Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
ElQuirko
Jester Syndicate S0UTHERN C0MF0RT
1314
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 15:58:00 -
[61] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Do you have any idea how much power is contained in a 425mm antimatter slug fired out of railgun?
None, rails are awful. Save the Domi model! Spacewhales should be preserved. |
BoBoZoBo
Divine Beasts Nite's Reign
225
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:11:00 -
[62] - Quote
I agree - When compared to current systems - EVE ships should be (much) faster, have bigger guns AND have MUCH longer ranges. Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite |
Xen Solarus
Inner 5phere
422
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:18:00 -
[63] - Quote
We're talking about internet spaceships. Very serious business! My addition to this rather pointless thread, is that a single EvE-Battleship turret would likely completely annihilate the ships the OP listed, in a single shot. We're talking future technology here people. No need for a ship covered in masses of small-scale barrels. The spaceships of the future can do far more with far less. Post with your main, like a BOSS! |
Aria Mataan
Four Pillar Production Headshot Gaming
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:32:00 -
[64] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:Jarod Garamonde wrote:Notice how every time anyone, anywhere in the world, wants to give an example of a mighty battleship, they invoke the name of the USS Missouri. Guns are so 1940s... modern warships are basically Caldari. All missiles and ECM.
With its fondness for drones and it's rail gun technology that's almost finished being developed I think the U.S. Navy is more like Gallente.
U.S. Navy Railgun Test |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1813
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:41:00 -
[65] - Quote
Jarod Garamonde wrote:Notice how every time anyone, anywhere in the world, wants to give an example of a mighty battleship, they invoke the name of the USS Missouri.
I'm not one of those "Mericuh! F**k yeah!" kind of Americans.... but recognize that this nation of mutts I call home, built the single most destructive conventional weapon in the history of mankind.... :)
Can I haz your stuff when you move to Cunuckistan?!?!?!
|
Alara IonStorm
5028
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:41:00 -
[66] - Quote
Hahahahahahahaha!
That was hilarious. I like the part about how they showed all the modern weapons designed around destroying ships that are not Battleships than pretty much stating that nothing can sink them.
Then they pointed to the Battle of Samar where 1 Escort Carrier was sunk by a surface fire and 1 actually sunk by a Kamikaze. Note that the Escort Carrier is not a fleet unit but built on a merchant ship hull, all the planes were armed with ground attack ordnance not anti ship, all six Escort Carriers weighed less than Yamoto alone, the only reason they were able to get so close to the fleet was because a colossal failure in intelligence combined with a diversion that cost four Japanese Carriers and the US won the Battle with the fleet 1/5 the size using convoy escorts. As for the HMS Glorious that was entirely their fault for not spotting them with I don't know their entire Airwing which was not flying at the time, the invention of Radar of course makes scenario unlikely to happen again.
Does the person who made this think a Carrier today or any armed missile ship will ever be within 30 km of a Battleship. No they will instead launch like 900 missiles from 100km+ away. They will never be in range of the enemy fleet unless they are using Missiles then what the hell are they wasting all that room for guns on?
|
baltec1
Bat Country
6391
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:43:00 -
[67] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:baltec1 wrote:Do you have any idea how much power is contained in a 425mm antimatter slug fired out of railgun? None, rails are awful.
250 mile range, hypersonic projectiles that travel so fast they turn the air around them into a plasma. Due to be fitted onto the next gen destroyers.
Antimatter. 250 grams of antimatter is as powerful as a 10 MT hydrogen bomb. A 425mm slug is along the lines of a railway sleeper.
My megathron could literally glass Americas 7 largest cities once every 4-5 seconds. Hell, I might be able to glass entire counties in a single volly... |
Adela Talvanen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:53:00 -
[68] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Hahahahahahahaha! That was hilarious. I like the part about how they showed all the modern weapons designed around destroying ships that are not Battleships than pretty much stating that nothing can sink them. Then they pointed to the Battle of Samar where 1 Escort Carrier was sunk by a surface fire and 1 actually sunk by a Kamikaze. Note that the Escort Carrier is not a fleet unit but built on a merchant ship hull, all the planes were armed with ground attack ordnance not anti ship, all six Escort Carriers weighed less than Yamoto alone, the only reason they were able to get so close to the fleet was because a colossal failure in intelligence combined with a diversion that cost four Japanese Carriers and the US won the Battle with the fleet 1/5 the size using convoy escorts. As for the HMS Glorious that was entirely their fault for not spotting them with I don't know their entire Airwing which was not flying at the time, the invention of Radar of course makes scenario unlikely to happen again. Does the person who made this think a Carrier today or any armed missile ship will ever be within 30 km of a Battleship. No they will instead launch like 900 missiles from 100km+ away. They will never be in range of the enemy fleet unless they are using Missiles then what the hell are they wasting all that room for guns on?
If you think that is funny, you should watch what he does with the M1A2, Bradley and Stryker.
If you are an American it's your tax $ paying for it all. |
Aria Mataan
Four Pillar Production Headshot Gaming
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 16:59:00 -
[69] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Hahahahahahahaha! That was hilarious. I like the part about how they showed all the modern weapons designed around destroying ships that are not Battleships than pretty much stating that nothing can sink them. Then they pointed to the Battle of Samar where 1 Escort Carrier was sunk by a surface fire and 1 actually sunk by a Kamikaze. Note that the Escort Carrier is not a fleet unit but built on a merchant ship hull, all the planes were armed with ground attack ordnance not anti ship, all six Escort Carriers weighed less than Yamoto alone, the only reason they were able to get so close to the fleet was because a colossal failure in intelligence combined with a diversion that cost four Japanese Carriers and the US won the Battle with the fleet 1/5 the size using convoy escorts. As for the HMS Glorious that was entirely their fault for not spotting them with I don't know their entire Airwing which was not flying at the time, the invention of Radar of course makes scenario unlikely to happen again. Does the person who made this think a Carrier today or any armed missile ship will ever be within 30 km of a Battleship. No they will instead launch like 900 missiles from 100km+ away. They will never be in range of the enemy fleet unless they are using Missiles then what the hell are they wasting all that room for guns on?
Railguns are going to seriously change the game once they are brought into active use (See the video I posted above) as they'll have just as good of range as missiles with the benefit of having projectiles that are extremely faster, a fraction of the cost, and unable to be shot out of the sky like aircraft or missiles can be |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
14264
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 17:07:00 -
[70] - Quote
Adela Talvanen wrote:Sometimes thou 'arm chair generals' are more knowledgeable about things then the real thing. GÇ£SometimesGÇ¥ Gëá GÇ£this timeGÇ¥, and especially Gëá GÇ£any time you involve real constraintsGÇ¥. This one forgets the lessons the Romans learned: gutta cavat lapidem, non vi sed s+ªpe cadendo.
Given how (relatively) easy it has been shown to be to get a mission kill on an entire carrier group, which offers every piece of versatility and survivability in the book, a Battleship on the modern battlefield would just be a bigger target. When in doubt, more dakka GÇö it solves every problem.
And anyway, if we're going to talk about GÇ£they should build it because it would be totally cool and unbeatableGÇ¥, nothing beats ye olde orbital kinetic-kill re-entry vehicle. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
|
Alara IonStorm
5028
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 17:34:00 -
[71] - Quote
Aria Mataan wrote: Railguns are going to seriously change the game once they are brought into active use (See the video I posted above) as they'll have just as good of range as missiles with the benefit of having projectiles that are extremely faster, a fraction of the cost, and unable to be shot out of the sky like aircraft or missiles can be
Which means ships of undetermined type with guns may one day at an undetermined might some day come back after a 50 year absence. Unless of course they build giant Railguns on shore with ICBM range or Rail Planes or Satellites completely obsolete that, or lasers. I doubt it would be heavily armored since this new super weapon is so powerful so it would be a Battlecruiser not a Battleship.
That really doesn't create the "myth of the battleship", just mean guns may come back on warships as offensive weapons. If they want to call that ship a battleship like they were planning for the defunct arsenal ship I am fine with that.
