Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.23 18:06:00 -
[1]
Here I'd like to propose a simple and effective fix for railguns according to the following assumptions.
Small railguns are probably fine. The idea can be implemented by only tuning a few numbers. Railgun must still be distinct from missiles, beam lasers and artillery cannons.
A simple idea satisfies all these conditions. Increase Railgun rate of fire by X percent and but decrease railgun clip size by Y percent. The exactly values should be determined by testing. The change would be more pronounced for larger guns.
This transform railguns into a burst weapon. They would have very high DPS when firing a burst, but a low sustained DPS. This make railguns ideal for sniping a few targets before clearing out. This allow railgun to fulfill their intended mid-point between projectile and energy weapons - good for more then a volley, but still relatively effective in prolonged engagements. |
Leviathan9
Gallente Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2011.01.23 18:15:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Leviathan9 on 23/01/2011 18:15:31 I think the Railguns ROF should be rather low, but the damage multiplier is increased. You'll get much higher alpha damage while keeping overall DPS in line with other long range turrets. |
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.23 18:19:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Zephris on 23/01/2011 18:20:27 Edited by: Zephris on 23/01/2011 18:20:13 That would make them identical to artillery cannons. An assumption of the Railgun fix is that it should remain distinct from other weapons. A ROF increase and a clip size Decrease make railguns ideal for 20 second engagement as opposed to 2 seconds (artillery) or 2 minutes (lasers) |
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.24 01:09:00 -
[4]
bump.
|
Alemana Hockeystick
|
Posted - 2011.01.24 03:16:00 -
[5]
I like the idea. It would come at a penalty of a faster cap drain, but it would still be a good trade-off.
I even have a role play explanation for this change.
'Weapons scientist announce a significant upgrade to the railgun technology.
A new device has been invented that can be fitted with railguns: superconducting transmission line coil. This device allows electrical pulse used to power electromagnet rail to be stored and be applied to propelling the next round. Normally, the electrical pulse is dissipated after firing 1 round. However with the upgrade, one pulse can be used repeatedly for multiple projectile rounds.
The magnitude of recycled pulse is attenuated with each firing and more power needs to be added to make up for the loss, but this is substantially less than having to generate a new pulse for each round, thus allowing the railgun to fire off all rounds in the clip in a rapid succession without upgrading the pulse generator.'
|
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.24 14:29:00 -
[6]
Yup. a rail ship would not be cap stable while firing a burst, but it would be overall cap stable if cap regeneration during reload is considered.
|
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.25 03:26:00 -
[7]
bump
|
Ethan Blacknova
Gallente Ghost Festival Naraka.
|
Posted - 2011.01.25 11:23:00 -
[8]
I wholeheartedly support this.
As a fan of turrets, but ALSO a fan of Caldai, I have long wanted to see Railguns updated. Right now they are pathetic (Medium Railguns in particular are ncredibly weak).
This Idea can boost the DPS of railguns, while keeping them unique.
As for numbers right now, 6 250mm Railgun IIs with CN Antimatter, and 3x Mag Stab IIs on a Rail fit tengu, only get 389 DPS at 36km with MAXIMUM skills.
This should be more like 600 DPS.
A missile tengu can do 650 DPS at up to >100Km, with 3 BCUs, Heavy Missiles, have no cap or tracking problems.
In short, I would like to see a 50% Increase In railgun DPS, ergo; 50% Increase in Rate of fire. (For Medium railguns Only. Different numbers should be used for balancing large rails.) I would accept a reduction in Magazine Size/Ammo Capacity, but I would like to see Cap requirements also reduced by 25-50%.
|
Sinikka Huiputti
|
Posted - 2011.01.25 14:18:00 -
[9]
caldari ship -> no damage bonus -> railguns -> useless crap
|
Ethan Blacknova
Gallente Ghost Festival Naraka.
|
Posted - 2011.01.25 14:30:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Sinikka Huiputti caldari ship -> no damage bonus -> railguns -> useless crap
Viable PvP Autocannon-Thorax disagrees.
|
|
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.25 22:07:00 -
[11]
thanks, Blacknova.
|
eleve
|
Posted - 2011.01.25 23:45:00 -
[12]
I like this idea too!
|
Mike Voidstar
|
Posted - 2011.01.26 01:33:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Ethan Blacknova
Originally by: Sinikka Huiputti caldari ship -> no damage bonus -> railguns -> useless crap
Viable PvP Autocannon-Thorax disagrees.
