Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolepgeek]

Ebbor; run it like WoT does. No, the AP shell will do negligible damage if it doesn't penetrate. That's the point of armor. The HE shell, on the other hand, will always do damage, whether it pens or not.

[10ebbor10]

WoT doesn't have to account for lasers though.

[Rolepgeek]

A laser just shreds the armor if it doesn't penetrate. Melts it and shit. You know. Makes it easier for the next time.

[10ebbor10]

Indeed, that is the problem. In the current system, a barely penetrated laser can do less damage than one which failed to penetrate. I'll rebalance the system soon enough.

((Both use the same system, but different damage tables))

[10ebbor10]

There isn't much to do on the craft. It's just there to give me some time to go over a few mechanics and prepare sheets.

[Rolepgeek]

Strike number two; Lucen's a girl, ebbor. :p

[~Neri]

Double Trap strikes back!

[10ebbor10]

I'm going to shift to gender neutral pronouns now.

[~Neri]

Hehehe.

[Flying Dice]

Out of curiosity, if we ever get the chance to do major alterations on our mechs, what would the effects of removing the gasoline drive be in mechanical terms (if it's even possible)? Or more accurately, how do the different drive types behave in terms of reliability, power output, &c?

[GiglameshDespair]

I need some kind of liquid coolant so I can operate in space without issue.
Or more missiles. I have a bare arm. Maybe I need another MRLS rack... can never have to many war-crime MMM launchers.

[Flying Dice]

I'm going to hazard a guess that if we do more space ops, they're going to be pretty far off in the future.

[Rolepgeek]

Air-cooled nuclear generators seem dangerous.

To everyone ever.

[GiglameshDespair]

Air-cooled nuclear generators seem dangerous.

To everyone ever.

Of nuclear power stations I know of (read: british) have CO² cooling (excepit one that uses pressurised water), and then a secondary water cooling for the coolant. So much smaller ones, I imagine, would rely on vents with large surface area to carry excess heat away via air. In a vacuum, the only heat loss would be via radiation, rather than conduction and convection, meaning it'd be a lot less effective. So the reactor would have to run at a lot lower capacity so it wouldn't overheat.

So they'd use air cooling to cool the coolant rather than the reactor itself. Either way, the air wouldn't be irradiated.

[Rolepgeek]

Air-cooled nuclear generators seem dangerous.

To everyone ever.

Of nuclear power stations I know of (read: british) have CO² cooling (excepit one that uses pressurised water), and then a secondary water cooling for the coolant. So much smaller ones, I imagine, would rely on vents with large surface area to carry excess heat away via air. In a vacuum, the only heat loss would be via radiation, rather than conduction and convection, meaning it'd be a lot less effective. So the reactor would have to run at a lot lower capacity so it wouldn't overheat.

So they'd use air cooling to cool the coolant rather than the reactor itself. Either way, the air wouldn't be irradiated.

Ah. As for Radiant cooling; cooling rods/spines are nice for that reason. More surface area to let the light heat off of. Radiation galore, though.