Miscellaneous Loroi question-and-answer thread

[icekatze]

hi hi

With a typical reaction drive, the speed of light is the absolute maximum exhaust velocity. Even at the theoretical maximum, you would need a relatively high mass ratio to get the kind of delta V budget that Loroi and Umiak warships have. If you want to bypass that limitation, some kind of super-science is a necessity.

Also, centrifugal force is a fictitious force, and it is the exact same kind of effect that happens when someone in a rocket accelerates quickly in a straight line as well. Gravity is a real force, and as a real force, it can accelerate any mass that it interacts with, and since gravitational waves propagate at the speed of light, it is much faster at distributing force than intermolecular interactions. (in spite of the fact that gravity is a relatively weak force.)

(On the topic of Loroi fighter pilots, they probably know they are not the top dogs of space combat, and the Loroi probably don't maintain that kind of fiction in general. If anything, the Umiak are probably known for their suicidal lack of fear than for their cowardice.)

[ShadowDragon8685]

Eh, the idea that the Umiak even had an opportunity to brainwash that many and well-distributed of Loroi was dubious itself, so no big change. Besides, assuming that all three of them were Teidar is understandable, I did it myself.

They do seem to have a penchant for pulling plot-token-screwing tricks out of their cloaca, don't they? As if a huge industrial base and an utter disregard for life wasn't enough...

You make too many assumptions about Loroi culture: given the existence of Teidar and Mizol, it would be ill-advised to assume that the "fighter ace" concept developed the same way among the Loroi as among humans. Besides, it's like hunting mamoths with just spears: the bigger the target, the more the bragging rights. Think of them less like knights dueling in tournaments, and more like whalers hunting sperm whales that have a taste for seals, or maybe even spear fishermen hunting Great White Sharks.

That'd make it more like Moby Dick, then - only, Moby won't give them the fair chance to be speared that the Delrias gave them, he just dumps an endless torrent of munitions and point-defenses at them, the cowards. Net result is still the same: No opportunity for the fighter pilot to go and gain glory, they might as well be remote-controlled external point-defense drones.

[Mr Bojangles]

SpoilerShow

I think you're misinterpreting what I said. In my initial post about inertial dampening, I hypothesized that the dampener worked by applying an equal counter-acceleration to an external acceleration. In this way, the crew wouldn't be turned into smears on the walls. Also, as gravity is equivalent to an acceleration, you would need only direct such a system towards a source of gravity to make your ship float.

icekatze pointed out that a dampener could work by equalizing the application of an external acceleration to a ship. This would effectively turn the ship, and all its contents, into an idealized rigid body, with every molecule experiencing the same force simultaneously. In this way, no inertial effects would be felt, but unlike my initial idea, it wouldn't allow a ship to freely float in a gravity well. I think this is the idea you're getting at with your "spreader."

What the post you responded to was getting at is that a uniform gravitational field applies a uniform acceleration to anything within it. No inertial effects would be felt as everything would experience the same force at the same time. That's just how gravity works. However, gravity propagates at the speed of light, so depending on your ship, how you're generating the gravity, and how you're moving, it's possible to get tidal forces, so there still could be a need for a "spreader."

In your second paragraph, it sounds like you're describing inertial reduction. This would allow a ship to accelerate faster for the same amount of force, as you say. However, it could run into the issue that everything in the ship would also have its inertia reduced. This would include the crew, so beyond having to worry about ship acceleration, you would also have to worry about how their biological systems responded.

No, it's not the same thing. Gravity Drive - a way to get ACCELERATION. Where, how and how much is applied - is details, not the essence. Distribution or "quenching" inertia - it's just a way to evenly DISTRIBUTE or COMPENSATE the acceleration imparted to the body so that the object accelerated absolutely evenly. In the case of the ship accelerates, at the presence of the compensator engines don't accelerate themselves, and then design and, finally, of any of organics the inside, but, at once, the ship as a whole (including of organics).

Acceleration - this is not only our thrust engines. There are for example the centrifugal force that is fully capable wipe up the floor all of the located on the bow of the ship with a sharp turn, brake accelerate and all sorts of stuff. Roughly speaking, if your ship with gravitational propulsion without compensator on 5 G try to turn sharply - his crew turn into mincemeat. And if you have to turn the compensator can be any figure - the crew didn't even notice them. The only question is energy.

I don't believe that the attempt to reduce the weight of the ship, which must be moved in order to save energy and fuel - it is a good idea. As hinted at logic and the laws of conservation, even when this would be possible, it is likely to require at least as much energy, how much we would need that would simply accelerate this mass in some way. If no more.

I'm not saying they are the same thing. I'm pretty sure that I said my initial idea was one thing and then icekatze presented me with a new idea. So, two different ideas for inertial dampening: one that explicitly applies counter-acceleration (gravitic) and another that turns the ship into an effective rigid body (no idea what physical force you'd base this on).

The only other thing I said is that if something is acted upon by a uniform gravity field it won't experience inertial effects. That object will still have inertia, but since every component is being acted on equally and simultaneously it won't feel any differential acceleration. If the field were to suddenly point in a different direction, nothing would be felt as the field is uniform: everything in the object experiences the same thing at the same time. So, when in such a field, an inertial dampener wouldn't be necessary.

That'd make it more like Moby Dick, then - only, Moby won't give them the fair chance to be speared that the Delrias gave them, he just dumps an endless torrent of munitions and point-defenses at them, the cowards. Net result is still the same: No opportunity for the fighter pilot to go and gain glory, they might as well be remote-controlled external point-defense drones.

When you have the PD capabilities, range and main firepower of Loroi and Umiak warships, pilots don't add much. There's definitely no glory to be had when you can be swatted out of space when you're still the better part of a light-second away from your intended target. We're actually getting there now in the real world, so...

[ShadowDragon8685]

That'd make it more like Moby Dick, then - only, Moby won't give them the fair chance to be speared that the Delrias gave them, he just dumps an endless torrent of munitions and point-defenses at them, the cowards. Net result is still the same: No opportunity for the fighter pilot to go and gain glory, they might as well be remote-controlled external point-defense drones.

When you have the PD capabilities, range and main firepower of Loroi and Umiak warships, pilots don't add much. There's definitely no glory to be had when you can be swatted out of space when you're still the better part of a light-second away from your intended target. We're actually getting there now in the real world, so...

Right, but that's my point - there was that glory to be hard during the last Big One that Loroi combat pilots engaged in - the Delrias campaign, when the pilots were the decisive factor.

So to be a Loroi combat fighter pilot in 2160 has got to be like being a human hopeful raised on a steady diet of Top Gun and Ace Combat, only to learn that one of the USAF's last real Top Gun pilots has just been completely fucking trashed in a complete shutdown by a software algorithym that can run on a goddamn Raspberry Pi, even when they castrated the AI by greatly reducing its' simulated aircraft's capabilities.

Which has gotta be galling, especially if you are a bona fide starfighter pilot badass, the kind who would be an Ace in the last war, having trashed tens of Delrias fighters and harpooned a double-fistful of big pocking capital ships.

[icekatze]

hi hi

I'm not sure if it is fair to say that fighters were "the" decisive factor in the Delrias campaign. Insider mentions that they were "an" important factor, but the Delrias had large ships with good beam weaponry, an area where fighters are inherently lacking. It is my impression that the Loroi won the Delrias campaign also because they were ready for it.

Although I think the original quote was lost during forum moves, I recall reading a post from Arioch which mentions that the Splinter Wars were the last time when the Loroi used fighters in a primary fighting role, and that it was in part due to the somewhat ritualized nature of intra-Loroi conflict that made fighters popular, part because the Loroi tech level at the time was much lower than it is presently, and part because fighters work better when you have the overwhelming numbers advantage. The Splinter Wars ended 758 years prior to the Bellarmine incident, and I think it is safe to say that it has passed out of living memory.

(If I am not mistaken, it was more a matter of the fact that the Loroi were really good at spoons, rather than the fact that spoons are better for digging than shovels.)

[dragoongfa]

Alright, I hate to point the obvious, in space fighters and fighter-bombers are practically useless for one simple fact that only the 'Lost Fleet' series has managed to put down on paper:

Both the fighters and their targets are traveling through the same medium which means that the ship with the better trust to mass ratio is automatically more nimble despite any size difference.

Star fighters may have better thrust to mass ratio than bulky battleships but they certainly won't be able to contend with smaller and more nimble ships like destroyers and frigates who will simple run circles around them. Furthermore even a lone battleship will be able to take down hundreds of starfighters due to its weapons and armor while the starfighters will never be able to out endure a proper starship in a prolonged fight.

The only saving graces that star fighters may have in the tactical sense is the role of miniature weapon platforms but then the problem becomes one of cost and effect: If a weapon is potent enough to be able to kill a cruiser then its too big and expensive to give to a short range and easily swatted fighter while if the weapon is small enough for a fighter then there are scant targets that it can be used against. The fact that they have been put down to PD duty speaks wonders on how horribly obsolete fighters are in the conflict.

The Loroi use of Star-Fighters is an anachronism that probably survives due to caste politics. All things considered it would be better (both from an economic and morale perceptive) to abandon the concept in favor of a copy of the Umiak Gunboats or a heavily specialized cheap and numerous Frigate class ship that would act as torpedo and gunboat sweeper.

[icekatze]

hi hi

I would suggest that rather than fighter pilots, the better analogy might be knights with swords vs soldiers with guns.

In the early days someone with an nth generation sword, honed to a fine craft over centuries of warfare, might fare alright against someone with a 1st generation matchlock musket. However, sending a squad of swordsmen against a squad of modern riflemen would be tantamount to suicide. But, in some rare situations, if a rifle armed soldier found themselves face to face with an enemy, pulling out a knife might be the correct move, and the opportunity cost of carrying a knife on their hip isn't prohibitively high.

I certainly expect that Loroi pilots are well trained to know what to expect from contemporary space combat.

[discord]

dragoon: that math is over simplified, there is a slight problem of structural integrity as well, and is the reason why star destroyers would go crunch under any significant acceleration.

the 'tear yourself apart' due to being TOO strong is not just a fictional thing.

as you apply acceleration your own mass becomes your limiting factor after a while.

[dragoongfa]

dragoon: that math is over simplified, there is a slight problem of structural integrity as well, and is the reason why star destroyers would go crunch under any significant acceleration.

the 'tear yourself apart' due to being TOO strong is not just a fictional thing.

as you apply acceleration your own mass becomes your limiting factor after a while.

You forget that ships with inertial dampers have far greater acceleration potential (Gs pulled + time accelerating) than fighters without inertial dampers.

It doesn't matter if a fighter can pull 40Gs for a few minutes. A destroyer with 30Gs of constant acceleration will be able to out accelerate it in the end because the fighter will be in danger of tearing itself apart if it tries too hard because of said lack of dampers.

Remember Space ships and Star Fighters operate in the same medium which is space and as thus they are subject to the exact same rules of mass to weight ratios in regards to speed and maneuverability. A modern frigate would tear itself apart if it tried to outmaneuver even a WW2 aircraft due to the resistance that water offers but it has no trouble outmaneuvering smaller skiffs if needed because the playing field of water resistance becomes the same.

@icekatze

The analogy is apt but actually proves my point:

Modern riflemen have bayonets which to the hands of a trained soldier are as lethal as any sword and soldiers do fix bayonets when hand to hand combat is a possibility.

The spaceship equivalent of a bayonet would be short range AMM missiles and PD batteries which make short work of any fighter.

[icekatze]

hi hi

I'm not sure why you included the conjunction "but," instead of "and," dragoongfa, since I was agreeing with you about the lack of offensive utility in fighters in the first place.

Bayonets and space fighters are both very situational tools in contemporary space combat. Bayonets in particular, have seen a steady decrease in utility over the years. In the American Civil War, the bayonet was responsible for less than 1% of battlefield casualties. In the Russo-japanese war, it was 0.3%. And in contemporary real world combat, there are only a handful of cases when bayonets have actually been cause casualties. I can only find three instances in the last 20 years, and one of them was because the soldier ran out of ammunition.

The Loroi space fighter is a mobile Point Defense platform. One of the significant benefits that it provides may be the ability to destroy Umiak torpedoes that are attempting to herd or box in a fleet, since point defense has limited range and the Umiak don't always fire their torpedoes straight in.

[dragoongfa]

Sorry, my reading comprehension devolves to 3rd grade level when I am sleepy...

[Arioch]

Small craft (fighters and gunboats) that rely on motherships can be designed using a much larger percentage of their mass and volume for engines, as they need less for fuel, supplies, crew amenities, jump drives, etc. And while straight-line acceleration is purely a matter of force vs. mass, rotation rate is limited by size. Because of the way torque and inertia work, a smaller hull can rotate faster than a larger one even if both have the same acceleration capability. So small craft can be both faster and more nimble than full-fledged starships.

The Loroi definitely have a heroic ethos built up around their fighter pilots, which is one reason why they continue to use them even in a war situation in which their effectiveness has come into question.

The Umiak use a lot of missiles, but they usually don't stand off, but rather close range behind the missile salvos as quickly as they can. Gunboats in particular must press in close to be effective, and so Loroi fighters go nose-to-nose with Umiak gunboats on a regular basis. The majority of Loroi fighter losses are to gunboats.

[dragoongfa]

Although I see the (flawed) logic behind the Loroi fighter concept the whole concept of nimbleness falls flat when it comes in contact with the concept of the turret and AMM missile combo. No matter how fast or nimble a fighter may be a turret and an AMM missile will be able to track the fighter with ease, the warship doesn't need to outperform the fighter but to just keep the fighter within its weapon envelopes.

The way I see it the fighters are death traps even against missiles and gunboats. I think that it is obvious that the Loroi know this and are working to correct this with the introduction of the mass produced Warhammer class destroyers but how many more Tenoins have to die before fighters go the way of the dodo in favor of the Warhammers?

[ShadowDragon8685]

Although I see the (flawed) logic behind the Loroi fighter concept the whole concept of nimbleness falls flat when it comes in contact with the concept of the turret and AMM missile combo. No matter how fast or nimble a fighter may be a turret and an AMM missile will be able to track the fighter with ease, the warship doesn't need to outperform the fighter but to just keep the fighter within its weapon envelopes.

The way I see it the fighters are death traps even against missiles and gunboats. I think that it is obvious that the Loroi know this and are working to correct this with the introduction of the mass produced Warhammer class destroyers but how many more Tenoins have to die before fighters go the way of the dodo in favor of the Warhammers?

Probably as many as it takes for someone to say "fuck this" and build a gunboat-sized warship using Loroi tech and shipbuilding techniques, and convince some Tenoin to try it out despite the odiousness of having borrowed the unit type from the enemy?



Come to think of it, that would really make the "whaling boat" analogy apt, wouldn't it?

[Tamri]

Although I see the (flawed) logic behind the Loroi fighter concept the whole concept of nimbleness falls flat when it comes in contact with the concept of the turret and AMM missile combo. No matter how fast or nimble a fighter may be a turret and an AMM missile will be able to track the fighter with ease, the warship doesn't need to outperform the fighter but to just keep the fighter within its weapon envelopes.

The way I see it the fighters are death traps even against missiles and gunboats. I think that it is obvious that the Loroi know this and are working to correct this with the introduction of the mass produced Warhammer class destroyers but how many more Tenoins have to die before fighters go the way of the dodo in favor of the Warhammers?

Lots of. Generally speaking, a fighter can give us something to endanger the ships main class only when there are two characteristics:

- He is really working anti-ship weapons, which operates at a normal distance, and not in focus; (Oddly enough, umiak gunboats carrying Medium PF to fit this criterion)

- They must be really a lot. Even if just because the push on a little boat ship dimensions guns obviously will not work, and for the destruction of normal ships they still need a good firepower.

Moreover, these features work only together, with no other fighter anyway be useless ballast, and a target for AMD. And, as we can see from the specifications, in this regard, as the anti-ship weapons Loroi fighters useless. They are incredibly few, their main armament is able to put at least some harm unless gunboats, and even then not all, and to hit targets with missiles, they: 1) are few rockets; 2) too few of themselves that would compensate.

In short, I would place the Loroi took off torpedoes with fighters and would put more guns for greater efficiency in the missile defense role. And left on all crafting one pilot, because the planting of two, already scarce specialists - unallowable expenditure cadres. It is desirable to make them at all automatic, operated from ships, but Tennoin disagree for this.

[ShadowDragon8685]

What's with the screens designation?

They seem to follow a standard roman numeral designation, and presumably to go as you'd expect - Class VI would be much more powerful than Class I, for instance, but some of the fighters have "class i" shields, with a lowercase i in the Loroi Ship Profiles. Is this merely a typographical error, or are "class i" shields sub-Class I shields?

And some of the warships have shields with plusses at the end - the Halberd Mk. 17 has "Class III+" Shields. Does this denote shields which are between Class III and Class IV, or does it mean that ongoing refits have resulted in some Halberds having Class III shields, and some have Class IV?

And if so... This is kind of confusing, honestly. If "Class i" shields are sub-Class I, why not call them "Class I-" shields. Alternatively, if the i is correct, why not list the Halberd as having "Class IIIi" shields?

[Absalom]

Alright, I hate to point the obvious, in space fighters and fighter-bombers are practically useless for one simple fact that only the 'Lost Fleet' series has managed to put down on paper:

Both the fighters and their targets are traveling through the same medium which means that the ship with the better trust to mass ratio is automatically more nimble despite any size difference.

Star fighters may have better thrust to mass ratio than bulky battleships but they certainly won't be able to contend with smaller and more nimble ships like destroyers and frigates who will simple run circles around them. Furthermore even a lone battleship will be able to take down hundreds of starfighters due to its weapons and armor while the starfighters will never be able to out endure a proper starship in a prolonged fight.

You know, every time I read this argument, it comes across as "if you carefully stack the deck, starfighters are permenantly useless". Outsider pushes their credibility, but they actually make some sense. Why? Because regardless of whether it's a gunboat, fighter, or "fighter-bomber" (heavy/assault fighter) all three types have a lower chance of getting hit at one light-second than a capital ship of the same speed.

Thrust is better? Please, thrust is just a means to an end, and the end is reduced chance to hit. Your chance-to-hit the target is determined by the area that your weapons fire will cover when it reaches the enemy, divided by ( the area that the target can cover before your weapons fire reaches them - the size of the target ), then modified according to how good your computers are at predicting the target's movements. If that number is 1 then you are guaranteed to hit them, if it's 0.1 you have a ten percent chance, if it's 0.01 you have a one percent chance. If we slow the Loroi assault fighter down to the same speed as the Warhammer and pretend that both are perfect spheres, then at any distance where a hit isn't guaranteed, the Warhammer is 32 times more likely to get hit than the assault fighter. For the Tornado (normal fighter) and Banshee (dedicated "bomber") the Warhammer is 43 times more likely to be hit, and for the Arrow the Warhammer is 69 times more likely to be hit. When you calculate in speeds (ALL of the four are around a sixth to a third faster than the Warhammer) the numbers are even more favorable. This comes with a correllary: for these numbers (no involvement with ECM & similar), the lower the chance to be hit, the closer they can get to their target before 100% chance of a hit.

Now consider: these small craft can't really take on capital ships, but can be and are outfitted to take on enemy ships that are large enough to kill capital ships. Four hits appear to have been enough to KO Winter Tide (and as bad luck had it, destroy it) when the Loroi were only facing gunships: I don't know how many hits from fighter-class weapons it takes to kill a gunship, or how close they have to be, but the math so far works out better for fighters vs gunships than Warhammers vs gunships. So much so that I expect any advantage that the Warhammer has to come entirely in the form of weapons range: the hit-chances are just way too skewed.

The only saving graces that star fighters may have in the tactical sense is the role of miniature weapon platforms but then the problem becomes one of cost and effect: If a weapon is potent enough to be able to kill a cruiser then its too big and expensive to give to a short range and easily swatted fighter while if the weapon is small enough for a fighter then there are scant targets that it can be used against. The fact that they have been put down to PD duty speaks wonders on how horribly obsolete fighters are in the conflict.

The fact that gunships are the target of point-defense speaks to how important PD is.

The Loroi use of Star-Fighters is an anachronism that probably survives due to caste politics. All things considered it would be better (both from an economic and morale perceptive) to abandon the concept in favor of a copy of the Umiak Gunboats or a heavily specialized cheap and numerous Frigate class ship that would act as torpedo and gunboat sweeper.

The gunboat is probably the better of the two ideas: from just the length the Hidden Dager class is maybe half as likely to get hit as a Warhammer, and if you altered the design to lean closer to a fighter thrust/mass ratio (and size) then you'd get something a bit better yet.

You forget that ships with inertial dampers have far greater acceleration potential (Gs pulled + time accelerating) than fighters without inertial dampers.

It doesn't matter if a fighter can pull 40Gs for a few minutes. A destroyer with 30Gs of constant acceleration will be able to out accelerate it in the end because the fighter will be in danger of tearing itself apart if it tries too hard because of said lack of dampers.

Acceleration potential that fighters don't have because of fuel limitations, and thus they'll fly in formation with the fleet, just like the Warhammers already do. The "perfect sphere volume" for the Warhammer is 15,625,000, while for the Lancer (largest of the fighter craft) it's 85,184. That's a three decimal place difference in volume that your inertial dampers have to overcome. Presumably it's possible, but this is no trivial feat.

The spaceship equivalent of a bayonet would be short range AMM missiles and PD batteries which make short work of any fighter.

And they happen to carry those same bayonet equivalents, and use them on targets that are similarly vulnerable. Your spearmen aren't fighting tanks, they're fighting wooly mamoths.

Although I see the (flawed) logic behind the Loroi fighter concept the whole concept of nimbleness falls flat when it comes in contact with the concept of the turret and AMM missile combo. No matter how fast or nimble a fighter may be a turret and an AMM missile will be able to track the fighter with ease, the warship doesn't need to outperform the fighter but to just keep the fighter within its weapon envelopes.

No, that's not how nimbleness matters. Nimbleness matters in terms of how close you need to get to your target before you have a 100% hit-chance. It has nothing to do with dodging bullets and similar implausibilities, it has to do with taking advantage of the speed of light to make it more likely that you will hit the enemy, than the other way around. I suspect that fighters still do most of their fighting in Outsider- knife-fight range, but on the way in they have the hit-chance advantage.

The way I see it the fighters are death traps even against missiles and gunboats. I think that it is obvious that the Loroi know this and are working to correct this with the introduction of the mass produced Warhammer class destroyers but how many more Tenoins have to die before fighters go the way of the dodo in favor of the Warhammers?

Against missles, but their chances against gunboats depends entirely on the effective range against gunboats of fighter weapons, because the fighters have the definitive advantage in terms of the chance of being hit.

The flaw in the logic is that the fighters presumably don't have either the weapons range or weapons power to capitalize on that hit-chance advantage against gunboats.

