Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 4 Votes - 1.75 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Reduce Ammo in Clips
2017-11-20, 12:02 PM
Post: #11
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
(2017-11-19 08:16 PM)SynthTwo Wrote:  Honestly I'd like to either see clipless APS volatility increased or clipped APS volatility decrease. The massive disparity is the only reason clipless is God tier.

With current damage numbers whatever you do to clip shell counts doesn't matter, practical cannons(>300mm, at least 20 loader+clip columns per turret) won't be contained.
Could be theoretically possible, but nobody will add 4-5m metal + maybe some HA just to contain a medium cannon going up.
Maybe disabling warheads and making only propellant explode could help a bit, 500mm frag/HE are way too strong but a single flak/5 GP may be possible.

Clipless also gives a higher RoF.
Increasing volatility doesn't matter, same reason as above.
If clipless is hit before it empties the inital load that chunk of the ship is done either way, when empty it obviously doesn't matter.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-20, 03:15 PM
Post: #12
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
I think you need 2m HA or 1m HA and 3+ Metal to contain 500mm HE/Frag turrets. Pure HE would probably require an extra 2m metal. And that is for 3m clips.

(2017-04-20 06:54 PM)Hikari Wrote:  I made something that has an impact of a type 1a supernova. The projectile already breaks laws of physics by going way past the speed of light.

2000mm HE Dakka Enthusiast
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-20, 04:13 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-20 04:50 PM by draba.)
Post: #13
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
(2017-11-20 03:15 PM)MizarLuke Wrote:  I think you need 2m HA or 1m HA and 3+ Metal to contain 500mm HE/Frag turrets. Pure HE would probably require an extra 2m metal. And that is for 3m clips.

Depends on the size/composition of the turret, didn't try it but with ~60 shells 2 warheads each even that doesn't look enough.
Frag needs more, 360° is much stronger than HE when everything hits(+linear stacking, +ricochets reduce damage loss against strong armor).
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-20, 05:23 PM
Post: #14
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
I think the problem here is: people think APS is slightly OP/good because they can easily build super high ROF high caliber guns, but they disregard their volatility completely. I rarely use more than 10 clips, often because I build my cannons small, and I have no problem with getting my turrets blown up, because they don't contain as much shells as many others do.

Build smaller guns, and compensate firerate with more guns, problem solved.

Once in a while I decide to do something stupid and try to perfect it. That is how some of my strongest designs were created.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-20, 06:17 PM
Post: #15
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
(2017-11-20 05:23 PM)CubeMaster_1 Wrote:  I think the problem here is: people think APS is slightly OP/good because they can easily build super high ROF high caliber guns, but they disregard their volatility completely. I rarely use more than 10 clips, often because I build my cannons small, and I have no problem with getting my turrets blown up, because they don't contain as much shells as many others do.

Build smaller guns, and compensate firerate with more guns, problem solved.

If you use smaller turret wells you need to cover a bigger surface with reinforced armor, and can't focus the outer armor covering the turrets as much.
People build those guns because trying those are optimal and trying to contain the explosion is simply not practical,
your style will be brutalized by something with proper guns because defenses will be really bad compared to those.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-20, 10:49 PM
Post: #16
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
(2017-11-20 06:17 PM)draba Wrote:  If you use smaller turret wells you need to cover a bigger surface with reinforced armor, and can't focus the outer armor covering the turrets as much.
People build those guns because trying those are optimal and trying to contain the explosion is simply not practical,
your style will be brutalized by something with proper guns because defenses will be really bad compared to those.

I dont think the term "proper" applies to 500mm explosive streams^^
Maybe that is the point where APS cannons get too strong, as any sort of defense becomes impractical.
I must admit, I don't build competetively, so you may have more experience there.
still can't figure out why I need to armor smaller turrets more to cover them than larger turrets.... maybe I didn't understand your sentence? Anyway, back on topic:

I think being able to manually cap the amount of ammo that can be loaded in clips would suffice. It would even be good for replicas.

Once in a while I decide to do something stupid and try to perfect it. That is how some of my strongest designs were created.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-20, 11:10 PM
Post: #17
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
(2017-11-20 10:49 PM)CubeMaster_1 Wrote:  still can't figure out why I need to armor smaller turrets more to cover them than larger turrets.... maybe I didn't understand your sentence?

Firepower more or less scales with volume in loaders + clips, with an almost constant overhead of coolers, inputs and complexity.
If you split up the same firepower into multiple smaller turret wells those wells will have a larger surface area for the same volume(squared vs cubic).
TL;DR is that if you use a single 9x9x9 turret it'll have better armor than 5-6 5x5x5 ones(relative to total clip explosion strength, that matters a lot with reinforcement).
Also, instead of a few critical spots you have several with small guns.

(2017-11-20 10:49 PM)CubeMaster_1 Wrote:  I dont think the term "proper" applies to 500mm explosive streams^^
Maybe that is the point where APS cannons get too strong, as any sort of defense becomes impractical.

Clip explosion strength is a balance concern, and from a gameplay point of view there is just no point going below 3-400mm.
Nothing wrong with using smaller guns for aesthetic reasons, but they do not matter too much in the context of turret durability.
Large guns are so good that not using them just because they explode is out of the question if you want your design to be strong,
and when they do explode it's prohibitively expensive trying to contain them.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-21, 04:33 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-21 04:36 PM by Ramble6.)
Post: #18
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
(2017-11-20 04:13 PM)draba Wrote:  ..Depends on the size/composition of the turret, didn't try it but with ~60 shells 2 warheads each even that doesn't look enough..

I decided to do a quick test. Built a 500mm turret that aims it's barrel down into the magazine itself so I can detonate it with an ACB. It uses 2 HE warheads per round and holds 62 rounds of ammo. I then put in a layer of metal around that and HA around that. 2 layers of armor.

As you can see from the pics below, it breached the sides destroying 6x 4m HA beams and cleared out all the metal inside. The turret is completely lost but I'm thinking an appropriately armored hull with this setup would still be floating compared to the way that a Thyr or Excal starts sinking.

And this is just 2m of armor encasement. So I'm assuming so far that 2m of HA or 1m HA and 2-ish m of metal does nicely for this particular setup and 60 rounds of 500mm.

This seems to go against the idea that a 500mm HE turret magazine detonation can't be to some decent extent contained.

[Image: 8YE7XrP.png]
[Image: 9q0Nm1H.png]
[Image: 8oHGOkj.png]
[Image: kGGMxaH.png]
[Image: hB5sMRP.png]
[Image: VozDAfm.png]

My DeviantArt Page Full of Shenanigans
________________________________________________________________________________​______________________
[Image: h6k8bShl.png]
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-21, 04:40 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-21 04:41 PM by draba.)
Post: #19
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
(2017-11-21 04:33 PM)Ramble6 Wrote:  
(2017-11-20 04:13 PM)draba Wrote:  ..Depends on the size/composition of the turret, didn't try it but with ~60 shells 2 warheads each even that doesn't look enough..

I decided to do a quick test. Built a 500mm turret that aims it's barrel down into the magazine itself so I can detonate it with an ACB. It uses 2 HE warheads per round and holds 62 rounds of ammo. I then put in a layer of metal around that and HA around that. 2 layers of armor.

As you can see from the pics below, it breached the sides destroying 6x 4m HA beams and cleared out all the metal inside. The turret is completely lost but I'm thinking an appropriately armored hull with this setup would still be floating compared to the way that a Thyr or Excal starts sinking.

And this is just 2m of armor encasement. So I'm assuming so far that 2m of HA or 1m HA and 2-ish m of metal does nicely for this particular setup and 60 rounds of 500mm.

This seems to go against the idea that a 500mm HE turret magazine detonation can't be to some decent extent contained.

That doesn't look too bad, might have overestimated clip damage a bit.
Won't be around FtD for a while, could you check with 2x360° frag warheads and 2m HA?
IIRC when I tested it was hopeless containing those.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-11-21, 04:43 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-11-21 10:37 PM by Ramble6.)
Post: #20
RE: Reduce Ammo in Clips
Yeah, I can definitely test that. I imagine those would be where the issue is at.

Edit: Did 2 frag warheads set 180 degrees for combined 360 and... the turret was completely decimated but no visible damage inside to the HA. So I'm testing another 500 mm round, with 4 frag warheads, each set to 180 deg cone and either 90 or -90 offset to get the full 360 coverage for two 360 warhead effects. Downside going out to meeting so I'll have to do a full good test and post pics after that.. but it is possible.. that it might contain that but we'll see. After that it would be HE-Frag mix and also if there is any difference if I do <20 deg frag cone.. as that is great at focused armor piercing. Which I'm curios about because then it would also mean that magazine facing directions need to be thought out for cannon designs depending on your ammunition loads.

More to come...

new

Tested 360 frags with 4 total frag modules, each set up for 180 deg with two being -90 and two 90 deg offset so 360 coverage x2. It knocked out some 4m metal floor pieces and damaged a couple 4m HA but no penetration.

[Image: EpMefo6.png]
[Image: RgfX3Cu.png]

64 rounds with HE HE HE Frag (Did not penetrate 2nd layer of HA, "Hull" metal layers not damaged. Ship would still float if bottom was armored as well with at least 2 layers metal.

[Image: K6SdSi4.png]

My DeviantArt Page Full of Shenanigans
________________________________________________________________________________​______________________
[Image: h6k8bShl.png]
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)