These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Destroyers for orbital bombardment? Really??

First post First post
Author
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2013-01-10 11:49:51 UTC
NickyYo wrote:
If they bring a rule / notification out, cannot warp into close orbit due to risk of gravitational disturbances for larger ships then the destroyer and below thing will work. Large guns only have a range of like 100k anyways..

So whats the problem?

EDIT: come to think of it, how is a destroyer going to shoot a planet whens its range is 20k...

My destroyer's range is 76km, that's without any tracking enhancers.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2013-01-10 11:50:10 UTC
iskflakes wrote:
Did you miss the fact that older players are having their advantages over new players nerfed?

The fact that you spend months or years training skills to high levels is now irrelevant.


Your first point is partly true, but it's with good reason. The second part is by no means true.

iskflakes wrote:
T1 frigates are as good as T2. T1 cruiser logi is 90% as good as T2 at 1/100th the cost. 15 drakes are now as good as a supercarrier at 1/20th the cost and a fraction of the skillpoints.


T1 frigates aren't by any means as good as T2 frigates, T1 frigates just have a larger range of tactical applications whereas T2 ships have one specific tactical application that they perform really well. A T2 logistics fleet might be vastly more expensive but it's also vastly more difficult to destroy, much harder to disrupt using capacitor warfare and that extra 10% does, in fact, make all the difference during clutch situations. Do 20 Drakes have remote ECM burst capability, e-war immunity, high-power logistics capability, a jump drive, the ability to give drones to ships with no drone bay and 6 million EHP with a T2 fit? What's that? They don't?

Then they aren't as good as a supercarrier.

iskflakes wrote:
CCP will keep doing this as long as they think loyal veteran players are preventing new subscriptions.


To be honest, if you genuinely thought it was better when it took a player the best part of six months to be of any use in PvP other than as a disposable tackler, you're probably the kind of subscriber CCP could stand to lose a few more of.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

ISD TYPE40
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#63 - 2013-01-10 11:52:16 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD TYPE40
Lipbite wrote:
I can't see any reason to risk 200-2000 millions worth battleship for a planet which can bring 50mil/month of "income" - or for ridiculous 12x12 surface battle with 5mil payout (5mil = my guess about Dust payouts).

About size. EVE destroyers are comparable to modern naval carriers and WW2 battleships. I.e. they are huge.

P.S. Asteroids bombardment = "mass driving" is too destructive.



As per your example there, a Catalyst is 88 metres from front to back (bow to stern if you wish) and 284 metres wide (or port to starboard), in comparison a Nimitz Class Nuclear powered Carrier is 333 metres in length. So in theory you could park a Catalyst on the deck of a Nimitz Class and have just about enough room to park a Gallente shuttle on the deck as well, leaving you with roughly enough room to swing a few cats.

DISCLAIMER: CCP does not condone the swinging of any animals for any purpose, scientific or otherwise.

[b]ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2013-01-10 11:55:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
ISD TYPE40 wrote:
It may be worth remembering just how big and powerful the shells are that we use in EVE when compared to standard ground based weaponry. Gallente destroyers with rails will usually fire 125mm shells, slightly smaller than the 130mm shells fired by modern naval destroyers.

We know how much damage that kind of real life shell can cause, now imagine those shells being filled with anti-matter! And now imagine a shell half a metre across made of the same stuff travelling a good percentage the speed of light, the kind fired from a 425mm battleship railgun. The kinetic damage alone would vaporise a large portion of the area. Add in the anti--matter and you wouldn't just kill a few DUST soldiers, you would vaporise a few square kilometres.

assuming the payload of the destroyer shell is a cylinder with 115mm diameter and 600mm height, its volume would be pi*600mm*(100mm/2)^2 = ~4,712,389mm^3

It would reasonable to use some relatively heavy antimatter as ammunition, for the sake of the argument lead ions will do.

Lead has a density of 11,340 kg/m^3 or 1.1340 *10^-5 kg/mm^3, therefore our (anti-)lead cylinder would have a mass of ~53.44kg.

Using E = m*c^2 one antimatter shell would be converted into ~4.8*10^18 joules, the equivalent of 1,148 megatons of TNT.

The most powerful nuclear weapon detonated on earth so far had a yield of 57 megatons.

One single destroyer shell - the equivalent of 20 extremely powerful hydrogen bombs.

Those DUST mercs better watch out.

.

niko86
Disiecta Membra
EVE Trade Alliance
#65 - 2013-01-10 11:55:53 UTC  |  Edited by: niko86
A dreadnaught firing its weapons at the ground would likely transform the whole battlefield into a smoking crater in RP terms.