There is a big, big difference between the base suckage of autocannons vs. failguns.
|
The Djego
Minmatar Hellequin Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.01.26 02:49:00 -
[14]
Edited by: The Djego on 26/01/2011 02:57:19 Railguns already have a small clip if you figure ROF in(it is similar to 1400ers).
The true problem with rails is mostly tracking(even with fits that double the tracking it leaves much to wish for at medium ranges) and the to low overall dps. If rails would be a weapon that tracks a untackeled targets up to peak dps at range with a ok DPS(nothing to fancy, 10-15% more would be enough) they would be far more useful in general pvp. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
Admiral Leviathan
|
Posted - 2011.01.26 03:07:00 -
[15]
I would not be opposed to a fearsome tracking bonus for rails, since their dps is the lowest of all guns. When I compared EFT sniper Rokh versus sniper Tempest, it seemed to have half the dps but twice the range, which seems balanced. However, that half the tempest dps falls below any useful dps one can dish out solo. I have no doubt 10 sniper Rokhs is nice to have at 250 km, but so is 10 Tempests at 150.
|
Frank Jewett
|
Posted - 2011.01.26 15:18:00 -
[16]
Djego, this idea is about adding those 10-15% DPS without making railguns identical to artilleries or beams.
|
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.29 03:57:00 -
[17]
bump
|
Nebularis
|
Posted - 2011.01.29 06:03:00 -
[18]
Rapid fire magnetic railguns already exist (google Metal Storm). A 10-15% RoF buff would actually be accurate, and balanced, as rails already take a fair bit of cap to use, increased rate of fire makes them more cap dependant, but not as much as energy weapons, while retaining damage per shot (no ammo adjustment necessary), range, and clip size. If that proved to be too much of a dps increase, simply increase reload time, the code is already in game for variable reload times (see crystal reloading vs other turrets.)
|
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.29 06:51:00 -
[19]
A change in clip size and a change in reload time is more or less the same because they both effect the ratio between shooting time and reloading time. IMO changing the clip size is easier. Changing reload time works too, of course.
|
The Djego
Minmatar Hellequin Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.01.30 12:14:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Admiral Leviathan I would not be opposed to a fearsome tracking bonus for rails, since their dps is the lowest of all guns. When I compared EFT sniper Rokh versus sniper Tempest, it seemed to have half the dps but twice the range, which seems balanced. However, that half the tempest dps falls below any useful dps one can dish out solo. I have no doubt 10 sniper Rokhs is nice to have at 250 km, but so is 10 Tempests at 150.
Well the key point of rails was always extreme range or best tracking at her range, by using faction ammo at ranges where other guns need T2 ammo(for caldari) or hulls like the mega with a tracking bonus.
But since you will always have mixed fleets you will most likely operate at the same range level as other hulls, on grid probing even made extreme range sniping somewhat questionable.
Lets take Mega Puls for example as it excels at medium range combat, bringing a tracking of 0.03 with scorch while the 425mm Rails only gives you only 0.012(with T1 ammo).
With the right fitting you can come close to scorch tracking speed in a mega(0.27 with T1 ammo)with the however this is after using up the full ship bonus plus 2 TCs. If you now apply the same tracking focused fitting(2 TCs) on the Puls Ship you can get outstanding 0.7 with faction ammo.
If you now double rail tracking you get scorch like tracking ability's at medium range with tracking bonused hulls and superior force projection ability's on caldari hulls at range. By this Caldari rail ships become the most powerful in the ability to adapt combat ranges and target types, even in a trade off for raw dps(similar like missile based ships but with instant damage).
Gallente on the other hand get a lot better at medium range pvp with rail setups what somewhat closes the a huge hole in her field of use with rails outside of small gang/solo and RR gang uses for blaster based setups.
The problems with the idea of the OP is that high rof don't work out very well in fleet fights under lag conditions, high ROF even creates more lag(bad thing in fleet environments) and the Alpha ability of minmatar makes them somewhat more desirable for hit and run tactics. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
|
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.01.31 16:15:00 -
[21]
Djego, wouldn't a tracking increase make rails very similar to beam lasers ?
|
rodensteiner
Amarr Awesome Jacket Society
|
Posted - 2011.01.31 17:36:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Nebularis Rapid fire magnetic railguns already exist (google Metal Storm)....
That isn't quite correct, actually. If I remember what I read about Metal Storm, it uses more or less conventional projectiles and cartridges, but it fires them electronically rather than with a striker. The Metal Storm weaponry also stacks multiple rounds per tube, and multiple tube per "launcher" and each tube fires its load in sequence.
Back to railguns, however. Again, if I remember reading correctly, one big advantage of a Railgun is that it is recoil-less. If we would like to keep railguns in game somewhat accurate to "real life" railguns, then the railguns should:
-Have a high alpha, but not as high as heavy artillery
-Have excellent range, in excess of heavy artillery (already in game)
-Better tracking than artillery. Again railguns are recoil-less, which should theoretically translate to higher accuracy. Technically, it could also yield lower cycle time, since you wouldn't have to re-aim as much after every salvo.
So basically, in-game changes needed are slightly higher ROF and better tracking. The changes also need to be looked at separately depending on weapon size as small railguns are actually not too bad as they are. Medium rails and Large rails seem to be hurting pretty bad, however. I believe short of capital weaponry, actually, I believe it is medium and large rails that are they only weapons that I have not ever been killed by
_____________________________________________
I'm horrible at PVP |
Caphelo
|
Posted - 2011.01.31 18:13:00 -
[23]
Originally by: rodensteiner
Again railguns are recoil-less, which should theoretically translate to higher accuracy.
No they're not, the recoil force is equal to the force applied to the projectile, which is quite huge.
|
rodensteiner
Amarr Awesome Jacket Society
|
Posted - 2011.01.31 20:31:00 -
[24]
Edited by: rodensteiner on 31/01/2011 20:38:58
Originally by: Caphelo
Originally by: rodensteiner
Again railguns are recoil-less, which should theoretically translate to higher accuracy.
No they're not, the recoil force is equal to the force applied to the projectile, which is quite huge.
You know, I thought about that for a minute, and of course you're correct. Just because there is no explosion, doesn't mean there is no equal and opposite reaction. Fail on my part
I did read a little more, however. Railguns supposedly can achieve much higher muzzle velocities than regular guns, so you would have a more range and accuracy.
However, the accuracy is partially because a higher velocity projectile suffers less from aerodynamic drag and bullet drop due to gravity...
...but we're in space...
_____________________________________________
I'm horrible at PVP |
The Djego
Minmatar Hellequin Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.01.31 21:00:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Zephris Djego, wouldn't a tracking increase make rails very similar to beam lasers ?
Well you would still have more DPS with the Beams(even outside of Tachs) at the tradeoff of around 20% more optimal compared to rails. I even would be fine just with just the extra tracking instead the dps if the amount would be sufficient to make them good enough at medium range in mobile fits. A lot of people underrate tracking, however tracking + range is a very powerful combination and even if it lacks the EFT dps it can come out an top in many real situations(I fly pests instead of megas this days for gank simple for this reason), plus it adds a lot of flexibility to you to decide at what range you want to fight and were you will have the most advantages.
---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
Dzrdya
Amarr Evil Holdings
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 04:16:00 -
[26]
Another idea to the topic is to make railguns fire 2-5 shots per reload, adjusting damage accordingly.
|
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 04:32:00 -
[27]
a Railgun can theoretically be made with no moving part by using compressed gas to move the carriages. Such a gun can be fired as fast as the current can be maintained.
Of course such ridiculous rate of fire would probably not do well in a game like eve.
|
Mike Voidstar
|
Posted - 2011.02.01 05:46:00 -
[28]
Don't confuse real life theory of railguns with game mechanic needs and balance.
IRL (well as IRL as railguns get), you can cut down on moving parts and such somewhat, but you still have to deal with opening and closing the firing chamber or deal with the projectile's natural tendancy to follow the path of least resistance in some other way. There's also waste heat to consider from the rapid acceleration, and inertia is a harsh mistress. Basically, a railgun only eliminates the moving parts associated with a fireing pin and hammer, or their equivilants for artillery. Automatics actually channel some of the recoil forces for the loading process--eliminating that moving portion of a weapon system means actually adding more devices to perform those functions.
The theory behind railguns does not remove the problems or limitations on traditional firearms, it just moves them to different areas. This results in improvements in some areas, and new or increased problems in others. This is why we don't use Railguns as a weapons system in real life----currently they are mostly just used for electric door locks and stuff.
|
Manfred Rickenbocker
Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 02:12:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Manfred Rickenbocker on 02/02/2011 02:13:37
Originally by: Mike Voidstar Don't confuse real life theory of railguns with game mechanic needs and balance.
IRL (well as IRL as railguns get), you can cut down on moving parts and such somewhat, but you still have to deal with opening and closing the firing chamber or deal with the projectile's natural tendancy to follow the path of least resistance in some other way. There's also waste heat to consider from the rapid acceleration, and inertia is a harsh mistress. Basically, a railgun only eliminates the moving parts associated with a fireing pin and hammer, or their equivilants for artillery. Automatics actually channel some of the recoil forces for the loading process--eliminating that moving portion of a weapon system means actually adding more devices to perform those functions.
The theory behind railguns does not remove the problems or limitations on traditional firearms, it just moves them to different areas. This results in improvements in some areas, and new or increased problems in others. This is why we don't use Railguns as a weapons system in real life----currently they are mostly just used for electric door locks and stuff.
Be careful you do not confuse coil-guns with rail-guns. The main difference between the coil-gun and the rail-gun is that a coil gun operates similar to a solenoid (as in your door locks). By providing electric current to a coil, it generates an electromagnetic field that pulls a ferro-magnetic projectile through it. You can multiply the acceleration by stacking several coils one after the other to increase the force. Coils also have good torque which is why they are used in locks but terrible acceleration (think diesel engine vs. gasoline). A rail-gun operates by using the projectile to complete an electric circuit. The magnetic field behind the projectile (where the current is sourced) effectively pushes the projectile forward. Ideally, all you have to do is place a projectile on the rails and it will proceed to zip through it. The longer its on the rails, the faster it will go.
Eve confuses coil-guns and rail-guns. Many of the descriptions (and names for that matter) reference both technologies inconsistently. Modern military theory will prefer a rail-gun to a coil-gun due to easier maintenance and lower power requirements for similar results, the problem being that both still require HUGE amounts of power and rail-guns require physical contact with the projectile to transmit power, and that causes friction, heat, and rail warping. ANY-way, we exist in EVE where the impossible is possible, right?
Fundamentally, a rail-gun should have a quicker fire-rate (lighter projectiles) and range (due to high velocity) but crap for damage (no explosive shell). That said, hybrid shells are supposed to be charged plasma somehow, so that *might* adjust the damage formula up. If there was going to be some balance, a nice solution would be to make railguns have a higher ROF with low damage, rendering them the Autocannons of the long range variant. Arty are high damage short range slow ROF, and beams are kinda medium medium medium, so the railgun being long-low-fast would make sense. A bit of extra tracking to help with midrange would be a nice boon too (as hybrid systems are sorely lacking for midrange combat).
One extra tidbit: hybrid ammo is wicked heavy (voluminous?). If you were to up the ROF on railguns, hybrid ammo sizes and clip sizes would need some serious tweaking to not screw up Blasters (which incidentally need boosting themselves). ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times. |
Zephris
|
Posted - 2011.02.02 06:31:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Mike Voidstar Don't confuse real life theory of railguns with game mechanic needs and balance.
IRL (well as IRL as railguns get), you can cut down on moving parts and such somewhat, but you still have to deal with opening and closing the firing chamber or deal with the projectile's natural tendancy to follow the path of least resistance in some other way. There's also waste heat to consider from the rapid acceleration, and inertia is a harsh mistress. Basically, a railgun only eliminates the moving parts associated with a fireing pin and hammer, or their equivilants for artillery. Automatics actually channel some of the recoil forces for the loading process--eliminating that moving portion of a weapon system means actually adding more devices to perform those functions.
The theory behind railguns does not remove the problems or limitations on traditional firearms, it just moves them to different areas. This results in improvements in some areas, and new or increased problems in others. This is why we don't use Railguns as a weapons system in real life----currently they are mostly just used for electric door locks and stuff.
IRL Railguns use is currently not widespread because of the ridiculous power requirement. Because there is no propellant, all the kinetic energy of the projectile is provided by the weapon itself. Only ships can generate that much power right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |