Mass Drivers/Railguns/Gauss Weapons...

[Caseck]

I'd really like to see some railgun type artillery.

These fricken' mortars have no more rate of fire or range than current mortars.

I'm deeply unimpressed.

I'd love to see Mass Drivers in the artillery role. High rate of fire, able to saturate an area. Long reload/recharge time after they fire a burst.

(Even this isn't too far from the PZG2000 or the postulated CRUSADER.)

[Caseck]

P.S.

Think ICM with 10 round bursts of 150mm artillery... I don't think the PD's could keep up with it.

[Alexander SquidLord Williams]

My suspicion is that the current projectile-based weapons on the vehicles are railguns, though more likely coilguns.

"Why?" you ask.

They operate in an extremely broad swath of environments with extremely high reliability and on relatively limited logistical trains. While the ammo might be caseless and fired by micro-antimatter reactions, I believe it'd be more reasonable to suggest they have sufficient power free from the AM plant that a 120mm coilgun firing is perfectly reasonable.

Why, then, do they have limitations roughly akin to the dynamics of our current weaponry? In part, to keep the game somewhat like modern warfare and allow known tactics to have a chance of being useful (as DarkAu has demonstrated, some people get quite grumpy when they don't mesh exactly with the modern), but from an in-game perspective, the weapons express a balance between range, rate of fire, and reliability that designs which push closer to the limits of the technology wouldn't.

Remember, the LiveShips are doing the weapon design and manufacture in this setting, and they've lost a lot of the high tech, advanced materials methods they used to have. They can't build a Hellbore and building significantly more advanced weaponry may simply not be reasonable for them.

(It occurs to me that the backstory mentions the weapons largely being caseless AM because low-tech gas accelerated guns are easy to design and build; I might twiddle that if I had the chance, but it's reasonable and also answers.)

[Dark_au]

Notice even though I stay away someone has to try and dig. My problems here mainly are to do with most people not having a clue what they are arguing about.

Your premise is incredibly flawed. Rail guns and mass drivers are actually simplistic an rudementary weapons. They in fact require less manufactuing knowledge than improved chemical fired munitions, As the boundary of chemically fired weapons is pushed then a lot of material science and engineering knowledge is required to deal with the stresses involved. The only reason we can't make them now is the power requirements. This tech supposedly has unlimited power, Any kid with some copper wire and a flash unit from a camera could make a Magnetic linear accelerator.... if they had a good enough power scource. In fact the technology for making a particle accelerator like an ION gun is already more advanced than nessecary to make a rail gun.

[poesel]

Caseck, I am trying to create an area effect artillery. Its rocket based though.

The discussion is here:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=61;t=000094

and if you like to give it a 'shot', download this mod:

http://dropteam.johalla.de/download/Nebelwerfer.zip

The model is not very nice, though, and in this form is quite unbalancing the game.

The next thing on the list would be a gauss gun. But this is still far away...

Alex, you overlook one thing: the muzzle blast. We wouldn't have that if the guns in the game were coil guns.

Dark_au, I doubt that a rail gun is simplistic in comparison to a common gun. I can make a chemical 'gun' with some matches and a bit of tinfoil. Copper wire and a flash unit would give similar deadly results.

Going to military grade is complicated for both techniques. Whats easier depends on what you currently have. Chemical are nowadays the energy source of choice, but, as you said, if (electrical) energy is easy to have a coil/rail gun would be the better choice but probably not an easier one.

[Dark_au]

of course its easier. The barrel doesn't have to take the pressure of a chemical explosion. To realistically make a chemically powered projectile at home is a lot harder than a MLA. The breach has to be able to take the pressure expansion. Take for example a modern tank gun. If you were to double the power delivered to the projectile then the explosion would have to be 2x the size and the breach would either need to be 2x the size or 2x the strength.The compensators and return "spring" would also both have to be larger. An MLA doesn't have any of these things. The barrel can be just a framework as there is no pressure to worry about. Also the same power that propells a rail charge can be shunted back to dampen recoil.

[Caseck]

Really, what I'm looking for is a single artillery piece that can put down a decent sized barrage.

I'm curious what kind of exploration has been done in this area.

[aittam]

give a try to poesel kat; it's quite impressive

[Chilibird]

I've got a possible idea.. take a look over in the mods section...

[poesel]

Dark, I would recommend you read that article here:

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

Especially chapter 3 'Railgun as Weapon'.

Nothing is easy at those speeds and amounts of energy. A coil gun would suffer from similar problems as the rail gun.

As a side note: having antimatter means just that you have 'unlimited' amounts of heat - not electricity. Commonly one would then use a turbine and a generator to produce electricity or use the turbine to propel the vehicle. Why DT then uses a combustion engine is beyond me (maybe it sounds better?).

Or is it AMDI - Anti-Matter Direct Injection?

[Chilibird]

I think the antimatter motor involves antimatter being anhialated (100% efficency) and the resulting energy somehow harnessed.

As such, the reason the engine being shot MAY explode is because if the area containing the combusting antimatter, or the lines that keep the antimatter in-vaccum in the fuel container are severed, the antimatter is exposed to air, and anihalates, exposing the vehicle to extreme amounts of heat, most likely taking out the fuel container, causing an explosion.

[ClaytoniousRex]

Caseck, there are some area effect screenshots here.

[cool breeze]

Sorry for off topic, but the vehicles in Dropteam clearly have limited energy because their speed is limited by horsepower, not just traction. Looking forward to getting a comp playing dropteam for me.

[Alexander SquidLord Williams]

Originally posted by cool breeze:

Sorry for off topic, but the vehicles in Dropteam clearly have limited energy because their speed is limited by horsepower, not just traction. Looking forward to getting a comp playing dropteam for me.

Well, that's not quite a perfect measure, since the real limit to their speed would be how they could transfer that motion into motive power, which is limited by physical constraints. Could the AM core spin the treads on a Thor at 500km/h? It's possible in a theoretical sense. Could the Thor's road wheels, axles and such stand being rotated at 500km/h for extended periods? Under gravitational stress? While moving over rough terrain? Probably not. Would it be a useful weapons platform if it could move that fast, given limitations in how fast the turret can track and how finely? Probably not.

So, even if you assume the pure power available from the AM engine is extremely high, it doesn't necessarily follow that the designs would necessarily be other than they are given the materials and abilities the LiveShips have at their disposal for creation. What it does allow is some out of the box thinking when it comes to questions of force concentration and the field of potential weapon / vehicle design for other factions. Which has kind of been on my mind, lately.

[Smeltz]

Maybe I'm missing the point but... Antimatter weapons are impractical completely due to the inherent instability. We create antimatter now, on this planet, in very small quantities. To harness the power of the antimatter and transfer it to weapons grade will be impractical to say the least. As power, it gives the ability of the game to not need fuel guages and run all the imagined high tech gear. But the game already states, it's in very short supply. For the game to start working on antimatter weapons while it's a short supply fuel source would be like our current battle tanks using gasoline as a shell propellent instead of good old TNT.

[Alexander SquidLord Williams]

Originally posted by Smeltz:

Maybe I'm missing the point but... Antimatter weapons are impractical completely due to the inherent instability. We create antimatter now, on this planet, in very small quantities. To harness the power of the antimatter and transfer it to weapons grade will be impractical to say the least. As power, it gives the ability of the game to not need fuel guages and run all the imagined high tech gear. But the game already states, it's in very short supply. For the game to start working on antimatter weapons while it's a short supply fuel source would be like our current battle tanks using gasoline as a shell propellent instead of good old TNT.

Well, except that the backstory is very clear that all of the HE weapons in the game use micro-amounts of AM as their explosive charge. Which makes sense, given their relative ability to produce AM in sufficient quantity to power entire fleets of ships and ground craft. It may be in "short supply," like everything else is in "short supply" during extended military environments; you never have enough of anything you'd really like to.

The craft of AM is really one of the core, if not the core suspension of disbelief hinges of the DT universe. Pretty much every SF setting gets one or two, whether it be Berserker's flightspace or Trek's transporter/replicator technology. AM tech is DT "reality manipulator;" pretty much all their departures from what we know as reality and physics are contingent on their "different understanding" of AM physics.

Which is fine, so long as one acknowledges it.

[poesel]

Smeltz, you are completly right. The whole purpose of the background story is to give reasons that we can play with nearly current time tank technology plus some high-tech weapons like ions plus space travel and dropships plus a lot of other things which keep the game in balance.

The balance is there and the fun, too. But the explanation is from a technology point of view, sorry, complete rubbish.

I don't mind that much actually, but trying to get some reason behind that all is a waste of time. Short of a nearly complete re-write that story does not make sense.

[Smeltz]

Guess it all comes down to the fact that any fiction story falls apart if you think too much. To get back on point about weapons however... We can all concieve more and more powerful weapons that should exist in the DT universe due to technology, but what would it do to gameplay and balance?

[Chilibird]

Well, the Ramses, if I ever finish it, will have a very powerful gun, possibly capable (though untested) of piercing Point Defense shields.

Originally, it was designed as a point defense, but mobile, weapon. As for it's intended target, it was ment to give the Hurricane and its gun a run for it's money.

[Hawkslayer]

What a fun and interesting thread. I love how hardcore people get about their fictious plotlines about a multiplayer oriented game where storyline doesn't really matter.

I do have to say DarkAu, that railgun barrels do have some special requirements.. they currently need to be able to be super-cooled to hold that kind of electricity without melting, and the pressure between the positive and negative sides is significant, and considering the power source and (if used) capacitor type storage for between shots, it's a bit more engineering than bullets shot down a tube, but yes I'd like to see heavy AP piercing railguns and such made as a mod.

"They're cool and would add an interesting element to the game" is enough backstory for me. Balance the unit and create backstory to fit.

I guess the question is if they're currently moddable as a projectile weapon or not.

I'd love to see a good anti-base defense weapon also. Slow, vulnerable, and effective. Maybe something with EMP shells or something would be a balanced way to do it.. instead of being able to kill it, just neutralize it for a min or so while others take it out.

I'm sure the developers sometimes moan about all this talk about new stuff we dream up, but it's cool to see a dialog from people who appreciate the work they've done and want to contribute towards it.

[ December 03, 2006, 06:52 PM: Message edited by: Hawkslayer ]

[Imperial Grunt]

Okay, after all that, I second my own motion for some railgun tanks.

[Tarquelne]

Long "reload" and burst fire seems like a plausible MD implementation to me. One well suited to artillery. Though a concentrate-the-energy-in-one-punch unit like the Ramses seems like a good place for it, too.

What advantages is the tech likely to have?

Higher velocity seems the only almost-certain one. (Even though AM gives a lot of energy, you've still got to direct it.) If you can't reliably accelerate enough mass to get more damage you'd still get other benefits.

Can carry more ammo? If you take advantage of the higher-V to use smaller projectiles.

Lighter barrels? That's assuming you can lick some of the problems mentioned in the Wikipedia.

More efficient use of AM? A MAG weapon might allow you to use efficient methods when harnessing AM.

Molten ammo? Allow the rail-gun to melt the (metallic) ammo. (Why? How, exactly? I dunno. Sounds neat though.)

Burst fire? (As mentioned by Caseck.)

What else?

If it's really lighter and/or more efficient it might be perfect for "light" vehicles. Rather than the Apollo, for example, having the same gun as the Thor it might have a MD version. The MD being the equivalent of the recoilless rifle, I guess. (Thus, the Ontos .)

I think the DT developers and modders can just pick the weapon/unit characteristics they want and then come up with an explanation. Though I do like the idea of making a place for some of the standard and/or more interesting techs, such as rail guns.

Here's a couple more techs to hang new weapons off of:

Another way to get long reload+burst might be a vehicle (or infantry squad) that has an (off board) satellite or few associated with it. The on-board unit paints or marks the strike area, and the satellite drops rocks, or whatever. (Anyone remember the "Thor" proposal? Drop guided depleted uranium rods from orbit.)

Metal Storm:

It's not MD technology, though I can see coil guns being set up this way.

Umm... nope, a search of the DT forum doesn't turn up any mention of it. So: Metal Storm Link is to the company website.

Here's some of the text from MS's "The Technology" page. (I've snipped what I thought less important.) I don't know how practical/effective it really is, but it looks/sounds really ginchy.

Metal Storm technology is an electronically initiated, stacked projectile system... Multiple projectiles are stacked in a barrel. The technology allows each projectile to be fired sequentially from the barrel.

Metal Storm’s fully loaded barrel tubes are essentially serviceable weapons... Metal Storm barrels can be effectively grouped in multiple configurations to meet a diversity of applications.

...Metal Storm enabled systems are capable of local or remote operation through a computerized fire control system. [Tarq: The company makes much of this. One example is a "network-centric" "minefield" that consists of some remote elements that very quickly "lay" the proper minefield for whatever happens by.]

Our technology achieves its performance through the concept of numerous projectiles stacked in a barrel, in which each projectile has its own propellant load, such that the leading propellant can be reliably ignited to fire the projectile, without the resulting high pressure and temperature...

* electronically programmable rates of fire from single shots to ultra-rapid rates;

* no moving parts...

* increased firepower to weight ratio ...

* modular pods that could operate as a complete weapon system in one container;

* the potential of grouping of multiple calibers and multiple lethalities in one gun ...

* fast second round strike capability before recoil effect.

I'd thought there might be a significant play-balance problem with this tech: If you take advantage of the super-high ROF you can then just extract and drop another vehicle. But that shouldn't be a problem if each individual projectile's penetration/damage is kept low enough.

Some possible ways to show the tech in DT:

A weapon that automatically fires the most-appropriate ammo type at the target in the site.

A weapon that allows you to "hold down the button" and fire multiple-projectiles at a target. (Either as an extended burst (0 reload time) or as one big mass ("variable damage.")

[Hawkslayer]

I understand the appeal to make real-world units and technology into a game, but the inclusion of some of these, without regard to gameplay balance, will severely unbalance the game.

While I realize I'm in a forum full of atypical gamers (we're not talking Battlefield 1942 here), and most people here are big WW2 style combat strategy types, unless you really want to make super strong units that only allow 1-2 per game, we probably should be talking about "what kinds of units would make the futuristic non-reality based game fun" rather than "let's simulate a M1 Abrams of the future" kind of stuff.

I suggest we toss out any expectation of mapping the game technology to "reality" and think about what kinds of things would be cool to have in this realistic oriented damage dealing game.

For me, the strength of this game is that the units have specific areas of weakness, rather than a simple "health bar". This allows interesting strategies and combat tactics that you simply wouldn't need to worry about in more arcade types of combat.

I think one form of damage we'd like to see is a front-loaded damage form of weapon, which most likely would be projectile based. (I'd also like to see a Hurricane mortar on other movement types)

Unless we want to increase the overall damage over time of this unit (making it a super-unit), we'd need to make it so there are extended times where damage isn't available. (reload/recharge/etc)

I think another interesting concept could be a form of damage that increases in damage over time. For example, a laser that starts out weak, then gets more and more powerful over 5-10 seconds until it needs to cool off. (or a Metal Storm type weapon that starts out slow, then really lets it rip)