Independence War calc request

[Hotfoot]

I'll have to dig around the INA forums when they're back up, but as I recall the PBCs worked on a similar principle to Turbolasers in that there is a magnetic bottling of the plasma or somesuch.

Don't say that too loudly. Dr. Saxton might hear.

He can take it up with the Particle Systems crew, if he'd like, I'm going by memory, and I could be wrong. I'd need to do a search of the archives to be sure, and they're down/

Anyway, it raises the question of how they could keey the field strength up after the bolt has been shot. The bolt itself could not sustain a magnetic field to keep the bolt "bottled up."

They don't, it would seem. That's why the damage of a PBC drops 50% every 0.35 seconds after having been fired. So at 0.75 seconds, it's only at 25% the original strength. It's strongest at 2.1 km or so, slightly more if you put more power into weapons. At about 10 km, the damage is terrible. You can't do significant damage to a Patcom or Corvette until at least 8km. If anything, the field acts to keep it from leaking out too quickly, or something to that effect.

[Durandal]

He can take it up with the Particle Systems crew, if he'd like, I'm going by memory, and I could be wrong. I'd need to do a search of the archives to be sure, and they're down/

I was referring to turbolasers. Saxton hates the idea that they're plasma.

They don't, it would seem. That's why the damage of a PBC drops 50% every 0.35 seconds after having been fired. So at 0.75 seconds, it's only at 25% the original strength. It's strongest at 2.1 km or so, slightly more if you put more power into weapons. At about 10 km, the damage is terrible. You can't do significant damage to a Patcom or Corvette until at least 8km. If anything, the field acts to keep it from leaking out too quickly, or something to that effect.

That's what a containment field would be for, yes, but where is it coming from? Magnetic fields don't just sustain themselves unless you've got charged particles. The only charged particles in the bolt are the ones escaping from the plasma.

[Hotfoot]

He can take it up with the Particle Systems crew, if he'd like, I'm going by memory, and I could be wrong. I'd need to do a search of the archives to be sure, and they're down/

I was referring to turbolasers. Saxton hates the idea that they're plasma.

Eh. I might have a few wires crossed today, but that's how I'm remembering them. No, scratch that, I do have a few wires crossed today. Who's Saxton again?

They don't, it would seem. That's why the damage of a PBC drops 50% every 0.35 seconds after having been fired. So at 0.75 seconds, it's only at 25% the original strength. It's strongest at 2.1 km or so, slightly more if you put more power into weapons. At about 10 km, the damage is terrible. You can't do significant damage to a Patcom or Corvette until at least 8km. If anything, the field acts to keep it from leaking out too quickly, or something to that effect.

That's what a containment field would be for, yes, but where is it coming from? Magnetic fields don't just sustain themselves unless you've got charged particles. The only charged particles in the bolt are the ones escaping from the plasma.

Eh, again, beyond my ability to recall for the time being. However, according to the I-War Manual (which I happen to have in a handy PDF format):

The particle charge is neutralised at the cannon emitter point.
The discharge delivers a heavy bolt of high-energy particles,
capable of delivering a blast which can cut through vessel hulls
and vaporise smaller ships.

[Admiral Valdemar]

http://ina-community.com/forums/forumdi ... orumid=137

Try there, they even had a schematic thread for the CNV-301 Dreadnaught going.

The original game reactors were to be teraWatts but they scaled them down a bit, however the plasma weapons are based on their own capacitors so the power output of the collider ring doesn't make it the power output for weapons (in the engineering screen some weapons barely get a few megaWatts power).

[Hotfoot]

http://ina-community.com/forums/forumdi ... orumid=137

Try there, they even had a schematic thread for the CNV-301 Dreadnaught going.

A-hem

I'll have to dig around the INA forums when they're back up

Thank you for letting me know that they're back up, however.

The original game reactors were to be teraWatts but they scaled them down a bit, however the plasma weapons are based on their own capacitors so the power output of the collider ring doesn't make it the power output for weapons (in the engineering screen some weapons barely get a few megaWatts power).

Again, the Engineering Screen in I-War 2 is an extremely unreliable source of information. Better to use the data from the dev team or the manual from the first games.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

We know through high-velocity collisions with asteroids and the use of neutronium in the hull that Trek weapons would be worthless against the Dreadnought, but I'm trying to figure out whether a PBC should take several hits to batter down a GCS' shields or whether it should be capable of basically blasting a hole in one side of the ship that comes out the other.

[Hotfoot]

Damnedest thing. When I reply, I can see Arthur Tuxedo's post, but not when normally viewing the thread. Weird...

Anyway, as far as drawing data from gameplay, I'm extraordinarily hesitant to do so. The asteroids in I-War 1 would break apart at the slightest touch sometimes it would seem, while the asteroids in I-War 2 are far more resiliant. Also, I've never actually seen the composition of the ship hulls mentioned anywhere in I-War. Neutronium is used as part of the power generation process. To quote the I-War 1 manual again:

Accelerated particles then pass into the reactor chamber where
they impact on the reaction surface: spongiform neutronium. The
fusion takes place within the pits within the reaction surface. The
released plasma is at a temperature of 12,000,000K.
The process yields two usable energy sources in the form of
high-energy plasma and electrical energy.
The plasma is channelled into the plasma grids to provide thruster
propulsion.
The electrical reaction direct current flow of over 1 million amps
at 1000 V providing power to drive the ring action method - as well
as maintenance of life support and active plasma containment.

Now, it's possible that I-War ships have neutronium-laced armored hull plating, but I don't recall anything that suggested such a thing. Maybe when the dev team has a free moment, I can ask them (they're rather busy working on a few new games now).

The way I always figured it was that if you took McDuff's "5 Terrawatt" value for the energy that the target recieves, then Star Trek doesn't stand a chance, as they are supposed to (IIRC) have shields that can take energy in the Gigawatt range. Even if we're generous and give them 999 GW, that's still going to lose to an incoming attack of 5 TW. Also, seeing as how even a lowly Puffin-Class tug can mount a PBC, that means that Edison Hayes' tug from the intro to I-War: Defiance would be able to take down a GCS with ease. The name of the tug? The Red Shirt.

[Durandal]

Hm ... 1000 V seems a bit low.

[Hotfoot]

Hm ... 1000 V seems a bit low.

Well, there's the problem. Some of the things in the game don't make a whole lot of sense. Dreadnaught-class Corvettes are supposed to have 6G forward acceleration, according to the manual, but in both games, it's at least three times that in practice. Hard to tell from the movies and cutscenes though.

There was supposed to be an extended universe on their official website, where they would flesh out the universe, the story, and the tech for the fans, but they wound up just not having the time to do so between projects, unfortunately.

Basically, somewhere between the fluff and the game, there's the truth. That's currently what I'm working on in the Epic/Elite Mod for I-War 2, rebalancing the game somewhat. Making it more of a capital ship combat simulator like I-War 1 was trying to be (and did a stellar job at, I should add). Trying to figure out just how many shots it would take with cannon X to destroy ship Y seems simple, but there are a number of other variables to take into account.

But I digress. Another (relatively) good source of information is the in-game encyclopedia in I-War 2. Don't think you'll find nearly as much useful tidbits as the I-War 1 manual, but it's worth a shot.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

You're still working on the Elite mod? I'll have to re-install EoC sometime and check it out. Great work on it, btw. Haven't seen it in a long time, but what I did see rocked.

P.S. Not to blow my own horn, but speaking of mods, I'm still rather proud of my Spartacus mod for I-War 2. I think captured the feel of the original game really well.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Oh btw, we now have some rough PBC estimates, but what about the other weapon systems? Gatling cannon, seekers, remote missile , and maybe the XL PBC just for fun . And energy limit and recharge rate of LDAs would be nice to know too.

[Hotfoot]

You're still working on the Elite mod? I'll have to re-install EoC sometime and check it out. Great work on it, btw. Haven't seen it in a long time, but what I did see rocked.

Yeah...there's some major changes in the works. Have a lot more on my queue before I'm willing to release it under 0.5 in good faith. It's going to actually slow down combat quite a bit. Previous versions were too focused on bringing the AI to the level of the player, rather than bringing the player down to the level of the AI. Now I think I've got a fairly decent middle ground to work from, but weapons balance (among a few other things) is proving to be a real bear.

P.S. Not to blow my own horn, but speaking of mods, I'm still rather proud of my Spartacus mod for I-War 2. I think captured the feel of the original game really well.

Spartacus Mod...holy hannah! Qlippoth? It's been a while man. How are things?

[Hotfoot]

Oh btw, we now have some rough PBC estimates, but what about the other weapon systems? Gatling cannon, seekers, remote missile , and maybe the XL PBC just for fun . And energy limit and recharge rate of LDAs would be nice to know too.

Gatling Cannon:
As normal PBC, but x5 ROF, roughly. I think. Gonna have to dredge through my notes to get anything more than that.

Seekers:
Microfusion, according to the I-War 1 manual. No yeild given. Can assume that they're not tremendously better than chemical warheads because of the harrower/seeker comparisons.

REM Missile:
Heavy Fusion, according to the I-War 1 manual. I'd put it on the scale of a tacnuke.

Recharge rate of LDAs? Navy or Assault?

Navy:
drain per hit-230
tank-1500
regen per second-220

Assault
drain per hit-270
tank-1500
regen per second-260

With TRI shields, regen increases by an additional 50%.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Yeah...there's some major changes in the works. Have a lot more on my queue before I'm willing to release it under 0.5 in good faith. It's going to actually slow down combat quite a bit. Previous versions were too focused on bringing the AI to the level of the player, rather than bringing the player down to the level of the AI. Now I think I've got a fairly decent middle ground to work from, but weapons balance (among a few other things) is proving to be a real bear.

Awesome, I'll check it out after finals are over.

Spartacus Mod...holy hannah! Qlippoth? It's been a while man. How are things?

Hehe, good guess. My mod was based off of his. What I did was change the weapon, acceleration, shielding, etc. values to bring them in-line with the first game. It really changes how I play I-War 2 back to how I played Defiance, namely using external view for combat, which is only feasible with 150 degree firing arcs like the Dreadnought and Spartacus. It didn't take nearly as much work as I'm sure Qlippoth's mod did, and I thanked and credited him profusely, but I'm proud of how close to Defiance the mod made I-War 2 feel. AFAIK, it's still hosted on Nanoprobe's site.

[Hotfoot]

Awesome, I'll check it out after finals are over.

Probably won't be ready until then anyway. I'll let you know though.

Hehe, good guess. My mod was based off of his. What I did was change the weapon, acceleration, shielding, etc. values to bring them in-line with the first game. It really changes how I play I-War 2 back to how I played Defiance, namely using external view for combat, which is only feasible with 150 degree firing arcs like the Dreadnought and Spartacus.

I remember F3 having 180 degree fire arc PBCs. I have fond memories of trying to get the fore and aft PBCs to ride the middle line to become "double" PBCs.

It didn't take nearly as much work as I'm sure Qlippoth's mod did, and I thanked and credited him profusely, but I'm proud of how close to Defiance the mod made I-War 2 feel. AFAIK, it's still hosted on Nanoprobe's site.

Ouch, unfortunately, Nanoprobe's site went down a while ago. I'd suggest giving SoupDragon a ring over at www.i-war2.com so he can host it.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Gatling Cannon:
As normal PBC, but x5 ROF, roughly. I think. Gonna have to dredge through my notes to get anything more than that.

Sounds about right.

Seekers:
Microfusion, according to the I-War 1 manual. No yeild given. Can assume that they're not tremendously better than chemical warheads because of the harrower/seeker comparisons.

According to Saxton's site, 100 kilotons is the least powerful a fusion warhead can be made, so maybe "microfusion" is just a buzzword. If I had to guess, I'd say seekers are propably fission missiles on the order of a few kilotons, based on their damage effects compared to PBCs.

[/quote]REM Missile:
Heavy Fusion, according to the I-War 1 manual. I'd put it on the scale of a tacnuke.[/quote]
I'd put it much higher than that. I know of no tacnukes capable of shattering 180 m long corvettes that are 5 km away. Someone like Wong or Marina O' Leary would know for sure, but I'd estimate a ~5-8 km blast radius fusion warhead to be at 5 to 10 megatons.

Recharge rate of LDAs? Navy or Assault?

Navy:
drain per hit-230
tank-1500
regen per second-220

Assault
drain per hit-270
tank-1500
regen per second-260

Umm, Assault I guess, whichever the Dreadnought has.

With TRI shields, regen increases by an additional 50%.

Hmm, so that would put regen rate at ~10 GW, with total energy at ~35 GJ with Assault shields with TRI.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

I remember F3 having 180 degree fire arc PBCs. I have fond memories of trying to get the fore and aft PBCs to ride the middle line to become "double" PBCs.

You're right, it does, and it has 180 in my mod too. For some reason, I got to thinking it was 150 after I made the mod.

Ouch, unfortunately, Nanoprobe's site went down a while ago. I'd suggest giving SoupDragon a ring over at www.i-war2.com so he can host it.

It's hosted there too. Btw, it's called the Defiance mod, not the Spartacus mod. That's Qlippoth's. How could I have forgotten the name of my own damn mod?

Here's a link if you're interested. http://www.i-war2.com/downloads/Defiance.zip You'll probably be the first person who's played it

[Hotfoot]

Seekers:
Microfusion, according to the I-War 1 manual. No yeild given. Can assume that they're not tremendously better than chemical warheads because of the harrower/seeker comparisons.

According to Saxton's site, 100 kilotons is the least powerful a fusion warhead can be made, so maybe "microfusion" is just a buzzword. If I had to guess, I'd say seekers are propably fission missiles on the order of a few kilotons, based on their damage effects compared to PBCs.

Missiles, IIRC, packed a heck of a punch compared to PBCs. *shrugs*

REM Missile:
Heavy Fusion, according to the I-War 1 manual. I'd put it on the scale of a tacnuke.

I'd put it much higher than that. I know of no tacnukes capable of shattering 180 m long corvettes that are 5 km away. Someone like Wong or Marina O' Leary would know for sure, but I'd estimate a ~5-8 km blast radius fusion warhead to be at 5 to 10 megatons.

Hm, I remember them being able to take out formations of Patcoms, but Corvettes had to be pretty close to be taken out for certain, IIRC.

Recharge rate of LDAs? Navy or Assault?

Navy:
drain per hit-230
tank-1500
regen per second-220

Assault
drain per hit-270
tank-1500
regen per second-260

Umm, Assault I guess, whichever the Dreadnought has.

Navy then, I think. However, those are stats for I-War 2. I-War 1 stats elude me, for the time being.

With TRI shields, regen increases by an additional 50%.

Hmm, so that would put regen rate at ~10 GW, with total energy at ~35 GJ with Assault shields with TRI.

o_O 10GW? Dunno about that...frankly, all these numbers can do is give us a reasonable way to figure out performance, not power really. These are primarily in-game stats pulled from I-War 2, I'm afraid. Best I can do.

[Hotfoot]

You're right, it does, and it has 180 in my mod too. For some reason, I got to thinking it was 150 after I made the mod.

Happens to us all at times.

It's hosted there too. Btw, it's called the Defiance mod, not the Spartacus mod. That's Qlippoth's. How could I have forgotten the name of my own damn mod?

Ah-ha! That explains it then. I remember seeing that, now that you mention it. Of course, I didn't ever play the Spartacus mod either (kind of busy as it was, heh....)

Here's a link if you're interested. http://www.i-war2.com/downloads/Defiance.zip You'll probably be the first person who's played it

Thanks, but don't sell yourself short. Chances are that there are a fair number of people who played it. I wish I could get around to playing it now, but I'm way too busy with other things at the moment. Maybe during the break though.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Missiles, IIRC, packed a heck of a punch compared to PBCs. *shrugs*

Really? We're both talking about the first game, right? I coulda swore that a point blank PBC shot and a seeker both did about ~30-35% damage to a PatCom.

Hm, I remember them being able to take out formations of Patcoms, but Corvettes had to be pretty close to be taken out for certain, IIRC.

Yes, but a Corvette is about the size of a US Navy cruiser. I still contend only a megaton-yield weapon could smash a USN cruiser to pieces from a distance of 5km from the blast yield and thermal effects alone (obviously there's no shockwave, tidal waves, etc. in space), and a USN is just plain-old steel.

o_O 10GW? Dunno about that...frankly, all these numbers can do is give us a reasonable way to figure out performance, not power really. These are primarily in-game stats pulled from I-War 2, I'm afraid. Best I can do.

Performance is good enough, I suppose, although it would be interesting to get some kind of decisive picture of what I-War can really do.

[Hotfoot]

Missiles, IIRC, packed a heck of a punch compared to PBCs. *shrugs*

Really? We're both talking about the first game, right? I coulda swore that a point blank PBC shot and a seeker both did about ~30-35% damage to a PatCom.[/b]

If the missile gets through the LDAs, they usually pack more of a punch, IIRC. Now, Full TRI Weapons + antimatter overload at point blank range might get you similar results to a missile, but I don't think you could normally.

Hm, I remember them being able to take out formations of Patcoms, but Corvettes had to be pretty close to be taken out for certain, IIRC.

Yes, but a Corvette is about the size of a US Navy cruiser. I still contend only a megaton-yield weapon could smash a USN cruiser to pieces from a distance of 5km from the blast yield and thermal effects alone (obviously there's no shockwave, tidal waves, etc. in space), and a USN is just plain-old steel.

Point. Also, however, take in mind the effect on cruisers and destroyers.

o_O 10GW? Dunno about that...frankly, all these numbers can do is give us a reasonable way to figure out performance, not power really. These are primarily in-game stats pulled from I-War 2, I'm afraid. Best I can do.

Performance is good enough, I suppose, although it would be interesting to get some kind of decisive picture of what I-War can really do.

Indeed. Antimatter's a good bet, but only sometimes, as it has that nasty "anything inside blast radius dies" effect...which is what made that easter egg Voyager such a tremendous pain in that Voyager vs. Dreadnaught mission.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

If the missile gets through the LDAs, they usually pack more of a punch, IIRC. Now, Full TRI Weapons + antimatter overload at point blank range might get you similar results to a missile, but I don't think you could normally.

You're probably right. It's been too damn long since I've played.

Point. Also, however, take in mind the effect on cruisers and destroyers.

1 Remote missile won't do the job against a destroyer, will it? I can't remember. Anyway, I would expect a ship of that size and tech-level to be able to take multi-megaton hits.

Indeed. Antimatter's a good bet, but only sometimes, as it has that nasty "anything inside blast radius dies" effect...which is what made that easter egg Voyager such a tremendous pain in that Voyager vs. Dreadnaught mission.

Voyager vs. Dreadnought mission? Which game was that from, and how do you get to it?

[Hotfoot]

If the missile gets through the LDAs, they usually pack more of a punch, IIRC. Now, Full TRI Weapons + antimatter overload at point blank range might get you similar results to a missile, but I don't think you could normally.

You're probably right. It's been too damn long since I've played.

Point. Also, however, take in mind the effect on cruisers and destroyers.

1 Remote missile won't do the job against a destroyer, will it? I can't remember. Anyway, I would expect a ship of that size and tech-level to be able to take multi-megaton hits.

No, it's something like 2 for a destroyer, and 4 or more for a cruiser, IIRC.

Indeed. Antimatter's a good bet, but only sometimes, as it has that nasty "anything inside blast radius dies" effect...which is what made that easter egg Voyager such a tremendous pain in that Voyager vs. Dreadnaught mission.

Voyager vs. Dreadnought mission? Which game was that from, and how do you get to it?

The original Independence War, actually. The model and texture were already in the game, and I think it was PS that made a special mission where you could fight it (or at the very least they did the 3Dfx port of it). The ship wasn't so bad, but when you killed it, it went boom. Big time.

[ClaysGhost]

Energy loss through radiation would be significant at 12 million K, and the weapon would rapidly become ineffective (well before the 2-4 km effective range from the game). The I-War universe (as far as I know from the first game) has no magic that will stop this radiation being emitted.

I'll have to dig around the INA forums when they're back up, but as I recall the PBCs worked on a similar principle to Turbolasers in that there is a magnetic bottling of the plasma or somesuch.

Magnetic fields do not prevent the plasma radiating, which loses you most of the energy rapidly.

There's a scene in the intro movie during which it's stated that an Indie PatCom's (smaller than a corvette) cannon is rated at 1TW, so I guess this implies that the energy is released at the target in 1/1000 of a second.

Nitpick: The PBC on the Indie Patcom Indecent Proposal was rated as a 5 Terrawatt cannon, according to the dialogue supplied by Quartermaster McDuff

Yes, I need to watch the movie again, obviously T

[ClaysGhost]

Eh, again, beyond my ability to recall for the time being. However, according to the I-War Manual (which I happen to have in a handy PDF format):

The particle charge is neutralised at the cannon emitter point.
The discharge delivers a heavy bolt of high-energy particles,
capable of delivering a blast which can cut through vessel hulls
and vaporise smaller ships.

Then the bolt isn't plasma at all, and radiation loss and bolt expansion shouldn't be significant over I-War ranges. Most of the bolt's energy will be mechanical rather than thermal, which is good since it's better to have a bunch of particles going in almost the same direction than it is to have a mainly thermal spread of velocities.