These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Fiction

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Modern Day ICBMs can go much further than missiles in EVE. Why?

Author
Bast's Cleric
24th Imperial Reserves
#21 - 2012-06-22 19:53:29 UTC
Dark Drifter wrote:
RL cruise missiles do not carry nuclear payloads... they carry standard munitions.

ICBMs carry nuclear payloads. and even these are split in to MIRVs



A RL Cruise Missile does indeed have the capability to carry a small nuke - but no one is willing to use it to carry one.

For the Empress

David Forge
GameOn Inc.
#22 - 2012-06-24 19:31:28 UTC  |  Edited by: David Forge
An ICBM is made to travel thousands of kilometers and hit a non-moving target (literally) the size of a city. EVE missiles are made to engage targets (with the exception of the larger capital ships) ranging from the size of a passenger airplane to a couple city blocks all with varying levels of maneuverability (sometimes matching and exceeding that of the missile). I would wager hitting a frigate with an ICBM would be pretty difficult.

Now, an ICBM could probably hit a Titan at a range of 10,000 KM provided that you could track it and you could stop it from jumping (which gives us one possible reason, i.e. warp disruption cannot take place over such vast distances). But those missiles could be used for nothing else, including probably smaller capital ships. So when you're designing missiles and equipping your ships you're likely to favor the hardware that can respond best to the most situations.

This leaves the question of things like stations, which are massive and (despite my strong belief that they ought to properly orbit something) stationary and would be an excellent candidate for a massive and long range but slow moving ICBM. The best explanation is that such an projectile would be defenseless against New Eden's anti-missile technology.
Synthmilk
The United Peoples of Synth
#23 - 2012-06-25 00:37:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Synthmilk
David Toviyah wrote:
Simon Heirmonious wrote:
Better questions would be why Lasers dont have infinite range.

That would actually be a worse question since the reason is relatively simple: Dispersion.


So what is dispersing the beam in Spaaaaaaaaace? Also I believe the term you were looking for is divergence.

Space is a vacuum, not 100%, but close enough that for our purposes it might as well be. This means that a photon will continue on a straight course at constant speed and energy as there is nothing to act on it. In short, there is nothing to disperse a laser beam in space.

Now divergence is a different beast, and basically is the tendency of a laser beam to get wider with distance, due to the relationship between the wavelength of the projected light and the diameter of the laser aperture (assuming the parts of the laser emitter are not faulty). This means it's impossible to get a 100% straight laser beam, where all photons are leaving the aperture in parallel.

So as we can't get a properly parallel beam, we will want to focus it onto the target so that we know 100% of the photons are hitting the target. The focus diameter is determined by the distance, wavelength and aperture diameter. For a weapon, we want the focus diameter to be as small as possible.

So if we ignore all the nitty-gritty math, we have an excuse for why EVE lasers have the ranges they do: The size of the laser emitters means each wavelength will have a different maximum focus range, beyond which the focal diameter will only grow larger, and thus the energy of the laser will be spread over a larger area, and not inflict as much damage. The higher energy wavelengths of light will have the shortest ranges as their minimum focal diameter will be closer, and the larger the diameter of the laser emitter, the longer the ranges can be for any given wavelength. The larger diameter weapons can also focus more raw energy regardless of wavelength, due to a complicated explanation having to do with how much energy a square inch of optical material can handle and bigger weapons having more surface area to pass energy through.

And that's why lasers don't have infinite range, why bigger lasers have longer ranges, and why bigger lasers are more powerful.
David Toviyah
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-06-27 18:38:24 UTC
Synthmilk wrote:
So what is dispersing the beam in Spaaaaaaaaace? Also I believe the term you were looking for is divergence.
Maybe. My dictionary translates it with dispersion. But yeah, what you described is what I meant by that term.
Kult Altol
The Safe Space
#25 - 2012-07-03 03:42:28 UTC
Kind of off subject but can some one link some lore for the liquid space theory. Does that mean we are actually piloting submarines?

[u]Can't wait untill when Eve online is Freemium.[/u] WiS only 10$, SP booster for one month 15$, DPS Boost 2$, EHP Boost 2$ Real money trading hub! Cosmeitic ship skins 15$ --> If you don't [u]pay **[/u]for a product, you ARE the [u]**product[/u].

Sitreba Oonchevkii
#26 - 2012-07-04 14:02:33 UTC
well, after the collapse of the eve gate, the surviving colonies fell back into a period similar to the stone age for thousands of years, and lost all knowledge of terran (earth human) technology, so maybe they missed something that the people in 20th century earth didn't when building missiles. also, the physics in space are so different from physics in the atmosphere, thats like asking why it's harder to play volleyball in the mariana trench then it is on the beach...

Blod-red skies, strange beings, and the number 514, often written in blood.

Kyle Ward
Doomheim
#27 - 2012-07-20 12:54:41 UTC
Aside from the fact that space battles would be absurdly boring waiting 20+ minutes for your missile to hit, it'd also leave a huge window for the defending ship to just shoot it down. Imagine if some fired a missile at you and you literally had enough time to redock, switch to a missile boat, load defenders and destroy the missile before it even appeared on your overview.

The Sandbox, you're playing it wrong!

Katalci
Kismesis
#28 - 2012-07-23 21:43:23 UTC
Modern day ICBMs take up to half an hour to hit their target.
Jiska Ensa
Estrale Frontiers
#29 - 2012-07-23 21:51:27 UTC
Katalci wrote:
Modern day ICBMs take up to half an hour to hit their target.



This. "Modern Day ICBMs" don't travel at several kilometres per second.
Istvaan Shogaatsu
Guiding Hand Social Club
#30 - 2012-07-24 01:30:55 UTC
If I were in charge of Eve... I would introduce many, many new kinds of weapons. We've been using the same bloody weapons since day one - not exactly an ongoing arms race.

One such weapon would be an ISBM - an Interstellar Ballistic Missile. Not ship-launched, but launched from installations, and able to take out other installations. Costs a crapload of resources to assemble, but able to take out a small POS in a single blow. Three could take out a large.

Such a missile would rely on gates to travel. It would also be possible to intercept this missile by shooting it down with ships before it reaches its target. The missile would be equipped with some countermeasures to protect itself - a cloak perhaps. However it would also have a short warp range, requiring multiple 'skips' to get across a large system. Once it gets into terminal range (within one warp of target) it is no longer possible to intercept by any means.

Certain POS modules would allow you to identify inbound warheads targeted at the POS.

My reasoning: The Wing Commander III mission with the Skipper Missiles. It was incredibly fun, but also incredibly intense - the missiles would stay cloaked 90% of the time, only dropping cloak to re-adjust their course toward a planet. If they hit the planet, the population is wiped out.

This sort of thing would make POS war a lot less mind-numbing, I feel.

Just one of many weapons I'd add...
killroy v2
Catskull Horizons
Grimskulls
#31 - 2012-08-03 05:18:06 UTC
Istvaan Shogaatsu wrote:
If I were in charge of Eve... I would introduce many, many new kinds of weapons. We've been using the same bloody weapons since day one - not exactly an ongoing arms race.

One such weapon would be an ISBM - an Interstellar Ballistic Missile. Not ship-launched, but launched from installations, and able to take out other installations. Costs a crapload of resources to assemble, but able to take out a small POS in a single blow. Three could take out a large.

Such a missile would rely on gates to travel. It would also be possible to intercept this missile by shooting it down with ships before it reaches its target. The missile would be equipped with some countermeasures to protect itself - a cloak perhaps. However it would also have a short warp range, requiring multiple 'skips' to get across a large system. Once it gets into terminal range (within one warp of target) it is no longer possible to intercept by any means.

Certain POS modules would allow you to identify inbound warheads targeted at the POS.

My reasoning: The Wing Commander III mission with the Skipper Missiles. It was incredibly fun, but also incredibly intense - the missiles would stay cloaked 90% of the time, only dropping cloak to re-adjust their course toward a planet. If they hit the planet, the population is wiped out.

This sort of thing would make POS war a lot less mind-numbing, I feel.

Just one of many weapons I'd add...

Shocked please ccp add this!!!!!Big smile
Thaddeus Aurelian
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-08-06 11:32:03 UTC
Well if missiles went a realistic range, then I'm sure a lot of the guns could also fire to a near endless range, since they don't have any of this warp drive business slowing them down. Artillery, Autocannons, Railguns and probably Lasers would be able to fire on targets that are miles away as long as those targets were still or kept moving in the same direction and there was nothing in the way.
Kalaratiri
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#33 - 2012-08-12 06:48:03 UTC
TIL: Jumping out of an Eve airlock results in drowning.

She's mad but she's magic, there's no lie in her fire.

This is possibly one of the worst threads in the history of these forums.  - CCP Falcon

I don't remember when last time you said something that wasn't either dumb or absurd. - Diana Kim

Silas Shaw
Coffee Hub
#34 - 2012-08-13 00:31:44 UTC
Synthmilk wrote:
David Toviyah wrote:
Simon Heirmonious wrote:
Better questions would be why Lasers dont have infinite range.

That would actually be a worse question since the reason is relatively simple: Dispersion.


Space is a vacuum, not 100%, but close enough that for our purposes it might as well be. This means that a photon will continue on a straight course at constant speed and energy as there is nothing to act on it. In short, there is nothing to disperse a laser beam in space.


Stopped reading at my italics. What is there to act on it are the other photons. They are not perfectly aligned, and slowly bump each other around.
Arnst Atram
Downgraded Avengers
Hard Knocks Citizens
#35 - 2012-08-13 12:01:22 UTC
Dey needz more Dakka! Take out da juicies, put in more Dakka!
Moe Cislak
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2012-08-14 10:24:45 UTC
Screw missiles, let me accelerate my noobship to ridiculous speed and ram it into a planet / station.

The main problem I have with EvE physics is the way starships move. You can't really stop your ship in real life space, you can reduce its speed with thrusters on the front for example.
But the way ships turn at 90° and go from 1000m/s (or faster) to 0m/s in a few seconds is unrealistic.

Evochron got it right
Sab Sab Five
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2012-08-14 20:33:37 UTC
ICBM's are huge. Our ships carry thousands o missiles on a kilometer wide platform. There is simply not room for us to carry thousands of giant missiles.

Also, in order to maintain acquisition of moving targets to perfectly hit every time, much of the missile is guidance. This detracts from warhead str. If you always hit, might as well lob ten or twenty missiles at your foe, rather than one BFG that may miss.

Furthermore, given the extreme amounts of corporate espionage over the history of the Caldari, LaiDai was instrumental in helping to pave industry standards that would limit the destructive power of individual missiles in order to protect assets in Stations they possessed in lawless areas. As missiles invariably were falling through safety webs into the hands of terrorists and pirates, the Caldari State found it best to limit payloads in production so as not to have 21st century ICBMs being launched from the safety of several AU away.

This is the same logic that prevents the Gallente Federation from producing huge rail platforms that could "lauch" asteroids at geostationary stations that would be unable to dodge them.

Warfare has become microcosm'd to a contest of smaller vessels piloted by immortals. Better for everyone, but especially collateral personnel on station and planetside.
Qvar Dar'Zanar
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#38 - 2012-08-15 01:43:13 UTC
Thaddeus Aurelian wrote:
Well if missiles went a realistic range, then I'm sure a lot of the guns could also fire to a near endless range, since they don't have any of this warp drive business slowing them down. Artillery, Autocannons, Railguns and probably Lasers would be able to fire on targets that are miles away as long as those targets were still or kept moving in the same direction and there was nothing in the way.


Actually it's never said in the game that they can't "reach" that far. Just that your systems can't aim them well enough to hit with them so far.
Senerio
Perkone
Caldari State
#39 - 2012-08-15 21:32:29 UTC
Qvar Dar'Zanar wrote:
Thaddeus Aurelian wrote:
Well if missiles went a realistic range, then I'm sure a lot of the guns could also fire to a near endless range, since they don't have any of this warp drive business slowing them down. Artillery, Autocannons, Railguns and probably Lasers would be able to fire on targets that are miles away as long as those targets were still or kept moving in the same direction and there was nothing in the way.


Actually it's never said in the game that they can't "reach" that far. Just that your systems can't aim them well enough to hit with them so far.

So essentially..."Space is big. It's hard to hit things." Sounds reasonable to me. Smile
Evet Morrel
Doomheim
#40 - 2012-08-16 00:08:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Evet Morrel
Synthmilk wrote:
David Toviyah wrote:
Simon Heirmonious wrote:
Better questions would be why Lasers dont have infinite range.

That would actually be a worse question since the reason is relatively simple: Dispersion.


So what is dispersing the beam in Spaaaaaaaaace? Also I believe the term you were looking for is divergence.

Space is a vacuum, not 100%, but close enough that for our purposes it might as well be. This means that a photon will continue on a straight course at constant speed and energy as there is nothing to act on it. In short, there is nothing to disperse a laser beam in space.

Now divergence is a different beast, and basically is the tendency of a laser beam to get wider with distance, due to the relationship between the wavelength of the projected light and the diameter of the laser aperture (assuming the parts of the laser emitter are not faulty). This means it's impossible to get a 100% straight laser beam, where all photons are leaving the aperture in parallel.


As you say lasers, all other things being perfect, have a diffraction limit which is a consequence of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Shame really, among other benefits like observing very distant objects, it would be a cool way to ship energy around the universe.
Previous page123Next page