/civ4xg/ - Stellaris, Civilization & 4X Strategy General

>>144642052
Cyclops eye mod when?

File: JUST.jpg (117KB, 910x462px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 910x462px

2nd for just league

File: epin.jpg (530KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 1920x1080px

Hello my fellow Materialist-minded individuals.
*tips space-helmet*

File: slipintosomethingalittlemoreconfortablespace.png (57KB, 674x489px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 674x489px

first for phd in FTL travel

File: 1450882609802.png (357KB, 397x402px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 397x402px

Is there a way to create full on scenario mods in Civ V?

>>144642539
isn't a scenario just a map?

>>144642409
man fuck reading that autism. Last thread was fun.

>>144642557
It depends on size, cost and scale factor of FTL engine.

>>144642638

No

>>144642714
are you the same person who couldn't read two sentences about why carriers are big?

>>144642409
Why even waste time with glassing with those physics
Why not just make a bigass slipspace drive and just crack a planet in half

>>144642887
for you

File: 1285605895183.jpg (380KB, 1024x575px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1024x575px

>>144642887
>runways in space

>>144642887
no I was arguing with that faggot

File: the problem with reactionless drives.gif (2MB, 454x244px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 454x244px

>>144643052
Because muh plot.

>>144642557
If that were true you'd see navies creating huge amounts of smaller ships. Not investing in carriers. Being in space or on the ocean changes nothing in that regard.

File: latest[1].jpg (18KB, 647x347px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 647x347px

>>144643052
slipspace was weaponized twice in the games already

>>144643243
>carriers
air craft carriers you fucking retard. Holy shit, they aren't spewing out a bunch of fighter boats

So did HOI4 outsell Stellaris or is this confirmed for Paradox's best game of all time. OF ALL TIME?

>>144643403
Do explain the apparently huge difference between strike craft and planes.

>>144643481
No idea.
For the lulz, go ask the autists in /gsg/

It'll trigger them into flining shit everywhere.

>>144643243
>If that were true you'd see navies creating huge amounts of smaller ships
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houbei_class_missile_boat

File: 1445972373343.jpg (81KB, 800x580px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 800x580px

>>144642638
Different victory conditions, different civ types with different starting techs, different units, bonuses for different events, etcetera.

>>144643717
Why would they care?
Its not like the hoi series is anything really good
They couldnt even get supply and naval AI to work in 3

File: tragic loss.png (917KB, 1046x794px) Image search: [Google]

917KB, 1046x794px

>>144643212
9/11 isn't a fucking joke

>>144643682
sea vs air

>>144643682
http://www.rocketpunk-manifesto.com/2007/08/space-fighters-not.html

>>144643997
Are you retarded?

>>144644196
are you?

File: 1365857612865.jpg (154KB, 858x990px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 858x990px

>>144643983
Okay fampaitachi.

>>144644245
There is no ocean in space dipshit.

>>144644374
(You)

>>144643846
That's half the reason.

The other half is that they flipped their shit when Stellaris was released becasue they couldn't handle a 4X in their thread.

>>144644474
You should have just said you were fucking retarded in the first place and I would have known not to bother.

>>144644374
we were literally just talking about about real life navies eg air craft carriers
>le space isnt an ocean lmao
idiot

>>144644118
lasers don't have that kind of range, and are shitty weapons in general

you're looking at missile spam, nuclear lances and particle beams I'd say

a "fighter" would have a much higher dV though, so it would still be a good platform for delivering weapons

>>144644584
You know those things that come out of hangers in stellaris? They are called strike craft retard. I asked what the difference between them and planes were.

>>144643682
There is no horizon in space.
Subsequently you don't need fighters to extend your range.
There is no water, nor air in space.
Subsequently you don't need fighters to use a 'faster' medium for weapons delivery.
There is no top speed in space.
Subsequently you don't need fighters to go fast.
There is no clutter and ambiguity to confuse automated system in space.
Subsequently you don't need fighters to visually inspect the target to identify it and establish ROE.
There is no apparent gravity in space.
Subsequently you don't need fighters because there are no hard upper limits on the size of your weapons platform.
Do I have to go on?

File: Kozlov.jpg (375KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 900x1200px

>>144642409
What kind of reaction did you intend on me having from this image?

>>144643336
Well it was only weaponized once. New Mombasa got fucked because the Prophet was panicking cause his entire fleet go wiped out and just wanted to gtfo and didn't care much about the collateral.

>>144644710
well in the context of what we were talking about; there are real life naval (on the ocean) strike crafts. You asked what the difference between them and planes were. I explained and then you got snippy.

File: oh for fucks sake.jpg (49KB, 415x392px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 415x392px

>radiation fucks up computers
>cant just fly about with drones
>humans would be considered too high risk because you'd be flying to certain death
>military craft go low-tech and start using clockpunk drones

File: IMG_1020.jpg (84KB, 719x703px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 719x703px

>>144644813
>there is no clutter in space
>space is empty

>>144644672
If you want to remain slightly realistic, the requirements for reaction mass makes fighters impossible.

>>144644994
There sure are a lot of burning buildings, concealing terrain features and panicking sandnigger civilians walking into the line of fire in space.
Fucking retard.

>>144644950
you know you can shield electronics right?

most serious long range spacecraft would probably generate their own magnetic field anyway

>>144644813
almost forgot
>no gravity
>no top speed and friction means inertia stops existing

>>144644813
While there is no top speed in space, mass and intertia still exist and the heavier an object in motion the more energy required to change directions.

Future space combat will probably involve lots of very small, well armed drones deployed from a "mothership" unless we develop some form of instantaneous weapon. Otherwise you're shooting at signatures hours or even days old in the vastness of space.

I don't think any space battles will occur within visual range except under very strange circumstances.

>>144643243
>If that were true you'd see navies creating huge amounts of smaller ships. Not investing in carriers
Carriers are literally bases for huge amounts of smaller ships high capable in mobility area (they are so capable that they can fly).

>>144644994
do you know what space consists of? fucking space it's named after it

>>144644813
>>144645181
>no top speed
>zip about at 50k km/h
>hit a fist-sized rock
>the bridge is gone

>>144644118
>carriers are useless because lasers
Does it really need to be explained why lasers are terrible weapons?

>>144645189
>the heavier an object in motion the more energy required to change directions
The heavier a ship the bigger a drive system it's going to pack.
Doesn't matter how big you are if the TWR and mass ratio stay the same.

File: PAX-0004-Casaba-1st-gen-Model[1].jpg (41KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x375px

>>144645189
probably you'll need to close, missiles and drones can be shot down, slugs can be evaded

but dodge this motherfucker

File: 1185052-emperor.jpg (23KB, 386x279px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 386x279px

>start as individualist, materialist science directorate
>want to go full blown exploration and science ala Star Trek Federation
>literally every neighbor are a mix of xenophobe spiritualist military and other shit that doesn't mix well with mine
>mfw

Knew I should have gone with space Hitler

>>144645347
>what are forward shields
we have learnt since titanic

>>144645449
please do explain, like I have half a foot in the door to put a ballista on my corvettes

>>144645553
>shields
Ok, just waiting for you to invent them

>>144645449
>carriers are useless because lasers
Carriers are useless because anything a fighter can do a missile can do better.
Here's you 'carrier' senpai:
http://www.rocketpunk-manifesto.com/2009/08/space-warfare-vii-kinetics-part-2.html

>>144644813
What does this have to do with stellaris?