Small weapons as an introduction make sense (in eve terms not pseudo reality ;p) because the role of the Dust mercs is not to flatten a battlefield but take over valuable infrastructure.
Thomas Gore
Blackfyre Enterprise
#66 - 2013-01-10 11:55:55 UTC
Deathan Taxxis wrote:
I quite like the idea that this will start off with small ships. Admittedly I am a little disappointed that missiles have yet to be included, as I think the new Corax would look amazing raining down missiles from orbit.


Yeah. Santa did it. Why can't we?
Bomerang
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#67 - 2013-01-10 11:58:16 UTC
Last I checked you can fit small guns on a BS. Go for it Shocked
ISD TYPE40
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#68 - 2013-01-10 12:01:22 UTC
Abu Tarynnia wrote:


Ahm .. YOU brought the RL-Destroyers shell into discussion .. and in RL anything filled up with antimatter would just implde AND a shell (short of 1KM diameter) will just vaporice because of the air around us .. otherwise you wouldn't be able to go around on the surface due to tiny asteroids and space-trash hitting earth all time.
And yes story ... and I still don't understand why my stealth-BOMBER cannot use its BOMBS for orbital BOMBartment ... though I have the skill BOMB deployment .. but that might be something completely different Roll



As in real life, so in EVE, at least in the case of antimatter. Remember, EVE is set thousands of years in the future so advancements in physics, materials science and all related matters would be expected. As it stands today we can and do already magnetically confine antimatter safely, we also have the ability to accelerate objects to very high velocities and in the case of particles, to around 99.99999% the speed of light. Given tens of millennia of scientific progress, the weapons seen in EVE are not as far fetched as they may seem. Big smile

Source for antimatter storage: Antimatter Storage

[b]ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Esan Vartesa
Samarkand Financial
#69 - 2013-01-10 12:05:46 UTC
As for the whole range disparity, that's obvious.

When you're firing your small weapons from a destroyer at targets in space, you don't have the aid of a guy standing on your target waving flags and saying:

"Shoot HERE!"
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#70 - 2013-01-10 12:07:11 UTC
ISD TYPE40 wrote:
Given tens of millennia of scientific progress, the weapons seen in EVE are not as far fetched as they may seem. Big smile

how does scientific progress prevent the entire battlefield from being vaporated when treated to the equivalent of 1 gigaton TNT?

.

JamesCLK
#71 - 2013-01-10 12:09:01 UTC
Incidentally, the orbital bombardment we saw at Fanfest 2012 was probably (I'm speculating based off some sisi footage) a Tactical strike. That huge AOE rain of fire and death we saw being fired from the Abaddon that cleared the front of a complex? Yeah, those were small artillery shells.
As for actual impact? One small gun's worth of bombardment seems to take off the shields of anything near the impact (again, sisi provided plenty of audio recordings of Dust players reactions to the shelling). A full rack on a destroyer would likely kill just about anything.

-- -.-- / -.-. .-.. --- -. . / .. ... / - --- --- / . -..- .--. . -. ... .. ...- . / - --- / ..- -. -.. --- -.-. -.- / ... - --- .--. / .--. .-.. . .- ... . / ... . -. -.. / .... . .-.. .--. / ... - --- .--.

niko86
Disiecta Membra
EVE Trade Alliance
#72 - 2013-01-10 12:11:46 UTC
Quote:
QUOTING THE DEV BLOG - These come with the risk of losing a collateral payment of ISK, but a victory will secure a district on one of the many temperate planets in Faction Warfare space.


In terms of RP you also don't want to be annihilating the surfaces of every temperate planet being fought over by using gigantic dreadnoughts and battleships. You want something smaller and tactically precise, to aid the mercs while they do their job.
ISD TYPE40
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#73 - 2013-01-10 12:18:14 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
ISD TYPE40 wrote:
It may be worth remembering just how big and powerful the shells are that we use in EVE when compared to standard ground based weaponry. Gallente destroyers with rails will usually fire 125mm shells, slightly smaller than the 130mm shells fired by modern naval destroyers.

We know how much damage that kind of real life shell can cause, now imagine those shells being filled with anti-matter! And now imagine a shell half a metre across made of the same stuff travelling a good percentage the speed of light, the kind fired from a 425mm battleship railgun. The kinetic damage alone would vaporise a large portion of the area. Add in the anti--matter and you wouldn't just kill a few DUST soldiers, you would vaporise a few square kilometres.

assuming the payload of the destroyer shell is a cylinder with 115mm diameter and 600mm height, its volume would be pi*600mm*(100mm/2)^2 = ~4,712,389mm^3

It would reasonable to use some relatively heavy antimatter as ammunition, for the sake of the argument lead ions will do.

Lead has a density of 11,340 kg/m^3 or 1.1340 *10^-5 kg/mm^3, therefore our (anti-)lead cylinder would have a mass of ~53.44kg.

Using E = m*c^2 one antimatter shell would be converted into ~4.8*10^18 joules, the equivalent of 1,148 megatons of TNT.

The most powerful nuclear weapon detonated on earth so far had a yield of 57 megatons.

One single destroyer shell - the equivalent of 20 extremely powerful hydrogen bombs.

Those DUST mercs better watch out.



That is some impressive math there Big smile It may be worth noting that no numbers are provided in EVE for the ratio of Antimatter to Matter in the construction of a shell. It may help to think of the shell itself as more of a delivery system, than half the bomb itself. In all likelihood, and going by modern scientific convention, a standard antimatter round would likely contain in the region of 10000's of a gram, providing a much smaller "Boom!"

Here is an excerpt from a Q & A session with a member of staff at the LHC at CERN:

CERN wrote:

Does one gram of antimatter contain the energy of a 20 kilotonne nuclear bomb?

Twenty kilotonnes of TNT is the equivalent of the atom bomb that destroyed Hiroshima. The explosion of a kilotonne (=1000 tonnes) of TNT corresponds to a energy release of 4.2x1012 joules (1012 is a 1 followed by 12 zeros, i.e. a million million). For comparison, a 60 watt light bulb consumes 60 J per second.

You are probably asking for the explosive release of energy by the sudden annihilation of one gram of antimatter with one gram of matter. Let's calculate it.

To calculate the energy released in the annihilation of 1 g of antimatter with 1 g of matter (which makes 2 g = 0.002 kg), we have to use the formula E=mc2, where c is the speed of light (300,000,000 m/s):

E= 0.002 x (300,000,000)2 kg m2/s2 = 1.8 x 1014 J = 180 x 1012 J. Since 4.2x1012 J corresponds to a kilotonne of TNT, then 2 g of matter-antimatter annihilation correspond to 180/4.2 = 42.8 kilotonnes, about double the 20 kt of TNT.

This means that you ‘only’ need half a gram of antimatter to be equally destructive as the Hiroshima bomb, since the other half gram of (normal) matter is easy enough to find.

At CERN we make quantities of the order of 107 antiprotons per second and there are 6x1023 of them in a single gram of antihydrogen. You can easily calculate how long it would take to get one gram: we would need 6x1023/107=6x1016 seconds. There are only 365 (days) x 24 (h) x 60 (min) x 60 (sec) = around 3x107 seconds in a year, so it would take roughly 6x1016 / 3x107 = 2x109 = two billion years! It is quite unlikely that anyone wants to wait that long.


Source: CERN spotlight. Enjoy!

[b]ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

ISD TYPE40
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2013-01-10 12:19:43 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
ISD TYPE40 wrote:
Given tens of millennia of scientific progress, the weapons seen in EVE are not as far fetched as they may seem. Big smile

how does scientific progress prevent the entire battlefield from being vaporated when treated to the equivalent of 1 gigaton TNT?



Answers are above Big smile

[b]ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Felicity Love
Doomheim
#75 - 2013-01-10 12:20:53 UTC
Like everything else in the game, "OB" will go through various iterations.

If you were expecting vast mushroom clouds and entire cities disappearing, well, how nice for you. Roll

That only happens in the movies..... and Nevada. Twisted

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )

Rain6639
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#76 - 2013-01-10 12:21:31 UTC
lemme shoot manually, top-down, real time
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#77 - 2013-01-10 12:22:26 UTC
Felicity Love wrote:
Like everything else in the game, "OB" will go through various iterations.

If you were expecting vast mushroom clouds and entire cities disappearing, well, how nice for you. Roll

That only happens in the movies..... and Nevada. Twisted


Well it's not as if that's impossible to do in real life, we as a species have simply (hopefully) grown past using such weapons.
But that's not a debate for GD.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Felicity Love
Doomheim
#78 - 2013-01-10 12:24:58 UTC
You put too much faith in our "species"... and yes, another debate, another time. Well said. Blink

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )

Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#79 - 2013-01-10 12:48:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Debora Tsung
ISD TYPE40 wrote:
You may want to read up on EVE's lore. The 425mm shells fired by Gallente Hybrid weapons do contain anti-matter (most likely suspended as it is in real life in a magnetic bottle) ...


Wait, all of them or just the Anti Matter Ammo? o_O

Meh, forgett I asked, posting while on sleep deprivation is not good. -.-

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.

Keno Skir
#80 - 2013-01-10 12:52:19 UTC
ISD TYPE40 wrote:
You may want to read up on EVE's lore. The 425mm shells fired by Gallente Hybrid weapons do contain anti-matter (most likely suspended as it is in real life in a magnetic bottle) and are fired at a considerable percentage of the speed of light.


Then why according to EvE lore do they magically cease to be at 30 or 40km?

As i have repeatedly said, i'm aware EvE doesn't (and shouldn't) simulate real physics. But the scenario in question doesn't even fit with EvE's version of physics and that's where i feel there is a break in imersion happening. Also the gameplay element but i'm happy to wait n see how that unfolds.