Switch Theme:

MAN OF IRON model...could it be  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






w1zard wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Battle Barges and Battleships are typically used for Exterminatuses. 6-8KM long ships, typically. However, it's usually done by torpedo - which could be fired from almost anything. Granted, a virus torpedo might not do anything to a warship, but a Cyclonic Torpedo would. So if a 6-8km long IoM ship can destroy all life on a planet - including any fortifications there - how would a 20km long ship survive?

A cyclonic torpedo wouldn't do anything to a ship, considering that its sole purpose is to ignite an atmosphere, not act as a huge bomb.

Bharring wrote:
I'm not forgetting. When it's size doubles on *one* axis, it's volume goes up by a factor of 8. But the relative ratios betwween a 20km ship and a 7km ship seem relatively similar to those between a 400ft ship and a 77ft ship.

The proportions are similar, but the SIZES are not. A 100m cube has a 984,375 m^3 volume advantage over a 25m cube. A 20KM cube has a 7,850,000,000,000 m^3 volume advantage over a 5KM cube. See the difference?

Bharring wrote:
A field force requires power at the cube of the distance from it's generator.

This is pretty much a guess on your part, you don't know how much power it takes to generate a shield of X size. It could be logarithmic for all you know and bigger shields are actually more energy efficient than smaller shields.

Bharring wrote:
That's basically a leap of faith. You're assuming that it takes an equal amount of energy to enforce equilibrium as it would take to destabilize equilibrium.

Unless it is greater than a 1/64 ratio I am still correct. And if it is greater than a 1/64 ratio shields would be useless on larger ships because it would use more power to protect less, and nobody would use them, a ships shields would get worse the larger it got no matter how much power you pumped into it.

Bharring wrote:
You're also assuming the Eldar believed the IoM had parity in construction, shield tech, and weapons tech - something they would never believe.

Unless you are making the argument that Eldar power generation technology is roughly 8 times better than IOM tech per size, this argument falls flat. I do not believe the tech parity is that wide considering Eldar naval vessel depiction in the BFG lore.

Bharring wrote:
A larger ship attempting to ram a smaller ship is also ramming every part of it's own ship in the same action. Even before collision with the smaller ship.
Acceleration requires an equal amount of energy for each unit of mass. A larger ship may increase energy generation at pace with it's volume - which is a cubic relationship with it's length - but also needs increased energy at pace with it's mass - which tracks at least at, and usually higher than, it's volume.

You are forgetting energy efficiency boosts for larger reactors, which are a real thing even today. You are also assuming thrust scales linearly with engine size.

Bharring wrote:
The larger ship is likely to have a faster top speed. But the smaller ship is almost certain to accelerate or maneuver faster. There is no reason to believe the larger ship can accelerate/maneuver as well.

Again, these are completely incorrect assumptions.

Bharring wrote:
If an Argentineinan 77ft plane can beat a 400ft UK ship of war - and one designed to stop said plain and the weapon type it was using - in the 80s, it seems silly to think no Eldar leader would think a 5km Eldar cruiser with the advantages of better tech, stealth, and weird cloud/storm/whatever effects could take on a 20km IoM dreadnaught.

If a 15ft missile can threaten a contemporary 400ft long warship, why wouldn't Eldar have something similar? And if so, why couldn't they arm a 7km long ship with one that threatens a 20km ship?

You keep making comparisons to modern day naval warfare, when those comparisons aren't accurate at all. Both the sizes and the environments involved are totally different.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Its increase in dimensions is cubed the number 2 is not cubed that is an arbitrary number.

Someone doesn't understand basic math.

V=L*W*H

An object twice as large has 8 times the volume.

8V=2L*2W*2H


No it doesn't, the shape matters, you are assuming its a cube, if you were to add a spherical portion to the ship the surface area is going to increase also the density has to stay the same for that to be true, you are assuming two ships are going to be identical. also If a single ship increased by 2 then sure as its the same ship, you can't compare different ships that way. Also some ships can go into the atmosphere, so there structure is going to be vastly different to a larger ship.

I mean you even wrote length width and height, you have literally given the dimensions of a cube and are trying to apply that to a battleship, so sorry to say you don't know basic math.

This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 00:47:02


 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

w1zard wrote:

A cyclonic torpedo wouldn't do anything to a ship, considering that its sole purpose is to ignite an atmosphere, not act as a huge bomb.


Nope. Cyclonic Torpedoes are essentially delayed detonation missiles. They are designed to bore into a planet's crust and then detonate, and with enough of them eventually fracturing the planet into an asteroid field. Atmospheric ignition is a secondary effect which occurs in combination with Virus Bombs having reduced all life on the planet to flammable gas and biological sludge, and said ignition can also be accomplished with something like a Lance battery.

Cyclonic torpedoes are when you need to destroy the actual planet. Virus bombs are when you just need to scour all life from its surface. A Cyclonic torpedo would be highly effective vs something like a Space Hulk or other similarly huge ship. It wouldn't be an efficient weapon against it, as Cyclonic torpedoes are not cheap, but it would definitely work.


