test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Should bare hull resist Energy Weapons the same way Shields resist Torpedoes?

13

Comments

  • spyralpegacyonspyralpegacyon Member Posts: 408 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    What it doesn't take into account is everything else...triggered CDs, Weapon Power, Range Penalty, Weapon Abilities, etc, etc, etc.

    And bingo was his name-o.
    Should all Energy Weapons be nerfed because folks can FAW 5x DBB/3x OD...?

    Or maybe should FAW be addressed?

    Drop it all out...step back...look at everything...eh?

    Nerf FAW and CSV becomes the flavor of the month. Buff torps and now its TS. And nothing changes as everyone complaining about FAW switches to a new target.

    There's too many levers and switches to balance everything and the community's too invested in their Advanced/Elites, DPS boat races, and/or PvP metas to relax.
    tumblr_n1hmq4Xl7S1rzu2xzo2_400.gif
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Nerf FAW and CSV becomes the flavor of the month. Buff torps and now its TS. And nothing changes as everyone complaining about FAW switches to a new target.

    Perhaps with the heavy handed way things tend to be done...aye, cause it's almost never a fine tweak down or up for things to bring them in line...it's massive swings all over the place.
    There's too many levers and switches to balance everything and the community's too invested in their Advanced/Elites, DPS boat races, and/or PvP metas to relax.

    Content itself could address various things...if there were more variety of content or even more variety within the content. But then with the "investment" some feel they've made into things there, they'd only run certain content or massively complain if the variety were introduced into the content.

    It's something that goes beyond just Energy vs. Projectile...with the content...gets into a bunch of the "it's not fair, cause I want to play A or B using X or Y instead of C using Z" discussions; where in many cases the viability or lack of viability comes down to the content.
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 11,393 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    Instead of buffing torp damage, another idea that I'm a huge fan of would be to implement a "sliding scale" of resistance for torpedoes vs shields. Instead of a tiny sliver of shields giving the full resistance, it should only give a fraction of the resistance that full strength shields would give.

    ^^ I support this idea. 'A tiny sliver of shields giving the full resistance' vs torps has always felt like a (deliberate?) slap in the face of torp users. If you only have a small amount of shields, then the kinetic bleedthrough should be proportionate to that.

    +1
    2u4ikno.jpg
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    meimeitoo wrote: »
    ^^ I support this idea. 'A tiny sliver of shields giving the full resistance' vs torps has always felt like a (deliberate?) slap in the face of torp users. If you only have a small amount of shields, then the kinetic bleedthrough should be proportionate to that.

    +1

    Why just for torps though? Why not all weapons? Everything receives the full reduction, keeping in mind that the reduction only applies as long as there are enough shields to prevent buckling. The 1% thing is a myth...popular myth...but myth all the same.

    Say you've got a torp that hits for 50,000 damage against 1000 remaining shields...with standard shields, standard NPC reduction, without any additional bleed, etc, etc, etc.

    50000 * 0.9 = 45000 goes to shields.
    50000 * 0.1 = 5000 goes to hull.
    1000 shields can absorb (1000 / ((1 - 0.75) * (1 - 0.14))) ~4652 damage.
    45000 - 4652 = 40348 additional damage done to hull for a total of 45348 damage to hull.

    But getting back to the weakening train of thought, although looking at hull, we actually have to take a trait to get what one might (or might not) think would be a basic mechanic...that as hull weakens, it becomes more susceptible to damage.

    Hell, lol, on the flip side - there are two traits with the mind-boggling reverse of that - as hull weakens, it becomes less susceptible to damage...lolwut, eh?

    So with folks mentioning, what one might (or might not) think would be a basic mechanic, shields offering less damage reduction and/or perhaps increased bleed...odds are we'd end up with a trait doing that as well as some trait that provides increased damage reduction and/or reduced bleed.

    Cause that's how things tend to go...
    Torpedo powers only affect one tube and only once. High Yield only works on one torpedo. Torpedo Spread fires one volley from one torpedo launcher. BFAW and CSV affect all of the appropriate weapons types for a lengthy duration and torpedoes have to deal with the inherent resist even a sliver of shields provide. CSV and TS are a cone so you can't just park your Scimitar and hit everything on the map. It'd take a fair bit of buffing/nerfing to dethrone BFAW.

    So does Energy...whatever reduction exists, exists for whatever amount of shields remain. It doesn't work any differently for Kinetic than it does for Energy.

    Standard NPC shield damage reduction for Energy is 14%...that applies whether there is 10000 or 1 shield capacity. 250 shield capacity will prevent ~290 Energy damage...then buckle.

    Standard NPC shield damage reduction for Kinetic is 78.5%...that applies whether there is 10000 or 1 shield capacity. 250 shield capacity will prevent ~1163 Kinetic damage...then buckle.

    It will only prevent the damage it prevents...it doesn't prevent more damage.

    And with a combination of Energy and Kinetic...that sliver's going to mean that much less.

    But there's no 250 arc FAW Torps for 10 seconds...which gets into the rest of everything else going on.
  • spyralpegacyonspyralpegacyon Member Posts: 408 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Perhaps with the heavy handed way things tend to be done...aye, cause it's almost never a fine tweak down or up for things to bring them in line...it's massive swings all over the place.



    Content itself could address various things...if there were more variety of content or even more variety within the content. But then with the "investment" some feel they've made into things there, they'd only run certain content or massively complain if the variety were introduced into the content.

    It's something that goes beyond just Energy vs. Projectile...with the content...gets into a bunch of the "it's not fair, cause I want to play A or B using X or Y instead of C using Z" discussions; where in many cases the viability or lack of viability comes down to the content.

    Yupyup to all of this as well.
    tumblr_n1hmq4Xl7S1rzu2xzo2_400.gif
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Nerf FAW and CSV becomes the flavor of the month. Buff torps and now its TS. And nothing changes as everyone complaining about FAW switches to a new target.

    Torpedo powers only affect one tube and only once. High Yield only works on one torpedo. Torpedo Spread fires one volley from one torpedo launcher. BFAW and CSV affect all of the appropriate weapons types for a lengthy duration and torpedoes have to deal with the inherent resist even a sliver of shields provide. CSV and TS are a cone so you can't just park your Scimitar and hit everything on the map. It'd take a fair bit of buffing/nerfing to dethrone BFAW.
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Torpedo powers only affect one tube and only once. High Yield only works on one torpedo. Torpedo Spread fires one volley from one torpedo launcher. BFAW and CSV affect all of the appropriate weapons types for a lengthy duration and torpedoes have to deal with the inherent resist even a sliver of shields provide. CSV and TS are a cone so you can't just park your Scimitar and hit everything on the map. It'd take a fair bit of buffing/nerfing to dethrone BFAW.

    I didn't mention this before, but yes, this is another problem facing torpedoes. They get a single special attack, once every 15 seconds at best.

    With FAW/RF/CSV, you've got every single one of your weapons doing their "Special Mode" for a solid 10 seconds.
    voporak wrote: »
    PvP'rs: 0, Devs: 1
    If any dev guy reads this for whatever reason, let me just ask a question... Is this what you (collectively) wanted? To see your most loyal fans, who were willing to offer help, who were wanting to improve the decency of a basic aspect of the game, completely stamped out? Is this what you wanted?
  • nimbullnimbull Member Posts: 1,470 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    They need to reduce shield effectiveness against a torpedo when your shields are low. The less shields you have protecting an area the more effective a torpedo should be against you. So if you are at like 10% shields and a torpedo hits you, you should be crying quite a bit more compared to having shields at 100%. I would love to be able to mix torpedos with my energy weapons on ships.

