Hard Light Productions Forums

Hosted Projects - FS2 Required => Blue Planet => Topic started by: Liberator on July 04, 2011, 03:01:50 pm

Title: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on July 04, 2011, 03:01:50 pm
The Node Thread in General Freespace made me ask this question to which no one over there answered:

Why is the Durga a sufficient threat to "almost" single-handedly prevent the GTVA from deploying significant forces directly to Earth?  BP's own Tech Description says that production has been kept artificially low by the council.  So this suggests less than 100 of them.  How exactly is this a threat to BP era GTVA destroyers and they're escorts given that GTVA anti-small craft capability roasts pretty much everything that gets within it's envelope within 20 seconds.  Between fighter screens and specialized escorts, the Durga's wouldn't even get close.  Unless they have Plot armor, which would make me cry foul very loudly.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on July 04, 2011, 03:06:38 pm
Slammers rape the almighty **** out of GTVA Strike Craft.
Durgas have Redeemer cannons that have high range.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2011, 03:08:19 pm
A couple Durgas are easily capable of killing a corvette in a few seconds. Those things aren't dicking about.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 04, 2011, 03:10:21 pm
given that GTVA anti-small craft capability roasts pretty much everything that gets within it's envelope within 20 seconds.
That's pretty much the description of the UEF point defenses here, not Tev's. The Tev defenses were designed to shoot down bombs and face multiple sucky Shivan crafts, not a handful of highly advanced fleet bombers.

Between fighter screens and specialized escorts, the Durga's wouldn't even get close.
Fighter screen ? What fighter screen ? Oh, you mean the slowass fighters easily dispatched by a few Kents ?

Jokes aside, BP canon clearly states that the UEF fighter corps is significantly superior to the Tev one. Mainly because, as stated above, it was designed to fight multiple, sucky Shivan fighters instead of few, elite pilots flying very high-tech crafts.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2011, 03:11:49 pm
Also the Vajra. When it does appear it'll probably kill **** quick. For now though the stats can't really be said to be indicative of what it's capable of.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on July 04, 2011, 03:15:16 pm
Wait, so the Durga has an Anti-capital CANNON?!?!??!??  On a fighter.  In a faction that can't manage to figure out beam cannons.

You'll forgive me if I sit over here in the corner and giggle at the inconsistency.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 04, 2011, 03:18:42 pm
... wait what.

Where's the inconsistency, please ?

Oh, and also :
In a faction that can't manage to figure out beam cannons.
You mean, in a faction that, despite the fact it never needed to have any sort of meaningful battle fleet, built the equivalent of five whole Tev battlegroups, and proved a match for the GTVA might for 18 months, despite that beam tech that seems to important to you.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 04, 2011, 03:19:30 pm
UEF fighters and bombers will just **** tev's fleet in no time that's why.

This is also the reason why TEV's strategy is one of beamrape + fly away as fast as possible, or, like, tricking you into thinking you have some destroyer cornered and then subspaceemerge-over-your-ass-n-beamrape your frigates with another destroyer.

Think of this war more like a tricky game of Judu. If you go too deep, your ass will be wiped to the floor.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on July 04, 2011, 03:22:02 pm
The Archer is an anti-subsystem slug cannon.
The Redeemer (I think the Vajra too) is an anti-matter hull breaking slug cannon.
Forgot what the UX Accelerator was, but Kentaurois can use them.

It's not like they use energy reserves, they are limited to ammunition magazines, so in that regard they're not so much advanced as they are simple but effective.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 04, 2011, 03:24:40 pm
You're also coming over here and starting a debate about the Durga, while not knowing its basic stats like the weapons it's wielding ? You'll forgive me if I sit over here in the corner and giggle at the inconsistency.

Contrary to the Boanerges or even the Ursa, the Durga is a survivable heavy bomber. It will survive in situations where full squadrons of Tev bombers would have been destroyed a few hours earlier, and it will get the job done nevertheless.

Not to mention that, contrary to the Tevs, the Feds can and will afford a fighter escort for their bombers, instead of throwing them away. Like Simms says in a cut sequence :
Quote
Almost feel sorry for the poor bastards, don't you? A third the training their fighter pilots get, glorified warhead buses to fly without even a turret to give 'em cover, and half the time their escorts get pulled.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2011, 03:26:20 pm
I want my Sidhe
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: The E on July 04, 2011, 03:26:28 pm
The Durga is a very real threat to Corvette-class ships, because its primary armament alone is capable of severely damaging one, and its shields are heavy enough to withstand a couple minutes worth of AA fire. 2 or three Durgas can destroy a Cv in less than a minute, and they can severely damage a DD if covered appropriately. They are even somewhat credible dogfighters, to make up for the lack of rear-mounted turrets.

Wait, so the Durga has an Anti-capital CANNON?!?!??!??  On a fighter.  In a faction that can't manage to figure out beam cannons.

You'll forgive me if I sit over here in the corner and giggle at the inconsistency.

There is no inconsistency. The Redeemer cannon is one more application of the UEF's expertise in antimatter handling and materials science. As with ship-mounted gauss cannons and rail guns, the UEF was able to develop this technology further than the GTVA because they didn't have much choice.

The Archer is an anti-subsystem slug cannon.
The Redeemer (I think the Vajra too) is an anti-matter hull breaking slug cannon.
Forgot what the UX Accelerator was, but Kentaurois can use them.

Correct for the Archer and Redeemer. The Vajra has been remodelled to be a rapid-fire anti-cruiser gun (but given that the Vajradahara can carry Redeemers in one of its other primary banks, this is not as great a drawback as you might think). The UX Accelerator is what amounts to a fighter-mounted sniper rifle.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2011, 03:27:52 pm
Would it be correct to say the Redeemer is similar to the Maxim in terms of operation?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: The E on July 04, 2011, 03:29:07 pm
Yeah, it's a good analogue. Although I think the Redeemer is a bit more effective.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2011, 03:30:37 pm
The Gattler is also similar but not nearly as good, I guess...
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on July 04, 2011, 03:42:43 pm
Correct for the Archer and Redeemer. The Vajra has been remodelled to be a rapid-fire anti-cruiser gun (but given that the Vajradahara can carry Redeemers in one of its other primary banks, this is not as great a drawback as you might think). The UX Accelerator is what amounts to a fighter-mounted sniper rifle.
Ah so it's being changed then.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on July 04, 2011, 04:13:29 pm
Ok, I'll buy that they can do the deed.  But it still strikes me as falacious that a hull plate that can withstand sustained direct plasma fire for several seconds is going to be devastated by the energy discharge from a anti-matter explosion.

Also, how would you provide a player piloting such a "broken"(yeah I said it) ship a competent challenge since multiple team members have stated that it's deliberately a)nigh-on impossible to kill and b)packs a game breaking wallop from it's primary armament.

I mean once upon a time, someone said that BP wasn't going to go the route of other campaign/mods and retain the destroyer as something to be feared.  But with the Durga, it seems you guys are drifting a bit, actually screw it, you guys are firmly into the MOAR! AND BIGGAR! EXPLOSIONS! AND GUNS! arms race at a scale that is that almost Lensman is scale.  I really expected better, but I guess I shouldn't have.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 04, 2011, 04:19:31 pm
But it still strikes me as falacious that a hull plate that can withstand sustained direct plasma fire for several seconds is going to be devastated by the energy discharge from a anti-matter explosion.

EDIT: On second thought, I'll replace the flamebait I posted here with something no more productive, but at the very least less insulting. Namely:

ANTIMATTER IS SERIOUS ****ING BUSINESS
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on July 04, 2011, 04:25:43 pm
Ok, I'll buy that they can do the deed.  But it still strikes me as falacious that a hull plate that can withstand sustained direct plasma fire for several seconds is going to be devastated by the energy discharge from a anti-matter explosion.

Also, how would you provide a player piloting such a "broken"(yeah I said it) ship a competent challenge since multiple team members have stated that it's deliberately a)nigh-on impossible to kill and b)packs a game breaking wallop from it's primary armament.

I mean once upon a time, someone said that BP wasn't going to go the route of other campaign/mods and retain the destroyer as something to be feared.  But with the Durga, it seems you guys are drifting a bit, actually screw it, you guys are firmly into the MOAR! AND BIGGAR! EXPLOSIONS! AND GUNS! arms race at a scale that is that almost Lensman is scale.  I really expected better, but I guess I shouldn't have.
Because last I messed around with Durgas, Redeemer fire alone still does very little damage to Destroyers, and as said before they're actually defended unlike GTVA bomber wings so they will be more difficult to take down. Then there's the Vajradhara, which given what it's supposed to do you'll likely only see it in what, a single mission maybe as an act of desparation?
Durgas in R1 appeared in one, two missions? They're not thrown around in droves like the Artemis, but used sparingly when deemed necessary.

Also, if they're so game-breaking they would've ganked the Serkr Team effortlessly, which they failed to do.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Spoon on July 04, 2011, 04:40:01 pm
I want my Sidhe
Don't worry, you will
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on July 04, 2011, 05:03:46 pm
But it still strikes me as falacious that a hull plate that can withstand sustained direct plasma fire for several seconds is going to be devastated by the energy discharge from a anti-matter explosion.

EDIT: On second thought, I'll replace the flamebait I posted here with something no more productive, but at the very least less insulting. Namely:

ANTIMATTER IS SERIOUS ****ING BUSINESS
It is, but just like nukes, the vast majority of the destruction you are thinking of is related to the medium it's being reacted in.  Also, if it's being deployed off a small craft, then the amount per shot has to be something that said small craft can withstand at ranges from maximum attainable to those verging on the suicidal.  Given that restriction, it shouldn't be any more destructive than, say, a Helios(also an anti-matter warhead) or a Shivan Megabomb.

All I'm saying is this, there's more than a little fanboy going on with the Durga.  I'm just trying to keep you honest.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2011, 05:19:05 pm
Well you'll just have to trust the team to do a good job.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Destiny on July 04, 2011, 05:20:21 pm
I sympathize with you Liberator, I do. All this super-bomber stuff just doesn't work when you factor everything in. I'm past the stage trying to prove my point :P


I thought the UX Accelerator was the three-burst weapon...? Never heard of it being described as a 'sniper rifle' by any players when I asked them in the somewhat previous BPMulti testing.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2011, 05:23:33 pm
You'll just have to trust that the team is capable of pulling it off. You're completely ignoring the fact that this discussion has probably already taken place on BP internal. Believe it or not the people behind WiH and AoA are actually capable of thinking.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Destiny on July 04, 2011, 05:29:15 pm
Naturally, if not WiH2 wouldn't be coming out anytime. The Durga does have some firepower it can boast about, to be honest. Twelve gunpoints, all three banks loaded with Gattlers is pretty deadly.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kolgena on July 04, 2011, 05:32:46 pm
It could just be the case that the BP tech descriptions are very in-universe: that is, they're written by the UEF, for UEF pilots. If they want to throw in some feel-good propaganda about the Durga, they might, and yield up this as the result.

Also, in R1, I think the Durgas showed up twice.
Spoiler:
Once when Serkr team first shows up and promptly leave before the Durgas can really do much, and second when you order them in using FLEETNET. I think they were the 5 point option or something. Two show up, and they down a corvette pretty easily if you give them a little fighter cover.

I dunno. I felt they were pretty effective, though probably by no means game breaking.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: The E on July 04, 2011, 06:47:42 pm
I thought the UX Accelerator was the three-burst weapon...? Never heard of it being described as a 'sniper rifle' by any players when I asked them in the somewhat previous BPMulti testing.

The UX is a high-speed, long-range, low ROF, high damage weapon. Sniper rifle is an apt description.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 04, 2011, 06:51:58 pm
And the Sidhe is like a shotgun which you shove in people's faces before pulling the trigger
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kosh on July 04, 2011, 11:59:44 pm
Quote
I sympathize with you Liberator, I do. All this super-bomber stuff just doesn't work when you factor everything in. I'm past the stage trying to prove my point :P


According to BP canon the awesomeness of the UEF's fighters and bombers are one of the few things keeping them going. As I recall reading the techroom description about Severanti's initial push into Neptune, they were able to turn the UEF's Karuna's and Naranya's into flaming wreckage quite handely with beam fire but had to turn back because the UEF fighter and bomber 1337ness.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 10:23:21 am
What is more interesting to know is the end result of the war, with a  combined force between the best beamraper technologies and the best fighter / bomber support UEF can bring to the battle against the Shivans.

This symbiosis will be undoubtedly the focus of that second BP war, which is an obvious continuation of the freespace tradition of starting a campaign with a war between similar contestants only for them to be harrassed and blown away by the relentlessness of the Shivans, forcing them to team up against the lovecraftians.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 05, 2011, 10:28:46 am
That would require the Shivans to pop up directly in Sol. The UEF can't operate at any meaningful scale outside Sol.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 10:39:40 am
In my theory, Cappella exploded to create a jump node to sol. Creating jump nodes is time consuming. So it will take the whatever n years that span between FS2 and BP WiH R2 or R3.

They will appear out of nothing near the sun, and rollercoaster Mercury and Venus, until a combination of Serk teams, Karunas and UEF bombers put a stop to the armada.

Oh yeah, and to make things easier, they will be swamped by a sun flare, damaging the majority of sathanas so the victory remains believable.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 05, 2011, 10:48:58 am
That would require the Shivans to pop up directly in Sol. The UEF can't operate at any meaningful scale outside Sol.

UEF strikecraft could probably operate off GTVA warships.

If BP3 goes this way, Simms needs to be stationed on the Imperieuse. You know, for the lulz.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 11:20:54 am
UEF strikecraft could probably operate off GTVA warships.

If BP3 goes this way, Simms needs to be stationed on the Imperieuse. You know, for the lulz.
And UEF warships can be supplied by GTVA logistics.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 05, 2011, 11:38:58 am
That's more debatable because we don't know if any UEF warships have intersystem jump capability (although there are compelling reasons that at least some of them should).
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 11:41:11 am
Don't we see them jumping in and out throughout the game?

DAMN THAT WAS ZZTUPID :banghead:
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Colonol Dekker on July 05, 2011, 12:23:38 pm
Durga Durga jihad?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 05, 2011, 12:45:15 pm
I should FRED a coop mission involving the Durga. So people can understand its true power.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 05, 2011, 12:56:51 pm
Durgas vs. Colossus
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 12:58:43 pm
Durgas vs. Colossus
Colossus would win. Decent AA turrets and tons of fighters.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 12:59:36 pm
Sure? Even if there are two, not one, Durgas around?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 01:00:16 pm
Sure? Even if there are two, not one, Durgas around?
Uh, yes. Obviously.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 05, 2011, 01:01:37 pm
AA turrets won't help against reedeemah. Fighters won't help against fighter escort.

All in all, the Collie is nothing but a big watergun-shaped target. Which is why the Tev never thought about building another after the first one failed.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 01:04:22 pm
AA turrets won't help against reedeemah. Fighters won't help against fighter escort.

All in all, the Collie is nothing but a big watergun-shaped target. Which is why the Tev never thought about building another after the first one failed.
The Colossus has lots of turrets, which would likely be well armored in the BP verse, and extremely tough. It'd likely have Ter pulses all over, replacing the old blobs, not to mention it has 60 fighter and bomber wings, which would take a lot of UEF fighters to chew through.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 01:05:43 pm
Come on I was being sarcastic. Any comparison like "durgas vs Collossus" is extremely annoying for its complete lack of proportion.

The question isn't if the Durgas are capable of taking down collossus, the question should be, how many Durgas are required to take down the Collossus.

And if the equalizer is the cost involved, then I'm sure Durgas would win out, given the sheer investment on the juggernaught.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 05, 2011, 01:13:57 pm
Durgas vs. pirate's (sic)?

