These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

explosive damage. why?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Airto TLA
Acorn's Wonder Bars
#21 - 2013-05-01 21:11:54 UTC
Please do not apply physics to this game you will get a headache.

But, I do want ot know why my scorch crystals so more em than thermal it seems like false advertising.
Morgan North
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#22 - 2013-05-01 21:20:22 UTC
EM - Lasers. Dodged with mirrors really. Or refraction/reflection mechanisms.

Thermal damage - Lasers and Blasters. Surface heat by EM-delivery, but with the importance being on absorbed heat. Ceramics can deflect this/aborb it superficially and take a while to actually start heating up.

Kinetics: Blasters, railguns, projectiles. Something hits something else. Baffled by elasticity in materials and angular incidence of projectiles, etc etc. Ways to deflect it vary from thick enough plating to angular plating.

Explosive: Projectiles. Basically, see above, but you can't penetrate deep enought. Your answer? As you penetrate/hit, you explode shortly afterwards. The result? You blow a part of the armour away. Deflected by mostly using specialized techniques to have the materials intertwined and interwoven as to avoid shrapnel.

All these damage types are actually technologies that are implemented offensivly, and defensivly require pre-planning.
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#23 - 2013-05-01 21:27:02 UTC
If you want realism, there's really only two types of directed energy: EM and Kinetic. (thermal is part of the EM spectrum)

However, we also fly submarines in space (fluid mechanics ftw). Realism isn't a pressing concern.

Overhaul Dscan!
Tiffy Mezzier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2013-05-01 21:40:01 UTC
I'd like to clarify, that there are such things as kinetic energy missiles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy_penetrator

Basically, an explosive charge detonates just prior to contact to ablate a portion of the target's armor and simultaneously propels a hardened alloy spike through the remainder.
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2013-05-01 21:56:28 UTC
Morgan North wrote:
EM - Lasers. Dodged with mirrors really. Or refraction/reflection mechanisms.

Thermal damage - Lasers and Blasters. Surface heat by EM-delivery, but with the importance being on absorbed heat. Ceramics can deflect this/aborb it superficially and take a while to actually start heating up.

Kinetics: Blasters, railguns, projectiles. Something hits something else. Baffled by elasticity in materials and angular incidence of projectiles, etc etc. Ways to deflect it vary from thick enough plating to angular plating.

Explosive: Projectiles. Basically, see above, but you can't penetrate deep enought. Your answer? As you penetrate/hit, you explode shortly afterwards. The result? You blow a part of the armour away. Deflected by mostly using specialized techniques to have the materials intertwined and interwoven as to avoid shrapnel.

All these damage types are actually technologies that are implemented offensivly, and defensivly require pre-planning.


Tiffy Mezzier wrote:
I'd like to clarify, that there are such things as kinetic energy missiles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy_penetrator

Basically, an explosive charge detonates just prior to contact to ablate a portion of the target's armor and simultaneously propels a hardened alloy spike through the remainder.


It's just a two stage shaped charge, the "kinetic penetration" you get from that is from a explosive charge. And there's reactive armor for that, which is also about explosives propelling something... kinetic. Kinetic and explosive is one and the same.

Also, US once made a laser antimissile system. It heats up a missile, melt it and make it explode... by shining a light on it. EM... heat... same thing. Then the Chinese mirror coated their missiles and that was the end of that. Giant lasers, 20 bil, a bucket of chrome paint, priceless.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#26 - 2013-05-02 07:20:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Felsusguy
Ines Tegator wrote:
thermal is part of the EM spectrum

It really isn't. Heat is technically kinetic because it is just movement. When something gets hot, that just means the particles that make up the object are moving around very quickly. The reason light often produces heat is because those incredibly tiny photons interact with individual molecules, giving them little tugs and pushes and making them vibrate. That's how a microwave oven cooks food, since microwave radiation is especially good at vibrating molecules.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Vesan Terakol
Trollgrin Sadface
Dark Taboo
#27 - 2013-05-02 13:33:23 UTC
Tiffy Mezzier wrote:
I'd like to clarify, that there are such things as kinetic energy missiles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy_penetrator

Basically, an explosive charge detonates just prior to contact to ablate a portion of the target's armor and simultaneously propels a hardened alloy spike through the remainder.


Weren't kinetic missiles currently in research more like your regular missile, but with no warhead and propulsion, capable of producing enough velocity for the missile to damage its target thru the transfer of energy during impact alone?
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#28 - 2013-05-02 15:33:55 UTC
1). Response to the OP: The 4 damage types in EVE make a decent amount of sense if you think of them in terms of how to prevent them. Thermal damage is countered through head dispersion and materials with a high tolerance for heat, EM is countered through non-conductive shielding around electronics and the dense materials, Explosive is countered by shock absorption and flexible material, and Kinetic is countered by thick or deflective armor plating. Similar differences apply to shields too.

2). The real problem is, why are missiles primarily kinetic (at least in terms of the ship bonuses to them) and projectile weapons primarily explosive?
Freya Kaundur
Doomheim
#29 - 2013-05-02 18:52:41 UTC
Xavier Thorm wrote:
1). Response to the OP: The 4 damage types in EVE make a decent amount of sense if you think of them in terms of how to prevent them. Thermal damage is countered through head dispersion and materials with a high tolerance for heat, EM is countered through non-conductive shielding around electronics and the dense materials, Explosive is countered by shock absorption and flexible material, and Kinetic is countered by thick or deflective armor plating. Similar differences apply to shields too.

2). The real problem is, why are missiles primarily kinetic (at least in terms of the ship bonuses to them) and projectile weapons primarily explosive?





you said it in your reply the same way you defend agains kinetic and thermal damage. is the same as you would an explosion. it boils down to kinetic damage and thermal damage. my point is that explosive damage as it exists in eve is a reduntant damage type.
Xavier Thorm
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#30 - 2013-05-02 19:26:16 UTC
Freya Kaundur wrote:
Xavier Thorm wrote:
1). Response to the OP: The 4 damage types in EVE make a decent amount of sense if you think of them in terms of how to prevent them. Thermal damage is countered through head dispersion and materials with a high tolerance for heat, EM is countered through non-conductive shielding around electronics and the dense materials, Explosive is countered by shock absorption and flexible material, and Kinetic is countered by thick or deflective armor plating. Similar differences apply to shields too.

2). The real problem is, why are missiles primarily kinetic (at least in terms of the ship bonuses to them) and projectile weapons primarily explosive?





you said it in your reply the same way you defend agains kinetic and thermal damage. is the same as you would an explosion. it boils down to kinetic damage and thermal damage. my point is that explosive damage as it exists in eve is a reduntant damage type.


No, I didn't. And no, it isn't. Thick armor might prevent projectiles from piercing the hull, but if it conducts heat into crew space it wouldn't be effective against energy weapons the heat it dramatically, if it isn't magnetically shielded it won't stop EM weapons from damaging the electronics inside your ship, and if it's just a big sheet of some kind of metal it's not going to do anything to stop a concussive force from shaking your ship around.

I could give the same kind of examples for types of defenses specialized against each type of damage, but you get the idea.

Yes, EVE's damage system gets a little metaphorical, since everything just causes your ship to blow up instead of causing different effects based on the attack type, but I think you're looking too hard for problems.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#31 - 2013-05-03 07:11:54 UTC
Xavier Thorm wrote:
Thick armor might prevent projectiles from piercing the hull, but if it conducts heat into crew space it wouldn't be effective against energy weapons the heat it dramatically, if it isn't magnetically shielded it won't stop EM weapons from damaging the electronics inside your ship, and if it's just a big sheet of some kind of metal it's not going to do anything to stop a concussive force from shaking your ship around.

Your assuming that the armoour is made of conductive metals. Ceramic alloys work very well to disperse heat. There are also many polymers under development at this time that all but completely prevent heat passing through them.

As for electromagnetic shielding to prevent EM damage, try reading what I wrote before. EM damage is not the same as an EMP, it's radiation.

A honeycombed latice of varied materials would form the perfect composite that would defend against all of the above. And guess what, the modern military do the same with tank armour... How amazing! I do hope we still have that technology in a few hundred centuries...

Friends
Tarn Kugisa
Kugisa Dynamics
#32 - 2013-05-03 08:58:32 UTC
Ivoto wrote:
"What's physics, precious??"
-CCP


says the game designer that thinks space is a fluid

Be polite. Be efficient. Have a plan to troll everyone you meet - KuroVolt
Funky Lazers
Funk Freakers
#33 - 2013-05-03 10:23:14 UTC
Freya Kaundur wrote:
i know there are physics and stuff in eve that makes absolutely no sense.

but i sit here drinking tonight and i open up my fitting window and for some dumb reason i look at resistances and wonder why do we have a explosive damage type. no matter how you cut it a explosion is a mix of kinetic and thermal damage. and yes i know there are other ways to splode things. but it all involves kinetic damage.

kinetic thermal em damage all makes sense cuz you can theoretically have each without the other. so i propose we find a 4th damage type. but i cant realy think of any other then like chemical or cold. or mabee and a nanite damage type. but that would be getting into dots in eve and i dont think i like that.

but this is my opinion. mabee some people can add to it or help me rationalize it.


It's just the same as increased Explosion should do more damage to the smaller targets, not less.

People who did this game did not know the word Physics.

Whatever.
Freya Kaundur
Doomheim
#34 - 2013-05-04 00:13:41 UTC
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Another "I want RL physics in my fluid universe submarine spaceship game' thread.


0/10 bud. i am not talking about physics i am talking about them having a damage "type" that is not a type of damage it is a cause leading to multiple types of damage and it dosnt make sense.
Previous page12