    It'd feel more like Star Trek again with a change like that. I'd also be flying my T'varo more again. :D
    Green people don't have to be.... little.
  • darkjeffdarkjeff Member Posts: 2,590 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Torpedo powers only affect one tube and only once. High Yield only works on one torpedo. Torpedo Spread fires one volley from one torpedo launcher.

    I would think the bigger, related issue, is that torpedoes have a 1s (1.5s if we including activation time) between launchers.

    If we could fire all four tubes at once and had the powers apply once per launcher, that would alleviate a lot of the weaksauce feeling of torpedoes. Without ever having to touch other mechanics.

    It'd be spikey as hell if you manage to down shields first, but since when has anyone cared about PvP? :P
  • trennantrennan Member Posts: 2,225 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    jellico1 wrote: »
    photon torpedo's are a matter anti matter explosion much like a warp core Breech

    That's energy damage and every other sort of damage you can think up

    Its not a cannon ball..................But I can be flanked thru my 360 degree shield so ...............

    Yes they are a energy explosive device. They aren't energey until they explode. Until then they are a solid projectile in a casing. So its a cannon ball stuffed with gunpowder.

    As far as shields go. One of my questions here is. Why does a ship shields stop a torpedo, but a personal shield can't stop a bat'lith? Torpedo's are a physical device until impact, that sets of the reaction that causes the energy explosion.
    Cheating_zps1brwslhb.jpg
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    darkjeff wrote: »
    I would think the bigger, related issue, is that torpedoes have a 1s (1.5s if we including activation time) between launchers.

    If we could fire all four tubes at once and had the powers apply once per launcher, that would alleviate a lot of the weaksauce feeling of torpedoes. Without ever having to touch other mechanics.

    It'd be spikey as hell if you manage to down shields first, but since when has anyone cared about PvP? :P

    A volley of HY PEP, Rom Hyper-Plasma, Omega, and one (two if I spin around) plain old Plasma torpedoes... *drool*

    As cool as that'd be it'd be way too awesome for the servers to handle.
    trennan wrote: »
    As far as shields go. One of my questions here is. Why does a ship shields stop a torpedo, but a personal shield can't stop a bat'lith? Torpedo's are a physical device until impact, that sets of the reaction that causes the energy explosion.

    Dune shields (minus the Lasgun interaction), a high velocity object gets stopped, the slow blade penetrates the shield.
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    darkjeff wrote: »
    I would think the bigger, related issue, is that torpedoes have a 1s (1.5s if we including activation time) between launchers.

    If we could fire all four tubes at once and had the powers apply once per launcher, that would alleviate a lot of the weaksauce feeling of torpedoes. Without ever having to touch other mechanics.

    It'd be spikey as hell if you manage to down shields first, but since when has anyone cared about PvP? :P

    It would render the use of any other combination pointless by comparison as long as one could clump targets which is easy enough to do...

    Picture the Scimitar with 5x Torps and 3x Turrets running TS/CSV with PWOs running Intel/Command sitting on the flank of a group of targets...if there was no CD between the torps and TS was a duration buff. Sheer obliteration...
  • trennantrennan Member Posts: 2,225 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    http://www.startrek.com/database_article/photon-torpedo

    Here you go Starfleet's definition of a photon torpedo.

    Self-propelled missiles consisting of a small quantity of matter and antimatter bound together in a magnetic container, used as a tactical weapon by Federation starships.



    Photon torpedoes are the preferred weapon when a ship is at warp drive since they are not limited by the speed of light, as ship's phasers are.

    missile
    noun
    : an object that is thrown, shot, or launched as a weapon; especially : a rocket that explodes when it hits a distant target
    Cheating_zps1brwslhb.jpg
  • trennantrennan Member Posts: 2,225 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    It would render the use of any other combination pointless by comparison as long as one could clump targets which is easy enough to do...

    Picture the Scimitar with 5x Torps and 3x Turrets running TS/CSV with PWOs running Intel/Command sitting on the flank of a group of targets...if there was no CD between the torps and TS was a duration buff. Sheer obliteration...

    This is why I offered the two solutions that I did. Either increase a torpedo's hull penetration. Thusly making them more useful, though those shield are still an annoyance.

    Or give them a 100% Shield Penetration and limit the use to 1 fore and 1 aft.

    Both of these still require the use of other weapons. The first one to get rid of the shields. The latter because of your limited use of Torpedo's.

    Neither one changes anything about how things are now, and keeps torpedos inline with energy weapons.
    Cheating_zps1brwslhb.jpg
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    It would render the use of any other combination pointless by comparison as long as one could clump targets which is easy enough to do...

    Picture the Scimitar with 5x Torps and 3x Turrets running TS/CSV with PWOs running Intel/Command sitting on the flank of a group of targets...if there was no CD between the torps and TS was a duration buff. Sheer obliteration...

    Good point.

    They can't just do a straight up 'remove the CD, make it a duration buff' kind of change. There's going to need to be some fundamental reworking if they went that route.
    voporak wrote: »
    PvP'rs: 0, Devs: 1
    If any dev guy reads this for whatever reason, let me just ask a question... Is this what you (collectively) wanted? To see your most loyal fans, who were willing to offer help, who were wanting to improve the decency of a basic aspect of the game, completely stamped out? Is this what you wanted?
  • woodwhitywoodwhity Member Posts: 2,636 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    trennan wrote: »
    As far as shields go. One of my questions here is. Why does a ship shields stop a torpedo, but a personal shield can't stop a bat'lith? Torpedo's are a physical device until impact, that sets of the reaction that causes the energy explosion.

    They are built differently. Starship shields wont let anything through, while personal shields have to allow air to pass, as well as allow you to interact with your surroundings. Would be bad if you needed a stim but your shield prevents it in a combat situation, eh.
  • darkjeffdarkjeff Member Posts: 2,590 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    It would render the use of any other combination pointless by comparison as long as one could clump targets which is easy enough to do...

    Picture the Scimitar with 5x Torps and 3x Turrets running TS/CSV with PWOs running Intel/Command sitting on the flank of a group of targets...if there was no CD between the torps and TS was a duration buff. Sheer obliteration...

    I guess PWO DOffs would need to be changed to be analogous to EWO DOffs, forgot about those.

    Not necessarily a duration buff, just one shot per launcher. Then even with 5xTorpedo launchers, you just get a burst of damage every 6s, so high damage per volley but comparable DPS.

    Keep in mind that shielded targets would negate a giant chunk of that, so unless you could bring down the shields first, that results in doing 75% less than the DPS of energy weapons.
  • voivodjevoivodje Member Posts: 436 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I was thinking: why not add Hull Armour that could be placed in the Shield slot?
    So pure Engi's could hull-tank, like in Eve?

    YES I KNOW, Eve is not a game, it's a thing ranging from extremely silly up to you name it, and sadly I was one of the worst evfer numbskulls ever to play it.
    I apologize.
    Now let's continue to the idea.

    :P
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 11,393 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    Good point.

    They can't just do a straight up 'remove the CD, make it a duration buff' kind of change. There's going to need to be some fundamental reworking if they went that route.

    Reworking reads as: nerf it to death. ;P

    Torp abilities shouldn't just affect one tube, though. As long as *any* tube can still fire whilst your torp ability is active, it should benefit from said ability. All other weps do too.
    2u4ikno.jpg
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    darkjeff wrote: »
    I guess PWO DOffs would need to be changed to be analogous to EWO DOffs, forgot about those.

    Not necessarily a duration buff, just one shot per launcher. Then even with 5xTorpedo launchers, you just get a burst of damage every 6s, so high damage per volley but comparable DPS.

    Keep in mind that shielded targets would negate a giant chunk of that, so unless you could bring down the shields first, that results in doing 75% less than the DPS of energy weapons.

    Intel providing Destabilized Emitters (shield drain).
    Command providing Tachyon Charges (shield drain).

    Neutronic, Particle Emission, Gravimetric, Resonant, Radiant

    Kinetic Precision, Intense Focus, Intelligence Team

    Omega Kinetic Shearing

    The CSV from the Turrets creating the Expose for the Violent Detonations.

    Etc, etc, etc...

    * * * * *

    Allowing the combination of Intel (Primary)/Command (Secondary) allows for all sorts of Torp fun...I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw they were going to do that...heh.
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    trennan wrote: »
    Yeah its an enery type weapon. So is a Magnesium Tipped Bullet(tracer Round), Phosphorus Grenade(Thermite), Molotov Cocktail, the Deleted Uranium Anti-Armor Tank Round.

    Tracer Round, the pretty light you see when you fire a torpedo.

    Phosphorus, Think Plasma here.

    Molotov Coxktail: Exothermitc Induction Field

    Deleted Uranium: Har'peng/Plasma Hybrid. Pentrates then explodes.

    Depleted uranium is favored for the penetrator because it is self-sharpening and pyrophoric. On impact with a hard target, such as an armored vehicle, the nose of the rod fractures in such a way that it remains sharp. The impact and subsequent release of heat energy causes it to disintegrate to dust and burn when it reaches air because of its pyrophoric properties.
    When a DU penetrator reaches the interior of an armored vehicle it catches fire, often igniting ammunition and fuel, killing the crew and possibly causing the vehicle to explode. DU is used by the U.S. Army in 120 mm or 105 mm cannons employed on the M1 Abrams tank. The Russian military has used DU ammunition in tank main gun ammunition since the late 1970s, mostly for the 115 mm guns in the T-62 tank and the 125 mm guns in the T-64, T-72, T-80, and T-90 tanks.

    So as I said in my prvious post. There are two ways to improve the torpedos we have.

    A: Is to give them more Hull Penetration. Think on it this way. Our torpedos right now are little more than laying a firecracker in the palm of you hand and setting it out. You burn your hand. Close your hand around the same fire cracker and set it off. Well, your signifigant other will be opening bottle for you from then on.

    B)Is to give them 100% Shield Penetration. On this one, they will strike the hull every time. But due to this you'd have a limited number of Torpedo's. At max I'd say 1 fore and 1 aft. Wouldn't want torp boats to be to OP and out do the pretty streamers of the beam dancers.

    Chemical and, kinetic based reactions like in these kinds of rounds, doesn't quite carry anywhere near the damaging force of a matter/antimatter weapon, for which photon torpedoes are comprised of.

    It's like launching a mini-warpcore out of the tube, than activating it into a massive ball of destruction, once it impacts something like a ship, we can expect a pretty destructive reaction.

    Don't get me wrong though, as there is still some chemical inside of a photon torpedo URL="https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=&oq=deut&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGHP_enUS614US614&q=deuterium&gs_l=hp..2.0l5.0.0.0.5444...........0.oeNZ1KHhfhg"]deuterium[/URL but, it is used as a source of hydrogen matter compound, for which the antimatter reacts with similar in a modern day nuclear reactor, minus the antimatter part.

    Best explained here as well, especially in the technical manual section.

    http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Photon_torpedo
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

  • dratikusdratikus Member Posts: 118 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    Should bare hull resist Energy Weapons the same way Shields resist Torpedoes?


    I thought Hull resists torpedos the way shields resist energy weapons. :eek:
  • trennantrennan Member Posts: 2,225 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Chemical and, kinetic based reactions like in these kinds of rounds, doesn't quite carry anywhere near the damaging force of an matter/antimatter weapon, for which photon torpedoes are comprised of.

    It's like launching a mini-warpcore out of the tube, than activating it into a massive ball of destruction, once it impacts something like a ship, we can expect a pretty destructive reaction.

    Don't get me wrong though, as there is still some chemical inside of a photon torpedo URL="https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=&oq=deut&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGHP_enUS614US614&q=deuterium&gs_l=hp..2.0l5.0.0.0.5444...........0.oeNZ1KHhfhg"]deuterium[/URL but, it is used as a source of hydrogen matter compound, for which the antimatter reacts with similar in a modern day nuclear reactor, minus the antimatter part.

    Best explained here as well, especially in the technical manual section.

    http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Photon_torpedo

    Yes but still a physical projectile until it impacts its target. Then it becomes an energy weapon. That's one of the points I'm trying to make. A torpedo is a solid object until it impacts it's target. Much like throwing your coffee cup against the wall. It's a solid object, until it impacts the wall. If it's full of coffee, well look at that as a plasma or matter/anitmatter explosion on the wall.

    Now lets add shields to this. Those nifty energy curtains, designed to stop energy weapons. We'll use serran wrap for this. The serran wrap really isn't going to do much to stop the torpedo from impacting the wall. It will however, prevent you from having to repaint over the coffee stain, assuming the coffee cup didn't just burst right through it and against the wall.
    Cheating_zps1brwslhb.jpg
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    trennan wrote: »
    Yes but still a physical projectile until it impacts its target. Then it becomes an energy weapon. That's one of the points I'm trying to make. A torpedo is a solid object until it impacts it's target. Much like throwing your coffee cup against the wall. It's a solid object, until it impacts the wall. If it's full of coffee, well look at that as a plasma or matter/anitmatter explosion on the wall.

    Damage of Fat Man or Little Boy falling on you, deadly on a personal scale.

    Damage of Fat Man or Little Boy detonating in your city, deadly on a city scale.

    Even now those sorts of weapons can be set for air burst, they don't need to run into anything.

    Your coffee cup example would have the armor piercing stream of super heated coffee lance out from the cup before the cup touches the wall.
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    trennan wrote: »
    Yes but still a physical projectile until it impacts its target. Then it becomes an energy weapon. That's one of the points I'm trying to make. A torpedo is a solid object until it impacts it's target. Much like throwing your coffee cup against the wall. It's a solid object, until it impacts the wall. If it's full of coffee, well look at that as a plasma or matter/anitmatter explosion on the wall.
    Now lets add shields to this. Those nifty energy curtains, designed to stop energy weapons. We'll use serran wrap for this. The serran wrap really isn't going to do much to stop the torpedo from impacting the wall. It will however, prevent you from having to repaint over the coffee stain, assuming the coffee cup didn't just burst right through it and against the wall.

    No, it's not, once it leaves the torpedo tube, it becomes active. Hence becoming a massive matter/anti-matter reaction ball of energy destruction.

    And shields as you know them, are actually referred to as deflector shields, meaning the try to deflect as much as possible, while also being able to absorb some dmg as well.

    Hence why there is bleedthru, because they cannot fully absorb and deflect everything.

    You really need do some actual research, before spouting off stuff you have no idea really about.
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

  • demonicaestheticdemonicaesthetic Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    No, it's not, once it leaves the torpedo tube, it becomes active. Hence becoming a massive matter/anti-matter reaction ball of energy destruction.

    And shields as you know them, are actually referred to as deflector shields, meaning the try to deflect as much as possible, while also being able to absorb some dmg as well.

    Hence why there is bleedthru, because they cannot fully absorb and deflect everything.

    You really need do some actual research, before spouting off stuff you have no idea really about.

    Erm, no, you are the one who needs to research, in fact if you google for photon torpedo, you get a very large number of sites, wikis, official info sites etc...

    On these wonderful sites, you can see photon torpedos in screen shots from the series and movies, and, what's even more fun, people have done cut-away diagrams of the insides of the damn things.

    If it was an "active ball of matter/antimatter energy" the moment it left the tube, why the hell does it have an engine and a guidance system?, Since these would be vaporised the moment the matter and anti matter meet.

    Matter/anti-matter reactions are not 'science fiction invented by Star Trek, but an actual scientific concept, the mutual destruction of both, instantly, they do not produce 'M/AM Energy' what they produce is...

    BANG!

    They do not 'burn' as they go, they just go...

    BANG!

    Mixing the matter and anti-matter the moment the torp left the launcher would result in the front end of your ship opening like a flower, probably killing the idiot who thought it was a good idea to set the safety timers and fuse timers to zero.
    <center><font size="+5"><b>Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day...
    Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life...</b></size></center>
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Erm, no, you are the one who needs to research, in fact if you google for photon torpedo, you get a very large number of sites, wikis, official info sites etc...

    On these wonderful sites, you can see photon torpedos in screen shots from the series and movies, and, what's even more fun, people have done cut-away diagrams of the insides of the damn things.

    If it was an "active ball of matter/antimatter energy" the moment it left the tube, why the hell does it have an engine and a guidance system?, Since these would be vaporised the moment the matter and anti matter meet.

    Matter/anti-matter reactions are not 'science fiction invented by Star Trek, but an actual scientific concept, the mutual destruction of both, instantly, they do not produce 'M/AM Energy' what they produce is...

    BANG!

    They do not 'burn' as they go, they just go...

    BANG!

    Mixing the matter and anti-matter the moment the torp left the launcher would result in the front end of your ship opening like a flower, probably killing the idiot who thought it was a good idea to set the safety timers and fuse timers to zero.

    *double facepalm*, I guess you don't actually read the full descriptions? The warhead reaction is encased in a magnetic field preventing it from effecting the launching system and, destroying itself in the process, this why they can be manually detonated and/or upon impact if need be.

    They also carry their own shielding systems!

    It is also why they can be manually destroyed if wanted and, used in a variety of configurations for several different jobs.

    Not to mention, they require a set time in second(s), before they fully mix [aka activate] when leaving the launcher, this is why they wouldn't destroy the ship that launched it, the moment it leaves.



    Now please, go back and actually read up on this stuff, before contradicting yourself some more.

    And, sorry if I come off seemingly mean but, I had asked the same question years ago myself!
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

  • demonicaestheticdemonicaesthetic Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    *double facepalm*, I guess you don't actually read the full descriptions? The warhead reaction is encased in a magnetic field preventing it from effecting the launching system and, destroying itself in the process, this why they can be manually detonated and/or upon impact if need be.

    They also carry their own shielding systems!

    It is also why they can be manually destroyed if wanted and, used in a variety of configurations for several different jobs.

    Not to mention, they require a set time in seconds, before they fully mix [aka activate] when leaving the launcher, this is why they wouldn't destroy the ship that launched it, the moment it leaves.



    Now, go back and actually read up on this stuff, before contradicting yourself some more.

    Go and read some damn science...

    The matter and anti matter would need to be kept APART by containment fields, since when they meet... BANG! And the kind of bang that the power systems in a torpedo could not contain. The separation field is dropped on detonation, thats how matter/anti-matter explosions are theorised to work.

    If you'd read the star trek fluff about the torps you'd have read that...
    The warhead had a detonation chamber filled with antimatter. Upon detonation the torpedo created a matter-antimatter explosion and a flood of ion radiation. (Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock; DS9: "Tribunal"; VOY: "Good Shepherd"; TNG: "The Loss", "New Ground")


    and you might have read
    As a safety measure the matter and antimatter are kept initially completely separated in the warhead. Only after the launch they are mixed during flight in the combiner tank, while still separated from each other in magnetic packets. This mixing takes a minimum of 1.02 seconds. (pg. 128, 129) This would explain why photon torpedoes are usually launched at very slow velocities when their targets are in relatively close range. As the travel time must always be over one second for the warhead to be ready to detonate.


    So even the professional fluff writers writing the background techy fluff checked some science, and realised the two substances have to be prevented from coming into direct contact prior to you wanting that...

    BANG!
    <center><font size="+5"><b>Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day...
    Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life...</b></size></center>
  • demonicaestheticdemonicaesthetic Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Best explained here as well, especially in the technical manual section.

    http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Photon_torpedo

    I'm going to be kind, and give you a hot tip...

    when posting a link to support your argument, READ the page to make sure it does not in fact refute everything you claim...

    http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/but-not-simpler/how-photon-torpedoes-will-mark-an-end-to-the-energy-crisis/
    No science fiction universe is complete without a legion of fans arguing over details, and Star Trek is a seriously complete universe. Looking at a photon torpedo scientifically would mean picking and choosing from one of the many makes, models, weights, payloads, and ranges. However, for simplicity, a standard torpedo to use would be a warhead from Star Trek: The Next Generation, which carries a 1.5-kilogram payload of antimatter. Here is where Einstein comes in again.

    If you want to use 1.5 kilograms of antimatter in a warhead, you would also need 1.5 kilograms of normal matter to react it with. The resulting explosion would be incredible, surely to the delight of Lieutenant Commander Worf. An annihilation of three kilograms of material–according to a 100% efficient E=mc2 model–releases one and a half times the amount of energy that the Sun hits the Earth with every second. That’s an amount of Joules (a unit of energy) that has 17 zeroes, so maybe a better way to think about it is in an equivalent amount of TNT. Making the conversion, one photon torpedo is effectively a 64-megaton bomb. That’s ten times greater than the Tunguska Event–a meteor strike that leveled 830 square miles of Russian forest, nearly three times greater than the eruption of Mt. St. Helens, and larger than the largest nuclear device ever detonated–Tsar Bomba.
    <center><font size="+5"><b>Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day...
    Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life...</b></size></center>
  • shadowwraith77shadowwraith77 Member Posts: 6,395 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Go and read some damn science...

    The matter and anti matter would need to be kept APART by containment fields, since when they meet... BANG! And the kind of bang that the power systems in a torpedo could not contain. The separation field is dropped on detonation, thats how matter/anti-matter explosions are theorised to work.

    If you'd read the star trek fluff about the torps you'd have read that...




    and you might have read




    So even the professional fluff writers writing the background techy fluff checked some science, and realised the two substances have to be prevented from coming into direct contact prior to you wanting that...

    BANG!
    I'm going to be kind, and give you a hot tip...

    when posting a link to support your argument, READ the page to make sure it does not in fact refute everything you claim...

    I did read it before you did even and, you obviously didn't read the changes before spouting off the mouth!

    Revise your post, as it now contradicts what is posted by myself.

    But, I see where you didn't even read into my post, you know the part where it says!

    *double facepalm*, I guess you don't actually read the full descriptions? The warhead reaction is encased in a magnetic field preventing it from effecting the launching system and, destroying itself in the process, this why they can be manually detonated and/or upon impact if need be.

    They also carry their own shielding systems!

    It is also why they can be manually destroyed if wanted and, used in a variety of configurations for several different jobs.


    Also shown in your own post!

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shadowwraith77 View Post
    *double facepalm*, I guess you don't actually read the full descriptions? The warhead reaction is encased in a magnetic field preventing it from effecting the launching system and, destroying itself in the process, this why they can be manually detonated and/or upon impact if need be.

    They also carry their own shielding systems!

    It is also why they can be manually destroyed if wanted and, used in a variety of configurations for several different jobs.

    Not to mention, they require a set time in seconds, before they fully mix [aka activate] when leaving the launcher, this is why they wouldn't destroy the ship that launched it, the moment it leaves.



    Now, go back and actually read up on this stuff, before contradicting yourself some more.

    Go and read some damn science...

    The matter and anti matter would need to be kept APART by containment fields, since when they meet... BANG! And the kind of bang that the power systems in a torpedo could not contain. The separation field is dropped on detonation, thats how matter/anti-matter explosions are theorised to work.

    If you'd read the star trek fluff about the torps you'd have read that...

    For this, you even get my cat doing a *double facepalm*
    tumblr_nq9ec3BSAy1qj6sk2o2_500_zpspkqw0mmk.gif


    Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!

Sign In or Register to comment.