Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: foolfromhell on July 31, 2007, 01:29:33 am
-
A Deimos with all Trebuchets instead of beams/weapons can take down any enemy ship. it can even take down a Sathanas if its not in front of the Sathanas.
An Aeolus or Leviathan with all Maxims can defend against virtually any fighter/bomber attack. It can shoot down all bombs easily.
Plus, All Trebuchets or Maxims is probably a LOT more cost-effective than "awesome beam technology".
I'm sure the GTVA/GTA could fire a harbinger/Helios at more than 50m/s... Hell, even great war era ships loaded with Phoenix Vs could have taken down the "fearsome" Shivan ships easily...
The recharge rate on beams is huge!!!
A Deimos can hold a few hundred or probably a few thousand Trebuchet Missiles... Probably a few hundred Helios Bombs... Of course, the destruction of the Deimos would mean a HUGE bang.
A combo of Maxim Deimos and Trebuchet+Helios Deimos could pwn any ship. Except, perhaps the Lucifer. Just catch the Sathanas from the sides/behind.
-
Beams are pretty.
-
When a stray spark sets off one of the stored Trebuchets, the Deimos' explosion will be too.
Space and volatility probably preclude designers from making such missile boats. Could be that Command also enjoys a good game of MechWarrior *, minus LRM-whoring jackasses.
* -- Was going to say three, but missile boaters are pretty lame in any iteration of the game....
-
I think the risk would be worth it if a Deimos could take down a Ravana... By itself...
-
Hmm, I know some warheads have to be armed to really detonate... IDK.
-
If a warhead gets hit with weapon fire, then it doesn't matter what the detonator is doing silly.
-
Really? Unless, ofc, it's a nuke. ;7
-
Last time I checked, beams move a hell of a lot faster than bombs or missiles, and the second-to-last time I checked, they can't be shot down or blocked by countermeasures.
-
Also, I'm betting energy to power beams is less costly than making a bunch of missiles.
-
Big Bombs move slowly and can be shot. Probably the best betw would be something like a Treb-Boat, which is designed to paralyse, rather than defeat an opponent, but that would just make the game too easy.
-
And while we're tinkering with missile boats, let's bring back the targetting laser so we can summon huge waves of Helios bombs on command.
-
local ssm... [kool aid man] Oh Yeah!
-
And while we're tinkering with missile boats, let's bring back the targetting laser so we can summon huge waves of Helios bombs on command.
[raspy, altered male voice]*They'll never know what hit them!*[/raspy, altered male voice]
*PHSSRRRRRRRRR!*
[female AI voice]*Nuclear launch detected*[/female AI voice]
-
Last time I checked, beams move a hell of a lot faster than bombs or missiles, and the second-to-last time I checked, they can't be shot down or blocked by countermeasures.
#1. If a ship is moving at 30m/s, it adds 30 m/s to the speed of the bomb anyway. Making it harder to shoot down. And, im sure that a Deimos would have a stronger launching-mechanism that a bomber.
#2 when targeting a ship, dumb-fire is enough. No need to lock on. If you need to shoot down subsystems/turrets, use trebuchets...
let's bring back the targetting laser so we can summon huge waves of Helios bombs on command.
Wtf is a targeting laser? Is it in the game?
-
Bombers are used as a mean to launch bombs close enough to the target so that they won't be shot down. Capital ships usually have lasers, flak weaponry, and AAA beam cannons to deal with bombs. A capital ship launching bombs not only risks being damaged from bombs that are blown as they launch (also a danger for friendlies), but also risks doing no damage at all against a well protected capital ship . A beam cannon can only be stopped by destroying it.
-
A beam cannon can only be stopped by destroying it.
Or by getting in the way, if all the harassing from fellow cruiser captains has drained all of your will to live.
-
Look here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos
Its technology TODAY.
And it can go up to Mach3.
Speed of sound is 340.29 m / s
Meaning, this can go 1000+ M/s
And this isnt even the most advanced tech today.
The range of these missiles doesnt have to be more than a few kilometers at MAX. A ballistic bomb with no rocket propulsion also would work. Its only a few kilometers!
In space, there is NO Friction with air, and no Gravity to pull down the missile.
Its reasonable to assume that Anti-Ship weapons hundreds of years in the future can go 1000+ m/s.
Flak/Turrets find it hard to shoot down a bomb at 150 M/s, which isnt even much. Get a Helios, mod it to go 150 m/s and get a Fenris to shoot it at any enemy ship. Especially an Orion. 95% of the time, the bomb will reach its target. Unless there are some 30 ships running intercept. And even then, its highly unlikely. No ships except a few Shivan ones can go at 150 m/s.
Edit: A cyclops bomb is fission bomb. Meaning, its as stable as any weapon in modern arsenals. Nuclear bombs dont explode when shot. They need to be DETONATED. Meaning, risk of blowing up is minimal.
-
Look here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos
Its technology TODAY.
And it can go up to Mach3.
Speed of sound is 340.29 m / s
Meaning, this can go 1000+ M/s
And this isnt even the most advanced tech today.
The range of these missiles doesnt have to be more than a few kilometers at MAX. A ballistic bomb with no rocket propulsion also would work. Its only a few kilometers!
In space, there is NO Friction with air, and no Gravity to pull down the missile.
Its reasonable to assume that Anti-Ship weapons hundreds of years in the future can go 1000+ m/s.
No it isn't, unless you want to explain why fighters in FS don't go above 200m/s and missiles or bombs are also extremelly slow in comparison to modern ones.
Flak/Turrets find it hard to shoot down a bomb at 150 M/s, which isnt even much. Get a Helios, mod it to go 150 m/s and get a Fenris to shoot it at any enemy ship. Especially an Orion. 95% of the time, the bomb will reach its target. Unless there are some 30 ships running intercept. And even then, its highly unlikely. No ships except a few Shivan ones can go at 150 m/s.
:rolleyes:
I can mod a fighter to go at the speed of light, but that doesn't mean it can happen. If most bombs in FS are slow, there is probably a reason for it.
Edit: A cyclops bomb is fission bomb. Meaning, its as stable as any weapon in modern arsenals. Nuclear bombs dont explode when shot. They need to be DETONATED. Meaning, risk of blowing up is minimal.
When shot down, a bomb in FS will explode. Regardless of what type/kind of explosion, it will damage nearby ships.
-
It would be interesting to completely eliminate the stupid "OMG INTERCEPT BOMBZ!" crap from the game by giving capital ships (or some capital ships) point defense lasers capable of taking out bombs instantly no matter how fast the bombs are, then make the bombs as fast-feeling as modern-day weapons.
-
Well if the FS universe beams are efective enough. The shivan beam tech is even more efecive it is just the GTVA beam tech that sucks ! Altough they have made some reamakable improvement with the Mjolnir beam cannons.
also do not forget that a ravana can take out your destroyer in what 15 or 20 seconds??? A lot fater then with bombs. Altough not for the GTVa since they cant get anywhere near the front firing ark of a shivan warship without loosing.
-
I personally think nitpicking a game's logic is pointless. A game is balanced, and that always means limitations that don't seem to make sense. And thats because game's are supposed to be balanced - real life isn't.
-
The thing is, if we fast forward anti-shipping technology to those kinds of levels, then you'd still have to balance off the playing field by upping the equivalent defences in order to keep the game balanced. Personally, I wouldn't fancy flying an interceptor anywhere near a ship capable of taking out fast bombs, something as big as my ship would be toast.
Edit: Basically, what Blackhole just said :)
-
Fine.
Its a conspiracy!
Command has the ETAK before the great war, and the Vasudans, Terrans, and Shivans dumbed down their technology so that the war is balanced.
-
perhaps GTVA scientists are more capable then you give them credit! :D
-
Jeez... Maybe its just cooler to have big beams and crap. I believe the launching mechanism for the bombs is the bomb itself. So as long as the ship can carry the bombs, it'll work. For any large ship to fire bombs, it has to be at a safe distance. Imagine how the Psamtak would of been if it had to use bombs instead of beams on the Belisarius. At a safe distance, the bombs can be easily shot down and can even do damage to the ship launching the bombs. The thing about bombs is, they're used as a tactical weapon although the Harbinger was said to be used as a planetary bombardment warhead.
So to overcome this difficulty, bombers are developed to deploy the bombs. In addition, multiple wings of bombers can be used for multiple missions where a single destroyer can only be at one place at a time. A destroyer's two primary roles are, to exercise power (meaning to attack and show off your ship) and to carry fighter/bomber wings. Missiles can be evaded by counter-measures and the missile hard points on a destroyer can be easily destroyed.
Overall, beam weaponry may actually be cheaper to deploy then warheads because it doesn't require physical storage space where beams are probably stored as energy thoughout the entire ship. Also, having a bombs and missiles located near the outer hull is another bad issue. Taking out a single missile battery would comparable to setting off a small nuke right on the ship. Beams are less vunerable, cheaper in the long run, and have a much longer range.
-
A combo of Maxim Deimos and Trebuchet+Helios Deimos could pwn any ship. Except, perhaps the Lucifer.
And there's your problem. Command are stupid. Until the Shivans waltz in with a fleet of shielded capships and wipe out the GTVA for being so stupid as to not develop beam weapons.
-
ERm..I tihnk he was refering to standard terran turrets replaced with maxims and fighter-killers with trebs, not the beam cannons themselves... :)
-
ERm..I tihnk he was refering to standard terran turrets replaced with maxims and fighter-killers with trebs, not the beam cannons themselves... :)
The entire thread is a rant against the use of beams. What makes you think he would keep them?
-
Yeah. I think that helios bombs shot at high-velocity are more effective than Beam cannons. Except BFRed. But Terrans dont have BFRed
-
But ALL bombs were ineffective against the Lucifer's shields. And Command was expecting to fight another Lucifer.
-
Yeah. I think that helios bombs shot at high-velocity are more effective than Beam cannons. Except BFRed. But Terrans dont have BFRed
Because we all know that during the campaign we see helios bombs being shot at high-velocity all the time so we know that is possible.
-
Beams still fire faster than bombs.There are fighters, turrets to kill bombs, and Bombs are slow.
-
What I am saying is that a Deimos would have the capacity to launch a Deimos using a railgun or other mechanism. When firing from an Ursa, it uses thrusters ON the bomb. When fired from a Deimos with the correct mechanism, it can be launched at a few hundred m/s with no thrusters...
No need for lock-on. A Target the size of a Corvette can be dumb-fired upon... One Deimos with like 6 Helios-Launchers and Maxims instead of turrets would be very strong... A Few Trebbies for long-range maybe too.
-
What I am saying is that a Deimos would have the capacity to launch a Deimos using a railgun or other mechanism. When firing from an Ursa, it uses thrusters ON the bomb. When fired from a Deimos with the correct mechanism, it can be launched at a few hundred m/s with no thrusters...
No need for lock-on. A Target the size of a Corvette can be dumb-fired upon... One Deimos with like 6 Helios-Launchers and Maxims instead of turrets would be very strong... A Few Trebbies for long-range maybe too.
Then explain why the fusion mortar, the only weapon that slightly resembles what you are trying to propose, despite of it's small size, can only go at 100m/s. Also, the fact that the only two ships in the game can carry this weapon (the Fenris and Leviathan) were intended to be replaced by a ship that didn't carry this... "artifact" of the great war (the Aeolus) speaks for itself.
-
Personalyl, I see this as part of the game design and what the devs found looks cool, not any sense or logic behind it.
so I intend to have LOADS of weapons for caphips for my campaign..or all kinds..from fast torps, slow torps, beamz, blobs to ...something
-
the real question is, why have blob turrets? so ineffective. they travel slow, do medicore damage, and miss any target smaller than a leviathan 90% of the time. as opposed to beams, which were a very nice addition too fs2. maybe volition is using content of HLP to build their own little game, and your convincing them beamz are bad :shaking:.
-
You know what? Take out all the beams and replace them with Terran Turrets/Terran Huge Turrets. THAT'S why command uses beams. :rolleyes:
-
the real question is, why have blob turrets? so ineffective. they travel slow, do medicore damage, and miss any target smaller than a leviathan 90% of the time. as opposed to beams, which were a very nice addition too fs2. maybe volition is using content of HLP to build their own little game, and your convincing them beamz are bad :shaking:.
Yup...blobs suck in FS1 & 2..
Some campaigns did re-do them and actually made them inot very decent weapons :nod:
-
Beams are all glowy and shiny and they make my screen light up at night. ^_^
-
Blob turrets aren't that bad. They're useful for shooting down bombs and I bet they use barely any energy at all. Since I'm assuming the blob turrets are same ones from FS1, they obviously won't use as much energy as newer weapons such as the Maxim or Subach 7. Now, if you were to replace all the blob turrets with Maxims, you can probably only replace about 1/4 of the blob turrets before the cruiser will be forced to fire in bursts since Maxims EAT energy like hell. Maybe half the original turret hardpoints with Subachs.
-
they only eat energy on fighters. you dont know how much energy captial ships have!
-
Energy, life support, engines, lights, all eat up energy too.
-
this is a game were talking about. energy is set by a table value, not ship-builders.
-
Turrets on bigger ships are the size of fighters..any ship builder with half a brain would stuck a fighter reactor into a turret and put something powerfull that will make full use of that power (AAAF, maxim, Keyser).
That way the ships reactor is free for engines and beam cannoz ;)
-
I concur. But, I mean, we're talking about bombs here... y'know how easy it would be to defend capships if they replaced all their blob turrets with ML-16s?? No shielding on capships or bombs... ML-16 fire rate is quite nice, and even on the earliest fighters, you can drop weapon energy to almost nothing and still fire continuously. Or drop it altogether & fire for like 3 mins straight. Blob turrets only make sense vs. unshielded, lightly armored, poorly maneuverable targets... Vasudan bombers, anyone? But that doesn't explain their use in FS2. That confuses me.
-
If cap ships had fighter weps they could defend themselves from bombers what would alpha one do?
-
Alpha 1 would probably go on more suicide bombing missions. You know.... Run the gauntlet of Morning Stars and AAA beams, while listening to Command ***** about how long it takes you to destroy your target.
-
I dunno, I guess it'll just be too hard to play if cap ships had fight weaponry for turrets. Or maybe its because theres a deal going on, buy 1 blob turret and get 20 free!
-
If we would make the mod anywhere close to reasonable then playing the game as fighter/bomber pilot might get very boring. By reasonable i mean that turrets would have at least equal specs as the fighter weapons, probably a lot better, having longer range and carrying long range missiles etc. (just to take out those pesky Maximizers). But as it is the game is just balanced to give fighters and bombers a huge advantage over the cap ships.
-
I dunno, I guess it'll just be too hard to play if cap ships had fight weaponry for turrets. Or maybe its because theres a deal going on, buy 1 blob turret and get 20 free!
I have made some experiments, and yes it does get harder...but not impossible.
Depends on how powerfull you make the blob turrets you may need to blance it slighly or none at all...
for instance, I play FS port and it's campiang with altered tables (TT's fire faster and travel faster...THT's have a far greater range, more damage and HUGE flags...smae for vasudan and shivan counterparts) without problems.. Slighly more challenging, but not by much.
Now I tried playing some other missions with even different weapons - some that turn capships into real doombringers..in this case you need to actualyl do some balancing (like adding more friendly/hostile bombers or increasing AI...or bomb damage). I have to say I find this more satisfying than the stock tables...
-
If we would make the mod anywhere close to reasonable then playing the game as fighter/bomber pilot might get very boring. By reasonable i mean that turrets would have at least equal specs as the fighter weapons, probably a lot better, having longer range and carrying long range missiles etc. (just to take out those pesky Maximizers). But as it is the game is just balanced to give fighters and bombers a huge advantage over the cap ships.
To make it more real...increase hte bomb damage SUBSTANTIALLy..yes, it will be harder for ANY bomb to come trough...but those that do will HURT!
There's your balance back.
-
you forget, freespace is not in our reality.
*outer limits theme start*
it exists in a reality conceived by Volition staff. in this reality, the laws of nature, physics, and science are different. its a reality that can be altered by the real world, or added onto too. it can crash itself becaus eof a table error, or have ships pass through eachother. a simple web address can give you the power to destroy all, or protect your wingmen. this reality...is the freespace limits.
*theme end*
-
Dunno...teh prospect of 4-5 bombs being enough to blow any capship away, but at the same time the capship having the power to blow most bombers away...intruigues me :D
-
If you want to make it more real-life, you'd have to have the Real flight mod or similar for the fighters & bombers. Capships get meaner, fighters/bombers get faster & more maneuverable.
-
-no_emmissive_light -ambient_factor 0 -spec_point 50 -spec_static 70 -spec_tube 68 -mod mediavps, realflight
-
akenbosch, give'em a linky for the realflight mod.... :p
-
What does the targeting laser do? It doesn't do anything for me. Is it a yet-to-be-implemented feature?
-
It was a feature that was removed from FS2... it was supposed to give you the ability to target something with it, and then a capship could fire Helios torpedoes at your target, IIRC. Not sure of the specifics.
-
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,47069.0.html
^best version of realflight. the newest version is on page 2 of modding, but dogfighting is a pain.
-
It was a feature that was removed from FS2... it was supposed to give you the ability to target something with it, and then a capship could fire Helios torpedoes at your target, IIRC. Not sure of the specifics.
I think it had something to do with the ssm.tbl. You would aim the targeting laser at a ship, and the defined missiles in the ssm.tbl would jump in from subspace and attack the ship you aimed it at.
-
i want that feature back!
-
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,47069.0.html
^best version of realflight. the newest version is on page 2 of modding, but dogfighting is a pain.
Oh, you mean http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,48331.0.html this one?
Hmm, ok, now ppl have linkies. :D
-
since pulse weapons are theoreticaly impossible, i present: taka's beam mod v.1.1 (some weapons kept to keep the game balanced)
http://www.mediafire.com/?bj4muzymny1 (http://www.mediafire.com/?bj4muzymny1)
ps: should this thread be split into "links for realism"?
-
Yup. Definitely takashi.
What does that thing do?
-
judging by these tables, makes everything a beam. looks like hes still going at his fighterbeams...
-
Yeah, definitely takashi if that's what it does.
-
its actulay pretty fun! especialy the maxim! (which the AI isnt handleing well...)
-
Not like I'm gunna play it.
-
snails a pessimist :doubt:
-
At least I'm not a masochist.
-
Well I'm a speciist....
-
dont you mean "specialist"?
-
No..speciesist
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0451.html
read hte lower strip to understand...
-
the real question is, why have blob turrets? so ineffective. they travel slow, do medicore damage, and miss any target smaller than a leviathan 90% of the time. as opposed to beams, which were a very nice addition too fs2. maybe volition is using content of HLP to build their own little game, and your convincing them beamz are bad :shaking:.
Yup...blobs suck in FS1 & 2..
Some campaigns did re-do them and actually made them inot very decent weapons :nod:
Actually, FS1 blobs are decent. Put a couple of capships broadside and try to count the blobs. Looks pretty cool, INMHO.
-
beams do not require ammo to fire.
(I think that closes the discussion?)
-
I don't think blobs require ammo either... IIRC, maxim SHOULD require ammo
-
Uranium slugs along its smoothbore barrel, or something like that.
That was probably also a feature that was left out due to time constraints.
-
beams vaporize small ships in one hit usualy...blobs dent the shields.
also, i think making the maxim ballistic would upset game balance. you have to pay attention to weapon energy and ammo left, but the AI apparently doesent even pay attention. i know this because i had a loki fire a maxim for one minute straight.
-
The real reason is that they couldn't get enough women to throw the bombs out the portholes.
I hate threads like this.
-
I set it up as ballistic with lotsa ammo...didn't throw hte game balance for me.. yeah, the AI can run out of ammo (if he lives that long) but he also calls in a support ship like the rest of us
-
Whoa... I can see the Colossus...
"I need to rearm! Calling in support!"
-
The fuel needed for beams would take up space too...
I think that Maxim Ammo and Helios Torpedos are a better use of the space.
Hell. Kayser Lasers instead of Maxims would work too.
-
i thought the GTVA had fusion reactors that supply contant energy, and rarely need refilled with attoms (they work on the same priniple as a star, fusing atoms until they can fuse no more.)
-
i thought the GTVA had fusion reactors that supply contant energy, and rarely need refilled with attoms (they work on the same priniple as a star, fusing atoms until they can fuse no more.)
Remember Prometheus-S cannons needed materials only in Sol / Nebula?
Different lasers and beams need different materials.
-
maybe GTVA beams need gasses so pilots can see them and not run into them, and the energy that shivans use makes their beams naturaly red.
-
Edit: A cyclops bomb is fission bomb. Meaning, its as stable as any weapon in modern arsenals. Nuclear bombs dont explode when shot. They need to be DETONATED. Meaning, risk of blowing up is minimal.
No, it's a "non-conventional" warhead, meaning antimatter or some other metastable payload. Whatever's inside, Bad Things happen when it loses containment.
-
as far as i can remember from the FS techroom description of the maxim it saiod somethiong like even tough it is not a solid projectile weapon which would require ammo it acts almost like one and has a s*** load of recoil and vibration spreading through all you ship.
If it was a solid projectile weapon then it wouldnt need that much energy now would it??
-
as far as i can remember from the FS techroom description of the maxim it saiod somethiong like even tough it is not a solid projectile weapon which would require ammo it acts almost like one and has a s*** load of recoil and vibration spreading through all you ship.
If it was a solid projectile weapon then it wouldnt need that much energy now would it??
Uhhh... Yes. You know how much energy it takes to throw a rock hard enough to knock a Mara off-course?
-
Remember Prometheus-S cannons needed materials only in Sol / Nebula?
Different lasers and beams need different materials.
hi,
i believe that this materials was for the optical or the construction itsself are needed, not thats they materials are the source of power.
Mehrpack
-
I have no idea that is just what i remembered from the tech description in FS2 about the maxim that it is not a solid projectile weapon ! Even so the amount of energy it eats up is ridiculous. The Kayser is more powerfull then the maxim since it can take out shields in a heart beat and i do not believe it uses that much energy. and it still does almost the same amount of hull damage as the maxim.
They needed the rare gasses for the Prometheus for it to work remember they had the prometheus r but it was a piece of junk since they did not have acces to the rare gasses from the nebula or SOL!
-
as far as i can remember from the FS techroom description of the maxim it saiod somethiong like even tough it is not a solid projectile weapon which would require ammo it acts almost like one and has a s*** load of recoil and vibration spreading through all you ship.
If it was a solid projectile weapon then it wouldnt need that much energy now would it??
A Maxim sounds and looks like a Railgun and a Railgun nowadays needs a minor nuclear reactor to power it.
-
oh for freack's sake so then if it saounds like a chicken and if it walks like a chicken then by all means it must be a chicken right?? Forget it i'm gooing to have a look in the FS2 techroom and quote exactly from there!
-
Beams are probably cheaper in the long run. Considering how beams are equipped on almost every capital ship, it is safe to assume they don't require a constant supply of "rare gases". The logistical forces will not be able to supply bombs rapidly enough where beams require little or even no additional support. The Mjonior (gah, can't spell that) cannons are relatively small and show no signs of needing a large amount of gas or other supply. It can be safe to assume that beams probably do not require much or any support where bombs can pose a problem if the supply line is broken. Remember, capital ships are meant to be able to survive behind enemy lines. Fighters and bombers on the other hand, must rely on support and capital ships to return to.
-
oh for freack's sake so then if it saounds like a chicken and if it walks like a chicken then by all means it must be a chicken right?? Forget it i'm gooing to have a look in the FS2 techroom and quote exactly from there!
The Maxim is a rapid-fire, extra-long-range (three kilometers!) anti-hull cannon. It is clearly designed for the purpose of making capital ships' lives miserable, allowing the player to destroy subsystems and even whole smaller capships with ease from beyond the range of return fire. It does produce some "shake" effect as it fires, degrading its accuracy somewhat. Because of its high rate of fire, despite its low shield damage it is also still mildly effective against shielded targets. Be aware though that this weapon is perhaps the biggest energy hog of them all, and will run you dry with mere seconds of sustained fire.
Because of its high rate of fire and long range, the Maxim may be the best bomb intercept weapon in the game.
Sorry dude.
A Rail gun is a gun that uses magnetic energy to accelerate a projectile to immense speeds.
if you have seen Halo 2, that huge MAC gun was a railgun that accelerated a projectile to 40%c.
They have railguns nowadays, but they require a LOT of power.
in Stargate: Atlantis, those fixed gun emplacements during the episode "Siege" were railguns.
Same with the secondary armaments of the Deadelus and Odyssey.
-
as far as i can remember from the FS techroom description of the maxim it saiod somethiong like even tough it is not a solid projectile weapon which would require ammo it acts almost like one and has a s*** load of recoil and vibration spreading through all you ship.
If it was a solid projectile weapon then it wouldnt need that much energy now would it??
A Maxim sounds and looks like a Railgun and a Railgun nowadays needs a minor nuclear reactor to power it.
It's not a railgun. It has a smoothbore barrel. It is clearly a coilgun. Now, the briefing classifies it as "technically an energy weapon", so we might want to take that with a grain of salt.
-
Remember Prometheus-S cannons needed materials only in Sol / Nebula?
Different lasers and beams need different materials.
hi,
i believe that this materials was for the optical or the construction itsself are needed, not thats they materials are the source of power.
Mehrpack
Argon, is needed for the Prometheus, If I am right, the gas miners don't only mine gas from nebulae but also from gas giants
-
Argon, is needed for the Prometheus, If I am right, the gas miners don't only mine gas from nebulae but also from gas giants
hi,
yop, imho they said it as you escort the miner to the colossus, that they collect fuel for the reactors of the colossus of gas giants.
Mehrpack
-
It's not a railgun. It has a smoothbore barrel. It is clearly a coilgun. Now, the briefing classifies it as "technically an energy weapon", so we might want to take that with a grain of salt.
The game designers have no idea what they're talking about.
-
No, they know, they just also know that most of their audience doesn't or doesn't care.
-
i thought the GTVA had fusion reactors that supply contant energy, and rarely need refilled with attoms (they work on the same priniple as a star, fusing atoms until they can fuse no more.)
The GTVA use fusion pile generators ;7
-
Coligun, railgun...really, it uses the same basic principle to propel the projectile...the only difference that one creates a EM field along two rails/rods, the other switches trough several coils/ring.
Meh..I made Maxim a ballistic weapon for me. A Mass Driver NEEEDS ammo! ;7
-
knowing you, you probably made the projectile bigger, and pumped up the damage/range so it has the other properties of a mass driver.
-
Nah....that's the Reaper :D
I left the maxim as is...except the ballistic properties...and a somewhat shorter range..
-
Mass Driver in space = no air resistance = range almost infinite. :p
-
A Deimos with all Trebuchets instead of beams/weapons can take down any enemy ship. it can even take down a Sathanas if its not in front of the Sathanas.
An Aeolus or Leviathan with all Maxims can defend against virtually any fighter/bomber attack. It can shoot down all bombs easily.
Plus, All Trebuchets or Maxims is probably a LOT more cost-effective than "awesome beam technology".
I'm sure the GTVA/GTA could fire a harbinger/Helios at more than 50m/s... Hell, even great war era ships loaded with Phoenix Vs could have taken down the "fearsome" Shivan ships easily...
The recharge rate on beams is huge!!!
A Deimos can hold a few hundred or probably a few thousand Trebuchet Missiles... Probably a few hundred Helios Bombs... Of course, the destruction of the Deimos would mean a HUGE bang.
A combo of Maxim Deimos and Trebuchet+Helios Deimos could pwn any ship. Except, perhaps the Lucifer. Just catch the Sathanas from the sides/behind.
Wait, a deimos with all trebs? Why not make a deimos with all BFGreens? That could kill a sathy even faster than trebs.
EDIT: [/sarcasm]
-
why not have fighters with beams? or bombers with beam turrets? or command with an IQ over 70?
-
why not have fighters with beams? or bombers with beam turrets? or command with an IQ over 70?
Ever notice that command has an IQ over 200? Problem is, he's just very sadistic and likes torturing Alpha 1.
-
Command has an IQ of 279...unfortunately it can only be stored in a variable that goes from 0-256.. which means command has an IQ of...23
-
:wakka:
-
Coligun, railgun...really, it uses the same basic principle to propel the projectile...the only difference that one creates a EM field along two rails/rods, the other switches trough several coils/ring.
Meh..I made Maxim a ballistic weapon for me. A Mass Driver NEEEDS ammo! ;7
(http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/2959/objectionfinalgi2.gif)
A railgun and a coilgun operate on completely different principles! Note this image. (click.) (http://www.court-records.net/evidence/photo.png) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Railgun-1.svg)
A railgun operates on magnetic pressure, represented by the green line. However, a coilgun operates simply by magnetic attraction!
-
I just shoot it to kill Shivans. :p :pimp:
-
A railgun and a coilgun operate on completely different principles! Note this image.
A railgun operates on magnetic pressure, represented by the green line. However, a coilgun operates simply by magnetic attraction!
the both use a EM field to propel mass....that's what I was implying.
-
Command has an IQ of 279...unfortunately it can only be stored in a variable that goes from 0-256.. which means command has an IQ of...23
The available values of an 8-bit variable can either be 0-255 or 1-256.
-
typo..I wouldn't be graduating as a computer engeneer (one more exam :D) if I didn't know THAT!