Heh, I'll bet you drive a lifted truck.

I see a frigate and zoom in and see oh there's the guns, on a battleship they look like peashooters.
Does anyone else think so? If so wonder why that is when you consider they really are massive?

Same reason guns look tiny on todays warships.

I see a frigate and zoom in and see oh there's the guns, on a battleship they look like peashooters.
Does anyone else think so? If so wonder why that is when you consider they really are massive?

I miss the relevancy of battleships.

I miss the relevancy of battleships.

I agree. We need to deplete the atmosphere so missiles and planes can't fly around so easily, and ballistic projectiles fly farther.

Where are the Spaceballs when you need them?

I see a frigate and zoom in and see oh there's the guns, on a battleship they look like peashooters.
Does anyone else think so? If so wonder why that is when you consider they really are massive?

Are you compensating for something? Or does it remind you of something?

I got this one. The guns look tiny 'cause the ships are so BIG!
(Don't applaud. Just throw money.)


Rail guns in real life. Yes, of course, CCP didn't originate this idea. Rail guns in real life have some pretty drastic problems, not the least of which, the magnitude of force involved with firing one literally tears the gun apart after just a few uses. Again, there's also the input (how much energy to create the blast) output (how much blast damage results) ratio. Cost effectiveness relies heavily upon this, and for rail guns, it's just not there. STILL, it so deliciously seems you're replacing ammo, it's hard to resist trying.

On a serious note, Eve frigates are the size of big airplanes. Putting 2 meter long cannons on it that operate along with shielding, lifesupport & a variety of other systems is pretty impressive.
While 2 meter long cannons sound big, compared to a boeing sized aircraft they're not (and still deliver a good punch)

On the note of Railguns, The US NAVY apparently has a real working rail gun in testing right now.

I met this totally awesome and beautiful woman who never complains when I play video games, has a job, doesn't cheat on me, lives a completely dramafree life.... but she's only got b-cups, so I'm going to complain

Size matters? I thought the important part was how you use them?

Even small guns will get the job done if used properly... It's just some pilots have issues with their aim.

Drone assist...

this has been doing the rounds again recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bac6yvYzaVI&list=UUTSrS_VHMOG7Uq_Q2r3m5Ug#t=236

That's nice and all but there is no banana, so I still do not have a proper frame of reference.

Yes, it's important to remember the scale of things here.

Guns in EVE are big as houses. Literally.

It's just that some of the ships we fit them on are big as villages GÇö even large house doesn't look that big in comparison.

My sense of this is that the OP comes to us having only previously played F2P Korean MMOs. Especially the ones, all of them really, where you can barely see the avatar beneath the massive sword or gun he/she's wielding. The only thing more oversized than the weapons in those games are the massive, and I mean MASSIVE boobs on the scantily clad fighters.

In any case, to my eyes many of the weapons we have in EVE are actually too big for the ships they are on.

Mr Epeen

not big at all, for eg. a g.e. gau-8/a avenger is way bigger than 2 meters (over 6 meters the whole system, 2.30 mt just the barrels) and fit on a smallish plane like the a10 warthog.
ok, the a10 warthog is a gau 8a avenger with wings and oversized engines stuck on, tho is still a plane...

But if we can village sized ships, why not mount them with village sized guns?

Why does the warp engine and hull take up so much space? Why not maximize the engineering architecture for offensive capabilities in the ship instead of wasting so much volume on essentially decorative elements?



I agree with OP. The guns are *relatively* too small in size compared to the rest of the ship. Some ships should literally be floating cannons. It's not like crew needs anything but injectable food and regular lashings in order to do their job..

I'm gonna stop now though, because I'm about half a step from comparing the tracking of two weapons so as to estimate the moment of inertia, and from that the mas and thus in turn the length of the barrel.

Mutliple people have said the guns look small because the ships are big... but if the ships are big shouldn't we need big guns to hurt them?

Battleships seem to die to proportionally less firepower than smaller classes.

It' s not the size of the gun that counts, but rather how much penetration you get.

Well, I would suppose Railguns and Blasters do not need to be giant to be effective, they use kinetic force to do damage.

On the note of Railguns, The US NAVY apparently has a real working rail gun in testing right now.

Yes and no. EVE railguns don't appear to be kinetic kill weapons (i.e. the slamming of fast moving hunks of metal into targets) due to having ammo types, and due to how ships bounce off of each other and large objects (meaning EVE ships, stations, asteroids, etc. appear to be immune to plain old kinetic damage.)

So EVE railguns do "kinetic" damage via some other, mysterious, exotic mechanism.[1]



Subs laugh at railguns.


[1] I cast magic missile at the darkness.

I see a frigate and zoom in and see oh there's the guns, on a battleship they look like peashooters.
Does anyone else think so? If so wonder why that is when you consider they really are massive?

Make your barrel too long and you lose more and more energy to friction, both with the air and between the bullet and barrel.

Thanks for the turret comparisons!

Wonder if a small pre-charge, loaded and ignited sub-seconds before the main charge, would make a difference by evacuating the barrel before the projectile starts moving. Obviously a big challenge to keep the main charge from firing prematurely.


OP - Don't know if this has been linked yet: Ships to RL Objects Comparison 14 minutes, well worth the time.

Why use anything other than antimatter? Why/how does ammo affect railgun range? If ships bounce off each other, why don't railgun rounds bounce off?

Eve railguns and RL railguns do not use the same physics to do damage (or use the same physics to reach their target.)

Why use anything other than antimatter? Why/how does ammo affect railgun range? If ships bounce off each other, why don't railgun rounds bounce off?

Eve railguns and RL railguns do not use the same physics to do damage (or use the same physics to reach their target.)

Blerg no
AM is merely an oppisitely charged state of matter, no different than building a lego house out of all blue instead of red
It has no more issues with cohesion than normal matter, and I am quite sure our fights arent going on until proton failure (though with TIDI at times, the computers might)
And since we are using an electromagnetic system for acceleration in a vacuum, oh wait I just described your average state for terrestrial AM, in space its just another spot on the list, vastly dwarfed by normal matter for an unknown reason that leaves scientists morbidly worried of something not being right

Oh and with fullerenes, AM is easy to contain, it can also be energetically liberated by the destruction of the fullerene matrix

It's not about the "size" ...
... it's about the "thrust" and "recoil" ........ *cough*

Also, the 'aim'.