[-Norbert-]

How does that work?

You'd have to ask the ones that did the animations for DoW to be sure.
But I guess it could be some kind of projected magnetic field to keep the bullet on course or something like that.

The Fluff of W40K pretty much boils down to a railgun being a big gun that fires very large bullets at very high speeds.... unless they eleborate a bit more in the Tau codex, which I don't have.

[eliex]

Watch the Broadsides fire in Dark Crusade. It looks kinda like a guiding beam  that the shell uses to travel to its target. Like the UCS plasma cannon superweapon in Earth 2140 series, which fires a plasma beam, which does nothing, merely transporting its payload of bombs down the beam.

Thanks for clearing that up. I was under the impression that the Tau were only plasma based, not with projectiles like the Space Marines or Sisters of Battle.

[Fjellsveis]

I'd like to see some weapons' system work like the Battlestar Galactica' flak. Say what you want about the series', but the weapons are very well done. Basically, the shells are high explosives filled with shrapnel, exploding in 'Airburst' patterns, very much like the tip of a watergun.

The fields of explosions you see over the Battlestar are just 'flak-fields', impossible for fighters, missiles or other to pass through.

So what I'd like to see, would be that capships have rows of the weapons, activating them when hostile objects comes to a ~1500m range. The weapon would have an effect at some ~500m from the hull. The ship proceeds to just shoot wildly towards the enemies, making an impassable field of fire for the hostile to attack through with anything but small missiles and gunfire. As a counter, fighters are forced to shoot out the flak turrets themselves. I assume capship weapons' fire can't damage their own hull or subsystems, so I think it'd be replicated nicely enough.

Could a coder call my bull****, or what do you think?

[eliex]

Sounds like a good idea. Just remember, try not to make capital ships too powerful: even Alpha 1 has his limits! 

[Fjellsveis]

Sounds like a good idea. Just remember, try not to make capital ships not too powerful: even Alpha 1 has his limits! 

Oh, please. Not like it'd be a generalized system. More like specialized corvettes(Aouleus, holy sFAOSFJBEEEEEEEAMS) or important, custom flagships.

[General Battuta]

I'd like to see some weapons' system work like the Battlestar Galactica' flak. Say what you want about the series', but the weapons are very well done. Basically, the shells are high explosives filled with shrapnel, exploding in 'Airburst' patterns, very much like the tip of a watergun.

The fields of explosions you see over the Battlestar are just 'flak-fields', impossible for fighters, missiles or other to pass through.

So what I'd like to see, would be that capships have rows of the weapons, activating them when hostile objects comes to a ~1500m range. The weapon would have an effect at some ~500m from the hull. The ship proceeds to just shoot wildly towards the enemies, making an impassable field of fire for the hostile to attack through with anything but small missiles and gunfire. As a counter, fighters are forced to shoot out the flak turrets themselves. I assume capship weapons' fire can't damage their own hull or subsystems, so I think it'd be replicated nicely enough.

Could a coder call my bull****, or what do you think?

Freespace already has flak guns that work like this, though.

[Fjellsveis]

Not quite. The flak guns that are in place are combat oriented, the system I'm talking about is purely defensive. It basically makes the capship in question neigh invulnerable to bombers and subsystem-disrupting rocket attacks. That, and you can't hide in it's crevices and tape in the 'shoot stuff'-button, because you'd get obliterated.

Plus, it doesn't look nearly as cool as a ship that looks like it's bloody burning.

[eliex]

Such a system would be terribly expensive and only for defence? I think it should be considered an upgraded version of the FS2 flak gun (so some combat orientation), because it's not beam-proof.

[-Norbert-]

Actually it's exactly like the FS2 flak, only that it doesn't fire at the enemy directly, but instead fire on a fixed position "above" the ship. Only that there are a hell of a lot of those things on a battlestar.
If I remember correctly there were two columns of doublebarreled turrets and in a single camerashot you saw at least four rows of those on screen at once. Now imagine 32 flaks in FS2 laying out continuous fire and you'll get pretty much the same carpet bombing effect as in BSG...

[Droid803]

And you also get MASSSSSSSIVE LAG + crash due to too many objects at once.
How fun.

[SpardaSon21]

And you also get MASSSSSSSIVE LAG + crash due to too many objects at once.
How fun.

Yes.  It is.  Sounds quite fun. 

And to clarify things, Halo MAC guns are actually huge coilguns.  Line a bunch of magnets up, place a barrel in the holes, add projectile, trigger magnets, projectile goes flying.  Railguns are a pair of metal rails.  You slide the projectile between them and shove a bunch of current through a rail which generates Lorentz force due to the electrical resistance of the projectile which acts as a conducting force between the rails, sending it flying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coilgun

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun

[Commander Zane]

I think UEF railguns will make for some awesome heavy broadside attacks considering that's the Solarius's primary role. Some sort of particle effect would give it something to make up for the lack of eye-candy you get from beamz, the flashy projectiles are good.

I'm not really bothered with the no beam concept when they have these ultra sexy fighters.

[Rodo]

I think UEF railguns will make for some awesome heavy broadside attacks considering that's the Solarius's primary role. Some sort of particle effect would give it something to make up for the lack of eye-candy you get from beamz, the flashy projectiles are good.

I'm not really bothered with the no beam concept when they have these ultra sexy fighters.

I would love to see that kind of combat...

the ones where the ship must take positions before attacking with all it's might... like a real pirate privateer reading it's guns !