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Lord of the Fleet





Seneca Nation of Indians

Bharring wrote:
"more credible guess considering the numbers from the BFG sourcebooks."
12 KM is possible, sure. We don't know. But the BFG sourcebooks aren't as relevant as you suggest.


I take offense to that, but will admit to being super biased as well.


Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Wizard,

Re: proportional sizes - the *ratio* of their sizes are what matter, not the flat "a-b" sizes.

A Field Force taking the cube of the distance (from center) to exert force at a point is not a leap - it's modern physics. Although a Force Field / Void Shield being a Field Force is a small leap.

As for acceleration and thrust energies vs surface area/size ratios, I wouldn't be surprised if they *did* scale more-than-linearly with surface area. But it'd be incredulous for them to scale more-than-linearly with volume. And they'd need to scale more-than-linearly with volume to produce more acceleration on larger vessels. Thrust required for the same acceleration increases linearly with mass. So cubed mass compared to a value between cubed and squared thrust obviously suggests the smaller mass vessel has greater acceleration capabilities.

It's true that both the sizes and the environments are different from 1980s Falklands. The scale is way beyond what we saw there. Considering that, as scale increases, the difference in size between an asset and what potentially threatens it appears to *also* increase, the scale makes it *more* likely. Considering that, as tech advances, the difference in size between an asset and what threatens it has also increased - so that, too, makes it more likely. Finally, it's also space combat instead of naval combat - an environment that is *much* more hostile to operating vessels, and as such requiring much less damage to destroy one - once again making it *more* likely a smaller vehicle can threaten a larger one.

Devals,
In math/physics, factors are often talked about their order/power, disregarding relatively minor factors. As such, a cubic relationship between A and B is A= n*B^3+M, for basically any positive N. So a sphere - or any 3d object - is typically said to grow in volume to the cube of length. It's a shorthand, because everything but the highest power involved tends to not matter.
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

Bharring wrote:

A Field Force taking the cube of the distance (from center) to exert force at a point is not a leap - it's modern physics. Although a Force Field / Void Shield being a Field Force is a small leap.


Force fields don't exist in real life, so applying any sort of real world physics to them is somewhat futile.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






 Grey Templar wrote:
Bharring wrote:

A Field Force taking the cube of the distance (from center) to exert force at a point is not a leap - it's modern physics. Although a Force Field / Void Shield being a Field Force is a small leap.


Force fields don't exist in real life, so applying any sort of real world physics to them is somewhat futile.


Actually the concept is being applied, the army are using electromagnetic fields for forcefields, very cool stuff.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/17 03:03:14


 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
Bharring wrote:

A Field Force taking the cube of the distance (from center) to exert force at a point is not a leap - it's modern physics. Although a Force Field / Void Shield being a Field Force is a small leap.


Force fields don't exist in real life, so applying any sort of real world physics to them is somewhat futile.


Actually the concept is being applied, the army are using electromagnetic fields for forcefields, very cool stuff.


Given that void shields work by directing the incoming energy or projectiles into the Warp, such physical laws don't apply.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





"field force" is a lot less magical than it sounds - think magnets and gravity.

Although Grey has a good point. We don't know *how* they actually function or what their power requirements are. There's a lot we don't know. As I said, assuming their force fields are some kind of field force is a leap - although not nearly as much a leap as half this thread.
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

Certainly, and thats probably how "force fields' will work if we ever invent any. But the 40k Void Shields quite explicitly work in a different way. They use Warp technology to transport the incoming energy or projectiles into the Warp itself. Making them act more like space-time bending devices than what we think of as a "force field", though the effect is similar.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

No it doesn't, the shape matters, you are assuming its a cube, if you were to add a spherical portion to the ship the surface area is going to increase also the density has to stay the same for that to be true, you are assuming two ships are going to be identical. also If a single ship increased by 2 then sure as its the same ship, you can't compare different ships that way. Also some ships can go into the atmosphere, so there structure is going to be vastly different to a larger ship.

I mean you even wrote length width and height, you have literally given the dimensions of a cube and are trying to apply that to a battleship, so sorry to say you don't know basic math.

You need calculus to calculate the volume of an irregular 3d object, I was using the simplest form of the equation to illustrate the principle, not stating that you can calculate the volume of anything by simply multiplying the base, width, and height together. But thanks for missing the point.

 Grey Templar wrote:
w1zard wrote:

A cyclonic torpedo wouldn't do anything to a ship, considering that its sole purpose is to ignite an atmosphere, not act as a huge bomb.


Nope. Cyclonic Torpedoes are essentially delayed detonation missiles. They are designed to bore into a planet's crust and then detonate, and with enough of them eventually fracturing the planet into an asteroid field. Atmospheric ignition is a secondary effect which occurs in combination with Virus Bombs having reduced all life on the planet to flammable gas and biological sludge, and said ignition can also be accomplished with something like a Lance battery.

Cyclonic torpedoes are when you need to destroy the actual planet. Virus bombs are when you just need to scour all life from its surface. A Cyclonic torpedo would be highly effective vs something like a Space Hulk or other similarly huge ship. It wouldn't be an efficient weapon against it, as Cyclonic torpedoes are not cheap, but it would definitely work.


You are somewhat incorrect: http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Cyclonic_Torpedo

What you are talking about is a "Two Stage Cyclonic Torpedo" which is for use against biologically void worlds, or worlds without an atmosphere for a normal cyclonic torpedo to work in. It is much more rare than a traditional cyclonic torpedo, which works by igniting the atmosphere like I described earlier.

Such a weapon is so rare that it is only carried on certain vessels, and would not be wasted in a ship on ship engagement where the risk of interception or missing is too great. Also, we have no idea how such a weapon would interact with void shields considering that it was made to punch through rock and not an energy barrier. I'm forced to agree though that a shieldless vessel would probably fare pretty poorly against such a weapon, no matter its size.

Bharring wrote:
...the *ratio* of their sizes are what matter, not the flat "a-b" sizes.

It does matter when it comes to things like the destructive yields of weapons, or Mass differences in a collision.

Bharring wrote:
But it'd be incredulous for them to scale more-than-linearly with volume.

I wouldn't be so sure. We see a similar effect IRL when it comes to scaling things up. Bigger things are usually more efficient.

Bharring wrote:
It's true that both the sizes and the environments are different from 1980s Falklands. The scale is way beyond what we saw there. Considering that, as scale increases, the difference in size between an asset and what potentially threatens it appears to *also* increase, the scale makes it *more* likely. Considering that, as tech advances, the difference in size between an asset and what threatens it has also increased - so that, too, makes it more likely. Finally, it's also space combat instead of naval combat - an environment that is *much* more hostile to operating vessels, and as such requiring much less damage to destroy one - once again making it *more* likely a smaller vehicle can threaten a larger one.

Again, I think you are stretching.

The fact of the matter is that outside of stored energy weapons like torpedoes, the power outputs between a vessel and one four times its length are going to be an order of magnitude (possibly even two orders of magnitude) apart assuming relative tech parity. Because shields exist in this scenario and can mitigate damage based on power fed into them, the ship with the biggest power output has a massive advantage. A larger vessel is always going to be substantially more dangerous in space combat from that fact alone.

The Eldar are arrogant and have better technology than the IOM. It still doesn't make sense to send a single vessel to attack a target 4 times its size. As I said the Eldar are arrogant, not stupid. The Eldar know full well the strength of standard IOM vessels because they have fought us plenty of times before.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 04:22:25


 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

They've added some fluff then. There didn't used to be any distinction. All Cyclonic Torpedoes were the two stage kind. They must have made up some lesser classes, which makes no sense since all of those descriptions for the lesser ones can apply to any number of other weapons.

For example, in the DOW2 Exterminatus clip. The atmosphere is ignited with a simple macrocannon shell and not a cyclonic torpedo. The gasses from the virus bombs along with the oxygen in the atmosphere mean any ignition source of sufficient power, basically any ship mounted weapon, can ignite the atmosphere.

It makes far more sense for Cyclonic Torpedoes to be a specific planet cracking device rather than a broad category of anti-planet weapons. More degradation of the fluff is unfortunate.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/17 04:01:02


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Reread your link. That designation refers to weapon that annialate life via a variety of ways. Plasma bombardment, for example, is not the same thing.
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

Bharring wrote:
Reread your link. That designation refers to weapon that annialate life via a variety of ways. Plasma bombardment, for example, is not the same thing.


Which is dumb, because that would include Virus bombs under the Cyclonic Torpedo umbrella.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





I also find it hilarious that IoM not having enough of a weapon that can destroy planets means that, somehow, Eldar have no weapons that they can mount on a 7km long ship that can destroy a 20km long ship.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Bharring wrote:
I also find it hilarious that IoM not having enough of a weapon that can destroy planets means that, somehow, Eldar have no weapons that they can mount on a 7km long ship that can destroy a 20km long ship.

You were saying that even smaller IOM ships have the power to destroy planets, and that a 20KM ship isn't a big deal by comparison. I was disputing the first point.

And the Eldar ship in question is 5 KM long, not 7. It's actually 4.7KM to be exact, but I was rounding up.

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 04:17:00


 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

w1zard wrote:
Bharring wrote:
I also find it hilarious that IoM not having enough of a weapon that can destroy planets means that, somehow, Eldar have no weapons that they can mount on a 7km long ship that can destroy a 20km long ship.

You were saying that even smaller IOM ships have the power to destroy planets, and that a 20KM ship isn't a big deal by comparison. I was disputing your point.


They can. Anything with Torpedo tubes can fire Cyclonic torpedoes.

Does every Imperial ship carry Cyclonic torpedoes at all times? No. Could they? Yes.

Its just like how any B52 bomber can drop nuclear bombs, because we have nuclear bombs capable of being dropped from a B52.

If an Inquisitor or some other individual empowered to authorize and Exterminatus only had a handful of Cobra class destroyers, he could still carry out the Exterminatus assuming he had the torpedoes for them to launch.

So yes, even small Imperial ships have the capacity to destroy planets, simply because they have Torpedo tubes.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Grey Templar wrote:
They can. Anything with Torpedo tubes can fire Cyclonic torpedoes.

You are missing the point. Are cyclonic torpedoes or their Eldar equivalents standard loadouts on cruisers? I think not.

Nor are they ever used in ship to ship combat, so the point is moot.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 04:22:05


 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

w1zard wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
They can. Anything with Torpedo tubes can fire Cyclonic torpedoes.

You are missing the point. Are cyclonic torpedoes or their Eldar equivalents standard loadouts on cruisers? I think not.

Nor are they ever used in ship to ship combat, so the point is moot.


Its true, Eldar don't really have anything equivalent to a Cyclonic torpedo. They don't blow planets up, at least not with something like ship mounted weaponry.

But it does illustrate that you can mount hideously powerful stuff on ships of any size in 40k. So clearly, the Eldar Cruiser could be somewhat of a threat to the Speranza. Especially since, you know, the book clearly showed that it was in some capacity. The same book which also showed the massive size of the ship

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






w1zard wrote:
 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

No it doesn't, the shape matters, you are assuming its a cube, if you were to add a spherical portion to the ship the surface area is going to increase also the density has to stay the same for that to be true, you are assuming two ships are going to be identical. also If a single ship increased by 2 then sure as its the same ship, you can't compare different ships that way. Also some ships can go into the atmosphere, so there structure is going to be vastly different to a larger ship.

I mean you even wrote length width and height, you have literally given the dimensions of a cube and are trying to apply that to a battleship, so sorry to say you don't know basic math.

You need calculus to calculate the volume of an irregular 3d object, I was using the simplest form of the equation to illustrate the principle, not stating that you can calculate the volume of anything by simply multiplying the base, width, and height together. But thanks for missing the point.

 Grey Templar wrote:
w1zard wrote:

A cyclonic torpedo wouldn't do anything to a ship, considering that its sole purpose is to ignite an atmosphere, not act as a huge bomb.


Nope. Cyclonic Torpedoes are essentially delayed detonation missiles. They are designed to bore into a planet's crust and then detonate, and with enough of them eventually fracturing the planet into an asteroid field. Atmospheric ignition is a secondary effect which occurs in combination with Virus Bombs having reduced all life on the planet to flammable gas and biological sludge, and said ignition can also be accomplished with something like a Lance battery.

Cyclonic torpedoes are when you need to destroy the actual planet. Virus bombs are when you just need to scour all life from its surface. A Cyclonic torpedo would be highly effective vs something like a Space Hulk or other similarly huge ship. It wouldn't be an efficient weapon against it, as Cyclonic torpedoes are not cheap, but it would definitely work.


You are somewhat incorrect: http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Cyclonic_Torpedo

What you are talking about is a "Two Stage Cyclonic Torpedo" which is for use against biologically void worlds, or worlds without an atmosphere for a normal cyclonic torpedo to work in. It is much more rare than a traditional cyclonic torpedo, which works by igniting the atmosphere like I described earlier.

Such a weapon is so rare that it is only carried on certain vessels, and would not be wasted in a ship on ship engagement where the risk of interception or missing is too great. Also, we have no idea how such a weapon would interact with void shields considering that it was made to punch through rock and not an energy barrier. I'm forced to agree though that a shieldless vessel would probably fare pretty poorly against such a weapon, no matter its size.

Bharring wrote:
...the *ratio* of their sizes are what matter, not the flat "a-b" sizes.

It does matter when it comes to things like the destructive yields of weapons, or Mass differences in a collision.

Bharring wrote:
But it'd be incredulous for them to scale more-than-linearly with volume.

I wouldn't be so sure. We see a similar effect IRL when it comes to scaling things up. Bigger things are usually more efficient.

Bharring wrote:
It's true that both the sizes and the environments are different from 1980s Falklands. The scale is way beyond what we saw there. Considering that, as scale increases, the difference in size between an asset and what potentially threatens it appears to *also* increase, the scale makes it *more* likely. Considering that, as tech advances, the difference in size between an asset and what threatens it has also increased - so that, too, makes it more likely. Finally, it's also space combat instead of naval combat - an environment that is *much* more hostile to operating vessels, and as such requiring much less damage to destroy one - once again making it *more* likely a smaller vehicle can threaten a larger one.

Again, I think you are stretching.

The fact of the matter is that outside of stored energy weapons like torpedoes, the power outputs between a vessel and one four times its length are going to be an order of magnitude (possibly even two orders of magnitude) apart assuming relative tech parity. Because shields exist in this scenario and can mitigate damage based on power fed into them, the ship with the biggest power output has a massive advantage. A larger vessel is always going to be substantially more dangerous in space combat from that fact alone.

The Eldar are arrogant and have better technology than the IOM. It still doesn't make sense to send a single vessel to attack a target 4 times its size. As I said the Eldar are arrogant, not stupid. The Eldar know full well the strength of standard IOM vessels because they have fought us plenty of times before.


Well you don't understand even the simplest form then and you aren't calculating the volume, you are supposed to be calculating the volume based on the increase of dimensions, I mentioned you stated the length, width and height so you are stating that you should have realised there is a relationship between the shape of an object, based on the square cube law, which you didn't lol No length, width and height cannot only be used to calculate any volumes, you need calculus to take into account curves and spheres and we aren't talking about volume, we are talking about the volume based on the increase of dimensions, which is the square cube law. Next time, don't be rude and I won't have to embarrass you by showing that you have no idea what you are talking about.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Grey Templar wrote:
 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
Bharring wrote:

A Field Force taking the cube of the distance (from center) to exert force at a point is not a leap - it's modern physics. Although a Force Field / Void Shield being a Field Force is a small leap.


Force fields don't exist in real life, so applying any sort of real world physics to them is somewhat futile.


Actually the concept is being applied, the army are using electromagnetic fields for forcefields, very cool stuff.


Given that void shields work by directing the incoming energy or projectiles into the Warp, such physical laws don't apply.


I know, just showing that there is 'force-field' tech.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 21:22:56


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Grey Templar wrote:
...But it does illustrate that you can mount hideously powerful stuff on ships of any size in 40k. So clearly, the Eldar Cruiser could be somewhat of a threat to the Speranza. Especially since, you know, the book clearly showed that it was in some capacity. The same book which also showed the massive size of the ship

The Speranza's size is never explicitly stated in the book. All we know is that it is "Large". "Large" can be anything, and I certainly agree that the Speranza was larger than the Eldar cruiser it was fighting. However that cruiser was in all likelihood only 4.7KM long. This means that the Speranza could be anywhere from 5KM to 30KM long (the largest ship in the setting). However, I think it is much more likely that the Speranza is in the 5-12KM range because previous Ark Mechanicus ships were in the 5-7KM range, and anything outside of 12KM is rarely seen, and that is stated IN UNIVERSE. The fact that the Eldar sent a 4.7KM long cruiser to deal with the Speranza alone, and had every expectation of it winning seems to support my opinion about the Speranza's size.

The fact of the matter is that outside of stored energy weapons like torpedoes, the power outputs between a vessel and one four times its length are going to be an order of magnitude (possibly even two orders of magnitude) apart assuming relative tech parity. Because shields exist in this scenario and can mitigate damage based on power fed into them, the ship with the biggest power output has a massive advantage. A larger vessel is always going to be substantially more dangerous in space combat from that fact alone.

The Eldar are arrogant and have better technology than the IOM. It still doesn't make sense to send a single vessel to attack a target 4 times its size. As I said in previous posts the Eldar are arrogant, not stupid. The Eldar know full well the strength of standard IOM vessels because they have fought us plenty of times before.

You can disagree if you want, because there is nothing as far as I know that proves either of us wrong. But I feel my hypothesis is a lot more accurate based on the information we do know, rather than yours and Bharring's claim that the Speranza was ~20KM long.

This whole discussion started because we were talking about DAoT tech, and me saying that the Speranza blew a comparatively sized ship (that supposedly had better technology) away with one shot. Bharring claimed that the Speranza was larger and that this outcome should be expected given the size comparison. My counterpoint was: Why would the eldar send such a small ship to fight a bigger one if they just expected it to get blown away in one shot? In fact, I think they did not. I think they sent a ship relatively similar in size and expected it to win, only to be massively surprised when the Speranza pulled DAoT weaponry out of nowhere and punch way above its weight class. Things make more sense that way.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Well you don't understand even the simplest form then and you aren't calculating the volume, you are supposed to be calculating the volume based on the increase of dimensions, I mentioned you stated the length, width and height so you are stating that you should have realised there is a relationship between the shape of an object of based on the square cube law, which you didn't lol No length, width and height cannot only be used to calculate any volumes, you need calculus to take into account curves and spheres and we aren't talking about volume, we are talking about the volume based on the increase of dimensions, which is the square cube law. Next time, don't be rude and I won't have to embarrass you by showing that you have no idea what you are talking about.

lol what?

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 06:42:21


 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

w1zard wrote:


The Eldar are arrogant and have better technology than the IOM. It still doesn't make sense to send a single vessel to attack a target 4 times its size. As I said in previous posts the Eldar are arrogant, not stupid. The Eldar know full well the strength of standard IOM vessels because they have fought us plenty of times before.


I disagree. Pretty much most cases where the Eldar are portrayed as losing its because, in their arrogance, they make stupid mistakes. Plus, keep in mind that the Eldar forces are stretched paper thin. Their population is only numbered in the hundreds of millions, and their ships even fewer. They're always going to be sending forces to face threats which outnumber, and outclass, them on a regular basis.

It is entirely believable that an Eldar farseer could only call upon a single Cruiser to deal with a threat like Speranza. Farseers are always seeing a thousand threads of doom, they can't deal with them all nor can they send adequate forces to even all the ones they choose to actually intervene with. Combine this with a chronic arrogance, it is not only conceivable, but inevitable that they would routinely underestimate their foe.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/17 06:48:57


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Grey Templar wrote:
I disagree. Pretty much most cases where the Eldar are portrayed as losing its because, in their arrogance, they make stupid mistakes. Plus, keep in mind that the Eldar forces are stretched paper thin. Their population is only numbered in the hundreds of millions, and their ships even fewer. They're always going to be sending forces to face threats which outnumber, and outclass, them on a regular basis.

It is entirely believable that an Eldar farseer could only call upon a single Cruiser to deal with a threat like Speranza. Farseers are always seeing a thousand threads of doom, they can't deal with them all nor can they send adequate forces to even all the ones they choose to actually intervene with. Combine this with a chronic arrogance, it is not only conceivable, but inevitable that they would routinely underestimate their foe.

There is a difference between losing because you underestimated your opponent, and walking into a suicide mission thinking you have the upper hand.

Ordering a 4.7KM cruiser to attack a ~20KM dreadnought at full power with unknown armament is not arrogance, it is stupidity. Stupidity that is not synonymous with the Eldar. They aren't arrogant enough to think that a single guardian can take on three space marines and win, nor are they arrogant enough to think that one of their light cruisers can take on an IOM dreadnought alone and win. The Eldar have been fighting humanity for a long time, and I do not think a Farseer would make such a stupid mistake.

Like I said, the narrative makes much more sense if the Speranza was in the 5-12KM range.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 06:56:08


 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

w1zard wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
I disagree. Pretty much most cases where the Eldar are portrayed as losing its because, in their arrogance, they make stupid mistakes. Plus, keep in mind that the Eldar forces are stretched paper thin. Their population is only numbered in the hundreds of millions, and their ships even fewer. They're always going to be sending forces to face threats which outnumber, and outclass, them on a regular basis.

It is entirely believable that an Eldar farseer could only call upon a single Cruiser to deal with a threat like Speranza. Farseers are always seeing a thousand threads of doom, they can't deal with them all nor can they send adequate forces to even all the ones they choose to actually intervene with. Combine this with a chronic arrogance, it is not only conceivable, but inevitable that they would routinely underestimate their foe.

There is a difference between losing because you underestimated your opponent, and walking into a suicide mission thinking you have the upper hand.

Ordering a 4.7KM cruiser to attack a ~20KM dreadnought at full power with unknown armament is not arrogance, it is stupidity. Stupidity that is not synonymous with the Eldar. They aren't arrogant enough to think that a single guardian can take on three space marines and win, nor are they arrogant enough to think that one of their light cruisers can take on an IOM dreadnought alone and win. The Eldar have been fighting humanity for a long time, and I do not think a Farseer would make such a stupid mistake.

Like I said, the narrative makes much more sense if the Speranza was in the 5-12KM range.


Arrogance makes people do stupid things all the time. It makes Eldar do stupid things all the time in the fluff. It also wasn't a light cruiser. It was a full cruiser as I recall.

The Eldar also attacked at a moment of disadvantage for the Ark. A time when they were reasonably sure they could attack it without fear of reprisal. Its even conceivable that they were using that moment to just probe the ship and see what it was capable of, intending to come back at a later date. They were never intending to actually face it head on, and they didn't. It just happened that they did some considerable damage, enough to freak out the Mechanicus crew and stir the ship's machine spirit to action, and then promptly took a Black Hole cannon to the face.

Maybe we could argue that it was poorly written and that realistically this situation wouldn't occur, but it is consistent with prior in-universe behavior. Dumber actions have occurred in the fluff, this is far from an egregious offender.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/17 07:06:53


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in gb
Excited Doom Diver





 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

Well you don't understand even the simplest form then and you aren't calculating the volume, you are supposed to be calculating the volume based on the increase of dimensions, I mentioned you stated the length, width and height so you are stating that you should have realised there is a relationship between the shape of an object of based on the square cube law, which you didn't lol No length, width and height cannot only be used to calculate any volumes, you need calculus to take into account curves and spheres and we aren't talking about volume, we are talking about the volume based on the increase of dimensions, which is the square cube law. Next time, don't be rude and I won't have to embarrass you by showing that you have no idea what you are talking about.

I've read and re-read this post several times, and DC: I hate to be rude, but it's barely coherent. I think I see what you're trying to say, and if so, then you're actually agreeing with them; you've just let yourself get caught up in perceived details while missing the actual point.

If you have an object of length X, and you scale it up to length 2X while maintaining the shape, the proportions, and the materials, then the larger version will have 8 times the volume, 8 times the mass, and 4 times the surface area. That's all we're trying to say. There's no point getting caught up in discussions of how to measure the volume from the length etc, since it's not relevant to the question of scaling.

If that's what you're saying, great! You agree with us. If your point is that you can't use the square-cube ratio because the shape might change, we know that, but it is still a valid point worth mentioning to highlight the assumptions used.

If that's not what you're trying to say, then I have no idea what your point is. But their mathematical descriptions have been acccurate to date.
   
Made in gb
Veteran Inquisitorial Tyranid Xenokiller





Watch Fortress Excalibris

OK, so back at the actual topic (which is not the square-cube law), here's a cool thing. UR-025's totally-real-and-not-at-all-made-up boss has the previously unknown title of 'Magos-Ethereum'. If you do a Google search for 'Magos Ethereum', you will discover that this is a clever fourth-wall-breaking joke.

A little bit of righteous anger now and then is good, actually. Don't trust a person who never gets angry. 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






I'm getting something o do with crypto-currencies?
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Halandri

MAGOS fund, managed by AI and supervised by our team, will be deployed on the Ethereum platform.

UR 025 is also the disk code of Universal Records publish of Galaxy 2 Galaxy, a 'Future Jazz / Techno' album.

I also wonder if it is a current political satire 'UR-0' becoming 'Euro', '2' becoming 'to' and '5' becoming Roman numeral 'V' (morse code shorthand for victory). ie European Union for the win!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/17 11:44:06


 
   
Made in gb
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






Aelyn wrote:
 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

Well you don't understand even the simplest form then and you aren't calculating the volume, you are supposed to be calculating the volume based on the increase of dimensions, I mentioned you stated the length, width and height so you are stating that you should have realised there is a relationship between the shape of an object of based on the square cube law, which you didn't lol No length, width and height cannot only be used to calculate any volumes, you need calculus to take into account curves and spheres and we aren't talking about volume, we are talking about the volume based on the increase of dimensions, which is the square cube law. Next time, don't be rude and I won't have to embarrass you by showing that you have no idea what you are talking about.

I've read and re-read this post several times, and DC: I hate to be rude, but it's barely coherent. I think I see what you're trying to say, and if so, then you're actually agreeing with them; you've just let yourself get caught up in perceived details while missing the actual point.

If you have an object of length X, and you scale it up to length 2X while maintaining the shape, the proportions, and the materials, then the larger version will have 8 times the volume, 8 times the mass, and 4 times the surface area. That's all we're trying to say. There's no point getting caught up in discussions of how to measure the volume from the length etc, since it's not relevant to the question of scaling.

If that's what you're saying, great! You agree with us. If your point is that you can't use the square-cube ratio because the shape might change, we know that, but it is still a valid point worth mentioning to highlight the assumptions used.

If that's not what you're trying to say, then I have no idea what your point is. But their mathematical descriptions have been acccurate to date.


Well when using the square cube law you don't assume that everything is a cube with the dimensions 2 by 2 by 2, which is what you's have all done. Saying that if you increase any objects dimensions by a multiple of 2 its not always going to be 8, just because the multiplayer is 2 doesn't mean the whole dimensions are 2, so it isn't going to automatically be 8. You's have all been saying that if you increase any object by a multiple of 2 its volume is going to be 8 times its original lol If you said it increases its volume cubed I'd agree, to say it increases its volume by 8 is just silly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
w1zard wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
...But it does illustrate that you can mount hideously powerful stuff on ships of any size in 40k. So clearly, the Eldar Cruiser could be somewhat of a threat to the Speranza. Especially since, you know, the book clearly showed that it was in some capacity. The same book which also showed the massive size of the ship

The Speranza's size is never explicitly stated in the book. All we know is that it is "Large". "Large" can be anything, and I certainly agree that the Speranza was larger than the Eldar cruiser it was fighting. However that cruiser was in all likelihood only 4.7KM long. This means that the Speranza could be anywhere from 5KM to 30KM long (the largest ship in the setting). However, I think it is much more likely that the Speranza is in the 5-12KM range because previous Ark Mechanicus ships were in the 5-7KM range, and anything outside of 12KM is rarely seen, and that is stated IN UNIVERSE. The fact that the Eldar sent a 4.7KM long cruiser to deal with the Speranza alone, and had every expectation of it winning seems to support my opinion about the Speranza's size.

The fact of the matter is that outside of stored energy weapons like torpedoes, the power outputs between a vessel and one four times its length are going to be an order of magnitude (possibly even two orders of magnitude) apart assuming relative tech parity. Because shields exist in this scenario and can mitigate damage based on power fed into them, the ship with the biggest power output has a massive advantage. A larger vessel is always going to be substantially more dangerous in space combat from that fact alone.

The Eldar are arrogant and have better technology than the IOM. It still doesn't make sense to send a single vessel to attack a target 4 times its size. As I said in previous posts the Eldar are arrogant, not stupid. The Eldar know full well the strength of standard IOM vessels because they have fought us plenty of times before.

You can disagree if you want, because there is nothing as far as I know that proves either of us wrong. But I feel my hypothesis is a lot more accurate based on the information we do know, rather than yours and Bharring's claim that the Speranza was ~20KM long.

This whole discussion started because we were talking about DAoT tech, and me saying that the Speranza blew a comparatively sized ship (that supposedly had better technology) away with one shot. Bharring claimed that the Speranza was larger and that this outcome should be expected given the size comparison. My counterpoint was: Why would the eldar send such a small ship to fight a bigger one if they just expected it to get blown away in one shot? In fact, I think they did not. I think they sent a ship relatively similar in size and expected it to win, only to be massively surprised when the Speranza pulled DAoT weaponry out of nowhere and punch way above its weight class. Things make more sense that way.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Well you don't understand even the simplest form then and you aren't calculating the volume, you are supposed to be calculating the volume based on the increase of dimensions, I mentioned you stated the length, width and height so you are stating that you should have realised there is a relationship between the shape of an object of based on the square cube law, which you didn't lol No length, width and height cannot only be used to calculate any volumes, you need calculus to take into account curves and spheres and we aren't talking about volume, we are talking about the volume based on the increase of dimensions, which is the square cube law. Next time, don't be rude and I won't have to embarrass you by showing that you have no idea what you are talking about.

lol what?


You would have said 'I was just trying to explain it simply' when I told you you were wrong, rather than saying I didn't know math because you were talking about a cube. If you said if you 'take a cube' then... but you didn't you thought everything goes up in 8 times the volume lol

This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 21:56:23


 
   
Made in gb
Excited Doom Diver





 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

Well when using the square cube law you don't assume that everything is a cube with the dimensions 2 by 2 by 2, which is what you's have all done. Saying that if you increase any objects dimensions by a multiple of 2 its not always going to be 8, just because the multiplayer is 2 doesn't mean the whole dimensions are 2, so it isn't going to automatically be 8. You's have all been saying that if you increase any object by a multiple of 2 its volume is going to be 8 times its original lol If you said it increases its volume cubed I'd agree, to say it increases its volume by 8 is just silly...

You would have said 'I was just trying to explain it simply' when I told you you were wrong, rather than saying I didn't know math because you were talking about a cube. If you said if you 'take a cube' then... but you didn't you thought everything goes up in 8 times the volume lol

Um.

You seem to be confused about the difference between a measurement - such as a ship being 7km long - and a multiplier - such one ship being twice as big as another.

We're only talking about multipliers here. If one ship is twice as long as another and is exactly the same shape just scaled up... then yeah, the bigger one has eight time the volume of the smaller one. That's because 8 is the third power of 2; the fact that 8 is called the cube of 2 doesn't mean we're talking about literal cube shapes necessarily.

It doesn't matter what shape you apply this to - spheres, cubes, cones, or a much more complicated design such as an Imperial starship, the relationship between how much each dimension increases and how much the volume increases is exactly the same.

By the same principle, if you scaled each dimension up by a factor of 3 while maintaining the same shape, the object would have 27 times the overall volume.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Grey Templar wrote:
Arrogance makes people do stupid things all the time. It makes Eldar do stupid things all the time in the fluff. It also wasn't a light cruiser. It was a full cruiser as I recall.

The Eldar also attacked at a moment of disadvantage for the Ark. A time when they were reasonably sure they could attack it without fear of reprisal. Its even conceivable that they were using that moment to just probe the ship and see what it was capable of, intending to come back at a later date. They were never intending to actually face it head on, and they didn't. It just happened that they did some considerable damage, enough to freak out the Mechanicus crew and stir the ship's machine spirit to action, and then promptly took a Black Hole cannon to the face.

Maybe we could argue that it was poorly written and that realistically this situation wouldn't occur, but it is consistent with prior in-universe behavior. Dumber actions have occurred in the fluff, this is far from an egregious offender.

Cruisers can be anywhere from 3-6KM long. Assuming the cruiser was shadow class (4.7KM) I guess that makes it more of a medium cruiser.

IIRC it was explicitly stated that the Eldar intended to attack and destroy the Speranza (from the Eldar pov no less), not probe.

I don't think it was "consistent" with in-universe behavior. I have never read anything about the Eldar making mistakes like that. I have read about a DE Archon underestimating SM scouts and getting a bunch of his men killed because of it. I have read about a group of craftworld Eldar underestimating the intelligence of an IG commander and making a tactical blunder. In both situations the Eldar ended up losing engagements because of it. Sending a 4.7KM cruiser to attack a ~20KM dreadnought is the equivalent of sending a guardsmen up against a Space Marine in a fistfight and expecting him to win. I still maintain that it is not something an Eldar farseer is stupid enough to do, and that the narrative makes much more sense if the Speranza was in the 5-12KM range.

But by all means, it doesn't look like I am going to change your headcanon so let's move on from this, we are already off topic enough.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/11/17 23:24:43


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Background
Go to: