enjoyment, not some fancy military space-warfare-physics simulation program that has nothing to do with gaming.
Invisible lasers = horrible gameplay

[Atarlost]

Ok, Atarlost, how can you think that high explosives and nukes wouldn't be extremely effective compared to kinetic? Their very nature means they release more energy, which means more damage done. Nukes have the added effect of releasing radiation, which affects the shield even more.

Something traveling at 1%C packs as much blam as nearly (0.998 and some change) a megaton of TNT per kilogram. A 1 megaton nuke masses a lot more than a kilogram. So why bother putting the nuke on?

The slowest weapon in Transcendence is 40%C. At that speed kinetic isn't just king, it's divine.

KE=1/2 mv^2

[Aeonic]

We've already had the discussions about speeds in Transcendence and they're all totally wrong, so its a waste of time to base anything on the speed of the projectiles in game terms.

[Sponge]

KE=1/2 mv^2

This is a Newtonian equation and you're talking about relativistic velocities. This is problematic because it just won't work. Theoretically, something moving at C will have an infinite amount of kinetic energy, though you'd never guess it using that equation. Just nit-picking.

[Atarlost]

At 1% of C the reletivistic effects are minor and only make the disparity between kinetics and nukes favor kinetics more.

[bluesaberist]

I'm pretty sure that all the physics in the game are based on Newtonian anyway.

Kinetic weapons are lethal. That much has been agreed upon. However, the nuke weapons have mass also, and fire about the same velocity. So it becomes a question of which is better: A three ton metal slug hitting you, or a three ton metal slug with a nuke inside hitting you?

I say the slug with the nuke will do more damage against both shields and armor.

I also think that nukes are harder to shield and armor against, hence it being a higher level damage type.

[Atarlost]

Nukes are expensive and you're talking the difference between 8d6 and 8d8. It's just not that much of a boost.

[Song]

Atarlost is both right and wrong.

A kinetic will have insane energy, but it won't always do more damage. Or at least, the sort of damage you want.

Consider this: A Lump of tungston travelling very very quickly (why tungston? because it's what's used today for hyper-velocity penetrating shots....it's the hardest metal known to humans currently) hits a spaceship travelling at speed...... the lump of tungston aint going to stop travelling....and it just punches holes in things, and keeps going, at a rather slower speed tha before, but still bloody quickly.... A lot of damage, but much energy isn't imparted. And if it hit in a bad place, it might not even cripple the target. A nuclear weapon however imparts energy directly (well, no, it doesn't. But a lot MORE directly)....so proportionally more of it's damage is absorbed.

And at 40% C, a slug won't even slow down much.....and self-sealing/self repair systems could quickly repair damage, if the areas pireced were not vital to the continued function of the ship (EG. A reactor coolant unit, computer system, huge tank of antimatter, etc)
Nukes are also easier to fire.....because sending a slug up to a fraction of C requires a HUGE amount of energy......Nukes just have to get close enough, and then bob's yer uncle.


But since this is a game, it doesn't have to make sense...game and movie physics never do ..and besides, M5 blasts look pretty.


But IRL, Kinetics would be good, up to a point. After that point, they'd stop doing more damage, and just take more power....

[Atarlost]

Nukes aren't divisible. Kinetics are. You can't make a nuke under something like 500 kilos. You can make a kinetic penetrator that masses a single gram. 1 nuke, or 500,000 small relativistic penetrators? Sure each may only be 1 kiloton equivalent, but there can be a lot of them and the armor isn't going to stop even a kiloton. And remember speeds can't drop without increasing the time compression because the game would become unplayable, and increasing the time compression would make most battles so long the game would become implausable.

[digdug]

From scienceclarified.com

The U.S. Space Command tracks more than 8,000 orbiting objects larger than 4 in (10 cm), of which only 7% are operational. The rest are debris—dead satellites, parts of exploded rockets, nuts, bolts, other lost hardware, etc. Most orbital debris is found in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), in altitudes below 1,243 mi (2,000 km). At these altitudes, objects collide at a speed of 6.2 mi per second (10 km/sec). In such velocities, even very small objects can inflict serious damage. It is estimated that smaller, non-tracked debris number in the millions. How much damage can an object smaller than 4 inches inflict in space? NASA documented a cracked space shuttle window from an impact with a paint chip estimated to be 0.008 in (0.2 mm) in diameter. Larger debris could cause damage up to and including a complete breakup of the spacecraft. And if a paint chip, which can't be tracked from the ground, cracked a space shuttle window, imagine what it would do to an astronaut out on a space walk.

As you can see from the picture, when a penetrator hit something, it doesn't simply create a hole, it creates a "crater", that's the same as for asteroids, a 2 m asteroid creates a 40 m (or so) impact crater, because of the energy release.

The equation is simple, Q=mV

For penetrators, you can use high density materials, to have more mass, or higher velocities. Current military penetrators are not anymore made from carbon tugstide, but from depleted uranium, which has much higher density and conseguently higher penetrator power (and in addition it's also pyrophoric, creating a burst of flames inside any vehicle it can penetrate)

[Aeonic]

So... is there actually any way to make invisible lasers?

[Wurmish]

I'm assuming we're all talking about lasers focused to a military-grade level... And since lasers are light, and most of the wavelengths that are used, to my memory, are infrared, or there are masers which use microwaves, which again, are not visible. Most of the invisibility is cured via specific lenses IIRC.

I don't guarantee accuracy in my memory Gist of my memory is lasers are usually invisible by default.