[SpardaSon21]

Beams are hard to aim.  Crossing someone's T is a lot harder to do with beams since they are set into the hull and don't have that much of a fire arc.  With turreted railguns however, the UEF has much more options for aiming then the GTVA.  A railgun turret mounted dorsally can attack to both sides and vertically, whereas the beam would be able to attack only vertically.  Also, how do ranges compare between railguns and beams?  Are railguns longer-ranged on average?  If so, then the UEF can attack from outside beam range and get an important alpha strike in, and possibly kite GTVA ships if they are faster.  However, sniping beam turrets will result in an easy UEF win since the GTVA has little else in the way of anti-cap firepower.  Snipe their beams, snipe their engines, demand their surrender, and then blow them up if they are stupid and keep fighting.

[General Battuta]

Beams are hard to aim.  Crossing someone's T is a lot harder to do with beams since they are set into the hull and don't have that much of a fire arc.  With turreted railguns however, the UEF has much more options for aiming then the GTVA.  A railgun turret mounted dorsally can attack to both sides and vertically, whereas the beam would be able to attack only vertically.  Also, how do ranges compare between railguns and beams?  Are railguns longer-ranged on average?  If so, then the UEF can attack from outside beam range and get an important alpha strike in, and possibly kite GTVA ships if they are faster.  However, sniping beam turrets will result in an easy UEF win since the GTVA has little else in the way of anti-cap firepower.  Snipe their beams, snipe their engines, demand their surrender, and then blow them up if they are stupid and keep fighting.

It's a sad fact that beams are actually way more accurate than railguns. They hardly ever miss (except for slashers) and they have no travel time.

Darius has mentioned a few times that GTVA capital ships are, overall, slightly superior to their UEF counterparts, which I really like.

Sniping beam turrets could just as easily be sniping railgun turrets.

[eliex]

The GTVA have taken over the role of Shivans as the beam-lords.
The First GTVA Incursion . . . 

[Agent_Koopa]

Well, personally when I heard "railguns" I thought of high-damage single-hit beams. Railgun turrets would still make power-up sounds, but not glow, and the beam itself would simulate the path of the projectile, which would be so fast that it could not be seen moving. So, basically, the beam would do an exorbitant amount of damage but only hit once. The "trail" of the projectile would flash as it was "fired", and fade out in less than a second. But I guess fast-moving blobs or missiles work too.

[SpardaSon21]

Beams are hard to aim.  Crossing someone's T is a lot harder to do with beams since they are set into the hull and don't have that much of a fire arc.  With turreted railguns however, the UEF has much more options for aiming then the GTVA.  A railgun turret mounted dorsally can attack to both sides and vertically, whereas the beam would be able to attack only vertically.  Also, how do ranges compare between railguns and beams?  Are railguns longer-ranged on average?  If so, then the UEF can attack from outside beam range and get an important alpha strike in, and possibly kite GTVA ships if they are faster.  However, sniping beam turrets will result in an easy UEF win since the GTVA has little else in the way of anti-cap firepower.  Snipe their beams, snipe their engines, demand their surrender, and then blow them up if they are stupid and keep fighting.

It's a sad fact that beams are actually way more accurate than railguns. They hardly ever miss (except for slashers) and they have no travel time.

Darius has mentioned a few times that GTVA capital ships are, overall, slightly superior to their UEF counterparts, which I really like.

Sniping beam turrets could just as easily be sniping railgun turrets.

Railguns are inaccurate?  Against a Raynor or Titan?  Inaccurate is impossible against ships that size.  Well, chances are the railguns have longer range due to the fact they are fire-and-forget weapons (after all, solid objects in space keep going until they hit something).  So if the UEF has a speed advantage, they can kite and railgun the GTVA to victory.  It doesn't matter how powerful your beams are if they can't hit the target.

Well no matter what, War in Heaven looks simply kickass, and I look forwards to flying your kickass fighters with kickass kinetic primaries.

[General Battuta]

It's not that railguns are inaccurate, but they aren't hitscan weapons, which beams are. Instantaneous travel time says a lot. Railguns aren't 'fire-and-forget'; that term is used to describe weapons that continue tracking on their own after launch, specifically missiles. Railguns are no more fire-and-forget than beams are.

Beams also have pretty huge range - 4000 meters for a standard Terran anti-capital beam. While railguns are really powerful, the two weapon types are probably meant to be balanced, each filling a different tactical niche and making the two sides unique. It's not a case of railguns > beams, and, in fact, the UEF is (from what we've seen and heard) portrayed as having a technological disadvantage in that sense.

You're also forgetting that both the GTVA and UEF have long-range torpedoes designed specifically for kiting -- the Temeraire uses them on a pursuing Ravana, but only after the Ravana's main beams are taken out. Again, beams are pretty much king.

Lastly, don't give me any credit! I just handle voice acting for Blue Planet. War in Heaven is completely Darius' game; I just do some PR. I have no inside information on WiH whatsoever, and this is all pure speculation.

[-Norbert-]

since the GTVA has little else in the way of anti-cap firepower.

Not quiete.
When I played AoA thourgh, the Raynor did more damage to the Earth ship in the last mission with the blob turrets. For some reason the Orestes only used the anti-capship beam once at the beginning, then only employing the AAA beams.

As to torpedoes, those can be shot down, so you'd have to first send in some fighters to take out their point defense and fighter screen to really be successful with those.... unless your attacking a Ravanas front apperently.
They have tremendous beam firepower forward, but little else.