Lots of. Generally speaking, a fighter can give us something to endanger the ships main class only when there are two characteristics:

The Loroi don't really use fighters against the big Umiak ships, only against missiles, gunboats, and other small things.

- He is really working anti-ship weapons, which operates at a normal distance, and not in focus; (Oddly enough, umiak gunboats carrying Medium PF to fit this criterion)

Umiak gunboats do try to attack large Loroi ships.

In short, I would place the Loroi took off torpedoes with fighters and would put more guns for greater efficiency in the missile defense role. And left on all crafting one pilot, because the planting of two, already scarce specialists - unallowable expenditure cadres. It is desirable to make them at all automatic, operated from ships, but Tennoin disagree for this.

Fighter pilots seem to die young, but the Loroi don't have a real problem with crew availability, just with crew experience and supplies (such as ships).

What's with the screens designation?

They seem to follow a standard roman numeral designation, and presumably to go as you'd expect - Class VI would be much more powerful than Class I, for instance, but some of the fighters have "class i" shields, with a lowercase i in the Loroi Ship Profiles. Is this merely a typographical error, or are "class i" shields sub-Class I shields?

And some of the warships have shields with plusses at the end - the Halberd Mk. 17 has "Class III+" Shields. Does this denote shields which are between Class III and Class IV, or does it mean that ongoing refits have resulted in some Halberds having Class III shields, and some have Class IV?

And if so... This is kind of confusing, honestly. If "Class i" shields are sub-Class I, why not call them "Class I-" shields. Alternatively, if the i is correct, why not list the Halberd as having "Class IIIi" shields?

That's just the way Arioch decided to do it. At any rate, class i is probably much weaker than class I, enough so that class Ii would be much weaker than class I+. Remember: class i fits onto vessels less than 50 meters long.

[ShadowDragon8685]

Here's another question - a lot of ships have 'Warhead Launchers' but don't have any torpedoes listed as being carried.
And some have torpedoes listed as being in inventory, but don't have Warhead Launchers.


What, exactly, are Warhead Launchers? They seem to differ from the standard AMM launchers, but no munitions seem to be supplied for them.

[Arioch]

What's with the screens designation?

They're just labels that cover a variety of attributes. The (unfinished) functional description in the (unfinished) Ship Systems page looks something like this:



Damage formula:
Penetrating_damage = (Shot_damage - DA) - (DR*Overload) [if < 0, =0]
Cells_damaged = Penetrating_Damage / 5
Overload = Overload - Cells_damaged * 5
DA = MAX( DA - Cells_damaged, 1)
PD = MAX( PD - Cells_dmaaged, 2)

Did I mention that this is unfinished? I think I did.

What, exactly, are Warhead Launchers? They seem to differ from the standard AMM launchers, but no munitions seem to be supplied for them.

I'll clean up the terminology for these at some point, but they're essentially catapult systems for missiles or bombs. They're mostly used to project bombs at a planetary target, but they can also be used to give a torpedo or missile cluster a head start.

[Tamri]

.

By your logic, the rocket should be generally immune - because the rocket is clearly smaller fighter. However, the facts tell quite different.

If the Loroi fighter specialization - to intercept missiles and gunboats, it is unclear why the hell they take torpedoes and why they need heavy attack craft.

However, while Warhammer, by your logic, and what is at risk is stronger fighter plane to catch the shot, but it allows the arms to attack targets from a safe distance for him, dealing with decent damage. Whereas the same Arrow should be approached almost close to the enemy, that would at least scratch the paint on its casing.

Well, yes, a fighter on the ship's combat distance can be more tenacious than the primary ship class. The problem is that it is at that distance, unlike normal ship is to opponent is not absolutely no threat. And if he will approach to a distance of an effective fight, he will be just as easy targets, like any other ship in its range.

Given that the Academy produces the pilots pieces 50 at a time, and only one group of raiders need 20-40 pilots for a complete set, with the speed with which the pilots have the potential to die - it is incredibly small. In this arithmetic in Loroi has long had over the pilots, even in the early years of the war.