>>144645605
plasma barriers are already a thing

>>144645605
I will when I invent militaristic space travel

>>144645567
Lasers work be transferring energy in the form of heat. All you need is something to reflect the heat. Something that already exists and we can barely leave our planet.

>>144645832
>Lasers work be transferring energy in the form of heat
Already wrong, not an argument.

>>144645538
That is the correct mfw to use.

>>144645725
None of those would do shit to protect against an impact of that power
And most of them are actually just radiation shielding, not projectile shielding

>>144645832
reflective armor might have some effect but not a great one, the coating would need to be perfect too

it's shit because it takes a lot of energy to do little damage, and at interplanetary distances they diffuse extremely quickly to the point of uselessness for anything but navigation

lasers that go to the moon already reach 60km radius from a point emitter on earth

>>144645181

Space isn't a true vacuum, it's full of all manner of dust and gases, sure they're pretty far spaced out and the friction is practically negligible in most cases, but it's there.

>>144645459
The bigger a ship the more fuel you need to make it do anything.

Unless we develop an unlimited energy source of course.

>>144645567
Lasers take a long time to actually kill something, especially if its armored. They use a massive amount of energy as well. With today's tech with the best ship mounted laser available it takes 3 seconds within visual range to kill a plane with a laser.

>>144645832
I hope you're not >implying you can reflect a laser with a mirror or something. No, you don't want to reflect the laser, you want to absorb the heat. In space that's kinda hard since you can't radiate heat well, but at the same time that's another strike against lasers since lasers build up an exorbitant amount of heat.
Carbon Carbon is the only reliable way to shield something from long term laser focusing, but that shit is expensive as dick to make.
Ablative armor would be much more reasonable as a defense against lasers, it would be a "can this not fall off before their ship overheats" game of cat and mouse in a sense.

>>144644374
but there's an ocean of spacetime newfriend!

File: 20160606190546_1.jpg (447KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 1920x1080px

Is there a relatively painless way to change my empire's ship appearance? I didn't see any console commands relating to it.

I'm getting advanced enough that I can stand up against fallen empires, I like the Mammalian designs but I'm feeling that I want some more weird looking ships like the custom golden/white molluscoid ships or something.

>>144645459
rocket engines don't scale that way, there's a reason irl space probes are tiny and use high isp low thrust shit like ion drives

>>144642374
I wonder if that was intentional by the team or if it was just the guy writing the text files being cheeky and sneaking it in

Either way, well played

>>144646137
>No, you don't want to reflect the laser, you want to absorb the heat. In space that's kinda hard since you can't radiate heat well, but at the same time that's another strike against lasers since lasers build up an exorbitant amount of heat.

Fans, a series of massive ship mounted fans to keep the hull from overheating during laser attacks.

File: 1459121095844.gif (2MB, 460x238px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x238px

>>144646476
What part of
>you can't radiate heat in space
are you not getting man.

>>144644813

Very little space combat in stellaris makes much sense when you bring cold hard logic into it.

It's designed to look good and fit the bill. In reality it's hard to say what exactly you'd use when you theoretically have weapons that are pinpoint accurate and travel at the speed of light.

>>144646476
>Fans, a series of massive ship mounted fans to keep the hull from overheating during laser attacks.

What. the. fuck.

AIR MOTHERFUCKER THERE IS NO FUCKING AIR

>>144646419
The reason being it would be prohibitively expensive to launch them otherwise or they wouldn't be able to be launched in one piece.
Per-kilogram-to-orbit cost scales inversely with launcher size.

File: latest[1].png (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

>>144646534
elite has a fancy active radiator that uses some kind of microwave convertor to dump heat fast

>>144646534
>can't radiate heat in space
then why do you get cold in space

>>144646561
Who even metioned Stellaris?
This is Space Propulsion Analysis and Design general.

>>144646434

a lot of the lines in the game are kind of intentionally hypocritical or a little bit silly

the insult lines are always a little silly wink/nod for instance, when a species which has no real discernible face, says they can't tell what part of you is your face.

>>144646617
you don't understand, the bigger the engine the more it weighs, the more it weighs the bigger it needs to be

it scales nonlinearly, at some point you can't add more fuel or bigger engines to push more fuel and bigger engines, for purely practical reasons

File: blues clues.gif (500KB, 500x374px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 500x374px

Militaristic spacecraft would just be orbital defenses and missile launchers/asteroid tugs at our current technological level
Everything else would be incredibly slow, expensive, and/or unreliable
A nebula might allow for some interesting battles, though, if the gas clouds are dense enough for smaller ramjet-like ships to operate

>>144646685
Call me when we have the technology to do that because right now we'd burn more energy trying to do that than we would leaving orbit.

>>144646745
Because space is cold as fuck and your body radiates heat. Also the vacuum of space splits you open.

>>144646745
you don't, space would be neutral at best, scalding hot in direct sunlight at worst

>>144646561
lasers are shit weapons though, they may go at the speed of light but that doesn't make them better

>>144646842
You're confusing deltaV with simple upscaling of designs.
Twice as big rocket with twice as many engines and twice the fuel has the same deltaV and TWR but carries twice the payload.

>>144646137
Material to reflect heat already exists. The Apollo program for instance used a thin layer of aluminum on the landing vehicles to reflect heat.

>>144646875
so your body in space, radiates heat, but you can't radiate heat in space. gotcha

>>144646745
>I never went past The Magic School Bus when it came to learning science

>>144646534

Are you pretending to be retarded? The entire point is that the ONLY real way to lose heat in space is to:

Eject materials that conduct heat from the craft, reducing the heat of the craft (dumping coolant after it's heated up, for instance)

Radiate (heat, as radiation, leaving the craft, as infra red radiation) heat very slowly from large surfaces.

There are no air currents, air or solid objects to conduct the heat to, so that only method is either removing hot material from the craft or radiating heat slowly via radiation.

>>144646973

>lasers are shit

are we talking stellaris or IRL here?

>>144647021
Who gives a shit about your literal tinfoil hat shield when you can just blow fuckers away with a bomb-pumped xaser.

File: ProjectOrion-Main[1].jpg (36KB, 572x400px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 572x400px

>>144646994
it doesn't scale that way

>>144646853
>our current technological level
1970 says hi

>>144647102
spills the beans for me genius, make sure to read the conversation to know exactly what you're butting into :^)

>>144646534
You mean convection doesn't work in space. Radiation can be used to get rid of heat in space, astronauts have radiators in their suits.

File: unbiddenwojack.jpg (71KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 633x758px

WHY WONT YOU LET US IN

WE JUST WANT A MULTICULT GALAXY FREE OF non-energy based lifeforms

LET US IN YOU ORGANIC RACISTS

>>144647187
>Orion
is a long distance travel craft that takes years to speed up and slow down

>>144647083
Ships are not organic, yes. The only way they can get rid of heat naturally is via radiation which is a very slow process. Otherwise you need heat sinks which are then ejected from the ship or cooled by other means internally.

>>144647021
Correct. That would classify as ablative armor however, which I already addressed.

>>144646973
Space is like -270 degrees Celsius dude.

>>144647293
orion is an orbital battleship with extremely high dV and a nuclear arsenal to rival a small nation

ITT: anons can't tell the difference between heat and temperature

>>144646853

>Everything else would be incredibly slow, expensive, and/or unreliable

What are you basing that off.

Keep in mind, there is no fundamental difference between a space craft and a space station. Their abilities differ but the basics are the same, they are both orbital craft. As long as we work with physics that's going to be roughly true.

What would be the difference between something that's a tug/orbital defense and an assault craft? They'd both use the same mechanisms.

At the current tech level, there exist guided missiles, kinetic kill projectiles that would work very well, and given enough fuel could certainly hit something on the other side of the planet given good enough guidance.

>>144647326
and your rug is the same temperature as your tiled floor but the tiles still feel colder

>>144647326
>Ships are not organic
irrelevant. Everything has an energy and everything can radiate heat in space. Whether it's effective enough for space travel or not is another matter but saying you can't radiate heat in space in fundamentally wrong.

>>144646685
If you could just take the little bit of heat building up across your ship and concentrated in one spot such that you could use it for something like a fucking laser beam then you would be reversing entropy. You can't reverse entropy without introducing and using energy from outside the system, thereby creating more heat.

>>144647326
>Correct. That would classify as ablative armor however, which I already addressed.
It reflected 95% of the heat. Seems a lot more effective than you want people to believe.

>Space is like -270 degrees Celsius dude.
Space varies pretty wildly in temperature.

>>144647632
yes that was a bit of a typo, I meant to say you can't *quickly* radiate heat in space.

>>144647187
What the fuck are you even on about?
Twice the rocket carries twice the payload.
Very small motors are incredibly inefficient due to minimum gauge problems. There's a breakpoint where square cube law and material science concerns with high pressures and temperatures make very large motors impractical but since the 70s nobody's even approached that point due to lack of demand for heavy lift.

>>144647326

>Space is like -270 degrees Celsius dude.

Yes, you still can't lose heat except via radiation.

If you were in space, but attached to a metal plate that was -270 C, you'd lose heat real fuckin fast.

>>144647768
fair enough

>>144646875
>Also the vacuum of space splits you open.

No it doesn't. Your tissue swells up in hard vacuum so you end up looking like a googly-eyed body builder but your internal body pressure isn't enough to cause your skin to rupture.

Your lung tissue can be ruptured by explosive decompression if you try and hold a lungful of air in when you're exposed but that's the air's expansion crushing delicate capillaries, not the tissue itself being torn apart by the vacuum.

>>144647326
>Space is like -270 degrees Celsius dude.
Yes, but radiation-based cooling is terribly slow
If you're going to have onboard fusion/fission reactors you're going to need radiators way bigger than what we have now

>>144647745
heat pipes are a thing, they're in your computer right now

>>144646374

pls

it can't be that difficult

>>144647942
start a new game

>>144647797
twice the rocket does not carry twice the payload because it has to carry itself first

>>144647757
It reflected 95% of the very non focused heat, yes.
Lasers would be much hotter, much more focused, and be far less reflected than general atmospheric heat.
I'm not saying it wouldn't be effective, rather I said ablative armor would be the best method for protection against laser weaponry unless we can figure out how to mass produce carbon carbon.

>>144647906
Creating more heat which you need to radiate.

What you are proposing is basically zero entropy or reversing entropy.

Thread is giving me kspg flashbacks.
>>144648064
This is bait.

>>144648156
heat pipes are completely passive

take your popsci slogans somewhere else baka

>>144647434
And it relies on being able to carry nuclear bombs to get around, and a working pusher plate
A weaponized Orion engine would be a kinetic-kill vehicle or a long-distance weapon carrier
You're not going to just hand off dozens of nukes to everyone in your fucking fleet so they can get around

>>144648020

It's literally just a value in your save, I would've thought.

>>144648347
>literally being retarded

"you're not going to"
>personal incredulity

FACT: USAF, WAS going to

File: 143546843704058.jpg (37KB, 329x400px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 329x400px

>>144647434
>IT'S A MASSIVE NUCLEAR BOMB SHAPED SHIP POWERED BY A NUCLEAR REACTOR, PROPELLED BY NUCLEAR WARHEADS AND ARMED WITH NUCLEAR MORTARS!!!!

That idea has to be the most stupid product of the 1950's 'Everything should be NUCLEAR!' mindset other than the Davey Crockett. And only because the Davey Crockett was actually built.

I imagine putting a pocket of really cold air between the outside of the ship and the rest of the ship would be a good way to cool it down.

>>144648251
Dude, think through things before you say it. Passive heat pipes don't concentrate heat, they distribute it further making it less usable for your microwave whatever.

>>144648250
Mechjeb isn't cheating, NASA uses it

>>144648506
>USAF, WAS going to
>US military does something stupid! Therefore, we should all be stupid!

>>144648550
heat travels from high temperature areas to low temperature areas, that's all there is to it

if you are removing heat from one area via a beam into space then heat will travel from other parts of the ship to there

>>144648443
I dunno how it works exactly but it's not that easy. It logs all your individual ships, fleets, etc. you'd have to change every single one

>>144648514
I fucking love the Davey Crockett, it's so great.

>>144648740
You are proposing taking a moderate temperature mass and extracting that thermal energy such that it is very very cold and concentrating that thermal energy into a beam without introducing further energy such as fuel for this machine. That is a reduction of entropy. It's impossible.

>>144647434
If you can move at interplanetary speeds having nukes is sort of a non-issue, your kinetic energy alone could turn any car-sized piece of metal you drop into a kiloton-range weapon.

wouldnt you have basically insane energy if you could build a machine that converts matter to energy

like breaking down the bonds between subatomic particles or some shit

>>144648514
>the most stupid
Maybe, but it's an awe-inspirign kind of stupid.

File: 396845_3180370314691_1428686839_33339574_223175234_n[1].jpg (65KB, 831x517px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 831x517px

>>144648514
thank fuck for kennedy

>>144648974
>interplanetary speed
???
any speed past escape velocity is "interplanetary"

>>144645567
Because you can't have powerful energy source in space (because what is Heat engine and why radiators only way to dump waste heat). Though same problem prohibits powerful high delta V engines and realistic space warfare would be dull and slug speed in the star system scale.

>>144649105
that's why antimatter is so dangerous, yeah

>>144642052
Why do torpedoes appear 4 times?

>>144649169
>nolbe

>>144649105
>wouldnt you have basically insane energy if you could build a machine that converts matter to energy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3QT1MFYcmo
Fission reactor
Fusion reactor
Annihilation Reactor
Black hole

>>144649105
Yeah, it's called nuclear energy
fission of atoms heavier than iron, and fusion of atoms lighter than iron

File: Nuked.webm (895KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

895KB, 1280x720px

>>144648857
Putting the horror that is a tactical nuclear device in the hands of junior officers is idiocy of the highest order. Thank fuck they came to their senses before they were widely deployed.

What if you put trebuchets on spaceships

File: fet.jpg (148KB, 421x443px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 421x443px

Can we please dial back on the pseudoscience here?
Rockets can't travel in space because the aether will slow you down eventually.

File: relativelyfgsfds.jpg (64KB, 809x545px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 809x545px

>>144649482
>black hole
>real

>>144649698
Black holes are abut as real as your mother.

>>144648974
You are forgetting the Cygni Treaty of 4,577 CE, banning the use of kinetic energy weapons within planetary systems above 10^23 Joules.

>>144642052
The best way to rank weapons would be by making a defense tiers chart and what they counter/are countered by

Armor is top tier vs kinetics/missiles/torpedoes/disruptors, mid to low tier vs lasers/matter disintegrators/lightning guns and below shit tier vs plasma or lances. But at least it doesn't require any power.

Shields by themselves are pretty meh, because if you don't have Shield Capacitors (which requires Shield Tech 3) they don't regen in combat. AT ALL. They are meh tier vs lightning which has 50% bypass (though you'll almost always have more hp than shields so arc guns still need to deplete the whole shield to kill a ship) and low tier vs disruptors which do double damage to them, and mega shit vs torpedoes which bypass shields completely.
BUT! If you add even a single small shield cap, shields will regen the listed amount PER DAY. This elevates them by at least 1 or 2 tiers, except against torpedoes which still bypass them completely.

HP (from crystal armor) is high tier vs everything, since nothing bypasses it and it doesn't require any power to use.

>>144649836
Anon was born in a synthetic womb

>>144649169
>any speed past escape velocity is "interplanetary"
escape velocity is 40,270 km/h
closest planet to Earth: Venus 107,477,000 km (0.718 AU)
107,477,000/40,270=~2669
2669/24=111.2 days
111.2 days to get to Venus. Actually doesn't seem that far giving that the """"""""""moon landings""""""""""" are real and all

>Stellaris exhaust its entertainment value after a month
>thread drowns in shitposting
Tis' tragic, if predictable.

>>144649502
No I mean like breaking down any object into raw energy

HEY GUYS
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT MASS DRIVERS?

>>144649413
they're just that good
no one actually knows

File: nickdubs.jpg (29KB, 433x444px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 433x444px

>>144650032
I think it used to be about the balance of fighters in stellaris at some point

>>144650110
they're very cool

like the spaceship equivalent of giving a broadside

>>144649983
>measuring interplanetary distances in straight lines
wew

>>144649903
>10^23
FUCK I FORGOT TO CELEBRATE MOL DAY

>>144649676
then the spaceship will get knocked backwards

>>144650079
which is what antimatter does

>>144650110
Eh, I'd rather a laser canon.

>>144650292
yeah

we should build a reactor that does that

then go super fast in space and shit

>>144650110
Boring.
I want a missile with a nuke-pumped laser warhead.

>>144650220
>distance between two objects is not straight
meme elsewhere weir

File: 718.png (1MB, 1440x900px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x900px

>>144649836
>your mother's Schwarzschild radius joke

>>144650451
teleforce is the way to go

>>144650451
Though on an afterthought it can be launched out of mass driver if you insist.

>>144650409
>build antimatter engine
>single antimatter particle gets out
>explosion
>rest of particles get out
>everything in 10 miles is gone

File: spessship.webm (3MB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 960x540px

>>144649105
That's basically what an antimatter/matter reactor would do, both mutually annihilate and release a shit load of exotic particles and energy.

Project Valkyrie designed an engine based on that to propel interstellar spacecraft.

The downside is that, firstly, antimatter is extremely expensive to produce, a single atom of antihydrogen is probably the most valuable thing on the planet relative to it's mass, given how expensive it is to run the particle accelerators needed to create it. You'd need something like massive solar collectors parked next to the Sun to power colossal particle accelerators to produce enough to reach Alpha Centauri.

Secondly, it's hard/energy intensive to store, especially in large quantities when it becomes extremely dangerous. You need to keep it magnetically sealed in a near-perfect vacuum because if it touches ANY regular matter, they'll mutually destroy each other and shit will go down.

Thirdly, heat. You'd never be able to use ALL of the energy produced in an antimatter/matter reaction, even with really, really efficient engines, so any spacecraft you build powered by it is going to need absolutely huge, extremely efficient radiators relative to the size of it's engines and payload.

Lastly, a Valkyrie engine burn for an interstellar mission would be visible for many light years in every direction, which might draw attention to you, which might suck if aliens turn out to be less like E.T. and more like The Thing.

>>144650625
Should have constructed additional dilithium crystals

>>144650556
the path that a body takes in a gravitational field is not straight

Dude, like, what if we strapped a sun-powered engine to Earth and shit?
>>144650564
Are you triggered?

Would it be possible/viable to somehow use mass driver projectiles as heat sinks for a ship?
>get rid of unwanted heat faster
>get rid of faggot causing your ship to heat up to begin with

>>144650661
>specify a quantity
>proceed to list it's value by weight
A single pound of gold is very expensive by weight.

>>144650661
Laser sail is a way to go if you want to be unseen.

>>144650661
>attracting attention
if aliens wanted us dead we would already be dead

>>144650732
no shit. That is not the same as the distance between two planetary objects. It may vary in distance but it will always be straight.

>>144650790
No, because you can't just convert a little bit of heat spread over your ship into usable concentrated energy without violating thermodynamics.

ENTROPY, MOTHER FUCKER

>>144648857
Remember the Alamo

>>144650790
In the same way you can use the exhaust of your engine as a heatsink, sure.
I.e. not in any usable way, because heat pumps generate heat themselves.

File: stupid_anon.jpg (64KB, 562x420px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 562x420px

>>144650556
Holy shit you're a fucking retard.

>>144650732
You can still assume that there is a point in time that the orbis are so alligned that when you leave earth at escape velocity and arrive at the orbit of venus, that venus will be there.

>>144650790
Ues and most powerful such device is called ...Orion Drive.

>>144650803
What's your point?

Antimatter is extremely expensive to produce even in tiny quantities and you need literal tons of it to get to other stars.

File: peace through power.png (952KB, 1047x711px) Image search: [Google]

952KB, 1047x711px

Rate my Synth

What if it turns out you can generative motive force with the sheer power of autism?

>>144651126
My point is that you done made a little goof.

>>144651005
So how far away is venus?

File: techtree 2.png (959KB, 1874x5961px) Image search: [Google]

959KB, 1874x5961px

Natural
>Engineers
>Physicists
>Sociologists

I want one of it to combine with Intelligent for max research speed race. Which one should I pick?

>>144645189
Drones consume 4 times the fuel that a missile needs.

Drone or fighter:
accelerate to target
decelerate to target
accelerate to mothership
decelerate to mothership

Missile:
accelerate to target

>>144650878
They might just not know we're here. Our radio transmissions become indistinguishable from universal background radiation just a few light years from us.

>>144651231
38-261 terameters

>>144650451
I want a missile that shoots popcorn at just the right temperature

>>144651231
0.72 AU

>>144650957
No you dont understand.
The heatsink IS the projectile

>>144651231
Not that anon, but delta V is what matters in a planetary system. Distance isn't a good indicator of how much energy it takes to get from point A to point B. Also your desired voyage duration has to be taken into account. More energy means less travel time.

>>144651231
Give or take 700 meters per second from an escape trajectory to a capture.

>>144651231
Depends on the day of the year :^)

>>144646053
>from a point emitter on earth
You need a larger emitter aperture so you can then maintain your focus over longer distances

>>144651369
anon, they're already here

>>144650957
Lord Entropy, brother.
>can't play materialist spiritualist Entropy-bringers
>>144651231
It varies greatly because of orbits, anon
at its closest: 24 million miles (38 million km)
at its farthest:162 million miles (261 million km)
And you dont travel in a straight line to it, to escape the Earth's SoI, then burn retrograde to the sun until you achieve an encounter with Venus's SoI

>>144651291
Why not all 4?
Gene modding baby

>>144651426
>1 terameter is about a lighthour
>Venus at 1.5 to 100 lightdays away
Dank meme

File: 457457438.jpg (181KB, 1046x1232px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1046x1232px

>>144651598

>>144651297
Missiles are also a lot less versatile have a limited range they can be launched from and can be shot down by point defenses.

New thread:
>>144422926
>>144422926
>>144422926
>>144422926

>>144651683
you cant get all 4, you only get one if you pick it at the start

File: 20160606210055_1.jpg (166KB, 415x1070px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 415x1070px

total war?

File: 637354_1_kirk[1].jpg (506KB, 768x1000px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 768x1000px

>>144651587
so you're saying you would need a phased array laser?

a... phaser... if you will?

>>144651291
Physicists since all the AI related tech speed boosts are in physics. granted you can get those no matter what your specialy is.

>>144651732
everything you said can apply to fighters and drones too.

>>144651732
>have a limited range they can be launched from
As opposed to?
>can be shot down by point defenses
As opposed to?
>a lot less versatile
>having more useful payload is less versatile
???

>>144651291
That chart is old.
Is there an updated one?

>>144647757
>Space varies pretty wildly in temperature.
Temperature is a property of matter.

A vacuum has no temperature.

>>144651985
Space isn't a true vacuum

File: IMG_1015_2.jpg (26KB, 300x296px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x296px

>>144651697
>terameters

I meant gigameters

>>144652053
>le no true scotsman fallacy

>>144651502
That's not a good idea. Nothing is gained from your projectile being a little hot.

Heat sinks on spacecraft simply radiate heat into space.

>>144651159
>android
>not gynoids
Waifu robot civ WHEN

>>144651781
Then pick none, maybe intelligent. Genemod the rest

>>144652117
In quantum field theory, a false vacuum is a metastable sector of space that appears to be a perturbative vacuum, but is unstable due to instanton effects that may tunnel to a lower energy state. This tunneling can be caused by quantum fluctuations or the creation of high-energy particles. The false vacuum is a local minimum, but not the lowest energy state, even though it may remain stable for some time.

File: 145437856459.jpg (200KB, 1040x656px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1040x656px

Is there a mod or some way to make the default United Nations faction appear in your games when you find Sol, instead of the World War II era Sol III?

File: 1458372448251.jpg (67KB, 694x530px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 694x530px

>>144651841
>phaser
>looks like a remove xeno trumpet
spess serbs!

>>144652117
>Vacuum has a clearly defined definition
>Saying something doesn't fit that defiinition is no true scotsman
Ayyyy

>>144651903
That implies you're using drones within visual range and not just mobile launch platforms you can send up a lot closer to the enemy.

>>144651910
Well, you can only shoot a missile so far before it runs out of fuel. Unless the enemy just isn't evading at all.
Mass drivers would be very difficult to intercept with point defenses, for instance.
>drones are a payload
Drones carry a payload, which can include missiles.

The value of a drone is you can send them 3 lighyears ahead to attack the enemy and if it dies you lose 2 million bucks as opposed to sending your big warship 3 lightyears ahead to a kill probable range and then maybe having it get shot down and being out 30 billion bucks and 300 highly trained soldiers.

There was a mod in the workshop that added a neutral ethic, but it hasn't worked in 1.1, and fucking around with the game files didn't help. Does anyone know how to add NEW ethics (without changing/replacing the existing ones) in the current game version? It's really difficult to add empire modifiers outside of ethics and techs, both of which seem difficult to add without revising current ones, and especially to add without making it freely available to any AI character that wants it.

How can I make the Swarm and Unbidden more powerful? I can't figure out how to increase the amount of Swarm reinforcements and increase the speed at which they get them to less than it's current every 10 years. I also want to increase the health of the unbidden portal and turn it into a true eye of terror.

>>144652053
>“That was our first thought, that the hydrogen was migrating through the walls of the containment chamber. But we were rapidly disabused of this notion by the sheer volume and persistence of the hydrogen density.
Regardless of how many times we ionized the chamber and swept the chamber clean, we still had the same amount of hydrogen we started with. And we could count how much hydrogen we had removed from the chamber. So it was obvious what was going on. Hydrogen was being created in the chamber. Our observations informed us that this process did not occur until a certain level of vacuum had been obtained. But from then on, it was hopeless to try to obtain our “perfect vacuum”. So we gave up and worked with what we had to work with.

>But it is appearing there in the vacuum chamber. I still can’t account for the sheer volume of it by such logical excursions as the above mentioned possibility. For us, the process was similar to trying to empty out a flowing stream of water by using a spoon. We kept taking water out, and more kept appearing. It doesn’t take too long under such circumstances to realize that the effort is futile.

>>144652412
I can swap around every 'drone' and 'missile' in your post and it still makes the same amount of sense.

>>144652412
It's not like there's friction in space. Just use a large proportion of fuel merely for acceleration and reserve a small amount for course corrections once you get close enough. It's not like there's any significant friction to slow it down.

>>144652412
Instead of sending a drone, you can send a missile and not have to spend a trillion on extra fuel.

>>144649169
>any speed past escape velocity is "interplanetary"
Yes, of course. What is your point?

>>144652053
>Space isn't a true vacuum
It is effectively for the temperature calculations you would do in terms of spaceships.

>speed
REEEEEEEEEEE

>>144652953
escape velocity isn't exactly threatening

>>144653046
I have a REEEEEEEEEE, a REEEEEEEEEEEE for SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEd

>>144652558
>>144652639
No, because a drone is smart and can carry a much larger fuel reserve than a missile. It can operate for weeks or months at a time.
>until it gets close
That's the problem with missiles. Space is endless and you can travel in every single direction. You can't just let it course correct, in space you can course correct in every conceivable direction. You'll detect someone lightyears away, but of course he's not there anymore by the time you get the readings, he's in any number of directions away form where you detected him. You're talking about nations fighting each other days at a time because space is so fucking big.

You play Mass Effect? Remember it talking about ships targeting hours in advance? You're talking about targeting days in advance. You can't just drop a missile in their general direction because their general direction is almost meaningless when you get down to it. The only conceivable way to kill a ship with a missile is to launch a missile from a (relatively speaking) very close range.
Which means you either send an inexpensive drone to do it, or try to close in with your multibillion dollar ship. And there's no guarantee you can actually do that because again, infinite possibilities for maneuverability. If you send a thousand drones that's less of a problem, but sending one ship or one fleet in one direction is a total fucking crapshoot, and suicidal at worst if they realize you're trying to beeline for them and just launch a fuckton of ordinance where they were as they go to where they're going to be.

File: 145648997460.jpg (99KB, 1197x798px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1197x798px

Mammalian ships that don't look like ass when?

>>144653391
>No, because a drone is smart and can carry a much larger fuel reserve than a missile. It can operate for weeks or months at a time.

The only difference between a drone and a missile is that you plan to recover a drone and expend a missile.

All other characteristics are arbitrary.

>>144652231
What mod?
Share clothes.

Anyone know any way to make it likely that my scientist will get psionics specialty?

>>144653391
What's the point in sending the drone if they can see that coming anyway too and, since they're on the defensive, send more drones to intercept quicker. The offensive drone is on the disadvantage because it has a relatively fixed destination. You can send a whole batch of interceptor drones to cover it's potential "evade vector" and you've got a defense.

>>144653803
Human Revolution

>>144653391
I don't see what's the fundamental difference that prevents a missile from coasting for a couple of days, scanning the area with passive sensors. before engaging its final drive,

>>144653803
>http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=687822601

>>144653902
hire lvl 1 scientists, quick learners

>>144653972
You don't send drones you send swarms of missiles and hopefully your throw weight is better than their defensive ability.

>>144654121
I never asked for this

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>144654154
That's my point exactly, the drone's "strength" is also its weakness.

File: 1464153422937.png (86KB, 510x546px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 510x546px

>stopid 'umies shotin mizzles 'stead a just ramin and shootin dakka an grotz
you 'umies is nevah gonna be good at fightan and lootan

>>144653716
Except that a missile is dumb and a drone is smart. A missile can only follow is target, but in space unless you're very close it's following a trail hours, days, possibly weeks old, and unless this is a big fucking missile it's going to run out of fuel long before it finds its targets.

Not to mention sending missiles in every direction to find a ship is retarded and wasteful, even if one missile finds the fleet it just gets shot down by point defenses. Missiles would need to operate in swarms, which again means you'd need some kind of close launch platform, preferably several, such as a drone swarm.

>>144653972
Because a drone could also be very stealthy, but this is one of the problems with space warfare. It's very information based, and heavily biased towards the defender since he could react much better.
Space warfare is all theory at this point but we know several things.
1. Engagement distances will be massive
2. Weapons will be very lethal
3. The guy who can predict faster will win
4. Not being seen where you actually are is the only way to survive

>>144654069
Because there's a 1/1000 chance you sent the missile in the correct direction from 2 days away. And the chance only gets exponentially worse the further you launch from, and exponentially more dangerous the closer you get.

>>144651159
Should start on an Arid or Arctic world.
Something inhospitable to known life.

What should I increase the unbidden portals health too? Also looking at these values for various ship stats, regular battleships are way more powerful (or at least have a much higher potential to be powerful) than any fallen empire or crisis ship except maybe the swarm queen but it's not like the swarm is massing those.

>>144654298
Drones are as worthless as fighters.

>>144654361
>Except that a missile is dumb and a drone is smart.
Says who?

>A missile can only follow is target, but in space unless you're very close it's following a trail hours, days, possibly weeks old, and unless this is a big fucking missile it's going to run out of fuel long before it finds its targets.

A missile can do anything your program it to do.
It's unlikely that a missile will ever follow a target rather than intercept it.

>Not to mention sending missiles in every direction to find a ship is retarded and wasteful
Which is why you fire missiles at your target and not in every direction.

>which again means you'd need some kind of close launch platform, preferably several, such as a drone swarm.
That implies no such thing.

>>144654361
>Because there's a 1/1000 chance you sent the missile in the correct direction from 2 days away. And the chance only gets exponentially worse the further you launch from, and exponentially more dangerous the closer you get.
Again, as opposed to?
>Except that a missile is dumb and a drone is smart.
Why would something that carries less payload for a given mass be dumber than something that carries more?

File: Heart_of_Midlothian.png (120KB, 1280x440px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1280x440px

>>144653442
Fucking agreed.
All the Mammalian Corvettes and Destroyers look like such ass I can't be bothered to actually play further.

>>144654425
finally a reply. thanks that's a great idea. I also switched from Collectivist to fanatic Materialist seeing as how they aren't a conscious but rather independent programs and they know that people created them and not something else

>>144655147
I mean
>be smarter than something that carries more

File: robotnik_the_yank_it_engine_by_mightyfilm-d34do4f[1].jpg (216KB, 900x1142px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 900x1142px

Am i the only one who created a Robotnik faction and gets off playing it and roleplaying him?

>>144654929
Why would you make a "smart" missile. The point of a missile is it explodes, you make it smart enough to hit what you want, anything more than that is a total waste of resources. You don't put long range scanners on a missile, you don't put advanced targeting systems on a missile, you put that on a ship you want to keep alive. Like a drone. Then you have it use those incredibly expensive and valuable systems to shoot a cheap missile with just enough hardware to hit what you're painting with your incredibly complex and expensive systems.

It's also unlikely you will intercept anything in space unless you're very close when you launch the missile. Leading into the problem of being close to the guy you're trying to kill, which is why drones are useful, because they may be a thousand times more expensive than your missiles, but they're still a thousand times cheaper than your warship.

Well you can either keep a safe distance and use drones or close the gap yourself and risk losing your warship cause you're too damn close.

>>144655147
As opposed to what?
The further you are, the safer you are, the safer the enemy is.
The closer you are, the less safe you are, the easier to hit your enemy. You want him to be in danger and yourself to be safe, that's why drones are good. They can put him in danger while you stay safe.
And yes, why would you make a missile smarter than its launching platform. Exactly. Why spend trillions on making tens of thousands of missiles smart instead of spending billions making launch platforms smart enough to shoot millions of dollars worth of tens of thousands of dumb missiles.

>>144655219
The cruiser front section with one large turret slot is fucking ugly as hell too. It's sad cause I actually like some of the battleship and cruiser configurations.

>>144654361
>>144654929
>>144655147
I think this guy is interpreting missiles as cold war ICBMS, which were basic as fuck, instead of missiles with extremely powerful computers to guide them.

>>144655219
Game designers should stop trying to design spaceships as if they were designing boats. Spaceships should be like flying skyscrapers, with the ships engine below the crew.

>>144655614
We don't have extremely powerful computers guiding a modern missile. We have basic GPS systems and some other pretty cheap comparatively hardware in modern missiles. The targeting systems are exponentially more complex and expensive, the missile itself is pretty dumb.

Now, "smart" missiles are still expensive as fuck, but not compared to their launch systems.

>>144655579
>Why would you want a smart missile
Are you fucking kidding me. How big is your average smartphone. Now add a few centuries of advancing tech and imagine how much even a "simple" home computer could do in terms of guidance. You're talking about cubic inches at most for computer that is potentially stronger than anything we have today. Why the fuck would you not shove that in a missile. It's not like that's going to be the big cost compared to fuel/payload.

>>144655737
>wanting ships that can't land on a planet

>>144655737
>Off center thrust
Oh yeah sure let's just waste fuel doing constant corrective burns, unless you have some impossible method of getting thrust from the engine from the lower decks to the rear, through all of the crew compartment.
Plus, how the fuck would you fit the pair of spinal railguns, each about 1km (mostly guesswork here) long?

>>144655579
This is kinda like USA vs Russians techs.
USA have plenty of dumb ammunitions so to modernize it they strap costly device on the bomb to make them smart. It cost a lot military-industrial complex rejoice.
Russians strap a device on a plane which let them use the cheap dumb bombs as sort of smart ones. They are cheap as as hell and they can use all that stored shit from USSR times.
I can kinda see both things happening in space more for political/financial reasons that pure efficiency.

>>144655579
>Why would you make a "smart" missile.
Because it works better than a dumb missile that's unguided flying in a straight line.

As soon as you give it any tracking ability you might as well pony up the extra 0.01% of it's cost and give it the best software and computational power you can so that it can do complex tasks. Let the missile network and share info with other missiles and the launch platform.

>It's also unlikely you will intercept anything in space unless you're very close when you launch the missile.
That's purely a function of delta v, orbital mechanics and technological limitations.

>>144656009
Exactly, why would you want a space boat, designed to bear loads horizontally instead of a neat vertical tower that you can turn into an instant landmark?

>>144656213
If they were built like a tower they'd have a pretty hard time in high winds when entering an atmosphere.

>>144655579
>It's also unlikely you will intercept anything in space
Doubly so for the drone, because the drone will be much heavier and thus much less agile at launch to account for the all extra fuel (50 times as much fuel, actually) you need to load it up with for it to be recoverable (four times the delta V compared to a missile).
Unless you ditch re-usability but then the drone becomes a missile.

>>144653442
Here fucking here. Shit looks like whale blubber

>>144656535
Explain to me how a kilometer long space boat will land on a planet without using space magic then.

>>144655948
>>144656197
Well it would be pretty expensive, especially on a mass produced scale like galactic warfare.
One dollar one billion times is one billion dollars, and I bet my left nut advanced targeting systems will run you a bit more than $1.

You don't need a smart missile. There's no need to have a smart missile. The military uses processors roughly as strong as a fucking Gameboy Color today in most of their hardware because shit gets too expensive if you make it too complex.
Smart missiles are a complete waste of money when you can make a smart targeting system to guide a "smart" missile. Yes, give a missile targeting systems, they call it a smart missile because it's partially guided, but it's not actually very smart and is very very limited. Future warfare will have actually smart robotic systems, and they'll be way too expensive to put on something that blows itself up.
Something tells me you guys aren't aerospace engineers like I am.

>>144656189
The USA uses a solid mix of high and low. A few very powerful, very advanced, very expensive weapon systems that supplement a lot of affordable, decent weapon systems. F-16 low to the F-15 high is the best example of this.

More recently the F-22 is the high and the F-35 is the low, although that's relative. The F-35 is quite expensive, just not nearly as much as the F-22 was.

>>144656665
War is not about efficiency, it's about winning. You have to be efficient enough to not crash your economy but there's a reason math professors aren't generals.
You spend 30 billion dollars to blow up 50 billion dollars and lose the war and it's a bad day. You spend 30 billion dollars to blow up 10 billion dollars and win the war and it's a great day.

>>144656997
>Engineer
>Doesn't believe in the post-scarcity future

Ditched

>>144656982
Aerodynamic and landing struts with thrusters to slow the decent.

>>144657162
fug
descent*

>>144656997
>Well it would be pretty expensive, especially on a mass produced scale like galactic warfare.
Because things get more expensive when you mas produce them.

>One dollar one billion times is one billion dollars, and I bet my left nut advanced targeting systems will run you a bit more than $1.
And if your 1 dollar addition makes your 10 million dollar missile 47% better that's a hell of a deal.

>You don't need a smart missile. There's no need to have a smart missile. The military uses processors roughly as strong as a fucking Gameboy Color today in most of their hardware because shit gets too expensive if you make it too complex.
The production side knows what if it an't broke don't fix it means. They also build to the limit of what they need and nothing else.

>Smart missiles are a complete waste of money when you can make a smart targeting system to guide a "smart" missile.
And when your missile is waiting on commands that are light seconds behind for how it reacts to ECM and decoys and counter missile fire?

>Something tells me you guys aren't aerospace engineers like I am.
Something tells me you watched Star Wars too many times as a child and think that space fighters are viable.

>>144656982
Parachutes, docking with with a space elevator, crumple zones.

>>144657148
Felate the bornio 2016
everything will be free

>>144656997
>War is not about efficiency, it's about winning
>Well it would be pretty expensive, especially on a mass produced
So is economy important or not?
And it's not the efficiency but about the fact that reducing the payload fraction of your weapon system by a factor of 50+ just so you can recover it is patently retarded at best and technically infeasible at worst.
>aerospace engineer
>doesn't understand the implications of the rocket equation
Sure, sempai, and my dad work at Weyland-Yutani.

>>144657148
Post scarcity does not imply unlimited resources, it just means we have enough to feed and house everyone. On practical terms this is unlimited, but on war scale that's an absolutely ridiculous notion.
Even with unlimited everything you don't have unlimited time and you can mass produce less complex systems much faster than a complex system, I'd argue with unlimited resources mass production of low would be even more important, because then the only limit on what you can produce is how fast you can make it. Supplement it with some high and the guy with more factories win.

But I don't think we're ever going to make a matter replicator or anything like that so it's a ridiculous notion to think that producing enough food to feed 15 billion people and having enough energy to transport it globally translates to having an infinite supply of silicone.

>>144657527
your mother felates me every night

File: 160126_NorthFront_EXT_rocinante_09d-layout.jpg (509KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 1920x1080px

>>144655737
>strafing with a skyscraper
pleb

File: 1417618320855.jpg (194KB, 630x900px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 630x900px

How difficult it would be to mod a more barren galaxy? For example where only 10% of planets are life supporting and each becomes a prize ?
Is it easy to change values so that 90% of planets are barren, molten or frozen?

>>144657527
>Implying that what I believe about future economies says something about my believes in modern economies.

A future economy where nearly everything that's produced is automated and resources are plentiful is a whole different kind of animal than our current economy lad.

>>144657658
MCRN best

>>144657162
>thrusters
The thruster is mounted at the end, which is at this time pointed parallel to the ground.
And making the ship landable would impose a massive mass penalty due to a need for reinforced structure where a skyscraped is designed to carry loads across the long axis.
>>144657507
>crumple zones
Go meme somewhere else.

>>144652231
>these clothes
>>144651159
>these ships
??????????????

>>144656185
The fuck? Nothing would be off center.

>>144657813
Colonizable planets is a single value in defines.lua, and gaia planets a seperate one I believe. Not sure if gaia planets means how many planets of all planets will be gaia, or how many out of colonizable planets will be gaia though.

>>144657893
Along, I mean.

>>144657893
>The thruster is mounted at the end
>only 1 thruster
>and its at the end
Hope you like going in a straight line

my only gripe with stellaris right now is the damned performance drop late game.

Anyway to deal with that beyond playing on a tiny galaxy?

>>144656009
First off, it would be MORE able to land on a planet. Saturn V rockets don't take off on runways. They are tall like skyscrapers.

>>144657847
>everything is automated
Yes, but it still takes time to produce things, meanwhile, the earth's population grows exponentially
The problem with post-scarcity is that it implies we'll just sit around with our current population doing fuck all instead of needing new materials for new technology and more materials for shitloads of more people

>>144658061
>maneuvering thrusters pulling enough deceleration to be able to land on them
Might as well call space magic, sempai.

>>144658158
Population control

>>144657464
Mass production makes things cheaper, it doesn't make things cheap. You can spend 10 billion on a million "smart" missiles or 100 billion on a million smart missiles. Who then kill themselves.

>47%
Dumb statistic you made up that doesn't really even make sense since the problem with a missile hitting a target was it being able to hit in the first place, the primary limiting factor to that being fuel. If a drone runs low on fuel it can return to the mothership, refuel and go back out. If you're suggesting we make refuelable missiles at this point I have to ask why you're calling suicide drones missiles, since you want a missile to do everything a drone could do and then blow itself up at the end.