Adela Talvanen wrote:M1A2, Bradley
Watched one. He compared it to a later built Bradley clone built after the Bradley's were all built made by allies that had all the information on it with horribly inflated production costs. The Bradley is up for replacement now that it is 20 years old BTW. Not really worried about the slightly better here or there category. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
14265
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 17:54:00 -
[72] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Aria Mataan wrote: Railguns are going to seriously change the game once they are brought into active use (See the video I posted above) as they'll have just as good of range as missiles with the benefit of having projectiles that are extremely faster, a fraction of the cost, and unable to be shot out of the sky like aircraft or missiles can be
Which means ships of undetermined type with guns may one day at an undetermined might some day come back after a 50 year absence. Unless of course they build giant Railguns on shore with ICBM range or Rail Planes or Satellites completely obsolete that, or lasers. I doubt it would be heavily armored since this new super weapon is so powerful so it would be a Battlecruiser not a Battleship. That really doesn't create the "myth of the battleship", just mean guns may come back on warships as offensive weapons. The problem with railguns will still be the same as for all unguided munition: hitting over the horizon. Then there's the problem of damage degradation over longer ranges. Now for swatting annoying flies out of the sky, on the other handGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.-á |
Mia Restolo
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
98
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 18:20:00 -
[73] - Quote
No space battleship discussion can be had without the mighty Yamato!
Looks like it has point defense against frigates. |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
391
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 18:29:00 -
[74] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:Aria Mataan wrote: Railguns are going to seriously change the game once they are brought into active use (See the video I posted above) as they'll have just as good of range as missiles with the benefit of having projectiles that are extremely faster, a fraction of the cost, and unable to be shot out of the sky like aircraft or missiles can be
Which means ships of undetermined type with guns may one day at an undetermined might some day come back after a 50 year absence. Unless of course they build giant Railguns on shore with ICBM range or Rail Planes or Satellites completely obsolete that, or lasers. I doubt it would be heavily armored since this new super weapon is so powerful so it would be a Battlecruiser not a Battleship. That really doesn't create the "myth of the battleship", just mean guns may come back on warships as offensive weapons. The problem with railguns will still be the same as for all unguided munition: hitting over the horizon. Then there's the problem of damage degradation over longer ranges. Now for swatting annoying flies out of the sky, on the other handGǪ
IMO, the real question will be how to power those weapons for sustained fire. We are talking about a metric ass ton of electricity released every single shot and you need to resupply the system. The ship will definately need to be nuclear for that I guess. |
baltec1
Bat Country
6399
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 18:36:00 -
[75] - Quote
Mia Restolo wrote:No space battleship discussion can be had without the mighty Yamato! Looks like it has point defense against frigates.
Yes, yust yes. |
Radius Prime
Tax Evading Ass.
58
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 18:39:00 -
[76] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Akirei Scytale wrote: It was probably the most influential battleship ever constructed, as it caused the freaking Royal Navy to panic.
Most influential probably has to go to the Merrimack and Monitor. The Battle of Hampton Roads made every warship prior obsolete.
Not quite although Americans like to think that.
CSS Virginia and USS Monitor were riverboats, both far from ocean worthy. They did not render the ocean going wooden ships obsolete. That honor goes to the French Gloire and even more so to HMS Warrior. The first true ocean going iron hulled ship that combined armor, a screw propellor and a steam engine. It was also twice the length of any other warship at the time. Warrior could sail through any fleet of the time unscathed and rendered all navies, including its own almighty British navy obsolete.
Both Gloire and Warrior predated the American ships but the first actual fight between ironclads happened at Hampton Roads. Reopen the EVE gate so we can invade Serenity. Goons can go first. |
Adela Talvanen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 18:50:00 -
[77] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Aria Mataan wrote: Railguns are going to seriously change the game once they are brought into active use (See the video I posted above) as they'll have just as good of range as missiles with the benefit of having projectiles that are extremely faster, a fraction of the cost, and unable to be shot out of the sky like aircraft or missiles can be
Which means ships of undetermined type with guns may one day at an undetermined might some day come back after a 50 year absence. Unless of course they build giant Railguns on shore with ICBM range or Rail Planes or Satellites completely obsolete that, or lasers. I doubt it would be heavily armored since this new super weapon is so powerful so it would be a Battlecruiser not a Battleship. That really doesn't create the "myth of the battleship", just mean guns may come back on warships as offensive weapons. If they want to call that ship a battleship like they were planning for the defunct arsenal ship I am fine with that. Adela Talvanen wrote:M1A2, Bradley
Watched one. He compared it to a later built Bradley clone built after the Bradley's were all built made by allies that had all the information on it with horribly inflated production costs. The Bradley is up for replacement now that it is 20 years old BTW. Not really worried about the slightly better here or there category.
As I said it's your tax $ paying for it all. |
Radius Prime
Tax Evading Ass.
58
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 18:59:00 -
[78] - Quote
Akirei Scytale wrote:Radius Prime wrote:Akirei Scytale wrote:Jarod Garamonde wrote:Notice how every time anyone, anywhere in the world, wants to give n example of a mighty battleship, they invoke the name of the USS Missouri.
I'm not one of those "Mericuh! F**k yeah!" kind of Americans.... but recognize that this nation of mutts I call home, built the single most destructive conventional weapon in the history of mankind.... :) Honestly, if you want an example of a top-of-the-line real-world battleship, you name the Yamato, Musashi or Bismarck. Bismarck was smaller then the Missouri, smaller guns, armor and boat.. and if it wasn't for the weakness of the British Hood it would have gone down as silent as its sister Tirpitz... The reason it was a major battleship is that it was revolutionary at the time of its construction, had a very solid combat record, and was very, very influential in its theatre of war. It was probably the most influential battleship ever constructed, as it caused the freaking Royal Navy to panic.
Again, its battle record shows the weakness of HMS Hood, which was a product of a different way of naval thinking, namely speed tanking. This way of thinking lead to battle cruisers like Hood which lacked deck armor in favor of speed but proved utterly useless in actual battle during both the great wars. The Hood was the pride and joy of the budget cut British Navy and in all their excitement they forgot it wouldn't match up to a true battleship. The admiralty made a fatal flaw ever pitting that ship against a battleship.
As far as construction goes, there was nothing revolutionary about the Bismarck. For a battleship its size it wasn't especially better armored nor was it fitted with extraordinary guns. The American Iowa class was superior to Bismarck in every field that matters. What provoked the press about Bismarck is that its very construction was in breach with the Treaty of Washington that limited battleship sizes at the time (it also ended British rule over the seas as 4/5 of the British BS fleet was destroyed in accordance with the treaty). In all honesty Germans weren't supposed to built battleships at all. This lead to a whole breed of German "supercruisers" miniature battleships built under Adolf ****** before Bismarck.
If you want to understand why the big fuzz about a ship. At the time battleships were seen as the ultimate weapons of war and destruction similar to how we see weapons of mass destruction today. So breaking the treaty was like North Korea building Nukes and led to a lot of diplomatic pressure.
Anyway, could discuss the subject for hours and left out a lot. Your view needs slight adjustment but I am not trying to belittle the Bismarck. It was by all measurement one of the greatest BS ever constructed and deserves its place in history. Reopen the EVE gate so we can invade Serenity. Goons can go first. |
Alara IonStorm
5028
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:11:00 -
[79] - Quote
Adela Talvanen wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:Not really worried about the slightly better here or there category. As I said it's your tax $ paying for it all. Who said I'm from the US? Besides that is this like a new revelation you are trying to share with the world because you might be surprised to know that every army is in fact funded by tax's. In fact it is common knowledge. |
baltec1
Bat Country
6403
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:15:00 -
[80] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Adela Talvanen wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:Not really worried about the slightly better here or there category. As I said it's your tax $ paying for it all. Who said I'm from the US? Besides that is this like a new revelation you are trying to share with the world because you might be surprised to know that every army is in fact funded by tax's. In fact it is common knowledge.
Thats debatable for the uk at times |
|
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
392
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:18:00 -
[81] - Quote
In case you don't have enough AA guns, the Japanese also had beehives shells just in case. |
Alara IonStorm
5029
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:24:00 -
[82] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Thats debatable for the uk at times You had such a beautiful war machine.
It could be worse. Canada is the second largest country in the world and we have about 90 F/A 18's to defend our boarder. Navy is in similar shape. I am pretty sure the yanks haven't conquered us yet because think they already did at some point and forget we're still a nation.
Can you loan us a couple of Eurofighters or somethin. |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
392
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:27:00 -
[83] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:baltec1 Thats debatable for the uk at times[:ugh: wrote: You had such a beautiful war machine. It could be worse. Canada is the second largest country in the world and we have about 90 F/A 18's to defend our boarder. Navy is in similar shape. I am pretty sure the yanks haven't conquered us yet because think they already did at some point and forget we're still a nation. Can you loan us a couple of Eurofighters or somethin.
But we are totally overpayin' for some kickin' new F35. Delivered next century or something...
The brits also sold us some fire hazardous submarine so I'd rather not buy from europe. |
Alara IonStorm
5029
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:35:00 -
[84] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: But we are totally overpayin' for some kickin' new F35. Delivered next century or something...
The brits also sold us some fire hazardous submarine so I'd rather not buy from europe.
CBC said that they were just testing the toaster oven on high.
I hope we get those F-35's before our Hornets become the new Seakings. You know what, I hope we give up, just spend our military cash on more healthcare or something.
We'll just be America's medic when war breaks out.
US Soldier: Ah I'm hit! Canadian Medic: Where does it hurt? US Soldier: .....Nothing big. I'll duct tape it later. Canadian Medic: I'm Canai.. US Soldier: Left Arm, it's in my Left Arm and it's burning! |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
392
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:38:00 -
[85] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote: But we are totally overpayin' for some kickin' new F35. Delivered next century or something...
The brits also sold us some fire hazardous submarine so I'd rather not buy from europe.
CBC said that they were just testing the toaster oven on high. I hope we get those F-35's before our Hornets become the new Seakings. You know what, I hope we give up, just spend our military cash on more healthcare or something. We'll just be America's medic when war breaks out. US Soldier: Ah I'm hit! Canadian Medic: Where does it hurt? US Soldier: .....Nothing big. I'll duct tape it later. Canadian Medic: I'm Canai.. US Soldier: Left Arm, it's in my Left Arm and it's burning!
I just hope no one lose thier wings in mid air now... |
Kult Altol
Biohazard.
251
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:44:00 -
[86] - Quote
Why do these discussion always turn into America vs the world *sigh*
The op was just illustrating that RL BS are bristling with guns and it would be cool to have the same kind of COMPRABLE fire power. An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded. A narrow mind is a focused mind.
|
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
392
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 19:48:00 -
[87] - Quote
Kult Altol wrote:Why do these discussion always turn into America vs the world *sigh*
The op was just illustrating that RL BS are bristling with guns and it would be cool to have the same kind of COMPRABLE fire power.
It would not be interesting it would be broken. Battleship are countered by small ship. It's meant to be that way. |
Adela Talvanen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 20:08:00 -
[88] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Adela Talvanen wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:Not really worried about the slightly better here or there category. As I said it's your tax $ paying for it all. Who said I'm from the US? Besides that is this like a new revelation you are trying to share with the world because you might be surprised to know that every army is in fact funded by tax's. In fact it is common knowledge.
I guess you miss read the bit that said "If you are an American".
True all things spent on by governments are from tax's if they haven't borrowed the money from the banks.
Canada is just as profligate with its defense funding, thou not in the same league as America. |
baltec1
Bat Country
6405
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 20:16:00 -
[89] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: But we are totally overpayin' for some kickin' new F35. Delivered next century or something...
The brits also sold us some fire hazardous submarine so I'd rather not buy from europe.
It was working fine before you took it from port. |
Throktar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 20:17:00 -
[90] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:baltec1 wrote:Thats debatable for the uk at times You had such a beautiful war machine. It could be worse. Canada is the second largest country in the world and we have about 90 F/A 18's to defend our boarder. Navy is in similar shape. I am pretty sure the yanks haven't conquered us yet because think they already did at some point and forget we're still a nation. Can you loan us a couple of Eurofighters or somethin.
Canada has great ground forces and that all you need really. America would protect Canada all day and night from an invasion, and we have all the big tools. Canadian troops are quite seasoned after ten+ years of fighting terrorists. As an American from the midwest I can tell you that we love Canada for all the support. It is one of the few countries in the world I would pay to go to lol .
Back to the original subject kind of...Game balance will never allow for true ships to be made. The most "realistic" version of void warfare I can think of would come from the Warhammer Universe. Gigantic slabs of metal housing tens even hundreds of thousands of humans doing battle from hundreds of thousands of km away all the way to point blank fighting. Those ships are basically nothing but guns on top of guns, with 300m long torpedoes and thousands of fighter escorts. Just more the grittiness of of for me I guess.
Cool Vids DoW2 ending And the best one imo :) |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |