[Spaceships] DS-1 Orbital Battle Station

vierasmarius · 07-26-2012, 05:57 AM

Looks good. I did the calculations for the size of the two Death Stars a while ago, and got the same results as you, so I think that's correct. I would not call it Streamlined however; the reduced armor efficiency of that option is due to a vessel having a higher-than-expected surface-area-to-mass ratio (due to the long narrow body and sculpted hull segments) while a sphere has, by definition, the smallest possible surface-area-to-mass ratio.

I'm not sure how you're getting 2dx1B for the Spinal Mount. A 1ZJ Ghost Particle Beam should deal 2dx100,000. It may be a typo, or you may have misunderstood the scaling of beam weapons. Of course, 2dx100K isn't sufficient to destroy a planet, even when tripled for an internal explosion; an Earth-sized planet is roughly SM +45, for 100M HP. So it could be that you've just handwaved a hugely inflated damage score to allow it to achieve that feat. After all, even adding the Cosmic Power modifier to the Superlaser (bumping it up to 1 Yotta-Joule) would only increase damage to 2dx1M, requiring five shots to drop a terrestrial planet to 0 HP, and far more to reduce it to rubble. It could be that the weapon is "double Cosmic", delivering 1000 YJ, or 2dx10M, enough to force a death check in one shot. Also, I'd recommend a TL12^ Conversion Beam as a better match for the Superlaser. You really don't need all that much armor penetration; an Earth-sized planet has only DR 2M*, so any weapon capable of damaging the planet will not even notice its DR.

All of this means, of course, that the other powered systems have negligible drain compared to the main gun, which is entirely appropriate. I'd suggest bumping up the cost of the Spinal Mount and Reactor by a couple orders a magnitude to represent the tremendous power they can deliver.

*I think I based that on a SM +45 Spaceship composed entirely of Rock "Armor". And even that may be excessive, since the crust is quite a thin layer, and the mantle and core may be less resistant to penetration.

07-26-2012, 05:57 AM	#2
vierasmarius Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Oregon	Re: [Spaceships] DS-1 Orbital Battle Station Looks good. I did the calculations for the size of the two Death Stars a while ago, and got the same results as you, so I think that's correct. I would not call it Streamlined however; the reduced armor efficiency of that option is due to a vessel having a higher-than-expected surface-area-to-mass ratio (due to the long narrow body and sculpted hull segments) while a sphere has, by definition, the smallest possible surface-area-to-mass ratio. I'm not sure how you're getting 2dx1B for the Spinal Mount. A 1ZJ Ghost Particle Beam should deal 2dx100,000. It may be a typo, or you may have misunderstood the scaling of beam weapons. Of course, 2dx100K isn't sufficient to destroy a planet, even when tripled for an internal explosion; an Earth-sized planet is roughly SM +45, for 100M HP. So it could be that you've just handwaved a hugely inflated damage score to allow it to achieve that feat. After all, even adding the Cosmic Power modifier to the Superlaser (bumping it up to 1 Yotta-Joule) would only increase damage to 2dx1M, requiring five shots to drop a terrestrial planet to 0 HP, and far more to reduce it to rubble. It could be that the weapon is "double Cosmic", delivering 1000 YJ, or 2dx10M, enough to force a death check in one shot. Also, I'd recommend a TL12^ Conversion Beam as a better match for the Superlaser. You really don't need all that much armor penetration; an Earth-sized planet has only DR 2M, so any weapon capable of damaging the planet will not even notice its DR. All of this means, of course, that the other powered systems have negligible drain compared to the main gun, which is entirely appropriate. I'd suggest bumping up the cost of the Spinal Mount and Reactor by a couple orders a magnitude to represent the tremendous power they can deliver. I think I based that on a SM +45 Spaceship composed entirely of Rock "Armor". And even that may be excessive, since the crust is quite a thin layer, and the mantle and core may be less resistant to penetration. Last edited by vierasmarius; 07-26-2012 at 06:03 AM.