Realistic Plasma Weapons

[Sarevok]

Why not use a flamethrower or thermobaric grenade instead ? The insides of a spaceship are perfect environment for such weapons.

[Purple]

Mostly becouse I guess that explosions of any kind would tend to damage the hallways more than just burning hot gas would. Heat shielding (think ceramic walls) being easier to get and repair afterward than explosion protection. But on that note, I will most likely simply depressurize the section for a while to kill anything without a mask, than depressurize it and spray a flame thrower on anything left alive afterward as you said.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Plus, plasma mean "atom nuclei separated from their electrons". That means that all molecules are cracked, reduced to their composing elements. How exactly do you intend to make a poison if you can't make molecules ?...

I think he's saying plasma that remained at ground level and burned people would render chemical weapons unnecessary. But the idea is stupid. Plasma is NOT a persistent chemical that sticks around and continues burning shit as if you doused it in napalm.

Unless you deploy it in an enclosed space, like the corridors of a starship. Close the blast doors to isolate the boarding team and hose the whole section with plasma.

Wait . . . what? So to deal with boarders, your plan is to close off a section of ship and . . . fill it with hot, ionized gas? Plasma isn't fucking elf magic. Furthermore, your worst enemy aboard any enclosed tin can is . . . get this . . . fire. You don't want to set anything on fire aboard a spaceship (or aboard real-life navy ships, for that matter.) It consumes your oxygen, puts heavy loads on your environmental support systems, and causes damage to delicate systems and people. Worse, in space, your biggest challenge is getting rid of extra heat. You're not going to do something as patently ridiculous as put corridor-mounted flamethrowers up to deal with boarders.

[Purple]

Wait . . . what? So to deal with boarders, your plan is to close off a section of ship and . . . fill it with hot, ionized gas? Plasma isn't fucking elf magic.

No, but I figured it is hot enough to boil anything alive in extremely closed spaces and can be pumped through the enviromental system.

Furthermore, your worst enemy aboard any enclosed tin can is . . . get this . . . fire. You don't want to set anything on fire aboard a spaceship (or aboard real-life navy ships, for that matter.) It consumes your oxygen, puts heavy loads on your environmental support systems, and causes damage to delicate systems and people. Worse, in space, your biggest challenge is getting rid of extra heat. You're not going to do something as patently ridiculous as put corridor-mounted flamethrowers up to deal with boarders.

Hence sealing the whole section. I don't design my ships like trek where anyone and their grandmother can board your starship to capture it. Nor do I have a single shared environmental support system to be damaged.

For a start, each of the critical areas (like the bridge, engineering, all battle stations) have independent life support capacities to last indefinitely. This includes heat transfer, and independent air circulation among other things. Connecting them are a network of tunnels with blast doors that can be closed and sealed at every 3m of the length. Now these tunnels is where this thing would be installed.

But flame throwers probably won't be effective against power armored shielded troops anyway. So, what do I use? Perhaps I should simply deploy machine gun turrets or have the walls close in to crush enemy forces. Or manipulate the artificial gravity in the section to crush them. I will think of something. But that is another story altogether.

[Simon_Jester]

Gun turrets are probably better, since it's harder to make things bulletproof than it is to make them fireproof. They're also a bit safer to work with on board ship, because they're not tied into other complicated systems or networks of pipes that run all over the ship. A gun turret is modular, can be installed anywhere, and can be unplugged to take it offline for maintenance. With a shipwide system of security flamethrowers, you have... well, I'd think you have more hazards from that.

[Sea Skimmer]

No need for long pipe runs. Nothing is stopping static flamethrowers fed from local tanks for security, the US had such a thing for airfield defense in WW2 which sprayed in two directions at once while triggered via a command wire (burn up all the Japanazi paratroopers). Russia and the Germans also used them in a very limited role. Its just pretty damn pointless as a future tech security measure since the fuel is so bulky and in space you'd expect enemy troops to be inside sealed suits that can resist heavy thermal loads from sun exposure. A short exposure to fire isn't going to stop them. Never mind the whole issue of the ship itself catching fire. Fire destroys ships much more easily then holes once it catches.

[Purple]

Right now I am thinking of simply having several holes drilled into the room ceiling (I have artificial gravity) and putting a simple grenade chucking machine inside. The plan would be simple. The doors close and 3-4 hand grenades drop into the room. And it could be done with a minimum number of moving parts.

[Simon_Jester]

Much better.

[Sea Skimmer]

Quite a few bunkers in real life had systems like that for clearing the entry hall and exterior ditches. Basically just a pipe with a contraption at the top which allowed you to place a normal hand grenade in it, pull the pin while the contraption still held the spoon safely, and then you pull a lever to release the grenade down the pipe.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Right now I am thinking of simply having several holes drilled into the room ceiling (I have artificial gravity) and putting a simple grenade chucking machine inside. The plan would be simple. The doors close and 3-4 hand grenades drop into the room. And it could be done with a minimum number of moving parts.

Arguably, given the hugeness of space, the comparative smallness of spaceships, and their fragility relative to the things you can shoot at them, if your ship is at the point where it's got boarders aboard . . . it's probably either already surrendered, or it's been shot so full of holes that anything fancy you've put in place probably wouldn't work anyway.

With that being said, the simple grenade drop is a much better idea than the flamethrowers. Unless your artificial gravity fails. In which case, I'd suggest adding a spring and electromechanical release.

[Purple]

That is what I was thinking. Above the tunnel section there would be a box of hand grenades that are designed to be electronically triggered by a signal. Besides this, there is a piston pushes them down through a hole and another one that pushes the next one into position. The sideways piston just pushes the whole line of grenades one by one like a conveyor belt of death. The downward piston should give the thing a good whack just for good measure to send it flying into the room at a fair speed gravity or no gravity.


(Naturally with a much bigger magazine. The red dot is the igniter.)

[Purple]

Edit: I don't even need a sideways piston. A simple spring loaded mechanism would do. The pusher piston is pushed all the way down in the safe position and between shots (making the hole invisible as a bonus). When it needs to fire, it would go up and than down again. So I have a perfectly safe select fire grenade dispenser with only 1 electrical circuit and 1 moving part.

[Simon_Jester]

Right now I am thinking of simply having several holes drilled into the room ceiling (I have artificial gravity) and putting a simple grenade chucking machine inside. The plan would be simple. The doors close and 3-4 hand grenades drop into the room. And it could be done with a minimum number of moving parts.

Arguably, given the hugeness of space, the comparative smallness of spaceships, and their fragility relative to the things you can shoot at them, if your ship is at the point where it's got boarders aboard . . . it's probably either already surrendered, or it's been shot so full of holes that anything fancy you've put in place probably wouldn't work anyway.

With that being said, the simple grenade drop is a much better idea than the flamethrowers. Unless your artificial gravity fails. In which case, I'd suggest adding a spring and electromechanical release.

There are contexts where some kind of security like this is useful- for example, on a large station where it's conceivable that infiltrators could get on board without having to fight and win a naval battle to immobilize the place. Or on ships that are designed to land- again, where it's conceivable that someone could storm the access ramp.

[Sea Skimmer]

Edit: I don't even need a sideways piston. A simple spring loaded mechanism would do. The pusher piston is pushed all the way down in the safe position and between shots (making the hole invisible as a bonus). When it needs to fire, it would go up and than down again. So I have a perfectly safe select fire grenade dispenser with only 1 electrical circuit and 1 moving part.

Still a really bad, unsafe idea in general, and one moving part is a non starter.You need some kind of physical safety to block the action to be remotely safe, plus and this is not complicated of course, the ability to put a physical safety pin in the system. Also the grenade has to safe/arm somehow. Even with all that , who in the crew wants to be stationed in such a compartment? Seems like money is better spent arming and training the crew to fight back then making sure the automatic live grenade deployment system is working safely 100% of the time, all the time, and still works safely after the ship takes damage in combat. Just install firing ports in key bulkhead doors and call it a day. If you have no crew to fight back, the enemy is going to take the ship one way or another. At that point blow a magazine and destroy the thing.

[Purple]

Still a really bad, unsafe idea in general, and one moving part is a non starter.

The starter is an electrical switch as already explained above. But I will repeat and explain in more detail.

That is what I was thinking. Above the tunnel section there would be a box of hand grenades that are designed to be electronically triggered by a signal. Besides this, there is a piston pushes them down through a hole and another one that pushes the next one into position. The sideways piston just pushes the whole line of grenades one by one like a conveyor belt of death. The downward piston should give the thing a good whack just for good measure to send it flying into the room at a fair speed gravity or no gravity.


(Naturally with a much bigger magazine. The red dot is the igniter.)

Emphasis mine

The idea is that you have a simple safety mechanism consisting of a switch (probably a mechanical one that completes a circuit). When the grenade passes over the little red box on the image, if power is on the electric circuit between the bomb and the power outlet (red box) completes and the trigger mechanism is armed. If the power is off than the thing would be pushed unactivated out of the box.

You need some kind of physical safety to block the action to be remotely safe, plus and this is not complicated of course, the ability to put a physical safety pin in the system.

Well, even without what I explained above the system would be 100% safe. If you go only by the text posted by me before this reply you still have an electric ignition system located in the place that when the system is not firing is plugged up by the piston body. The only way the grenade can be armed is if it connects with said circuit, something that given the aforementioned blockage would be impossible.

Also the grenade has to safe/arm somehow.

Mentioned above. An electric fuse.

Even with all that , who in the crew wants to be stationed in such a compartment?

There would be no crew there. During battle or any sort of boarding or similar conditions all crew are supposed to be at their battle stations deep inside the ship. And no, there would not be any moving around. No damage control or anything like that. This is becouse my starships are in essence very small submarine like shells buried inside kilometers of armor and shields with remote controlled guns attached on the outside. During battle the crew stays in the safest places on the ship, the center and runs the ship via remote control.

And even if not, IFF detection equipment and cameras would make sure that this does not hit the wrong person.

Seems like money is better spent arming and training the crew to fight back then making sure the automatic live grenade deployment system is working safely 100% of the time, all the time, and still works safely after the ship takes damage in combat.

Well as described above you need a really bad failing to mess up such a simple mechanical system and power the electrical ignition switch. And the way my ships are constructed. If your internal hallways are having problems with battle damage it's time to abandon ship since everything else around them is gone.

[quot]Just install firing ports in key bulkhead doors and call it a day. If you have no crew to fight back, the enemy is going to take the ship one way or another. At that point blow a magazine and destroy the thing.[/quote]
The crew bunches up in their self contained battle stations to guard them. The security systems handle the several kilometers of hallways going between them. It and the combat drones.

[Simon_Jester]

There would be no crew there. During battle or any sort of boarding or similar conditions all crew are supposed to be at their battle stations deep inside the ship. And no, there would not be any moving around. No damage control or anything like that. This is becouse my starships are in essence very small submarine like shells buried inside kilometers of armor and shields with remote controlled guns attached on the outside. During battle the crew stays in the safest places on the ship, the center and runs the ship via remote control.

What happens when the control runs start going out because of shock damage from hits on the surface?

[Sea Skimmer]

Mentioned above. An electric fuse.

So if the system cycles its always going to go off is what it looks like. That's not really a safety.

There would be no crew there. During battle or any sort of boarding or similar conditions all crew are supposed to be at their battle stations deep inside the ship. And no, there would not be any moving around. No damage control or anything like that. This is becouse my starships are in essence very small submarine like shells buried inside kilometers of armor and shields with remote controlled guns attached on the outside. During battle the crew stays in the safest places on the ship, the center and runs the ship via remote control.

Submarines still have damage control, and generally.. the idea of a huge ship with none is very questionable. Anyway the main point was not during battle, when certain risks might be accepted... but all the rest of the time. What makes a crewmen in the space certain he can not be killed while scraping paint?

And even if not, IFF detection equipment and cameras would make sure that this does not hit the wrong person.

Very optimistic but whatever. At that point I don't see why you wouldn't put in a gun turret, it'd be more complicated but also a lot more effective and able to function while friendly forces are present.

Well as described above you need a really bad failing to mess up such a simple mechanical system and power the electrical ignition switch. And the way my ships are constructed. If your internal hallways are having problems with battle damage it's time to abandon ship since everything else around them is gone.

What do you expect to happen if borders come on-board, they leave everything intact? The only time this system would be relevant would be when you're already heavily damaged and have people tearing the ship apart from the inside out.

The crew bunches up in their self contained battle stations to guard them. The security systems handle the several kilometers of hallways going between them. It and the combat drones.

If the ship is that big nobody will ever both taking it compartment by compartment through the normal hatches ect... they'll rip through the decks with explosives until they reach the bulkheads outside of those small crew spaces you have, and then blow them up. If you have reliable combat drones then I'd just buy as many of those as possible since they are mobile and can go back into damaged areas to keep fighting. The idea that several kilometer long control cable runs will still work without damage control crews and with so much damage the enemy is able to board... well that doesn't sound right to me but write whatever you want.

[Shroom Man 777]

Just send tanks to board the ship.

[Sea Skimmer]

Just send tanks to board the ship.

I pretty much had in mind some kind of assault cannon, it may not really have much of a vehicle attached, that fires a shell into the next compartment to be seized, blowing up its interior, then men with linear shaped charges blow out a section of bulkhead around the shell hole. The assault force then enters and secures the compartment and moves on towards the objective. Nobody is going to use light infantry room clearing tactics to go through kilometers of starship which seems to be the only thing this grenade system would have any value against.

[Shroom Man 777]

If it's low-gravity, it could be some kind of recoilless gun wrapped around some hovering/jumpjet thing, and you can have astronaut soldiers around it holding it and jumping/hopping forward. Like a moon-walking heavy weapons team!

The moon buggy weaponized into a space FAV!

And those things in Armageddon, those weirdo gatling gun-armed asteroid vehicles, they finally make sense!

[Purple]

There would be no crew there. During battle or any sort of boarding or similar conditions all crew are supposed to be at their battle stations deep inside the ship. And no, there would not be any moving around. No damage control or anything like that. This is becouse my starships are in essence very small submarine like shells buried inside kilometers of armor and shields with remote controlled guns attached on the outside. During battle the crew stays in the safest places on the ship, the center and runs the ship via remote control.

What happens when the control runs start going out because of shock damage from hits on the surface?

I have talked about this in more detail in my armor thread some months back. In essence, the armor is a composite design made to absorb heat, radiation and shortwaves thus ensuring that the internal components are not effected until the armor is actually breached. And if that happens, than the time has come to abandon ship.

Submarines still have damage control, and generally.. the idea of a huge ship with none is very questionable.

That is becouse there really is not much you can do. All the combat related systems are on the surface, often several kilometers away from the core of the ship. If your turret gets hit it's getting blown off and there is nothing the crew can do about it. And as said above, the living quarters and battle stations are generally too well protected. The only thing you could reasonably run damage control on is if some part of the ship just decides to malfunction on it's own.

Anyway the main point was not during battle, when certain risks might be accepted... but all the rest of the time. What makes a crewmen in the space certain he can not be killed while scraping paint?

The fact that the system would be manually activated from the security room. You know, just like gun turrets if I had them. If the master switch is off the pistons stay pushed down and the system is inert. As I said before, closed piston is the default state of the system.

Very optimistic but whatever. At that point I don't see why you wouldn't put in a gun turret, it'd be more complicated but also a lot more effective and able to function while friendly forces are present.

A gun turret can be blown up, targeted and othervised damaged. It takes many times more man hours to maintain and reload.

What do you expect to happen if borders come on-board, they leave everything intact? The only time this system would be relevant would be when you're already heavily damaged and have people tearing the ship apart from the inside out.

Actually, I was planing to use it in case prisoners escape or someone tries to board my ship when it's docked at a shipyard or station. In combat boarding is so unlikely that it should not even be considered unless the enemy has some sort of teleportation technology. And they don't.

If the ship is that big nobody will ever both taking it compartment by compartment through the normal hatches ect... they'll rip through the decks with explosives until they reach the bulkheads outside of those small crew spaces you have, and then blow them up.

That is why (as described back in the armor thread) my compartments would not be floating in empty space. And there would be relatively few decks to speak off. Instead, all the critical components are distributed through the ship like a maze and immersed in armor from all sides with the only entry point being the tunnel system. So if you want to blow your path to any of them through the ship be my guest. Just remember to bring enough capital ship grade main gun projectiles to do the job.

You can't think of my design as a what you would expect from a trek or wars ship. Instead, think of it as a solid block of armor with the tunnels and compartments drilled into it. (That's not how I actually build it but for combat approximation it will do)

If you have reliable combat drones then I'd just buy as many of those as possible since they are mobile and can go back into damaged areas to keep fighting. The idea that several kilometer long control cable runs will still work without damage control crews and with so much damage the enemy is able to board... well that doesn't sound right to me but write whatever you want.

Good point there thou. I will just spam combat drones that I can rely on to move around the ship to where ever I want. The grenade launchers will only go into the prison cells redesigned as food dispensers.

[Simon_Jester]

There would be no crew there. During battle or any sort of boarding or similar conditions all crew are supposed to be at their battle stations deep inside the ship. And no, there would not be any moving around. No damage control or anything like that. This is becouse my starships are in essence very small submarine like shells buried inside kilometers of armor and shields with remote controlled guns attached on the outside. During battle the crew stays in the safest places on the ship, the center and runs the ship via remote control.

What happens when the control runs start going out because of shock damage from hits on the surface?

I have talked about this in more detail in my armor thread some months back. In essence, the armor is a composite design made to absorb heat, radiation and shortwaves thus ensuring that the internal components are not effected until the armor is actually breached. And if that happens, than the time has come to abandon ship.

Which, of course, you won't be able to do because the surface of the ship (through which any escape must pass) is in ruins.

The fundamental problem, though, is the idea that no active damage control is needed to deal with large automated systems- this is simply not the case. Long control runs are more likely to be damaged and in need of repairs than short, local-control systems, not less likely.

That is becouse there really is not much you can do. All the combat related systems are on the surface, often several kilometers away from the core of the ship. If your turret gets hit it's getting blown off and there is nothing the crew can do about it. And as said above, the living quarters and battle stations are generally too well protected. The only thing you could reasonably run damage control on is if some part of the ship just decides to malfunction on it's own.

Which it will do, because that's how machinery works...

Put simply, this ship is so comically vulnerable to situations that leave the crew trapped and helpless inside a multi-billion ton steel coffin, powerless to affect their surroundings because nothing aboard the ship is repairable, reachable, or capable of operating on local control... what's the point? The ship will be unable to continue fighting long before it's destroyed outright, at which point it becomes easy prey for the victors.

It's not really worth the effort of ensuring that after the enemy has fired X rounds to mission-kill your ship, he'd need to fire another 100X rounds to kill the crew... because if nothing else, he can just set up a shuttle-bus system of ammunition tenders to keep hauling in more rounds until he's fired off those 100X rounds and made your ship dead, dead, dead. At which point you've expended a vast amount of resources making this ship 'invincible' only to have it mission-killed for a trivial fraction of its total cost, and then battered into dust during the mop-up phase of the battle.

[Purple]

Which, of course, you won't be able to do because the surface of the ship (through which any escape must pass) is in ruins.

The core of the ship is the escape pod. The FTL system is in the center of the ship and if it is mission killed the ship has the duty to escape the battle and save it's crew.

The fundamental problem, though, is the idea that no active damage control is needed to deal with large automated systems- this is simply not the case. Long control runs are more likely to be damaged and in need of repairs than short, local-control systems, not less likely.

But short local control systems put the crew at a greater risk. A ship can be built again and again but the crew is unique. A skilled crew is worth more than a million ships. It's better to simply have many redundant connections and have as much of it as it can be computerized (turrets that automatically aim and fire etc.) than to risk loosing crew.

I am also going for very high automation. For example gunnery on my ships looks much more like that on a missile cruiser than what you would see on a battleship. The crew designates a general set of target ships and the computers take over from there. You won't see manually aimed canons and things like that.

Which it will do, because that's how machinery works...

Even under those conditions. How often do you expect that will happen in the heat of battle. The tunnels are there so that you can do maintenance. But repairs should be done after the battle. After all, how to hell do you expect to do repairs under fire? This is not an age of sail warship where you can just roll another canon into place and plug leaks with cork. If a 10 meter in diameter L50 barrel is blown up with its respective turret how do you expect to repair that? And for anything smaller like wiring you can do it with robots and redundant systems.

And yes, if the remote controlled maintenance machines fail, all the redundant systems fail and everything goes to hell you will see people eventually going out to do manual damage control. That is why the tunnel are there for. But that king of occurrence would be far fetched to happen. And if this becomes widespread around the ship, at that point the ship should really be thinking of retreating anyway.

The ship will be unable to continue fighting long before it's destroyed outright, at which point it becomes easy prey for the victors.

That is exactly the point. My ship takes no longer to mission kill than it's rivals but it takes way more time to truly kill. As such, even if I lose the battle I can retreat (see 1st reply way up) and if I win my losses in terms of crew are minimal.

It's not really worth the effort of ensuring that after the enemy has fired X rounds to mission-kill your ship, he'd need to fire another 100X rounds to kill the crew... because if nothing else, he can just set up a shuttle-bus system of ammunition tenders to keep hauling in more rounds until he's fired off those 100X rounds and made your ship dead, dead, dead. At which point you've expended a vast amount of resources making this ship 'invincible' only to have it mission-killed for a trivial fraction of its total cost, and then battered into dust during the mop-up phase of the battle.

Even if the initial X is more than is needed to kill his ships completely?

The best way to approximate this would be images from the battle of Jutland. The British battle cruisers blew up like firecrackers. The Germans got mauled and completely unable to rebuild but managed to limp back to port and save their crews. Both ships took equal time and effort to disable, but that extra protection gave the Germans a chance to limp home. That is the thing I am aiming at here.

[Simon_Jester]

But short local control systems put the crew at a greater risk. A ship can be built again and again but the crew is unique. A skilled crew is worth more than a million ships.

...Why, is your entire civilization collectively sterile and incapable of teaching anyone to do anything ever?

I mean, the sheer opportunity cost of building one of these ships is going to be insane- the things you could do with the resources are staggering. You could build housing for millions of people, or provide advanced technical training for at least thousands, at those costs- no matter how insane your economy is.

What sane nation would regard that cost as tiny compared to the cost of re-training the crew? Especially if all the complicated jobs are done by machinery anyway, so that the crew's skill level and training requirements are reduced?

Which it will do, because that's how machinery works...

Even under those conditions. How often do you expect that will happen in the heat of battle.

Pretty fucking often- machinery fails more when it's getting shot at, not less.

The tunnels are there so that you can do maintenance. But repairs should be done after the battle. After all, how to hell do you expect to do repairs under fire? This is not an age of sail warship where you can just roll another canon into place and plug leaks with cork. If a 10 meter in diameter L50 barrel is blown up with its respective turret how do you expect to repair that? And for anything smaller like wiring you can do it with robots and redundant systems.

Why do you even put human beings on these ships, anyway? If the IFF is so good they always know who the enemy is, and the onboard AI is capable of maintaining, fixing, and fighting on its own with minimal guidance from humans (who are locked in a steel coffin several kilometers from the fighting anyway)... what's the point?

The ship will be unable to continue fighting long before it's destroyed outright, at which point it becomes easy prey for the victors.

That is exactly the point. My ship takes no longer to mission kill than it's rivals but it takes way more time to truly kill. As such, even if I lose the battle I can retreat (see 1st reply way up) and if I win my losses in terms of crew are minimal.

If the enemy is building two, or three, or four times as many ships that take the same amount of time and firepower to disable... they're gonna win. A lot. Because they will outnumber and outgun you, and all you gain is that your ships survive losing more battles while being pushed back and sent to the repair yards every time they fight on account of their surface features have been blown to bits.

The best way to approximate this would be images from the battle of Jutland. The British battle cruisers blew up like firecrackers. The Germans got mauled and completely unable to rebuild but managed to limp back to port and save their crews. Both ships took equal time and effort to disable, but that extra protection gave the Germans a chance to limp home. That is the thing I am aiming at here.

You will also note that Jutland was a colossal defeat for the German Navy and they never stuck their necks out of Wilhelmshaven again, being effectively neutered for the rest of the war...

Look, the fundamental problem here is that you're expending an insane amount of tonnage on this protection scheme. If it takes X shots fired at one of your ships to defeat it, but 100X to kill it, whereas one of my ships, at half* the cost but equal firepower, take X shots fired at it to defeat but 'only' 10X to kill...

All else being equal, I can afford twice as many ships as you. Say you have 10 ships; I have 20.

My fleet shows up and fires 2X shots in the time it takes you to fire X shots, because I have twice as many ships. I disable two of your flying bricks, you disable one of my battleships. Your bricks run away, my battleship runs away. Now I have 19 ships to your 8. We repeat the process several times; when the smoke clears, five of my ships (out of 20) are in drydock for repairs, while ten of your ships (out of ten) are in drydock. I am free to do as I please in the area we are fighting over, and to move forward and repeat the process.

Your ships spend proportionately more of the time in drydock, your military gets demoralized from being outnumbered and beaten up all the time even if none of them are dying, and ultimately, all your super-invulnerable core hulls get you is that I have the devil's own time cutting them up for scrap metal after the peace treaty is dictated in your capital star system on account of all your ships being in drydock for repairs, while half of my fleet is still mobile to do things like attack the drydocks.

The situation gets even more exaggerated if building a ship 10% as durable as one of your bricks costs me, say, 20% of what one of your bricks costs. At that point, my fleets outnumber you so badly that it stops mattering if you manage to kill a few of them, because I can stampede over you anyway.
__________

*A very conservative estimate, I'd say, given how exaggerated your defensive scheme is.

[Sea Skimmer]

The best way to approximate this would be images from the battle of Jutland. The British battle cruisers blew up like firecrackers. The Germans got mauled and completely unable to rebuild but managed to limp back to port and save their crews. Both ships took equal time and effort to disable, but that extra protection gave the Germans a chance to limp home. That is the thing I am aiming at here.

Bad armor had nothing much to do with the loss of British ships at Jutland, that was completely a matter of poor ammunition handling. Orders were made to overload handling spaces and turrets with ammunition prior to the battle to speed up rates of fire. The British then covered this act of incompetence up by claiming they had insufficient deck armor... when in fact no deck nor any belt armor thicker then 7in was known to have been pierced. That makes German belts as thick as 12in rather pointless doesn't it? Its telling that no British battlecruiser had a boiler or engine room hit and yet the those rooms are much bigger targets then the magazines. Meanwhile the only heavy ship lost from being overwhelmed by hits as opposed to a magazine explosion was German, Lutzow. This is not to say armor is a bad idea, but the fact is many British ships came home with many heavy hits and did just fine.

Your ship design ideas sound like they'd be near impossible to repair even in normal conditions with everything buried and scattered throughout kilometers of armor with access deliberately denied. If the enemy destroys the gun positions on the surface and the engines which have to be exposed, what does it really matter that the core of the ship is intact? The enemy will find a way to destroy you one way or another while you can't destroy the enemy. The Germans ran away from Jutland and could get home in one night, the same is unlikely to be true in space. In the end the point of a warship is to move weapons to attack the enemy; armor is just to protect its ability to do so. You want a highly unbalanced ship, that usually doesn't work out well.

The fact that the system would be manually activated from the security room. You know, just like gun turrets if I had them. If the master switch is off the pistons stay pushed down and the system is inert. As I said before, closed piston is the default state of the system.

So the system is always armed and ready, just not firing. That isn't a safety but I have no more time to waste on this.