Syaoran
Retired Staff
'Ready to lauch' shouldn't matter since you're talking about the 'endurance' of the weapon, or it's longevity in a battle.
Star Army
Star ArmyⓇ is a landmark of forum roleplaying. Opened in 2002, Star Army is like an internet clubhouse for people who love roleplaying, art, and worldbuilding. Anyone 18 or older may join for free. New members are welcome! Use the "Register" button below.
Note: This is a play-by-post RPG site. If you're looking for the tabletop miniatures wargame "5150: Star Army" instead, see Two Hour Wargames.
-
If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
-
Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
Arieg
DEFCON Everybody Dies
https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=wip:indigo_class_escort#missile_and_torpedo_systems any ideas on how I could maintain this on board missile inventory? But balance it in way that wouldn't upset the weapon limit?
Fred
Retired Staff
I'm fairly confident the figure I offered actually matches the weaponry expectations of a starfighter or a bomber. It gives a number of missiles I think is relateable with. If a fightercraft invests half of its budget just in single-shot missiles, it's arguably already armed to the teeth, in similar veins to today's heavily-laden fighters.
Regarding the Indigo, it really depends on how much your non missile weaponry is actually worth. Once you determine that, then the rest can be filled in with missiles.
You essentially have a total of 896 missiles, regardless of type.
Each of the Indigo's eight weapon equivalent can be worth:
4 medium anti-starship missiles.
8 light anti-starship missiles.
16 heavy anti-mecha missiles
32 medium anti-mecha missiles
64 light anti-mecha missiles
So, even if you used your full budget, you'd end up with 512 of the weakest non-anti-armor missiles possible. Not enough to meet your
Say that I decide I'm not generous enough with 4 and increase that to 6. The end result with a 1/8 of your weapon budget ends up being:
6 medium anti-starship missiles.
12 light anti-starship missiles.
24 heavy anti-mecha missiles
48 medium anti-mecha missiles
96 light anti-mecha missiles
With full budget, we end up at 768. They're at the strength you want, but don't come quite close to the 896 number on your submission... and still leave you no room for anything else (your guns).
...
Arieg, I've looked at your missiles. I've looked at your ship. You're essentially trying to convince people that you could dot the surface of your ship with nearly 900 single-person escape pods (not the size of your missiles, but probably the size of their container) while that ship is only 224 meters long. It seems like a tall order to me. I look at the art of your ship: long, sleek, aerodynamic, slender main body, smaller tappered wings... and I just don't see how that's possible. I mean, it's a corvette, not some missile cruiser.
What I do see is 12 apparent forward-facing missile launchers. That you could probably fit in 3/8 of your budget to turn those into 12 Heavy Anti-Mecha torpedo launchers at that'd fit with the artwork. you could probably add hatches that could supplement that with 64 to 128... and still have comfortable room to fit in all your turrets.
I'll admit, I cannot relate with your attachment to having so many VLS-launched missiles on this kind of platform. It makes little sense to me.
Regarding the Indigo, it really depends on how much your non missile weaponry is actually worth. Once you determine that, then the rest can be filled in with missiles.
You essentially have a total of 896 missiles, regardless of type.
Each of the Indigo's eight weapon equivalent can be worth:
4 medium anti-starship missiles.
8 light anti-starship missiles.
16 heavy anti-mecha missiles
32 medium anti-mecha missiles
64 light anti-mecha missiles
So, even if you used your full budget, you'd end up with 512 of the weakest non-anti-armor missiles possible. Not enough to meet your
Say that I decide I'm not generous enough with 4 and increase that to 6. The end result with a 1/8 of your weapon budget ends up being:
6 medium anti-starship missiles.
12 light anti-starship missiles.
24 heavy anti-mecha missiles
48 medium anti-mecha missiles
96 light anti-mecha missiles
With full budget, we end up at 768. They're at the strength you want, but don't come quite close to the 896 number on your submission... and still leave you no room for anything else (your guns).
...
Arieg, I've looked at your missiles. I've looked at your ship. You're essentially trying to convince people that you could dot the surface of your ship with nearly 900 single-person escape pods (not the size of your missiles, but probably the size of their container) while that ship is only 224 meters long. It seems like a tall order to me. I look at the art of your ship: long, sleek, aerodynamic, slender main body, smaller tappered wings... and I just don't see how that's possible. I mean, it's a corvette, not some missile cruiser.
What I do see is 12 apparent forward-facing missile launchers. That you could probably fit in 3/8 of your budget to turn those into 12 Heavy Anti-Mecha torpedo launchers at that'd fit with the artwork. you could probably add hatches that could supplement that with 64 to 128... and still have comfortable room to fit in all your turrets.
I'll admit, I cannot relate with your attachment to having so many VLS-launched missiles on this kind of platform. It makes little sense to me.
Navian
Inactive Member
I think we should take an effect-based approach with missiles. If you want to describe your faction as shooting 6000 missiles for an effective brute force attack, okay, but it shouldn't be any more effective than someone else who uses six super-missiles. (Note that this has nothing to do with DR tier, there are reasons why small missiles can cause absurd amounts of damage in space combat and these can be subsumed into an effects-based approach.)
Likewise, the speed of missiles should be able to vary dramatically, so long as we're willing to accept that the slowest missiles have something to keep them from being 'obviously' useless, and the fastest missiles have some flaws that prevent them from being too powerful.
Different factions should have different tech and flavour, and what 'is best' is beside the point. The technology the setting permits determines what's best, and it can change, the same way it changes in real life with advancing technology, only more exaggerated because we permit so much superscience.
It's unfortunate we need a ship speed limit; ideally we'd constrain ourselves in such a way that a range of speeds could be possible even within one faction. We don't need this for missiles because they don't transport characters around, and can't operate on their own, so discrepancies don't significantly damage a plot's chronology.
If a GM wants to give someone more 'turns' to respond to a missile attack, they can--it's not realistic, but that doesn't matter. All that matters is that defenses exist and missiles aren't mean to be overpowering.
Likewise, the speed of missiles should be able to vary dramatically, so long as we're willing to accept that the slowest missiles have something to keep them from being 'obviously' useless, and the fastest missiles have some flaws that prevent them from being too powerful.
Different factions should have different tech and flavour, and what 'is best' is beside the point. The technology the setting permits determines what's best, and it can change, the same way it changes in real life with advancing technology, only more exaggerated because we permit so much superscience.
It's unfortunate we need a ship speed limit; ideally we'd constrain ourselves in such a way that a range of speeds could be possible even within one faction. We don't need this for missiles because they don't transport characters around, and can't operate on their own, so discrepancies don't significantly damage a plot's chronology.
If a GM wants to give someone more 'turns' to respond to a missile attack, they can--it's not realistic, but that doesn't matter. All that matters is that defenses exist and missiles aren't mean to be overpowering.
Navian
Inactive Member
We have torpedoes in space combat for the same reason we have aircraft carriers and submarines... meaning, we don't, really, but we have things that mimic their roles whether or not it makes sense, and come up with justifications to allow them to work. Real torpedoes are slow and troublesome compared to missiles because they travel through water, not air.
Space torpedoes might have a design philosophy that emphasizes armour, shields, or even point defense, or they might hew closer to what makes real torpedoes work and have some way to travel through another dimension, and are difficult to stop except by defenses that also work in that dimension. I find the latter more plausible and interesting, but either is fine with me, and I'd expect both to exist in the setting, if only because people try everything and we've already seen them in popular media.
Space torpedoes might have a design philosophy that emphasizes armour, shields, or even point defense, or they might hew closer to what makes real torpedoes work and have some way to travel through another dimension, and are difficult to stop except by defenses that also work in that dimension. I find the latter more plausible and interesting, but either is fine with me, and I'd expect both to exist in the setting, if only because people try everything and we've already seen them in popular media.
FrostJaeger
Banned Member
The latter is also currently impossible to implement in the setting due to faster-than-light travel being impossible within a star system's FTL exclusion zone...
...and because of the Submission Rules, which clearly state:
Navian
Inactive Member
It doesn't have to be faster-than-light. Torpedoes are slower than missiles because they travel through a denser medium, space torpedoes could be slower than space missiles due to travelling through another dimension that makes them slower, too. This could also be used to justify some stealth ships, smallcraft than can 'aerodynamically' bank and brake in space, and to re-explain some old 'phasing' technology in a way that causes fewer problems in play.
I think it's worth considering, and it doesn't go against the spirit of the restriction against new planes of existence so long it doesn't provide much new potential and mostly serves to explain things we already have and want.
I think it's worth considering, and it doesn't go against the spirit of the restriction against new planes of existence so long it doesn't provide much new potential and mostly serves to explain things we already have and want.
Syaoran
Retired Staff
Just a heads up, things like subspace attacks have been restricted, because it was abused at one point with people jumping into subspace and popping back up under people's shields. It's why everyone has the same type of warp drive now, to prevent that. Hopping into different dimensions is not technically banned for missiles I don't think. But doing so would be going against the spirit of a tech restriction already in place.
Navian
Inactive Member
The shenanigans a torpedo can get up to by travelling through water, rather than air, are pretty limited. They're not immune to damage, just difficult to hit because most weapons don't fare well when crossing the interface and have limited underwater range. Other weapons work just fine. And they definitely can't bypass a ship's hull unless a hole is made in it, the same as any other weapon. There's no reason to let them bypass barrier screens, either.
I think it'd be possible for people to restrain themselves from extending the capabilities of 'subspace transit', or whatever we call it, further than necessary to just allow them to use Earth-based war machines in space without stripping away the basic capabilities they need to function. I could be wrong.
I think it'd be possible for people to restrain themselves from extending the capabilities of 'subspace transit', or whatever we call it, further than necessary to just allow them to use Earth-based war machines in space without stripping away the basic capabilities they need to function. I could be wrong.
Fred
Retired Staff
Are you telling me that this ship actually should have 56 tubes, each with 8 rounds?
FrostJaeger
Banned Member
No, @Zack, though in hindsight I admittedly made the same mistake when converting the Nepleslian Star Navy's weaponry.
Missiles are not bullets. Missile launchers are not guns.
Furthermore, did you actually even read the wiki article for the Variable Launch Tubes before posting?
The Variable Launch Tube wiki article said:
56 times 4 equals 224 missiles per minute, not 30, unless my calculator is broken.
Lexically speaking in SARP, there's no difference between missiles, torpedoes or rockets. They're interchangeable because we have no set definition. It's whatever the creator/faction calls it.
What Yamatai calls a torpedo could be called a missile by someone else and a rocket by someone else.
What Yamatai calls a torpedo could be called a missile by someone else and a rocket by someone else.
