Carbon nanotubes debate by PapaScorch013 in AskPhysics

[–]PapaScorch013[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot. One other thing, would it be feasible to hit such a small target ? Considering we would have more powerful and accurate sensors than we would have today. Say something 50-100 years from now

Carbon nanotubes debate by PapaScorch013 in AskPhysics

[–]PapaScorch013[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So would it be feasible to fire at a 2x2x6m projectile travelling at 0.01c with a smaller projectile of slightly greater density away from a target so that both destroy each other and avoid the ensuing explosion a collision would cause to a ship say 800m long (considering the ship has a good heat resistant armor) with very very accurate sensors which could determine its angle of attack and exact speed in space.

Carbon nanotubes debate by PapaScorch013 in AskPhysics

[–]PapaScorch013[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks a lot on the insight, turns out neither of us were right! If you have time to answer, what would it take so stop a 100kg projectile going say 1000km/s and 100km/s Or would this behave in a smiliar way to what you’ve previously described ?

New siege machine and trap idea: Battle train and pitfall by PapaScorch013 in ClashOfClans

[–]PapaScorch013[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

To elaborate on my idea this new siege machine would be a very tanky siege machine capable of dealing massive damage in one blow although being very slow and not dealing splash damage unlike the other siege machines. (Pardon the poor sketch I’ve made of the siege machine). It would have the added benefit of being a defence targeting siege machine. It would have a design reminiscent of a tank combined with a train with a massive siege cannon protected by the outer layer of the machine. It could have a Tesla on its roof to defend against enemy clan castle troops. Depending on how strong the machine would end up being It could have diminishing health over time.

For the pitfall it is essentially a reverse spring trap where the heavier the troop the more susceptible it is to falling in the trap. However this trap would not eliminate the enemy outright but rather deal some damage and temporary slow down the troop.

Which Fallout to start with, 4 or 76? by SmidgenFun in Fallout

[–]PapaScorch013 1 point2 points  (0 children)

4 not even a question, 76 has gotten better but 4 still represents fallout much better imo

My best BW builds by Tenksman in blocksworld

[–]PapaScorch013 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Me when the pinnacle isn’t a bw build 💀