(http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/8880/bloomab.jpg)
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 05, 2011, 01:17:56 pm
How many Durgas to send in?

All of them.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: StarSlayer on July 05, 2011, 01:23:19 pm
Durga has eight arms full of weapons and she rides a celestial tiger...

she will mess your battlefleet up.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 01:23:26 pm
Come on someone punch up a Colly and 20 durgas and see who wins out. I'm bettin' on the DDDDDDDDDDdds.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on July 05, 2011, 01:56:15 pm
How many fighters does the Collie get to have?  Does it get Alpha 1?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 02:04:17 pm
Damn good question. It all hingez on A1.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 05, 2011, 02:07:10 pm
A1 is on the other side. Flying Durga.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 05, 2011, 02:07:56 pm
Well let's be honest,

Laporte > Alpha 1
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 05, 2011, 02:11:16 pm
Well let's be honest,

Laporte > Alpha 1

I think age of aquarius is a pretty cool guy. eh destroys shivan beams and doesnt afraid of anything.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 02:12:10 pm
Unless Alpha 1 IS THE COLLOSSUS
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 05, 2011, 02:12:52 pm
Well let's be honest,

Laporte > Alpha 1
In soviet UEF...

Laporte IS Alpha 1...
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 02:13:41 pm
A1 is on the other side. Flying Durga.
trollolol, no. Neither side would get a player.

Let's break it down. The Colossus is said to have '60 fighter and bomber wings', which could mean a total of the two, or it has both 60 wings of fighters and 60 wings of bombers.

If it's the former, that could mean anywhere from 30 more more wings of fighters, and each wing being four (which seems to be the normal for wings) which would be a ****load of fighters. Especially since the Colossus, due to its nature, would likely have more fighters.

If it's the latter, that's still a ****ing ton of fighters. Either way, you'd need maaaaaaany UEF fighters to actually kill them all.

The Colossus wouldn't have the same armor/turret HP/armor as in FS2. If we scale it as the Carthage was, it'd have an almost impenetrable amount of health. Not to mention the texturing on the retail model suggested it was rushed to the front lines, as it has tons of girders out in the open, which would be structurally compromising. The second would would likely see total completion, and would likely be slightly different, with better materials or construction all around, learning from the mistakes of the first model.

There's also the factor of the jump drive. No sane commander would just sit there if they can't win.

There'd likely be slightly upgraded anti fighter armaments as well, at least terpulses replacing the blobs.

Bottom line: Even if the Colossus can't reach the bombers/fighters itself, it has a **** ton of fighters to swarm them with. You'd need to commit a huge amount of bombers and fighters, the fighters to protect the bombers, and the bombers to actually punch through the colossus' hull. Generally, this way probably wouldn't be worth it.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 05, 2011, 02:16:29 pm
The Colossus wouldn't have the same armor/turret HP/armor as in FS2. If we scale it as the Carthage was, it'd have an almost impenetrable amount of health.
*cough*

That was plot armor.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 05, 2011, 02:17:31 pm
that could mean anywhere from 30 more more wings of fighters, and each wing being four (which seems to be the normal for wings) which would be a ****load of fighters. Especially since the Colossus, due to its nature, would likely have more fighters.

If it's the latter, that's still a ****ing ton of fighters. Either way, you'd need maaaaaaany UEF fighters to actually kill them all.
We should count how many fighters we kill in DE. IIRC, that should be pretty close to something like 10-15 wings. How many fighters achieved that ? 2-3 wings ?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 02:18:29 pm
We should count how many fighters we kill in DE. IIRC, that should be pretty close to something like 10-15 wings. How many fighters achieved that ? 2-3 wings ?
Along side several frigates which have fairly good anti fighter defenses, and not all of those fighters are present at the same time, iirc.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 05, 2011, 02:26:25 pm
There's also the factor of the jump drive. No sane commander would just sit there if they can't win.
Aren't we talking about the Colossus here?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 02:27:07 pm
Ok, but if you are going to add 60 fighters to the colly, then it's only fair to add 60 fighter support for our Durgas, since the main proposition was durgas vs colly, not durgas vs colly and its entire squadrons.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 02:27:53 pm
There's also the factor of the jump drive. No sane commander would just sit there if they can't win.
Aren't we talking about the Colossus here?
Different commander. :P

Ok, but if you are going to add 60 fighters to the colly, then it's only fair to add 60 fighter support for our Durgas, since the main proposition was durgas vs colly, not durgas vs colly and its entire squadrons.
You can't have a capitalship versus another ship without factoring in the fighter support it can field, otherwise it's a stupid versus argument, since it'd be highly unrealistic for it to not have/use its fighter compliment.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 02:30:15 pm
And you can't have multiple bomber wings without factoring in the fighter and frigate / destroyer escort they'll likely have in its bombing run.

Hell, let's bring the whole fleets and smash them together.

Oh wait, we lost the whole point.

Quote
otherwise it's a stupid versus argument.

I've been sayin that from the beggining ;). It's still the quickest test you can make.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 02:32:13 pm
And you can't have multiple bomber wings without factoring in the fighter and frigate / destroyer escort they'll likely have in its bombing run.
Uh, that'd be suicide to commit that many of the UEF capitalships to that fight. They only have three destroyers, and if they engaged, even if they aren't killed by the Colossus, they'd be easy targets.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on July 05, 2011, 02:33:00 pm
Hades' right. If you're gonna simulate the potential of ships vs ships, you've got to take all the factors into account, including fighter complements.

Problem is, if we're incuding the Collie's fighter complement, we've got to add the fighter escort of the Durga, which in all logic, would comprise enough fighters to take care of the Collie's escort. So on the other hand, we've got to include the warship escort the Collie will surely have. With their own fighter escort.

And so on.

There is a point we have to stop that little game, or we're gonna simulate a large-scale war. Which isn't the point.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 02:35:11 pm
Hades is surely right, I was merely making a general point, without being specific.

Quote
And so on.

Hey I said that.

Quote
Which isn't the point.

HEEEEY
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Scotty on July 05, 2011, 03:04:16 pm
Hades' right. If you're gonna simulate the potential of ships vs ships, you've got to take all the factors into account, including fighter complements.

Problem is, if we're incuding the Collie's fighter complement, we've got to add the fighter escort of the Durga, which in all logic, would comprise enough fighters to take care of the Collie's escort.

The problem with this kind of pissing contest is that there is no cap to the number of Durgas (other than the hundred or so fluff cap) we can hypothetically sling at the Colosssus.  A hundred of ANY decent bomber would beat the **** out of ANY capital ship.  It's not exactly a ringing endorsement of the Durga's ability.

Neither is yelling "BUT THEY HAVE AN ESCORT" to argue away all of the Colossus's own fighter complement.

To be perfectly clear, there is no way to arrange this to the satisfaction of both sides.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 03:09:09 pm
The problem with this kind of pissing contest is that there is no cap to the number of Durgas (other than the hundred or so fluff cap) we can hypothetically sling at the Colosssus.

So I may conclude that you didn't get the point?

I've said that this was a completely idiotic "contest" if it was to be made in the way you are defining it.

What I then said was something completely different, which is not to say "who is better", but rather turning it into another question:

How many Durgas does it take to take down the Collossus?.

In this way we get a proportional clue on how tougher the Collossus is in relation to the Durgas, and it is a very precise question with a definite answer to be found. Is it as tough as 20 Durgas? 30? 40? 100?

Leave out the wings, etc., to "further analysis". Keep it simple at the start. Then we can add complexity.

If we are still interested, that is.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 05, 2011, 05:10:21 pm
Hades' right. If you're gonna simulate the potential of ships vs ships, you've got to take all the factors into account, including fighter complements.

Problem is, if we're incuding the Collie's fighter complement, we've got to add the fighter escort of the Durga, which in all logic, would comprise enough fighters to take care of the Collie's escort. So on the other hand, we've got to include the warship escort the Collie will surely have. With their own fighter escort.

And so on.

There is a point we have to stop that little game, or we're gonna simulate a large-scale war. Which isn't the point.
Well no. The UEF likely wouldn't be able to commit so many fighters to one battle, else they be open to attack elsewhere. Same if they send so many bombers at them. It's just not worth it, and the Colossus is only drawing away much needed UEF cannon fodder forces from elsewhere.

The Colossus would be perfect against the UEF, it's large, so it'll attract attention. It's powerful, so it's hard to engage. It's tough, so it's hard to take down. On top of that, they can't commit too many forces to try and take it down else they be open to counter attack by other GTVA forces, plus the Colossus would be extremely hard to kill, numerous fighters and bombers.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 05, 2011, 05:41:59 pm
Oh come on. First, the Collossus *doesn't exist* in BP universe anymore. So if we are willing to accept its existence, we might as well admit the existence of a spare bunch of Durgas. Second, if the Colly "exists" then you might bet for sure that the UEF will try to bring it down to destroy Tev's moral.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: SpardaSon21 on July 05, 2011, 05:43:25 pm
Oh come on. First, the Collossus *doesn't exist* in BP universe anymore. So if we are willing to accept its existence, we might as well admit the existence of a spare bunch of Durgas. Second, if the Colly "exists" then you might bet for sure that the UEF will try to bring it down to destroy Tev's morale.
I fixed that for you, since I fail to see how destroying a Colossus will morally degrade the GTVA.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 05, 2011, 08:20:22 pm
Oh, look. A thread in the BP forum has turned into a Buntu/Tev dick-wagging contest. It must be a day that ends in 'y'.  :doubt:
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: QuakeIV on July 05, 2011, 08:51:10 pm
Oh, look. A thread in the BP forum has turned into a Buntu/Tev dick-wagging contest. It must be a day that ends in 'y'.  :doubt:

 ;7
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 06, 2011, 01:07:54 am
Oh come on. First, the Collossus *doesn't exist* in BP universe anymore. So if we are willing to accept its existence, we might as well admit the existence of a spare bunch of Durgas. Second, if the Colly "exists" then you might bet for sure that the UEF will try to bring it down to destroy Tev's moral.
There's the fundamental problem, the Colossus is too important and powerful to ignore, and too tough for them to directly engage. They'd likely need numerous, numerous ships, bombers capitalships. But considering the state of the UEF after WiH, that'd leave other sectors of UEF space open fore attack, due to relocated forces.

Also, are you daft? This argument assumes the Colossus exists in the BP universe, else it's a stupid argument to go 'hurr durr colossus v durgas except colossus doesn't exist makes sense rite' or to have Durga's at modern technology while the Colossus is still using what is technically pre-Capella technology.

Oh, look. A thread in the BP forum has turned into a Buntu/Tev dick-wagging contest. It must be a day that ends in 'y'.  :doubt:
Welcome to most threads on BP. :p
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Fury on July 06, 2011, 01:49:21 am
The Vajra has been remodelled to be a rapid-fire anti-cruiser gun
Son, I am disappoint.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Colonol Dekker on July 06, 2011, 02:52:10 am
TB-80 Devastator Bomber > Durga

Durga = Wolverine / Grendel.  :nervous:


(disclaimer, i forget which model the durga was inspired by)
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Darius on July 06, 2011, 03:29:46 am
The Vajra has been remodelled to be a rapid-fire anti-cruiser gun
Son, I am disappoint.

Considering the previous version was just a super Archer, this is a far better use for it.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 06, 2011, 01:11:31 pm
Also, are you daft? This argument assumes the Colossus exists in the BP universe, else it's a stupid argument to go 'hurr durr colossus v durgas except colossus doesn't exist makes sense rite' or to have Durga's at modern technology while the Colossus is still using what is technically pre-Capella technology.

What I meant to say is that if we are willing to give the existence of Colly a get-go, then all this talk about how Durgas should be in limited numbers 'coz BP canon is ridiculous.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: -Norbert- on July 06, 2011, 03:03:20 pm
The second would would likely see total completion, and would likely be slightly different, with better materials or construction all around, learning from the mistakes of the first model.
The GTVA did learn from their mistakes. That's why they didn't build another Colossus and instead went for a high mobility force, purpose build for quick manouvering and shock-jumping.

And I have to agree with Luis Dias here. On one side we have a magically conjured up Colossus, clearly defying BP canon, but on the other hand we may not bring more Durgas into the scenario than the UEF has, because it would defy BP canon? Doesn't make much sense.
Also a Colossus isn't just going to magically appear out of thin air (or vacuum). It has to be build using money, materials and manpower (not to mention it takes time). Ressources that in BP canon went into the construction of the rest of the fleet and the portal.
So if the GTVA had a Colossus, there wouldn't be any Titans and Raynors and far fewer next-gen Corvettes, which would make a massive strike at the colly much less risky for the UEF, because the GTVA simply dosen't have the necessary ships to mount a "backdoor offense", or at least not an offense devastating enough to equal the loss of the Colossus.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Qent on July 06, 2011, 03:07:44 pm
Yeah, a universe with another Colossus would potentially be so different from BP that it's meaningless to talk about anything less specific than "How many Durgas are required to take down a Colossus?"

Helios continuity for the win, though.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 06, 2011, 03:08:57 pm
But in BP there are alternate universes


Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 06, 2011, 03:14:26 pm
The second would would likely see total completion, and would likely be slightly different, with better materials or construction all around, learning from the mistakes of the first model.
The GTVA did learn from their mistakes. That's why they didn't build another Colossus and instead went for a high mobility force, purpose build for quick manouvering and shock-jumping.
Obviously. I meant in the way of ship construction. Better materials, more sensible construction methods and such.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 06, 2011, 03:15:34 pm
So one Colly could have jumped to the wrong sol node.

That would be a neat diversion. Of course, that timeline would be so different, the Colly itself would be utterly confused at the present conflict.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: The E on July 06, 2011, 03:16:35 pm
In BP, the better, sensible construction method for Colossus-class vessels is "don't build one Colossus when you can build two Raynors instead".
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kolgena on July 06, 2011, 03:19:06 pm
I thought the Colossus was going to be used as some sort of hypothetical benchmark, kind of like Lucifer vs. Colossus or something like that.

Why do we care about whether such a hypothetical set up is possible? How hard is it to chuck some ships together in FRED and load fireworks? If it's a benchmark we care about, then things like how old the Colossus is, what time it's from, what it's made of, whether it has fighters is moot, because we just want to see how well pure durgas do against 1 colossus.

Edit: I can live with being a pawn if the game makes sense!
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 06, 2011, 03:19:53 pm
In BP, the better, sensible construction method for Colossus-class vessels is "don't build one Colossus when you can build two Raynors instead".
Well herp-de-derp. Not arguing that, in fact.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 06, 2011, 03:27:12 pm
No Kolgena, that would have been too ****ing simple, and we apparently have a taste for complexifibications.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: -Norbert- on July 06, 2011, 03:32:33 pm
Quote
I thought the Colossus was going to be used as some sort of hypothetical benchmark, kind of like Lucifer vs. Colossus or something like that.
It did start out that way, but then fighter and bomber complements were brought into the discussion, followed by escort warships, then the strategic situation. And I think that sums up (and at the same time over-simplyfies) how we got to the current line of arguments I think.

Oh and then Snail brought parallel universes into the discussion as well, to make sure we have every conceivable situation covered :P
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kolgena on July 06, 2011, 05:13:20 pm
Well, someone set up that super complicated scenario.





If it looks really good when we're done, we'll submit it as WiH R2's massivebattle BOE stress test.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kosh on July 07, 2011, 02:48:51 am
In BP, the better, sensible construction method for Colossus-class vessels is "don't build one Colossus when you can build two Raynors instead".


Probably more than two Raynors since the Colossus had way more total volume. There is some sense in having a couple of superdestroyers for heavy blockade busting/enforcing and major fleet engagements, but beyond that there's no reason.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Flak on July 07, 2011, 02:50:49 am
At least how fast just a few of these things rape the hell out of the Medea, and those things were only loaded with Jackhammers instead of Sledgehammers.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: -Norbert- on July 07, 2011, 03:31:17 am
In BP, the better, sensible construction method for Colossus-class vessels is "don't build one Colossus when you can build two Raynors instead".


Probably more than two Raynors since the Colossus had way more total volume. There is some sense in having a couple of superdestroyers for heavy blockade busting/enforcing and major fleet engagements, but beyond that there's no reason.
Didn't the cutscene say something about the mass of 6 lucifers? I guess a Raynor and Lucifer have roughly comparable volume.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 07, 2011, 04:07:49 am
Didn't the cutscene say something about the mass of 6 lucifers? I guess a Raynor and Lucifer have roughly comparable volume.
No. It said twelve, which is absolutely recockulous. It's more like 4-6.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kosh on July 07, 2011, 04:26:50 am
Didn't the cutscene say something about the mass of 6 lucifers? I guess a Raynor and Lucifer have roughly comparable volume.
No. It said twelve, which is absolutely recockulous. It's more like 4-6.

The Lucifer was long, but it was also very thin, kind of narrow and not very tall. Even if they were the same length the Colossus was much more spacious.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 07, 2011, 05:35:52 am
That's easy to check in the volume of both models, innit? Much talk little science I see ;)
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Darius on July 07, 2011, 05:40:23 am
Durga Durga jihad?

 :yes:
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 07, 2011, 06:03:12 am
The Lucifer was long, but it was also very thin, kind of narrow and not very tall. Even if they were the same length the Colossus was much more spacious.
(http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm56/HLPHades/uwrong.png)
Yeah. Not that much thinner, actually.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 07, 2011, 06:15:11 am
Even as a self-proclaimed Tev this is a little too much dick-waving for my liking. Why can't we have a joint pinup calendar and compare Chebs for once? We can let the Vasudans in on it too, with that beautiful monstrosity pinup girl...

And **** the Colossus, it was crap in FS2 and it'd be mega-crap in BP. I want to see the GTD Hades taking on a wing of Durgas, that's a real fight! (Until they hide in the 'trench')

Ninja'ed: I could've sworn the Colossus cutscene scaled down the Lucifer to look smaller. In fact it looks like this is the case: http://youtu.be/DX6bzq3M4M4?t=1m18s
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 07, 2011, 06:18:01 am
'scuse me, what makes the Hades any more useful than the Colossus?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 07, 2011, 06:58:17 am
Watch out Rounds, Hades could be fooling us with a perspective effect ;).

EDIT: I'm still willing to bet with any of you that the 10-12 figure might actually be more spot on than the 4-6 figure that people have claimed to in here.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 07, 2011, 07:13:25 am
'scuse me, what makes the Hades any more useful than the Colossus?

I've FREDed them plenty of times as foes and the Colly never does as it well as it should, going by armament. Besides the Hades is way cooler and in a discussion with as much merit as this that's all that matters. :) It's also smaller for a disproportionately high amount of hitpoints.

I would've thought the Colossus would be the one with far less mass to volume than the Lucy.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 07, 2011, 07:17:47 am
we are equating mass with volume here, since otherwise it could range anywhere and it would spoil the fun
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 07, 2011, 08:22:41 am
lolwut? If the Lucy was mostly empty you could just crush it up to match the Colly's density and stick however many in there (this is assuming the Colly is more dense as in more mass to volume). The tech vid is too ambiguous really, regardless of mass/volume etc. I doubt you'd fit 12 in there.

We're getting dangerously close to a full on physics brawl, we better leave it before this place gets maths-nuked by Herra and The E.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 07, 2011, 09:07:09 am
No what I said here was that I'm ignoring any ratio between mass and volume and assuming it is equal for both ships.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kolgena on July 07, 2011, 09:55:03 am
Watch out Rounds, Hades could be fooling us with a perspective effect ;).

EDIT: I'm still willing to bet with any of you that the 10-12 figure might actually be more spot on than the 4-6 figure that people have claimed to in here.

I think so too. It's easier if you look at the position of the Lucifer relative to the FRED grid, then look at where those grid lines end up on the Colossus. Still looks nowhere near 10-12 though.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 07, 2011, 09:59:14 am
I'll tell you when I get home.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 07, 2011, 10:23:12 am
No what I said here was that I'm ignoring any ratio between mass and volume and assuming it is equal for both ships.

Righto fair enough then, but if they're equal then there's just no way in hell you'd fit a full 12 Lucys into one Colly, just looking at the pic.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 07, 2011, 10:29:27 am
pics deceive you. When I look into both their volumes (or someone ninja's me in it) in PCS2 or smth then we might make a simple calculation there and see who's right.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 07, 2011, 10:34:12 am
If we had a really, really big measuring cylinder we could stick them both in and see how much water they displace.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 07, 2011, 10:41:52 am
Or you could just use the volume check function in any model viewer....
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Black Wolf on July 07, 2011, 10:46:25 am
'scuse me, what makes the Hades any more useful than the Colossus?

Infinite Lokis.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Colonol Dekker on July 07, 2011, 11:32:29 am
Durga Durga jihad?

 :yes:

I'm justified :3
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Hades on July 07, 2011, 05:13:42 pm
'scuse me, what makes the Hades any more useful than the Colossus?

Infinite Lokis.
I AM CREDIT TO TEAM
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on July 07, 2011, 06:24:45 pm
No, not you, the infinite Lokis you give birth to.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 07, 2011, 07:44:51 pm
Can't have infinite Lokis without Hades.

Although given his projects, I wonder if they're actually Loki Primes.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: redsniper on July 07, 2011, 10:10:10 pm
Quote
Twelve Lucifer-class destroyers can fit within it's massive hull....

Don't question the sales pitch guys...
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Destiny on July 07, 2011, 10:25:06 pm
Maybe the Colossus's model was really intended to be much much larger but they got lazy?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 07, 2011, 10:58:23 pm
Its pivot point must be at what was originally planned to be the model's center.

EDIT: Oh, uh, Durgas. They're cool and all.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on July 08, 2011, 02:58:27 am
Its pivot point must be at what was originally planned to be the model's center.

:jaw:
If that's the center, dear sweet baby Jesus, the whole thing would have been HUGE.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 08, 2011, 04:35:27 am
Video clearly says the Colly was designed 6km long.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 09, 2011, 02:40:48 pm
But it still strikes me as falacious that a hull plate that can withstand sustained direct plasma fire for several seconds is going to be devastated by the energy discharge from a anti-matter explosion.

EDIT: On second thought, I'll replace the flamebait I posted here with something no more productive, but at the very least less insulting. Namely:

ANTIMATTER IS SERIOUS ****ING BUSINESS
It is, but just like nukes, the vast majority of the destruction you are thinking of is related to the medium it's being reacted in.  Also, if it's being deployed off a small craft, then the amount per shot has to be something that said small craft can withstand at ranges from maximum attainable to those verging on the suicidal.  Given that restriction, it shouldn't be any more destructive than, say, a Helios(also an anti-matter warhead) or a Shivan Megabomb.

All I'm saying is this, there's more than a little fanboy going on with the Durga.  I'm just trying to keep you honest.

1 gram of antimatter would release 179.8 Tera Joules of energy, Fat Man released between 84-92 Tera Joules of energy. While there be no blast wave in space, this amount of energy alone would be sufficient to convert nearby plating to gas or liquid states. With just 11.9 Kilos of antimatter you would exceed the energy of all nuclear testing done in the world. In the a real world , antimatter = death. Luckily this isn't the real world.

EDIT: Note these are very rough estimates as matter antimatter interaction has rarely been observed and I did not account for the release of neutrons as I am assuming anti hydrogen which would mean minimal to no loss due to neutron radiation, or creation of mesons or the  as I am not familiar with how that works. 
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on July 09, 2011, 07:24:52 pm
The potential warhead yield isn't the problem.  The survivability of the squishy pilot and his craft are.  Comparing to a beam cannon, which delivers enough energy to the target to obliterate in less than a second the pilot and his craft, anti-matter warheads would have to be a fraction of this power level.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 09, 2011, 07:57:58 pm
Not necessarily, if the shielding of a fighter is capable of deflecting high energy gamma rays then an anti matter explosion would have little effect (assuming antihydrogen is used). Though why shields would feasibly deflect gamma rays and not other Electromagnetic waves is completely unknown to me but it would allow shielded targets to survive antimatter explosions while unshielded ones would be devastated.

As for why beam cannons may be effective against shielded vessels: A plasma based weapon would due damage with thermal energy and the bombardment of high energy electrons. Assuming it was the electrons that allowed shield penetration then beam weapons would not need to be more powerful then an antimatter warhead to quickly destroy a craft and pilot.


As a side not plasma beams make no sense (as a beam of charged matter that travels instantaneously just make 0 sense) but I'll accept it for the sake of the game. (That and they look cool)
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kosh on July 10, 2011, 01:19:42 am
Quote
Not necessarily, if the shielding of a fighter is capable of deflecting high energy gamma rays then an anti matter explosion would have little effect (assuming antihydrogen is used). Though why shields would feasibly deflect gamma rays and not other Electromagnetic waves is completely unknown to me but it would allow shielded targets to survive antimatter explosions while unshielded ones would be devastated.


Only half the energy of said explosion is converted to gamma rays, the rest is heat and some other types of lower energy radiation.


Quote
As a side not plasma beams make no sense (as a beam of charged matter that travels instantaneously just make 0 sense) but I'll accept it for the sake of the game. (That and they look cool)


It isn't instant, but it is so fast that our puny human senses make it appear that way.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 10, 2011, 01:57:34 am
Though why shields would feasibly deflect gamma rays and not other Electromagnetic waves is completely unknown to me but it would allow shielded targets to survive antimatter explosions while unshielded ones would be devastated.

Any realistic shield system has to have either gaps in the frequency coverage to see (unlikely) or an activation threshold below which it won't engage (much more likely). Otherwise you actually have a cloaking device, and you're as blind as everyone else.

Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 10, 2011, 06:37:37 am
It is, but just like nukes, the vast majority of the destruction you are thinking of is related to the medium it's being reacted in.  Also, if it's being deployed off a small craft, then the amount per shot has to be something that said small craft can withstand at ranges from maximum attainable to those verging on the suicidal.  Given that restriction, it shouldn't be any more destructive than, say, a Helios(also an anti-matter warhead) or a Shivan Megabomb.

All I'm saying is this, there's more than a little fanboy going on with the Durga.  I'm just trying to keep you honest.

I have to point out that the shells used in the Redeemer will definitely be carrying far less antimatter than a Helios and the weapon itself has way less yield, it's powerful simply because it's a primary, nothing to do with fanboy-ery.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 10, 2011, 03:33:33 pm
Even a very small quantity of antimatter would devastate a target in the real world. Though I defiantly am glad this is not the case in freespace as I much prefer balance to realism.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: QuakeIV on July 10, 2011, 05:45:02 pm
Your assuming we have armor remotely as strong as what you see about three to four hundred years later.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kolgena on July 10, 2011, 06:03:09 pm
Well, a harbinger is 5 gigatons according to the wiki, which is 100 times stronger than the biggest nuke humanity has ever set off (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba). Basically, one of these could probably sink Europe and end the world.

You need 33 harbingers to kill an Orion. Even factoring the fact that damage is massively reduced without an atmosphere, that is still really tough armor.

(Random tidbit off wikipedia: The total global nuclear arsenal is about 30,000 nuclear warheads with a destructive capacity of 5,000 megatons (5,000 million tons of TNT). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT_equivalent)
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: redsniper on July 10, 2011, 06:08:37 pm
Collapsed core molybdenum is nothing to sneeze at.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Mars on July 10, 2011, 06:38:41 pm
The Battuta stated informally that he doesn't accept the Harbinger's numbers into his view of BP canon, so I assume that goes for the rest of the team.

Degenerate matter armor most definitely helps.

Although hitpoints aren't set in BP, the Carthage we see in the final mission of WiH has the equivalent of 1,000,000 hitpoints, so, more like 330 harbingers.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 10, 2011, 06:46:56 pm
The problem with armor protecting against an antimatter explosion is the heat. Molybdenum melts at 2896 K, Tungsten at 3683.15 k, Carbon at 3773.15 k (The highest of any known element). The heat from little boy (roughly 60 terajoules) is as follows: 17m = 300,000 k & at 50m = 9000-11000k.  Little boy released less than 1/3 then energy the a single gram of antimatter so any armor composed of currently known materials would melt from the explosion.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Mars on July 10, 2011, 06:58:21 pm
"Degenerate matter"

Plus its super armor from the future in general, but I believed its implied in "collapsed core molybdenum."

Disregarding that entirely, remember your average corvette is probably in the range of tens of thousands of tons, even if they were made of just steel. Yeah, I don't think anything is going to survive 100 gigatons, but a few megatons is conceivable to survive.

Also in BP canon, Tev ships have a shield system ingrained in their armor.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 10, 2011, 07:04:54 pm
Molybdenum based degenerate matter is still very much capable of melting, especially considering that altering the energy levels in degenerate matter would cause the volume to increase (and by extension density decrease).

Also out of curiosity, from what I've read on degenerate matter (which admittedly isn't much) I've only really read about degenerate gases. I am not sure if this is just my limited knowledge or due to some printable I don't know but if you have any information please feel free to link. I am curious.


Edits: A Corvette MAY survive as a ship a megaton detonation, but the direct impact are would not remain in tact at all.

The Tev shield system would be necessary to maintain high density degenerate armor (and would actually allow the use of degenerate gas as Armour) so I approve. Also noting the obvious resistance fighter shields have against these high yield explosions it would stand to reason that the Tev's integrated hull shielding would at least provide some resistance.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Mars on July 10, 2011, 07:08:06 pm
Molybdenum based degenerate matter is still very much capable of melting, especially considering that altering the energy levels in degenerate matter would cause the volume to increase (and by extension density decrease).
:wtf:
A) its sci fi fluff and
B) You can melt a neutron star?
Quote
Also out of curiosity, from what I've read on degenerate matter (which admittedly isn't much) I've only really read about degenerate gases. I am not sure if this is just my limited knowledge or due to some printable I don't know but if you have any information please feel free to link. I am curious.
I think being in such a high density forces the atoms into higher energy states or some such, so you may well be right.

EDIT:
I have no background in physics for the record, just stating what I think to be BP canon, IDK if its canon on the degenerate bit or not, but I heard it mentioned somewhere
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 10, 2011, 07:13:39 pm
A neutron star is theoretically composed almost exclusively of neutrons so I don't think you can melt one (though I honestly have no idea) What I was trying to say is that if it is based on Molybdenum which does melt it would stand to reason that it would still melt if enough energy was applied.

What was sci-fi fluff? you were unclear

EDIT: lol my physics background is 1 year of base level college physics which just covers the basics really. I am perfectly capable of being wrong.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Mars on July 10, 2011, 07:15:24 pm
Nuclear scale yield absorbing armor in general.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 10, 2011, 07:18:26 pm
Well without it every capitol ship  engagement would have 1 bomber launching one bomb at a capitol ship and killing it. That would simply be no fun at all so you kind of have to ignore reality for the sake of game play.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Klaustrophobia on July 10, 2011, 11:16:49 pm
with no medium to propogate the shockwave in space, the destructive power of explosives is hugely reduced.

this is my own personal fluff to make sense of the canon fluff.  you may borrow it if you like.  no, i won't defend it in a physics argument.

i'm not much a fan of the degenerate hull idea.  i would think that would give the bulkheads their own gravitational pull.  (i won't defend that one either)
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 11, 2011, 12:47:15 am
with no medium to propogate the shockwave in space, the destructive power of explosives is hugely reduced.

That's absolutely true. However, I doubt it's true to the extent of allowing a warship to shrug off a direct hit from a paired salvo of 5-gigaton antimatter bombs.

Hell, if the destructive power of a helios is reduced a million-fold by virtue of being in space, it's still the equivalent of a fairly sizeable tactical nuke in atmosphere.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Destiny on July 11, 2011, 12:52:18 am
I wonder why they don't just use shaped charges or something...?

Well without it every capitol ship  engagement would have 1 bomber launching one bomb at a capitol ship and killing it. That would simply be no fun at all so you kind of have to ignore reality for the sake of game play.
You can kill a Fenris with dual Helioses, I think that's...fun enough :P
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 11, 2011, 04:02:20 am
I wonder why they don't just use shaped charges or something...?

We can already defend against those with 20th century armour (deflection, explosive reactive etc.), I'm sure they'd be perfectly capable of finding something in the 24th century. Can anyone give a number on how fast the redeemer's rounds travel? I'm sure the kinetic energy alone would be huge from such a weapon.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on July 11, 2011, 04:35:52 am
Probably not appreciable compared to the blast from the warhead.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Darius on July 11, 2011, 04:53:16 am
The speed of the rounds will have been chosen for gameplay reasons (for instance, effectiveness as a dogfight weapon) rather than to satisfy theoretical physical principles. Just a heads up in case they seem to be under/overpowered according to their kinetic energy :P
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 11, 2011, 05:03:42 am
with no medium to propogate the shockwave in space, the destructive power of explosives is hugely reduced.

Doesn't work if it's in skin-skin contact or penetrates. Bombs don't proximity-detonate for the most part.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 11, 2011, 05:07:54 am
Doesn't work if it's in skin-skin contact or penetrates. Bombs don't proximity-detonate for the most part.

I actually hadn't though of that, if the weapon detonated in direct contact then the shock wave would propagate through the hull instead of an atmosphere. No idea what that would do to the hull, but I can't image it would be good.

And a detonation near or inside a hull breach would cause a shock wave to propagate throughout the ship likely destroying it, but at the very least killing most or more likely all the crew.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: -Norbert- on July 11, 2011, 05:17:53 am
At least in BP the ships have composit armor, including shock absorbing layers as a protection against kinetic weapons, so at least surface impact will have the shockwave's effects reduced. I guess the same goes for heat and radiation, no matter wether it is realistic to disperse such a huge amount of each.
If it was the Vishnans or Shivans we could simply argue that part of the shockwave and radiaton is somehow diverted into subspace, but I'm pretty sure that is far beyond the GTVA and UEF at the time of BP.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Contrition on July 11, 2011, 05:26:41 am
Well if you could prevent a direct contact detonation, I suppose it would be possible to create a material that would be able to deflect the vast majority of the radiant energy (kind of like a mirror but much more efficient). Under that you could have a small vacuum buffer and a  layer of material capable of absorbing large quantity of thermal heat (such materials do exist today). Then beneath that you'd have to have a thick wall of heavy metal (such as lead) to protect the crew from the harmful radiation that was released and not reflected.

This armor could be compromised by kinetic impacts, but if the materials were efficient enough it would severely reduce the threat of antimatter based weapons and I think the threat of those weapons of these weapons would be significant enough to warrant such precautions.

NOTE: I know little about armor so this is just speculation on my part
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Flak on July 12, 2011, 11:50:35 pm
Those direct contact bombs are less effective unless it is extremely powerful. Shaped charge is more efficient since with the same amount of warhead it detonates after it pierces the armor plating rather than outside it. Considering spaceships are supposed to be a lot tougher than today's toughest tanks.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 13, 2011, 02:03:08 am
Those direct contact bombs are less effective unless it is extremely powerful. Shaped charge is more efficient since with the same amount of warhead it detonates after it pierces the armor plating rather than outside it. Considering spaceships are supposed to be a lot tougher than today's toughest tanks.

A shaped charge is wasted against a good compartmentalization scheme.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Luis Dias on July 13, 2011, 08:55:00 am
Has anyone seen Sara's video of a missile that breaks itself into a ton of primary shots?

It's so ****ing awesome.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 13, 2011, 09:09:54 am
Link?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: crizza on July 13, 2011, 09:20:19 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M69OT1fobj4&NR=1
And it is awesome;)
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kolgena on July 13, 2011, 09:27:28 am
Finally, and infyrno that even noobs can use. It's even directional so you can't kill yourself with it.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: The E on July 13, 2011, 09:34:00 am
Finally, and infyrno that even noobs can use. It's even directional so you can't kill yourself with it.

I thought that was the Slammer...
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 13, 2011, 09:36:00 am
I thought that was the Slammer...

I recall you guys saying something about giving the player anti-Slammer armor a few times because people got killed by their own/other UEF fighters' Slammers.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Deadly in a Shadow on July 13, 2011, 09:59:17 am
Finally, and infyrno that even noobs can use. It's even directional so you can't kill yourself with it.

I thought that was the Slammer...
The mass driver slammer.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: The E on July 13, 2011, 10:06:10 am
I thought that was the Slammer...

I recall you guys saying something about giving the player anti-Slammer armor a few times because people got killed by their own/other UEF fighters' Slammers.

That was more due to the AI firing Slammers into a dogfight you were part of.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kolgena on July 13, 2011, 10:53:52 am
I felt that the slammer is more of an upgraded piranha, since it uses tracking projectiles.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on July 13, 2011, 11:09:28 am
The Piranha also uses seekers, they're just horribly ineffective seekers.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: crizza on July 13, 2011, 11:15:37 am
Hm, a ship firing Piranhas damages itself, doesn't it?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Deadly in a Shadow on July 13, 2011, 11:30:14 am
Hm, a ship firing Piranhas damages itself, doesn't it?
If the shields are in really bad shape, yes.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: crizza on July 13, 2011, 11:37:09 am
I'm talking about capships.
Don't know which one, but I once fredded a capship using them...and it blew up itself quite spectacular^^
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kosh on July 14, 2011, 05:47:55 am
The Piranha also uses seekers, they're just horribly ineffective seekers.


Yeah but when you've got an inbound wing of bombers launching them all at once they can be ****ing terrifying
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on July 14, 2011, 07:06:50 am
It's also a complete waste of Tempest space which would still help you kill them faster.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kolgena on July 14, 2011, 09:47:50 am
You read wrong. Kosh said piranha spam BY the bombers can be scary if you fly intercept.

I just do barrel rolls and spam X, though I lose valuable time that could be used for shooting down bombs.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: NGTM-1R on July 14, 2011, 10:04:18 am
It's also a complete waste of Tempest space which would still help you kill them faster.

The Piranha is much more effective than the Tempest in the hands of the AI.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on July 14, 2011, 10:19:32 am
They can be made to use dumbfires properly can't they?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Deadly in a Shadow on July 14, 2011, 10:35:15 am
They can be made to use dumbfires properly can't they?


They do it, thanks to the Fury AI.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Mars on July 14, 2011, 11:05:17 am
They can be made to use dumbfires properly can't they?


They do it, thanks to the Fury AI.

Oh god Vassago's Dirge. . . some of those fighters are nightmares with Tempests.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Kosh on July 14, 2011, 11:12:07 am
You read wrong. Kosh said piranha spam BY the bombers can be scary if you fly intercept.

I just do barrel rolls and spam X, though I lose valuable time that could be used for shooting down bombs.


And since those Nahema's are nearly as fast as your interceptor that gives them a lot of time for Cyclops spamming too, making interception even harder. Not to mention the losses your AI wingmen will undoubtedly take in the process.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on July 14, 2011, 12:01:14 pm
Nahemas are true Jerkasses. They're faster than anything classified as an Interceptor except for the Horus, which it is equal in speed (Its engine overclock is botched though, then again when it comes to FreeSpace 2's bombers, everyone's engine overclock is botched except the Boanerges and Taurvi (The Sekhmet has too little of a boost to count)), and out of all the bombers you fight they're the ones that love trying to intercept you. They're large and weaker than the other Shivan bombers though, if you're lucky and they haven't started zipping all over the place two or three can at least be taken out in a single pass.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 14, 2011, 12:24:18 pm
See, I love Nahemas. My strategy for Clash of the Titans II consisted of getting in an Ares, ordering my wingmen to guard the cruisers, speedmatching the Bastion, and sitting in front of it spamming Trebuchets while constantly C-5ing. Nahemas are the only Shivan bombers that go down in one salvo.

This would probably fail spectacularly if I tried it on Insane, but so would any other strategy I tried on Insane. :p
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Timerlane on July 14, 2011, 02:18:38 pm
I think Argonautica (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Argonautica) is the one most of us are thinking of, with Vasudan fighters as your only choices(leaving pretty much just the Tauret and Seth as durable enough to stand up to Piranha spam).
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: LordPomposity on July 14, 2011, 02:33:52 pm
Ah, yes. The mission where the Aquitaine is fooling around in the nebula for no good reason and gets bumrushed by a moloch.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 14, 2011, 05:18:57 pm
I think Argonautica (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Argonautica) is the one most of us are thinking of, with Vasudan fighters as your only choices(leaving pretty much just the Tauret and Seth as durable enough to stand up to Piranha spam).

Nah take a Serapis, flies like a dream. "Avoid the bomblets and you won't get hit, pilot."
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Destiny on July 15, 2011, 12:09:19 am
I think Argonautica (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Argonautica) is the one most of us are thinking of, with Vasudan fighters as your only choices(leaving pretty much just the Tauret and Seth as durable enough to stand up to Piranha spam).

Nah take a Serapis, flies like a dream. "Avoid the bomblets and you won't get hit, pilot."
Guess what, shockwaves kills it if not the bomblets. :P
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on July 15, 2011, 05:35:47 am
"Avoid the shockwaves and you won't get hit, pilot."
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: -Norbert- on July 15, 2011, 10:25:10 am
So what's the logical conclution of that chain? "Avoid being hit and you won't get hit pilot"?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Deadly in a Shadow on July 15, 2011, 11:35:29 am
So what's the logical conclution of that chain? "Avoid being hit and you won't get hit pilot"?
"Avoid being slammer'd or redemah'd and you won't get hit pilot."

My logical conclusion:"Avoid being a pilot and you won't get hit."
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Destiny on July 15, 2011, 07:07:45 pm
I believe that 'Avoid existing and you won't get hit, but even then in heaven or hell you'll still get hit because there is a War in Heaven'. :P
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Alpha1 on August 11, 2011, 06:26:29 pm
I Hope i can fly the Durga und the other Fleetbomber in the next Acts of War in Heaven :-) I tested the new weapons and ships in the Singelmission und i think these vessels fit perfectly in the BP Universe.
Not quantity but high quality ships and less advanced, but highly effective weapons.
The fact that the UEF and the GTVA are that different makes the Gameplay interesting and I like to have influence on the battle - even against GTVA Capships - which is possible due to these crafts.

Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Flak on August 15, 2011, 01:56:06 am
Yeah, the only thing missing in War in Heaven is some capital ship bombing missions.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Darius on August 15, 2011, 02:01:42 am
Worry not, there will be plenty of "I am heavy weapons guy" coming up.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Buckshee Rounds on August 15, 2011, 06:05:55 am
How come there weren't any in the first release of WiH? Did it have something to do with you guy's adversity to bombers?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Snail on August 15, 2011, 06:37:25 am
How come there weren't any in the first release of WiH? Did it have something to do with you guy's adversity to bombers?
Uh, what adversity to bombers?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: The E on August 15, 2011, 07:24:00 am
The one we've stated in the commentary, for example. Yes, that did play a role, however, a bigger part in our decision was to make sure you guys understood that the UEF bombers are highly valuable, very rare ressources that are only dragged out in the direst of emergencies.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Liberator on August 15, 2011, 06:36:15 pm
Which still doesn't make sense to me given that the UEF favors small craft deployments.  Was it just something to make them different from the GTVA, which favors large numbers of reasonably tough, though slow and under armed torpedo delivery vehicles?
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: JerichoDeath on August 15, 2011, 07:37:52 pm
Dang, there are so many things here that I want to comment on, but most of them were posted forever ago...
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: -Norbert- on August 16, 2011, 03:25:56 am
Which still doesn't make sense to me given that the UEF favors small craft deployments.  Was it just something to make them different from the GTVA, which favors large numbers of reasonably tough, though slow and under armed torpedo delivery vehicles?
It does make a lot of sense, if you consider the situation.
The UEF was isolated with the Gefs being the only enemy. Since the Gef have no capital ships, bombers and destroyers were not needed and thus became a highly controverse topic. Their building was opposed by many within the UEF and thus only few were build.
And that's why they are so valuable and only brought out in emergencies. While they are highly effective, they simply have too few of them for widespread deployment.
Furthermore with the UEF ships being more maintanance intensive than their GTVA counterparts, I think each individual ship will spend more time in the workship thus further limiting the number of currently usable bombers (that last sentence is pure speculation on my part - except the high maintanance part, that's BP canon - but it would be a logical conclusion from the facts provided by the background story and the BP team).
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: The E on August 16, 2011, 05:28:52 am
Then there's the thing that UEF bombers generally pack a lot more firepower (because of their heavy primary armaments), and are thus a higher risk to GTVA capital ships. As a result, the GTVA has deployed hunter-killer fighter groups that are dispatched whenever these bombers show (What did you think popup Trebuchet strikes are for?), making their deployment a risky gamble. Unlike the GTVA, the UEF simply can't afford to deploy manned bombers in large numbers and soak up the losses.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Timerlane on August 16, 2011, 12:03:35 pm
I imagine the far more plentiful(pre-GTVA incursion) Uriels would have been more than sufficient to handle the bomber/assault duties within the Sol system, with all those primaries, and room for eight Slammers plus a pair of Jackhammers, if bombs were ever really needed.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Commander Zane on August 16, 2011, 12:05:28 pm
They're not plentiful, read its tech description. Losing too many of them to Trebuchet strikes forced the UEF to use the Uriel on special occasions only as well.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Timerlane on August 16, 2011, 12:10:54 pm
That's why I said "pre-GTVA incursion". They simply didn't have a need for lots of apocalyptic super-bombers until the GTVA showed up.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Flak on August 18, 2011, 11:07:31 pm
At least we haven't seen the new fighters and bombers yet, probably Byrne kept them in hiding until the right moment.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Drogoth on August 19, 2011, 01:47:45 pm
At least we haven't seen the new fighters and bombers yet, probably Byrne kept them in hiding until the right moment.

Probably Byrne kept them hiding until it was to late*

Long live the Tevs!

In all seriousness though, it better be to late :/
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Ravenholme on August 21, 2011, 04:00:56 pm
At least we haven't seen the new fighters and bombers yet, probably Byrne kept them in hiding until the right moment.

Probably Byrne kept them hiding until it was to late*

Long live the Tevs!

In all seriousness though, it better be to late :/

The Tev love in the BP forums warms my heart - I love my morally questionable Tevs, if only because they've endured so much and deserve to win, imo.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: MatthTheGeek on August 21, 2011, 05:10:14 pm
Tev lovers are the louder ones.

Because they know in their heart that they're wrong, but won't admit it.
Title: Re: The Durga
Post by: Scotty on August 21, 2011, 05:36:18 pm
Tev lovers are the louder ones.

Because they know in their heart that they're wrong, but won't admit it.

To paraphrase the military maxim: "If I'm more confident in my wrong answer than you are in your right one, I'm right."