Railgun Power | Eclipse Phase

Thu, 2011-03-10 14:27

#2

nezumi.hebereke nezumi.hebereke's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Batteries are normally pretty heavy. I think the mindset might be adding a separate battery lets you put it somewhere more comfortable on the user's frame, which makes the weapon less awkward and cumbersome. It sounds like you're describing a situation where each cartridge ('bullet' in the common parlance) has your ferrous slug and a one-use battery in a single (plastic?) case. You put it in the gun like you're loading a shotgun. The battery connects to the firearm, charging it, and the magnetic pulses launch the slug. These would probably cost more per unit, and be more likely to jam (since the battery of each round needs to settle properly with the contact in the firearm for every shot). Ammunition will also be pretty heavy. But I don't see anything inherently wrong with the idea, and it's certainly cinematic.

Thu, 2011-03-10 14:42

#3

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

I believe the OP is describing not per-cartridge power cells, but per-*magazine*.

Thu, 2011-03-10 15:05

#4

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Even so as someone who has disassembled and reassembled his fair share of firearms the idea of a battery per magazine sounds like it could be an issue. It adds an unnecessary risk as damage to the box could cause fluids to leak and damage materials. A battery in the gun itself, while still having this risk in game from let us say a called shot, is still protected by a much sturdier frame. I can see the advantage in weight though. Each soldier will probably be carrying 5 or 6 of the batteries (they're worth 200 rounds each right?) and that's besides ammo and whatever other supplies he needs. If each magazine was loaded with a battery of it's own it would cut down on weight but that brings up another question. How much do these things weigh? How big are they? If they aren't that much of an issue then the whole weight side of the argument becomes null and void.

—

C-rep +1

Thu, 2011-03-10 16:11

#5

OneTrikPony OneTrikPony's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Seems that railguns produce their kinetic energy via velocity rather than mass. The book says 'mach 6' on p.336 which would be about 2050m/s (you could bench mark a high powered modern rifle around 3500fps so an EP rail gun is twice as fast as a modern rifle.) if you make some fairly large assumptions that average DV is equivalent to the kinetic energy then you might conclude that railguns fire a slug of half the mass at twice the velocity as their EP counterpart Firearm while using about the same energy. Then you just have to make a call as to the energy density of EP batteries compares with the energy density of chemical propellant and you'll get an idea of how heavy batteries are in your game. Personally I'm comfortable with the idea that a railgun battery and ammo can fit in about the same volume as the ammo and propellant of it's Firearm counterpart but I'm under the impression that one battery can fire multiple magazines of ammo so I'm not sure if it's a good idea to combine them.

—

Mea Culpa: My mode of speech can make others feel uninvited to argue or participate. This is the EXACT opposite of what I intend when I post.

Thu, 2011-03-10 17:05

#6

TBRMInsanity TBRMInsanity's picture

Re: Railgun Power

From a more realistic POV (I know it's SciFi, realism is purely relative), having a separate power supply means you can mount the weapon and draw from a static power supply (like vehicle power, or building power). Forcing the power supply to be part of the clip forces you to only use the weapon in a dismounted theatre only. It would be like having the antenna for a military radio, have a built in AMP. You wouldn't be able to use different antennas for the radio (or field improvised ones for that matter). Yes your right about it being more of a PitA for supply, but the versatility it offers to commanders may make it worth the effort. That being said, in your game you can always say the battery is incorporated into the clip. EP states that each hab (let along each faction) creates their own flavour of items and no two habs have the same item (for game purposes they all have the same stats in the core book).

—

Jovian Motto: Your mind is original. Preserve it. Your body is a temple. Maintain it. Immortality is an illusion. Forget it.

Thu, 2011-03-10 17:06

#7

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

There's no reason it couldn't be both, TRBMInsanity. :) For those rare occasions of emplaced use. Personally, I'm happy with the 'standard' battery-in-gun setup.

Thu, 2011-03-10 17:30

#8

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Railguns likely use a vast amount of power in a very short period of time, so I'd imagine that most batteries do not themselves have the necessary output capability to directly power the rail. Instead, railguns likely have an internal capacitor bank that siphons the energy out of an attached power cell at slower pace and is capable of output that suffices for railgun operation. So in all, I'd say it's a combination of both external and internal power sources... a railgun can probably charge its capacitor bank from an outside source (including a battery clip), but the capacitor bank itself is internal. Railguns and energy weapons designated for urban warfare (okay, maybe just energy weapons) may even be able to charge up their capacitor banks from wireless energy transmissions.

TBRMInsanity wrote:
That being said, in your game you can always say the battery is incorporated into the clip. EP states that each hab (let along each faction) creates their own flavour of items and no two habs have the same item (for game purposes they all have the same stats in the core book).

Even if each faction has their own flavor of items, there is likely some degree of standardization. While a submachine gun from one hab might have a different shape to it, they probably use very similar (potentially even interchangeable) rounds and parts.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Mon, 2011-03-14 17:26

#9

Teryn

Re: Railgun Power

Well, with what the book lays down, the batteries are good for lots of clips, so I could reasonably see having a smaller battery that was only good for as many rounds were in the clip attached directly to it. Maybe having the battery separate is just a standardized design.

Decivre wrote:
Even if each faction has their own flavor of items, there is likely some degree of standardization. While a submachine gun from one hab might have a different shape to it, they probably use very similar (potentially even interchangeable) rounds and parts.

Unless the faction or hab specifically designed their equipment to not have parts interchangeable with similar ones from other factions. I could definitely see this happening, even if it wasn't common.

—

[img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/hcda_userbar.jpg[/img]

Mon, 2011-03-14 18:39

#10

TBRMInsanity TBRMInsanity's picture

Re: Railgun Power

I disagree that parts would be shareable between habs (excepting habs from the same faction) unless two habs happen to share the same blueprints for their weapons (ie the AK-47 effect where one blueprint is used in several locations). From a purely game POV I would say an AK-47 would have the same stats as an M-16, even though they are two totally different weapons and you can not share anything between them (not even the shoulder strap). Heck M-16 made in America and C-7 (the Canadian version of the M-16) aren't even compatible (except when it comes to ammo). Either way I think I need to reread the section on Rail guns because I was under the assumption that the Battery was an additional clip in a Rail gun and not a belt battery with cord (from a military POV I would totally stick with Ballistic weapons because of this).

—

Jovian Motto: Your mind is original. Preserve it. Your body is a temple. Maintain it. Immortality is an illusion. Forget it.

Tue, 2011-03-15 07:54

#11

delroland

Re: Railgun Power

I thought railguns used nuclear batteries, i.e. they can fire for three years before needing a recharge or replacement battery. I would assume this would be incorporated into the frame of the weapon and included in the weapon's listed weight. If that is not the case, I can certainly imagine with the advent of smart materials and nanotech each round including its own battery, magnetically hovering the round into place through wireless or nanoscopic buckywire transmission of power. No mechanical parts == no jamming.

Tue, 2011-03-15 10:09

#12

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Nope. "Railguns also require battery power for each shot. Standard railgun batteries hold enough power for 200 shots, after which they must be recharged at the rate of 20 points per hour."'

Tue, 2011-03-15 16:41

#13

sjmcc13

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
Nope. "Railguns also require battery power for each shot. Standard railgun batteries hold enough power for 200 shots, after which they must be recharged at the rate of 20 points per hour."'

Though it is worth noting that that does not state external batteries, so they could still be internal to the gun.

Tue, 2011-03-15 16:50

#14

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

I think it's 100% assumed that they're internal, in fact. :) Probably removable, for combat 'reloading'.

Tue, 2011-03-15 18:05

#15

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
I think it's 100% assumed that they're internal, in fact. :) Probably removable, for combat 'reloading'.

You would be right. Taken from the description of nuclear batteries in Gatecrashing. These nuclear batteries can regenerate their charge at a rate of 20 shots per hour. Changing a battery is a Simple Action.

—

C-rep +1

Tue, 2011-03-15 18:16

#16

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

The core book batteries are described as 'being recharged', though, not 'recharging themselves'. The nuke cells are an upgrade, right? Either way, I was just pointing out that we know the RAW is a single internal, rechargeable power source; I do find the idea of magazine- or cartridge-individual cells interesting, but not better. :)

Tue, 2011-03-15 18:21

#17

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
The core book batteries are described as 'being recharged', though, not 'recharging themselves'. The nuke cells are an upgrade, right?

Not really. It just says "they must be recharged", not that it requires an outside source. It would make sense that these are nuclear batteries, because most power systems are probably efficient enough to recharge a battery far faster than in 10 hours. The fact that the railgun battery charges so slow implies that it's probably an atomic battery.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Tue, 2011-03-15 18:32

#18

Wyldknight Wyldknight's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Wait are we discussing whether or not railguns use nuclear batteries? Because it specifically says they do.

—

C-rep +1

Tue, 2011-03-15 18:43

#19

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

That makes sense, Decivre. It's still very abnormal in English to refer to them with "must be recharged" if they're recharging themselves. It doesn't say nuclear batteries in the core book, it says 'high-energy portable batteries'. I certainly believe you, though. Beam weapons are described as using 'nuclear batteries', but it doesn't say they recharge themselves; the same goes for many things in the core book. It certainly is weird to imagine a rechargeable nuclear battery that doesn't recharge itself. :D This is all cleared up in Gatecrashing… which is a funny place to have to go for *core* rules.

Wed, 2011-03-16 06:26

#20

Gee4orce

Re: Railgun Power

I also thought the same thing as the original poster. I think, however, that the logic for a separate battery could be to do with scale efficiencies: a single battery that can shoot multiple magazines would be more efficient than a separate battery in each magazine. Also, you'd want to have a little surplus built into the battery to be sure that you have enough juice to shoot all shots (and also to allow for inevitable loss of charge over time) - you'd probably have more wasted surplus with lots of little batteries than with a single large one. Also, probably the most important reason: this is the military we are talking about, and despite what you might think they don't always make the most logical choices !

Wed, 2011-03-16 06:30

#21

Gee4orce

Re: Railgun Power

Also: nuclear batteries - WTF ? Are these supposed to be self-recharging using radioactive decay ? Fair enough, but there's a major problem - what happens when the battery is fully charged ? That isotope isn't going to stop decaying, that energy is going to have to go somewhere. If the battery can't absorb it (because it's full) then the thing is probably going to melt and/or explode.

Wed, 2011-03-16 07:59

#22

Tyrfing

Re: Railgun Power

Radioisotope generators are nifty things. The present day ones use the heat from radioactive decay to generate power through thermoelectric effects or Stirling engines, a type of high efficiency heat engine. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stirling_radioisotope_generator_head_t... is a picture of a generator head because it is pretty cool.[/url] The one in that case is a slug of Plutonium 238 clad in iridium. It has a half life of about 90 years and can be completely shielded with less than 3mm of lead. A one kilogram mass will generate about 500W of heat. Now like you said, Gee4orce: you can't switch off radioactive decay. If you're not charging those railgun batteries, you're having to dump a lot of heat into the environment around you. Presumably large heatsinks are involved, particularly if it is designed for use in a vacuum. It strikes me as poor design to stick something like that in a weapon that won't need the power 99 percent of the time. Especially when you need to carry around ammo for it anyway. In my games I've decided to rule that it's not a radioisotope generator, just a high density battery. It has to be plugged into an external power source to be recharged. You can carry spare batteries if you're feeling really paranoid about it.

—

[i][size=9]Your mind is software. Program it. Your body is a shell. Change it. Death is a dis@#%di. l%eo $k. S@sdf36 3kl5j2o er3o4|h 4lakl iT. Y0ur life is a disease. Cure it. Extinction is approaching. Embrace it.[/size][/i]

Wed, 2011-03-16 09:54

#23

TBRMInsanity TBRMInsanity's picture

Re: Railgun Power

I was thinking of the batteries this morning, I wonder if the ball in all the weapons is the battery?

—

Jovian Motto: Your mind is original. Preserve it. Your body is a temple. Maintain it. Immortality is an illusion. Forget it.

Wed, 2011-03-16 10:24

#24

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

The 'standard batteries' in the book *are* plenty good. High capacity, fast recharge, and Trivial cost. I really think (despite the clear evidence given above) that weapons should have nuclear batteries as an optional upgrade/parallel system. Gatecrashing talks about using nuke cells to recharge standard cells for various gear, and that's the most logical to me. If you need more than 200 shots at a time, just buy more Trivial railgun batteries and say that they're removable. :) Otherwise, all the weapons (railguns, beam weapons) are like the annoying Eridian guns from Borderlands (with much higher 'clip size', of course).

Wed, 2011-03-16 16:53

#25

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Gee4orce wrote:
Also: nuclear batteries - WTF ? Are these supposed to be self-recharging using radioactive decay ? Fair enough, but there's a major problem - what happens when the battery is fully charged ? That isotope isn't going to stop decaying, that energy is going to have to go somewhere. If the battery can't absorb it (because it's full) then the thing is probably going to melt and/or explode.

Atomic batteries don't really hold a charge. There's likely to be another component of the gun, or attached to the battery, for that purpose (like a capacitor bank). All an atomic battery does is produce power. The devices designed to utilize atomic batteries are built with the design constraint that they must be capable of preventing that power from damaging it, because it's production is constant (yet ever-decreasing). My guess is that railguns will have some idling process that occurs when the capacitor is fully charged... like starting up the rails at low power so that a bullet isn't pulled through but excess energy can be wasted. For the record, this isn't theoretical technology. The first atomic battery (the beta cell) was created in 1913. We've had quite some time to perfect the tech already. I can only imagine how much better it will be by 10 AF.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Wed, 2011-03-16 17:01

#26

King Shere King Shere's picture

Re: Railgun Power

A "spent" one time battery could perhaps be utilised as the slug to be launched next.

—

[img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/tc_userbar.jpg[/img] [img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/exh_userbar.jpg[/img] [img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/argo_userbar.jpg[/img] [i]"To find fault is easy; to do better may be difficult."[/i] Plutarch

Wed, 2011-03-16 17:07

#27

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
The 'standard batteries' in the book *are* plenty good. High capacity, fast recharge, and Trivial cost. I really think (despite the clear evidence given above) that weapons should have nuclear batteries as an optional upgrade/parallel system. Gatecrashing talks about using nuke cells to recharge standard cells for various gear, and that's the most logical to me. If you need more than 200 shots at a time, just buy more Trivial railgun batteries and say that they're removable. :) Otherwise, all the weapons (railguns, beam weapons) are like the annoying Eridian guns from Borderlands (with much higher 'clip size', of course).

The biggest disadvantage to a nuclear battery is that they have a low power output, and a decaying charge. Firstly, that means that a nuclear battery has a low general yield of power, and isn't too useful by themselves for maintaining something that requires a high charge (most major weapons), and they won't fill up fast on their own. Pointing to the example from this thread, the railgun's atomic battery takes 10 hours to fully recharge, at an average of 1 shot every 3 minutes. That's not particularly overpowered. Picture your Borderlands character hiding out for half-a-day so he can fully reload his Eridian gun. Doesn't make them all that lethal anymore, does it. Standard batteries will oftentimes be more useful because they can be recharged far faster attached to a power grid. More dangerously, a bunch of soldiers might be able to fire their railguns and energy weapons nearly limitlessly if their weapons are wirelessly connected to a power source. The atomic battery has it's uses when you have something that you want to get sustained power over a significant period of time. In this case, the pragmatic logic was someone using a railgun probably won't be engaged in a firefight requiring more than 200 shots, so the low-level sustained power is a better way to charge the capacitors. Secondly, it means that an atomic battery becomes less potent over time due to decay. The half-life of the isotope decides how long it takes for the battery to become more and more ineffective. Let's say the isotope in the railgun has a half-life of 78 years. In 78 years, that gun is charging up 10 shots an hour rather than 20. In 156, it's only charging 5 shots an hour. This will continue until the charge rate is worthless.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Wed, 2011-03-16 22:44

#28

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

That's my point; we're agreeing. :) The reason the Eridian weapons are worthless is their 'nuclear batteries'. I'm saying it makes more sense in EP to use cheaper, better standard batteries. If you need to recharge them, use a nuke cell as described in Gatecrashing; but it doesn't make tons of sense for all beam and railgun weapons to *typically* have nuke cells. I do agree that 200 shots is a very, very comfortable pool, so this isn't a *problem*. It's just odd, when you can have the same ample capacity in a fast-charge standard battery. :)

Thu, 2011-03-17 00:07

#29

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
That's my point; we're agreeing. :) The reason the Eridian weapons are worthless is their 'nuclear batteries'. I'm saying it makes more sense in EP to use cheaper, better standard batteries. If you need to recharge them, use a nuke cell as described in Gatecrashing; but it doesn't make tons of sense for all beam and railgun weapons to *typically* have nuke cells. I do agree that 200 shots is a very, very comfortable pool, so this isn't a *problem*. It's just odd, when you can have the same ample capacity in a fast-charge standard battery. :)

Your mention of Gatecrashing urged me to look through that book, and I found this little ditty on page 155:

Quote:
Nuclear batteries are used in both railguns and energy weapons to recharge the standard batteries that power these weapons.

That sounds about right. Capacitor banks were my theory, but it seems like energy and rail weapons utilize standard batteries for power storage, and nuclear batteries for power generation. But one does wonder what the problem with nuclear batteries is. A nuclear battery produces a constant recharge rate. Even with standard batteries, why wouldn't you build nuclear batteries into most appliances that aren't expected to have a constant connection to a power supply? I'd imagine that most large tech has some sort of nuclear battery, if only for emergency energy supply. Even synthmorphs are sustained by a nuclear battery. Why shouldn't weapons be?

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Thu, 2011-03-17 00:29

#30

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Nice snag! That's the setup that made sense to me, too, though I could just as easily see them leaving out the nuclear batteries (leaving it as an upgrade). Like I said before, there's no *problem* with them. It's just an extra component, an extra cost.

Thu, 2011-03-17 01:45

#31

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
Nice snag! That's the setup that made sense to me, too, though I could just as easily see them leaving out the nuclear batteries (leaving it as an upgrade). Like I said before, there's no *problem* with them. It's just an extra component, an extra cost.

But a potentially vital component. The ability to continually recharge a battery has great potential on a battlefield, especially when power grids are down and there's no sun or panels to charge from.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Thu, 2011-03-17 03:48

#32

Tyrfing

Re: Railgun Power

Decivre wrote:
But one does wonder what the problem with nuclear batteries is. A nuclear battery produces a constant recharge rate. Even with standard batteries, why wouldn't you build nuclear batteries into most appliances that aren't expected to have a constant connection to a power supply? I'd imagine that most large tech has some sort of nuclear battery, if only for emergency energy supply. Even synthmorphs are sustained by a nuclear battery. Why shouldn't weapons be?

Three main issues leap to mind. First off is heat. For an example, my laptop here uses about 20W in its power saving mode. Because of various inefficiencies, I'll need at least double that for a heat source to power it. If we start sticking nuclear batteries into everything (especially if it's something that doesn't need it all the time), we're putting an unnecessary strain on a habitat's air conditioning plant. It also means the highly entertaining possibility of starting fires by leaving too many items with nuclear batteries in a poorly ventilated closet. Second flaw is weight. Those radioactive isotopes need shielding. Lead is heavy. Other materials are possible but lead's quite common. Third is the fact it's radioactive. This means sneaky sorts could make dirty bombs or similar nastiness by collecting enough of these wonderful nuclear appliances.

—

[i][size=9]Your mind is software. Program it. Your body is a shell. Change it. Death is a dis@#%di. l%eo $k. S@sdf36 3kl5j2o er3o4|h 4lakl iT. Y0ur life is a disease. Cure it. Extinction is approaching. Embrace it.[/size][/i]

Thu, 2011-03-17 04:03

#33

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Tyrfing wrote:
Three main issues leap to mind. First off is heat. For an example, my laptop here uses about 20W in its power saving mode. Because of various inefficiencies, I'll need at least double that for a heat source to power it. If we start sticking nuclear batteries into everything (especially if it's something that doesn't need it all the time), we're putting an unnecessary strain on a habitat's air conditioning plant.

Or a potential benefit. Those nuclear batteries could even potentially be used to power the air conditioning.

Tyrfing wrote:
It also means the highly entertaining possibility of starting fires by leaving too many items with nuclear batteries in a poorly ventilated closet.

My guess is that the majority of items that have nuclear batteries (weapons, synthmorphs, outdoor equipment, emergency devices) won't be stored in tiny closets.

Tyrfing wrote:
Second flaw is weight. Those radioactive isotopes need shielding. Lead is heavy. Other materials are possible but lead's quite common.

My guess is that shielding technologies have improved over the years. Otherwise, we wouldn't be capable of mounting nuclear batteries on man-portable weapons.

Tyrfing wrote:
Third is the fact it's radioactive. This means sneaky sorts could make dirty bombs or similar nastiness by collecting enough of these wonderful nuclear appliances.

In EP, there are far worse things that could be made with what is considered to be common household goods. A skilled nanoprogrammer with a cornucopia device could theoretically produce an apocalyptic gray goo. I'm far more afraid of that than any radiation exposure that might hit my gene-enhanced body. Dirty bombs sum to potential backup restorations and radiation cleansing... costly but not devastating. Gray goo can annihilate worlds.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Thu, 2011-03-17 10:20

#34

TBRMInsanity TBRMInsanity's picture

Re: Railgun Power

I agree with Decivre, in EP there are things far worse then dirty bombs. In fact I would think that there would be standard protection from dirty bombs all over the place (especially in places like the Hypercorps and Jovian Republic). Heck if they can have flats and splicers living inside the radiation zone of Jupiter, I think the average citizen has ample enough protection from the radiation of a dirty bomb. Nanoware weapons are a far greater threat.

—

Jovian Motto: Your mind is original. Preserve it. Your body is a temple. Maintain it. Immortality is an illusion. Forget it.

Thu, 2011-03-17 10:30

#35

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Again, Decivre, I can certainly see how (agonizingly slow) self-recharging would be useful for weapons in certain situations. I just think that in the other 95% of situations, 200 shots (per Trivial quick-change clip) will be enough to get you to a power source. Making the nuke cells the invisible, automatic default removes an option from the game (game logic) and adds a cost to all those weapons (fluff logic). *shrug*.

Thu, 2011-03-17 19:28

#36

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
Again, Decivre, I can certainly see how (agonizingly slow) self-recharging would be useful for weapons in certain situations. I just think that in the other 95% of situations, 200 shots (per Trivial quick-change clip) will be enough to get you to a power source. Making the nuke cells the invisible, automatic default removes an option from the game (game logic) and adds a cost to all those weapons (fluff logic). *shrug*.

They are a pretty cheap element of the gun, and can be purchased at low cost if bought separately. It would be equally "practical" to screw newly-sleeved people out of mesh inserts, or distribute firearms without a barrel (that barrel is an extra cost too). While your average soldier might be more amicable to simply swapping out the rechargeable cells for fresh ones, I'm sure they'll be thanking the hypercorp that built their weapon when they're out on the battlefield running for their lives and they notice that in the 3 minutes that they have spent fleeing they gained one more shot to fire. Nuclear batteries are likely to be a standard attachment to every single device that is designed to be used where there are no power grids. Emergency flashlights likely have small nuclear batteries. Portable radios probably have nuclear batteries. Even synthmorphs have nuclear batteries. Unless that weapon is designed for urban combat, and the explicit idea of being in constant contact with a wireless power grid, nuclear batteries are probably the staple assumption for "just in case" measures.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Thu, 2011-03-17 19:47

#37

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Those are very unreasonable comparisons. Mesh inserts and barrels are fundamental components. There are *some*, rare situations where a nuke cell would be useful in a gun. Most of the time, it's not. I don't understand why you say "even" synthmorphs; there's a big difference between the power source for your body, which you'll be using 100% of the time, and the slow recharger for your 200+ shot gun. :) The low-ammo beam weapons don't help either: if you only have a dozen or two shots, that's *more* reason to use standard batteries.

Thu, 2011-03-17 20:11

#38

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
Those are very unreasonable comparisons. Mesh inserts and barrels are fundamental components.

To soldiers, that nuclear battery is probably a fundamental component. Much like a hand-crank on an emergency radio, a nuclear battery on a weapon with energy needs is likely considered to be a psychologically fundamental element of the weapon. On the contrast, I'm sure there are weapon variants that have no nuclear battery (as well as urban weapons, which likely have no battery at all)... but it's likely that the majority of weapons are designed with them, and those are likely the most popular.

Yerameyahu wrote:
There are *some*, rare situations where a nuke cell would be useful in a gun. Most of the time, it's not.

That rare situation would be warfare. In a prolonged campaign where logistics are shit, soldiers will be very thankful that their weapons recharge on their own.

Yerameyahu wrote:
I don't understand why you say "even" synthmorphs; there's a big difference between the power source for your body, which you'll be using 100% of the time, and the slow recharger for your 200+ shot gun. :) The low-ammo beam weapons don't help either: if you only have a dozen or two shots, that's *more* reason to use standard batteries.

Again, they use both standard batteries and nuclear batteries.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Thu, 2011-03-17 21:55

#39

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

I didn't say they didn't use both. I said they needn't. ;) You've just repeated my case: *if* it's a long campaign, *if* logistics are bad, etc., then you gain a minor edge with nuke cells. That's not all warfare, and it's definitely not all combat. AFAIK, there *is* almost no warfare in EP, apart from the Ultimate mercs, and we're talking about all weapons in all situations. If a soldier says that the nuke cell is a fundamental component, he's stupid or lying to make a point in a discussion forum. ;) Without the barrel, it's not a gun. Let's be serious. Is the nuke cell handy? In rare cases, yes. Is it expensive? No. :) As I said, it's not a *problem*, it's just an odd design choice that takes an option away from the player. You might as well say that all biomorphs come with Light Bioweave (cheap, no drawbacks) along with the other Standard Mods, or Medichines (massively useful), or any/all of the handy and [Low] cost augmentations that basically everyone will always get (Enhanced *everything*). These are as cheap as nuke cells and vastly more useful, after all.

Thu, 2011-03-17 23:24

#40

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
As I said, it's not a *problem*, it's just an odd design choice that takes an option away from the player.

Again, it's not that odd a design choice. For instance, all guns today come with rifled barrels. Barrel rifling is not necessary for a gun to fire. Why do that when rifling the barrel is an additional cost? Why do bullets come packed in shells when it would be cheaper to buy the bullet and gunpowder separately, and force people to pack their own rounds? Why put bullets in clips when that clip is an added cost, and people can just manually feed rounds in? Why are all weapons (excluding certain sport rifles, shotguns and revolvers) semi-automatic, when it would be cheaper to get a gun that requires you to manually reload? As time progresses, certain things that are [i]technically[/i] optional become so much of a staple, that it's near-impossible to find the option to purchase without. No company has produced a gun barrel for a non-shotgun without rifling since the 19th century. Guns have been designed for cased rounds for about the same length of time, and only a rare amount of novelty guns since has been built for personal packing. The vast majority of weapons handle clips, while most that don't are for sport or hobbyist purposes. These elements are all optional... and yet they aren't. Sure, there are probably some guns even in 10 AF that probably don't handle nuclear batteries, but the largest majority of the market probably doesn't buy them. Why would they? You could get that same gun [i]with[/i] the ability to have a nuclear battery, and simply remove the battery for the same exact effect. The latter simply comes with the battery. Hell, the gun that [i]can't[/i] house a nuclear battery probably costs more, because it has a smaller market and has to raise the cost to accommodate. You could make that same argument with morphs, but morphs are in much higher demand with far lower supply than guns... people would be willing to buy morphs that don't even have cortical stacks at this point, and those [i]are considered standard attachments to the morphs you can buy in a store[/i]. If guns had nearly as much demand as morphs with nearly as low a supply, you would probably not only find them in versions that didn't have nuclear batteries, you'd find them in models that [i]stab you in the damn hand for funsies[/i].

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Thu, 2011-03-17 23:43

#41

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

Again, those are not appropriate comparisons. The nuke cell is a minor help in a small context; rifling and cartridges are a massive help in all contexts, and the same applies to your other examples. I'm not even sure that it *would* be cheaper to make SS instead of SA, but that doesn't matter at all in the face of the, again, massive benefit in all contexts. As your previous examples, these are apples and oranges. I have no idea if the relative demand for morphs means that the given models are shoddy and lacking the many impressive, cheap mods that are all vastly more important than nuke cells to a railgun; but I'm prepared to bet that's not the case. Instead, I'm wagering that the game designers thought player and consumer choice (no matter how trivial and lopsided) were good ideas. Unlike all of your examples (and all the morph mods I mentioned), the nuke cell isn't a complete no-brainer. It's not even a half-brainer. :) It isn't a huge benefit. It isn't cheaper. In most situations, it's worthless. Therefore—and I can't stress enough that this isn't a problem, merely odd—it's strange that they're included in everything. And *given* that they're included in everything, it's stranger still that they felt the need to talk about nuclear recharger backups in Gatecrashing. And the (potentially) nuke-powered Wireless Energy Transmitter. Many of the devices and vehicles specifically used in exploring extrasolar planets highlight their use of nuke cells… what's weird is that every last railgun and beam weapon has them as well, despite having no need. *shrug*

Fri, 2011-03-18 00:09

#42

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
Unlike all of your examples (and all the morph mods I mentioned), the nuke cell isn't a complete no-brainer. It's not even a half-brainer. :) It isn't a huge benefit. It isn't cheaper. In most situations, it's worthless. Therefore—and I can't stress enough that this isn't a problem, merely odd—it's strange that they're included in everything. And *given* that they're included in everything, it's stranger still that they felt the need to talk about nuclear recharger backups in Gatecrashing. And the (potentially) nuke-powered Wireless Energy Transmitter. Many of the devices and vehicles specifically used in exploring extrasolar planets highlight their use of nuke cells… what's weird is that every last railgun and beam weapon has them as well, despite having no need. *shrug*

Why is that weird? What are the odds of you stumbling across a spare battery in the wastes of an alien planet? What if you land on a planet that has no sun from which you can charge your appliances? What if you happen to live in the outer system where solar charging isn't an option? Why [i]wouldn't[/i] you want a nuclear battery in your equipment? It makes perfect sense that they put nuclear batteries in a book as a separate purchasable item, because you eventually have to buy a new battery. Nuclear batteries constantly decay and get weaker, so eventually they simply cannot produce enough power to sustain their devices. You will eventually have to replace those nuclear batteries... but they're still awesome to have. The ones in gatecrashing (and I presume firearms) last for 3 years before needing to be replaced. It would be interesting to calculate out the exact half-life. Firearms have "no need" for a nuclear battery just like everything else has "no need" for a nuclear battery. They form the very specific function of providing a long-lasting and reliable power source, and they are damn handy for just that function.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Fri, 2011-03-18 00:17

#43

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

That's exactly, exactly my point: it *makes sense* when you're on a sunless alien planet. And (almost) only there. :) The batteries in the book last between 3 years and like 10, with lower-output ones lasting longer. That's much longer than any campaign of EP will probably last, so I'm not too worried about replacing the batteries in my (apparently very faithful) railgun. So, we agree: the vast majority of items in the vast majority of contexts have no need for nuke cells. :) Gatecrashing, guerilla military, and other kinds of extreme isolation/exploration/etc. would want them, and they could easily just buy them for that. There's no reason to put them in every railgun and beam weapon, in the process depriving PCs from feeling clever about buying an upgrade they feel they need for a specific situation.

Fri, 2011-03-18 01:39

#44

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
So, we agree: the vast majority of items in the vast majority of contexts have no need for nuke cells. :) Gatecrashing, guerilla military, and other kinds of extreme isolation/exploration/etc. would want them, and they could easily just buy them for that. There's no reason to put them in every railgun and beam weapon, in the process depriving PCs from feeling clever about buying an upgrade they feel they need for a specific situation.

Actually, we're not in agreeance on this. Only things which have every expectation of maintaining a steady power supply have no need for nuclear batteries. Habitats with solar arrays that are close to the sun probably don't use nuclear batteries. Implants don't have nuclear batteries. Home appliances built in cities that have a power grid probably don't have nuclear batteries. Urban weaponry probably doesn't have [i]any[/i] batteries. Everything else probably does have a nuclear battery.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Fri, 2011-03-18 06:35

#45

Gee4orce

Re: Railgun Power

Another reason that nuclear batteries wont be commonplace, aside from the major factor that they are very dangerous (if broken open), is that they rely on rare earth elements. These aren't things you can make in a nano-fabricator. It's also highly possible that the solar systems' main source of radioactive isotopes are the large rocky planets - Earth and Venus*. Active geology draws up rare earth elements from the planetary interior - and Venus appears pretty dead geologically, so there's a good chance that Earth is the best source of these in the entire system. Which, in Eclipse Phase, is something of a problem… When you've got comprehensive power grids, and access to limitless free solar power and fusion, then rechargeable batteries are going to be the #1 option. Just plug them into the power grid and recharge. Now, I can imaging gatecrashers carrying a radio-isotope powered portable power station with them, but that's s special case. * I'm not sure of the science behind this, but it seems logical. Incidentally, I did hear that the Earth contains enough gold to plate the entire surface of the planet 1 ft deep ! The problem is that it's all locked up deep down near the core, and evenly mixed throughout instead of condensed into nice nuggets.

Fri, 2011-03-18 11:18

#46

thewoozle

Re: Railgun Power

Just a couple years ago, we would have to argue this stuff ad naseum because it was all science fiction. Just like the NAVY's new battlefield laser prototype that can drill a hole through 20 feet of steel in one second. Here's the Railgun wilipedia page :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
Granted, this is TODAY technology and EP would have technology a few years advanced. AND, yes, this is not a man-portable weapon. Neither was the first gunpowder cannon.

In January 31, 2008 the US Navy tested a railgun that fired a shell at 10.64 MJ with a
muzzle velocity of 2,520 m/s.[16] Its expected performance is a muzzle velocity over
5,800 m/s, accurate enough to hit a 5 meter target over 200 nautical miles (370.4 km)
away while firing at 10 shots per minute. The power was provided by a new 9-megajoule
(MJ) prototype capacitor bank

Also, here's an interesting page on making a homemade railgun, with 9-volt batteries.
http://scitoys.com/scitoys/scitoys/electro/railgun/railgun.html

—

-- Interdum in mane est onus nimis mordere per funis tergorum. some days it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps in the morning -Michael McGuire

Fri, 2011-03-18 12:14

#47

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Gee4orce wrote:
Another reason that nuclear batteries wont be commonplace, aside from the major factor that they are very dangerous (if broken open), is that they rely on rare earth elements. These aren't things you can make in a nano-fabricator. It's also highly possible that the solar systems' main source of radioactive isotopes are the large rocky planets - Earth and Venus*. Active geology draws up rare earth elements from the planetary interior - and Venus appears pretty dead geologically, so there's a good chance that Earth is the best source of these in the entire system. Which, in Eclipse Phase, is something of a problem…

Actually, we've observed recent volcanic activity on Venus through radar imaging via the Magellan probe. Maat Mons, the largest volcano on the planet, appears to still be alive. Also, the planet's surface is observed to be mostly basalt, which largely requires volcanic activity. Besides that, Mars is expected to have a little volcanic activity, and Io is more geologically active than Earth. However, the asteroid belt is likely to be the most popular source for radioactive and rare earth materials. What can't be mined directly can most likely be produced by various fission or fusion techniques used on mined materials.

Gee4orce wrote:
When you've got comprehensive power grids, and access to limitless free solar power and fusion, then rechargeable batteries are going to be the #1 option. Just plug them into the power grid and recharge. Now, I can imaging gatecrashers carrying a radio-isotope powered portable power station with them, but that's s special case.

Batteries are not likely to be common at all due to the prominence of wireless energy transfer. Most of those portable devices that you carry with you on your hab are likely connected straight into the local grid at all times, rendering batteries moot. You'll never have an issue for recharging. Internal devices like mesh inserts probably sustain themselves on your metabolism. The only devices like likely tend to have batteries of any sort will likely be used in areas without a grid... and they'll probably couple normal with atomic batteries.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]

Fri, 2011-03-18 14:33

#48

Yerameyahu Yerameyahu's picture

Re: Railgun Power

No, wireless energy transfer causes slow, low-grade muscular dystrophy! You fools! Seriously though, between the no-batteries of radiant energy and the nuke cells, I feel like high-cap, fast-charge standard cells are the sweet spot. Anyone who's going gatecrashing or behind enemy lines would *opt* for a nuke cell recharger (external or integrated).

Fri, 2011-03-18 23:36

#49

Decivre

Re: Railgun Power

Yerameyahu wrote:
No, wireless energy transfer causes slow, low-grade muscular dystrophy! You fools! Seriously though, between the no-batteries of radiant energy and the nuke cells, I feel like high-cap, fast-charge standard cells are the sweet spot. Anyone who's going gatecrashing or behind enemy lines would *opt* for a nuke cell recharger (external or integrated).

To be fair, high-cap fast-charge cells would be the optimal choice in our society today... most of us already live and die by our mobile devices, and their effectiveness is largely defined by how quickly we can charge them and how long they can last. Technological shifts will likely change this mindset. Urban lifestyles will adjust to the precept of a constant flow of power when wireless energy transfer technology takes off. In 10 AF, having battery storage in your mobile devices would be as logical as having battery storage in your home TV today. It's a ludicrous notion because most people just see that device as being plugged in all the time. As for batteries, it might seem logical that people will buy large quantities of them and simply swap them out, but this is a trend that's already dying today. The largest number of battery-powered devices already have non-removable rechargeable batteries. I don't expect this pattern to change, especially as rechargeable batteries become more reliable, hold a larger charge, and charge faster. However, the needs for batteries will shift as, once again, wireless energy transmission pushes battery needs out of cities and high-quality habitats. The primary function of a battery will largely be energy storage in places that energy production is spotty, or power grids are non-existent. That's where power generation comes into play. One of the primary advantages of a nuclear battery over other sources is reliability. Solar chargers require sun exposure, and only work effectively at a specific distance from the sun. Antimatter is too risky. Fusion and fission reactors take up too much mass (although they may be the preferred choice on ships and vehicles). That largely leaves nuclear batteries for all outer system and exoplanet power needs. That's not to say that everything will always have nuclear batteries. Synthmorphs built in the inner system, with every expectation of grid access or a solar-paneled exterior (one thing I think should have been an enhancement in the core books, or a purchasable trait) might have no batteries at all or solar panel chargers as an alternative. But they will be in the minority, and the largest portion of synthmorphs will have nuclear batteries to suit those where such options aren't a possibility. The same will be true of weapons; while some might have solar chargers, or the ability to tap into the local grid (another thing that maybe should have been an optional alteration), the largest majority will have nuclear batteries, and neither option. Lastly, we should remember that the info released so far is but a small portion of the setting of Eclipse Phase. We had to wait for the third sourcebook to get rules on how to buy a basilisk hack resistance suit! If there are guns that don't have nuclear batteries, I'm sure we'll get access to them down the line.

—

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age. [url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]