>>144657529
Economy is important, efficiency on the battlefield is not.
A drone can do a lot of things. A lot of things it would be wasteful to make a missile do. Increasing fuel consumption is well worth it if you can use that increased consumption to defeat an enemy navy. Missiles are limited, if they are going to be fired you should be assured they will kill the target. You get one, maybe two missile swarms, necessitating the missiles be close when launched, which again, means you're firing them from close range.
You either have a drone doing this, or a warship doing this. There is no way around this. You cannot make a missile smart enough and carry enough fuel to navigate the vast expanse of space while guaranteeing it will hit its intended target if you're firing it from lightyears away. And if you're not lightyears away from the enemy, he can kill you just as easily as you can kill him.

>>144655418
Next playthrough i am planing to fill every planet in the galaxy with synthetics and purge every other race.

>>144651159
>Android
>traits

You should start as robots instead btw and upgrade to synths and androids

>>144658195
We have a hell of a time just leaving the planet. Anything that can travel between stars is space magic.

>>144651159
Is that a fucking Mechanoid?
Vardrag racemod when?

>>144658272
>stripping the populace of rights
Oh, no need to automate then, you control what they "need" off the bat, Orwell

>>144657658
wat

>>144658121
just research Education to Tier II so you can afford Computing IV

>>144658061
>What is thrust vectoring

>>144658158
>earth's population growns exponentially
>every technologically advanced nation shows birthrates of ±2, several lower
Malthus pls

The future world is not africa where children are an insurance policy lad.

File: 1436889527746.png (1MB, 770x1177px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 770x1177px

Oh hey, this place isn't dead anymore

File: putting-gun-to-head.gif (2MB, 250x188px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x188px

>mfw terraforming worlds because I'm xenophobic and don't want to use droids/synths

>>144658464
#ENEMYFLEETDETECTED

>>144658503
>every technologically advanced nation shows birthrates of ±2, several lower
Because of socioeconomic limiting factors
If you don't have to work, then you've got plenty of time to fuck and have kids

>>144658503
>What is thrust vectoring
Yeah. Good luck being maneuverable enough to fight with that.

>>144658525
holy fuck
this still isnt fixed?

>>144651291
Neither.
Pick Intelligent, then when you have a planet you are filling with physics lab, genemod natural physicists on to them.

If you had to pick 1 I think physicist is the best one, but engineering may be more efficient.

Tomb Worlds give extra physics and your main pops probably can't work there, so instead you'd want tomb world preference presentients that you mod Intelligent+Natural Physisist on to.

You don't want Sociogist, because there's a presentient trait that is called Natural Intellectuals, so it's better to mod Natural Sociologist+Intelligent on to them.
Intellectuals give +% society.

That leaves Engineering.
But physics is still probably better.

File: Mothership.jpg (124KB, 1001x863px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1001x863px

>>144655737
>Spaceships should be like flying skyscrapers
HOMEWORLD SHIPS WHEN?

>>144658790
Reptilian archetype is already a poor ripoff of the Kushan aesthetic.

>>144658790
Not what he meant
He implied that the ship should have the floors perpendicular to the thrust, if I'm reading it right

>>144658643
Plenty of time to fuck and have kids doesn't mean you will. I mean sure, people will fuck, but I can't see the majority of people really wanting that many kids. But maybe that's just jaded me. Also I think I've set us on a path that veers quite far from the original topic, so I'll just go back to playing some stellaris and gtfo

File: China3rdKoreaWar.png (2MB, 1398x1020px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1398x1020px

>>144658508
Mostly stellaris and space chat anymore, but there's some civ

>>144658275
And to expand on this, suicide drones are a totally viable option. They could come in a variety of flavors, from KE suiciders to mines. They wouldn't be quite as smart as other drones, only smart enough to detect, get a kill solution for, and track a hostile fleet. They could wait inert around celestial bodies or float among asteroids or simply float in the vastness of space waiting for a hostile fleet to pass by. They could only be used so in areas a fleet would be guaranteed to pass through because, again, space is massive you can't just mine space willy nilly, you'd have suicide drones near friendly planets or hostile planets, perhaps leaked intel saying where a fleet would rally.

Suicide drones could totally be a thing, drones are going to be very useful in the next 100 years and as robotics get better they're only going to become more and more ingrained into the military and most likely every day human life.

>>144658921
Yes, that is what I meant.

>>144657658
Looks neat.
Modded into starsector when?

>>144658790
MOTHERSHIP

>>144658934
Post-scarcity is essentially free welfare for everyone
Look at all those children nignogs and white trash shit out

File: 1453157905577.jpg (122KB, 753x521px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 753x521px

>>144658438
thrust creates artificial "gravity" through accelaration, so the decks are aligned bottom (engine) to top (bridge).
>>144657848
>MCRN best
this
pic almost related

>>144659046
would the thurst also create artificial gravitiy?

File: Homeworld.jpg (114KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 900x900px

>>144658790
>>144658904
>>144658921
homeworld patch tomorrow

File: 1464209406353.jpg (87KB, 588x437px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 588x437px

>>144644994
Anime posters everyone.
Thinks space is cluttered with asteroids and other shit and not almost completely void.

>I THOUGHT IT BE LIKE THE STAAR EAARS!

>>144658275
>You cannot make a missile smart enough
Says who?
>and carry enough fuel to navigate the vast expanse of space while guaranteeing it will hit its intended target if you're firing it from lightyears away
Which goes even more so for a drone because a drone has to carry more fuel compared to a missile for the same capability.
>suicide drones
Also known as missiles.
>buzzwords
>Missiles are limited
Drones are more limited because you'll be carrying less of them because again, rocket equation.
>I'll call every good solution a drone and every bad solution a missile
Literal marketing guy logic.

File: 11.jpg (18KB, 191x306px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 191x306px

>>144658682
>mutants think this is the bug

>>144659529
Is tomorrow? nice

>>144659314
>thrust creates artificial "gravity" through accelaration, so the decks are aligned bottom (engine) to top (bridge).
Uh, yeah, that's why skycrapers with engines below are best.

File: 20160606222542_1.jpg (128KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 800x600px

neat

>>144659917
CK2 level of traits when?

>>144658437
Seize the means of production

>>144659618
Practicality, distance, let me ask you, what makes you think you could? Just how big are you making this missile? Don't forget, any missile you launch you're launching with about 1,000 other missiles. Space is limited in space, you only have a warship so big, you don't have unlimited missiles or unlimited size to make these missiles.
>suicide drones, also known as missiles
Fuck off retard.
Here, look, explain to me how you're going to get a kill solution on an enemy lightyears away. Explain this to me, explain how you're going to with much more limited fuel than him, predict where he is going and achieve terminal velocity. He won't sit still, he's going to be evading the ENTIRE TIME, and he has much more fuel than any missile to maneuver with. A .0001 degree deviation by him over 400,000km means your missile has to make a massive course correction. Predicatively, because it doesn't know which direction he went in until he's already changed directions again.

>try a democracy
>have to fuck with scientists ever 4 years
Holy fuck this is annoying.

>>144660209
>Not just re-electing one guy over and over.