HOME | DD
KillaBC — Boiling Point
Published: 2012-09-05 22:07:56 +0000 UTC; Views: 3111; Favourites: 36; Downloads: 109
Redirect to original
Description
The Alliance Cruiser force intercepts the Reaper Destroyer and takes instant damage. The skrimish cost two cruisers and a third retreated.Same theme as the last one as it's a sequal of sorts and it gives me a chance to practice ever more on those action shots.
Ships by Bioware.
Jupiter by NASA edited by me.
Related content
Comments: 13
that's what you get for giving your ships tissue-paper armor
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The armour is strong, just not against reaper weapons.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
They have ablative armor, which I think is just sheet metal hung over the structure to stop lasers. Basicaly if the shields go down its dead. I was thinking of a couple meters of titanium armor plating, in terms of armor.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sounds about right as I recall ablative armour was in on the USS Defiant in DS9 which seemed to increase the livability of the ship even with shields down.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Defiant's ablative armor are in truth more sturdy, and ceramic based, adding chemical bond to actual thin layer of armor, but its still ablative armor. Here we only have thin layer of energy scattering coating, and no armor beneath it. Extensive use of kinetic barriers seems to make people dumb, it seems
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Element Zero does seem to have the same effect as magic in Harry Potter (Reduction of common sense)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
True. And about armor, considering the nature of Magnetohydrodynamic cannons (those fire streams of melted alloys at large sppeds of .c) , i doubt couple of meters of titanium plating would make any difference, althrough regular mass accelerators would do much less damage. Composite armor could be more effective (im really taking a guess here). So, in a nutshell - avoid getting hit.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Metal armour just melts away from that blast. Nanotubes would be more effective as they don't melt, they would bend after some time of pressure. The ME ships have shields as primary defence, you lose your shields and you retreat.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You have a point there with nanotubes, however covering entire ship in those would be rather expensive AFAIK, not even mentioning crystallographic defects, which can affect thermal properties by photon scattering. Stone Wales defect can also be thrown in as a example . Despite that my main nitpick with ME ships was lack of any meaningful form of armor plating behind shield bubble. Weapons with bleedthrough capabilities, or purely energy-based ones, given enough power behind each strike, could cause rather severe damage when struck by. Like particle beam, whick thanks to high energy state of accelerated particles, instantly knock out KB-s(CBT-s fare better against them thanks to objects being slapped away by those, not stopped). God forbid plasma, if barrier itself is too close to the hull. And i dont know if i understood that well, but you were throwing composites in the same group as a basic mono-material armor ?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It seems like ME ships use range as defence, as soon as the reapers goes in close their useless. Covering an entire ship with nanotubes might be expensive, but you can either cover only the impact areas and use normal 50 mm titanium for the rest, or armour it after the 'all or nothing' principle.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, i throught about nanotube reinforcements for bulkheads protecting vital areas of the ship, or even those bulkheads being entirely made of carbon nano-s. For exterior i would apply all or nothing scheme with composite armor, and throw in reactive armor plate above proper hull. Using anglo-german armor layout could be good enough to adequately protect hull from light kinetic impacts, but citadels would suffer from lack of armor thickness in exchange. I hope this can stop stray shots from penning where they shouldn't when ME space fleets decide to use AP ammo.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
We seem to have reached a consensus. You should have real armour too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1