Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.

About big arms and Eclipse Phase. (My Players: Perfectly free to read!)

44 posts / 0 new
Last post
ShadowDragon8685 ShadowDragon8685's picture
About big arms and Eclipse Phase. (My Players: Perfectly free to read!)
So, there's a long and involved small arms debate in another thread. This is not about that: this is about the big stuff. This is about the kind of things you'd arm vehicles or fire teams with - the smallest of these are weapons that could convert to crew-served weapons (IE, a Fury might be able to fire them like a rifle... If she were wearing a full battlesuit.) The biggest are not remotely personnel weapons. My players may be seeing some of these in the near future. :) For reference, these are intended to be heavy weapons: think "mount it on a truck or a Diatya" for scale. Absolutely no thought whatsoever has been given to making these "game balanced." These are ruinous heavy weapons in the scale between "you can use these like a gun" and "You mount this on the hull of a spaceship." Some of them [i]could[/i] be mounted to the hull of a spaceship... But I digress. Please, no arguing about the usefulness of these in the RPG. If you don't want mil-spec weapons in your game, well... Good luck keeping them out of the hands of players armed with open-sourced Fall-era military fabrication blueprints and nanofabbers! (Or just have the Eye tell them that if they deploy these weapons without authorization or an exsurgent outbreak they will face Consequences.) And yes, I [i]do[/i] tend to be verbose when I write things for games. Unlike the people who are making books to print, I don't have to manage wordcount. If you can and feel like coming up with TL;DR version which loses none of the important bits of what I've written or the vital flavor, be my guest. [h1]Heavy Machine (Rail)gun[/h1] Humanity have been using HMGs since the dawn of automatic weapons. Essentially burst-fire and fully-automatic capable sniper rifles in terms of the weapon's size and the caliber of round it fires, these historically have been, and remain, weapons which are best fired from the prone position with the bipod/tripod gecko pad-gripped to the ground, or from a vehicular mount. These weapons, even in railgun format, very frequently fire rounds whose dimensions are precisely 12.7x99mm, for reasons which only very old soldiers and military historians can adequately explain. [SolArchive link: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Browning]John Moses Browning[/url]]. An HMG cannot be adequately wielded as a rifle by any biomorph which is of human size and scale. Even though modern rheological systems prevent muzzle climb recoil from being a factor, they do not magically negate recoil; even the biggest, toughest Fury will fall flat on her ass if she tries to fire something like this from even a kneeling position! Multi-limbed, rigid morphs of size comparable to a humanoid morph, such as the Arachnoid (or some of the more inventive Novacrab body-modders) can fire one adequately if it is mounted into their chassis, and biomorphs who are wearing power armor can pull this off, however. Being in low gravity does not help this situation, it exacerbates it by reducing the forces which serve to help you resist the recoil of this massive weapon. [i]Anyone who attempts to fire an HMG without adequate measures (firing from the prone position, firing a pintle-mounted weapon attached to a vehicle or a prepared firing position, being sleeved in an arachnoid which has the weapon mounted to their chassis, wearing power armor, etc.) suffers a -50 penalty to their attacks and is incapable of achieving any measure of success greater than simply having succeeded or failed. When they fire, after resolving their attack they have to pass a DUR ÷ 2 test, or be knocked prone![/i] If mounted on a Large morph or vehicle, the weapon can feed from an internal ammunition hopper, which can be as small as 100 rounds or as many as 1,000 (if mounted on something which is truly large, such as a truck or a militarized Diatya, on which it is a primary weapon,) but it tends to be around 300 rounds. If used as a crew-served weapon, most of them come in the form of ammo belts arranged inside ammunition boxes, which tends to be 100 rounds. If for some reason you absolutely have to have magazines for them, you can get a box mag of 20 rounds (or the enlarged version of 30 rounds.) [h2]Firearm Version[/h2] [i]Armor Penetration:[/i] -12 [i]Damage Value[/i]: 2d10 + 10 (Average DV: 21) [i]Firing Modes: BF, FA[/i] [i]Short Range:[/i] 0-100m; [i]Medium Range (-10):[/i] 101-400m; [i]Long Range (-20):[/i] 401-1,000m; [i]Extreme Range (-30):[/i]1,001-2,000m. [h2]Railgun Version[/h2] [i]Armor Penetration:[/i] -15 [i]Damage Value[/i]: 2d10 + 12 (Average DV: 23) [i]Firing Modes: BF, FA[/i] [i]Short Range:[/i] 0-150m; [i]Medium Range (-10):[/i] 151-600m; [i]Long Range (-20):[/i] 601-1,500m; [i]Extreme Range (-30):[/i]1,501-3,000m. [h1]Plasma Cannon[/h1] Just like the plasma rifle used by irresponsible Furies everywhere, but in a heavy weapon configuration, this weapon draws from massive supercapacitors and/or vehicular generators, and dumps waste heat to massive heat sinks with powerful liquid cooling systems. Occasionally found pintle-mounted in prepared fighting positions, this is not a weapon system which any reasonable squad of soldiers can haul to a battle on foot, more for reasons of set-up time than mass and size. You're perfectly capable of mounting it on a vehicle or large synthmorph, though. In terms of game stats, this is exactly the same as a Plasma Rifle, except that it can fire in Burst and FA modes, which are less repeating blasts and more extended, cooking shots of plasma. If attached to a generator, it has effectively limitless ammunition capacity. More than perhaps anything but a nuke or a cruise missile, this weapon could be described as the patron saint of collateral damage. Deploying a plasma cannon is likely to engender a [i]massive[/i] armed response, and if you happen to belong to a covert operations group like Firewall or Project Ozma, they will take a very dim view of deploying these weapons for anything less than an overt Exsurgent outbreak. Gamemasters are encouraged to play up the "bonus damage" aspects of firing off these weapons anywhere which is populated. [h1]Gatling Weapon[/h1] Known to those who lack a sense of historical majesty as Rotary Cannons, Gatling-style weapons are machine guns used when single-barreled weapons just don't give you a high enough rate of fire. First invented almost three centuries ago, the purpose of a rotary barrel was and is simple: enable a higher rate of fire than any one barrel can tolerate individually by using three, four, or more barrels. Gatling weapons can be machine guns or heavy machine guns, or even larger weapons. They can be propellant or mass driver weapons, but not even the generators and supercapacitors you can cram into a Large morph or a vehicle can cope with the voracious demand for power that a Gatling machine railgun demands... But Large vehicles/morphs can handle a propellant Gatling Gun just fine. (Theoretically you could make a rotary cannon firing a pistol-sized round... Why would you?) Gatling weapons require one action phase of non-firing to spin up before firing. All modern designs, of course, use electric motors and tend to have counterbalancing gyros to prevent unwanted torque from rotating you if you're in microgravity, which means you're perfectly free to keep the barrel spinning continuously. There is no way to make this stealthy in any kind of an atmosphere, but one could argue that the time for stealth is past when you're breaking out these cannons anyway. Rotary Cannons fire in fully-automatic mode [i]only[/i], and consume a voracious 25 or 50 rounds per shot. Like semiautomatic weapons, they may be fired twice with the same complex action (using the same rules.) A normal shot (directed at one person and everybody unfortunate enough to be in his general vicinity) consumes 25 rounds and may be focused on the one target, using normal rules for either focusing your fire for increased damage, or spreading the shots out for increased chance to hit. Anyone unfortunate enough to be within three meters on either side of your target is affected as if you'd used a normal machine gun's full auto to hose down the area. An expanded shot, using the higher rate of fire, hoses down an entire [i]area[/i] with fire. Pick a dramatic direction (such as "everybody on the left side of the street," or "anyone on that rooftop" and hose 'em down.) Notably, Particle Beam Bolters can be manufactured as miniguns whose power requirements meet the power budget of a small vehicle or synth, which provides a significant amount of relief to those on a budget who need the firepower of a minigun - or those who need to engage vast numbers of extremely weakly-armored and soft but determined targets, like swarming people whose brains have been hijacked by hostile nanotech. [h1]Laser Cannon[/h1] Every ‘mesh nerd who gushes about the obvious superiority of kinetic weapons to lasers knows that handheld laser pulsers are hilariously weak compared to even a primitive projectile rifle. This is not a laser pulser, this is a laser [b]cannon[/b]. This is a heavy antivehicular weapon which delivers enormous amounts of energy directly to the target in one short pulse, though you can use it against personnel targets if you really want to. It fires in SS mode, with an armor penetration of -20, dealing 3d10+20 damage to a single target. So much energy is absorbed at the moment of impact that each trigger-pull on this weapon is (exactly) like centering a high-explosive grenade blast at the point of impact, with a blast which deals 3d10+10 damage (falling off at -2 DV per meter.) This damage is dealt again to the primary target if the shot hit, and the attack scatters if it misses. If the target’s armor was completely overcome by the initial attack and it also dealt a wound, the secondary blast damage bypasses the target's armor entirely, and (if the target was a vehicle,) any passengers or crew in the hit compartment suffer full blast damage to boot. This weapon is called a cannon for a good reason, and organizations like Firewall would very much not approve of its indiscriminate use without a very good reason. [h1]Microwave Cannon[/h1] Despite its intimidating name, this is actually a crowd-control weapon, intended to be nonlethal if used as intended. It is basically a Microwave Agonizer writ large, capable of making continuous, fully-automatic emissions of microwaves along a wide area; just like the minigun, you may fire two “Fully Automatic” shots per round, and actively deny a broad swathe of area. Being affected twice by the agony setting does nothing, nor does focusing in, so a user going for area-denial is well-advised to choose two broad swathes of terrain, and to choose the +30 to-hit option. The Roast mode is another matter. Like the standard Microwave Agonizer, it has an Armor Penetration of -5 and deals 2d10 damage. The user may choose to use it to cook an entire area, dealing 2d10 damage to everyone with a +30 benefit, or the user may roast a single target and anyone around him to the tune of 5d10 damage. [h1]Seeker Rifle[/h1] For when you absolutely, positively have to blow up every motherfucker in in an entire public plaza, the vehicular Seeker Rifle is your weapon of choice. It functions just as a Seeker Rifle which your friendly local Fury would carry, firing minimissiles, but its internal ammunition magazines can carry 20 rounds each, and it has five magazines, with the ability to switch between them at-will. It fires in SA, BF, and FA modes, with the usual benefits/drawbacks thereof. [h1]Seeker Pod[/h1] Fighters on foot who need a lot of boom are offered a devil's choice: carry one full-sized Seeker in a disposable launcher, capable of eradicating one target altogether and then useless as anything but a cudgel, or carry a minimissile/micromissile seeker rifle, which is effective as a grenade launcher but not very useful if you need to kill tanks. Fortunately, if you're driving a tank, or sleeved into a heavy synth, you don't need to choose! Just mount a Seeker Pod, and strap several missiles into an armored case mounted on the top. Small but heavy synths like the Arachnoid might be able to mount two seekers in a pod, while really big ones like a Diatya or an armored fighting vehicle could mount four, six, eight, or more. Anything larger than this is the domain of rocket artillery and cruise missiles. [h1]Laser Anti-Missile System[/h1] Not intended for direct use as a weapon system, the Laser AMS is basically a laser with sufficient cooling and generator/supercapacitor capacity to fire continuously - that is, at full-auto rates of fire. It functions just like a laser pulser with an FA rate of fire if used offensively, but that’s an off-label use. The intended use of the Laser AMS is to shoot down incoming missiles aimed at vehicles and large combat synths. Each action phase, the onboard AI shoots at seekers launched into the general vicinity of the vehicle which possesses it (or its tacnetted allies, if they’re in range and so is their attacker.) It shoots at the standard AI skill of 40, with a +10 modifier for the smartgun system included. Every additional time it attempts to shoot down a missile, it incurs a -20 penalty; so in any given action phase, it fires at an effective skill of 50, 30, and 10, before it can’t fire again. If the LAMS’s shot succeeds, the incoming missile is destroyed immediately, detonating 1d10x6 meters away from the victim, to a minimum of 10 meters away from the shooter. If the shooter is firing at under ten meters, LAMS cannot intercept the seeker. [h1]Chemthrower (Torch/Sprayer/Freezer)[/h1] This modern-day chemical thrower is a vehicular heavy weapon with which to project a liquid up to 80 meters. Owing to its liquid dispensing method, it has a short range of 50 meters, a medium range of 80 meters, and no further weapon ranges. Each shot covers an area roughly three meters in radius, though if you’re firing flamethrower fuel, you’ll also hit anything along the line to that target. Missed shots scatter as per normal rules, which can easily result in a “miss” still being a hit. These weapon, in most vehicular mountings, have two tanks, each containing twenty shots worth of chemical, which you may load and discharge as you see fit per complex action; each type of shot may fire in semiautomatic mode, with the expected results. Between shots, a blast of high-pressure gas cleans the system, just in case you loaded materials which might unfortunately interact with one another, or the barrel. (You can get these high-pressure liquid dispensing sprayers made as backpack-mounted weapons, in which case they have only one tank of ten shots.) A Freezer tank fires Freeze foam, as normal, and a variety of drugs are available with which to spike it as you see fit. Out of this massive tank, it can be used to very rapidly construct huge barricades! A Chemical tank fires any chemical/drug you see fit, as per usual. Slip is a popular choice, as you can cover a much larger area with Slip than with other substances, thanks to the way it splashes and so little goes so far, covering an entire 45-degree cone 80m long if you wish to discharge ten shots in one go. A Torch tank seems like a step back from the standard Torch flamethrower’s ammunition capsules, which are much more portable and wieldly. It in fact is not, however, as this vehicular weapon launches either a 1:1 mixture of monomethylhydrazine and unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine, a hypergolic admixture that very vigorously catches fire and burns even in the absence of oxygen or external ignition source, or the even simpler and more terrible singular compound chlorine triflouride, which is hypergolic with practically every substance known to transhumanity, including sand and water (with which it reacts explosively,) as well as almost all modern smart materials - and of course, with oxygen. (Luckily it tends not to react with basic structural metals like steel, for the same reason oxygen declines to explosively react with aluminum.) A Torch tank firing a hypergolic hydrazine mixture has an armor penetration value of -4, deals 3d10 damage, and any target which is directly splashed continues to take 2d10 damage every round thereafter until they can clean themselves off or the fuel burns out (which takes place in 5 action rounds.). A successful Fray check (which is not halved against the slower-moving liquid splash,) allows the target to get out of the way of the direct splash, but if they were in range, they will still take 1d10 damage from the intense heat alone. Chlorine Triflouride does the same, but once it's on someone (a direct hit with the liquid,) it's absolutely impossible to extinguish the fire until it goes out; and as a bonus, it releases some very effective chemical warfare agents, which though not immediately lethal or deadly unless the victim is breathing them into their lungs, are still quite ruinous to biomorphs. Although not typically a habitat-wrecking weapon, using flamethrowers (not to mention chemical warfare,) on ordinary transhuman targets has long been considered a barbaric act and a war-crime in most circles. (The rumors that Direct Action mercenaries were very fond of using chlorine triflouride on evacuees who may have been from "compromised" (read: poor) populations during the Fall are, of course, completely unfounded, just ask Direct Action's PR division.) Flamethrowers of this size are ruinously effective against nanoswarms, of any origin, TITAN (including their sub-nanoscale picoswarms) or otherwise, cooking entire swarms with one shot which only needs to be a Simple Success. This is a simple fact of thermodynamics and cannot be avoided, no matter the level or origin of the technology, so if you have reason to fear nanoswarms, a vehicular flamethrower loaded with hydrazine is by far and away your best bet. It also works well against the reanimated dead, according to most videogames to feature zombies and other reanimated corpses for the last hundred and fifty years, though as-yet no field results on the subject have come back conclusively one way or another.
Skype and AIM names: Exactly the same as my forum name. [url=http://tinyurl.com/mfcapss]My EP Character Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/lbpsb93]Thread for my Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/obu5adp]The Five Orange Pips[/url]
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
Me like.
Me like. Nice catch on the counterotating weights on the rotary cannon. I do think they could run on small EP batteries though, given the sort of power they can deliver for morph lifting, railgun fire, lasers and such. If you want to have big guns on small frames, in the Rifts RPG, they had Glitter Boy power armor which had a massive rail cannon on its shoulder. To handle recoil, it shot long steel spikes into the ground and dug in with claws, and it had a retro-thruster rockets nozzles on its back to keep it from toppling over (also nice for micro-gee shooting, which will make handling recoil a lot harder in general).
LatwPIAT LatwPIAT's picture
Two questions and one
Two questions and one complaint: a) "Seeker Rifle" is already the name of an EP weapon. b) How do you propose automatic rifle is handled with your Seeker Rifle? Do you, as per the rules, add +1d10/+3d10 DV to the explosion? c) Is it intentional that the Laser AMS doesn't seem to take the missiles' target size modifiers into account?
@-rep +2 C-rep +1
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
A few things:
A few things: 1. The HMG railgun should probably be more powerful compared to the standard HMG. Railguns are going to scale better with larger weapons because the longer barrel gives more time to accelerate the projectiles. 2. There was no mention of recoil for the laser cannon, and you should probably put one in so that people do not assume that just because it's a laser it has none. (Photons carry momentum so a laser *does* have recoil--it's just very small relative to energy output compared to projectile weapons) 3. Can the HMG or rotary cannon fire smart ammo?
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
ShadowDragon8685 ShadowDragon8685's picture
Smokeskin wrote:Me like.
Smokeskin wrote:
Me like. Nice catch on the counterotating weights on the rotary cannon. I do think they could run on small EP batteries though, given the sort of power they can deliver for morph lifting, railgun fire, lasers and such.
You can totally spin up a rotary cannon with an EP electric motor that can fit anywhere. I would expect that virtually all of them use electric motors to spin up the barrels. The problem is the demands for railgun fire at minigun rates. A minigun firing at maximum rate of fire can put out [i][b]one hundred[/b][/i] rounds in the same span of time (one Complex Action) that a regular machine gun or an assault rifle puts out [i]ten[/i]. It's literally an order of magnitude more ammo. You just can't fit the kind of supercapacitors and generators you need to sustain that kind of a rate of fire on something the size of a truck or a diatya.
Quote:
If you want to have big guns on small frames, in the Rifts RPG, they had Glitter Boy power armor which had a massive rail cannon on its shoulder. To handle recoil, it shot long steel spikes into the ground and dug in with claws, and it had a retro-thruster rockets nozzles on its back to keep it from toppling over (also nice for micro-gee shooting, which will make handling recoil a lot harder in general).
That would be awfully unwieldly... But I could see it working with, say, something that fires a light cannon shell.
LatwPIAT wrote:
Two questions and one complaint: a) "Seeker Rifle" is already the name of an EP weapon. b) How do you propose automatic rifle is handled with your Seeker Rifle? Do you, as per the rules, add +1d10/+3d10 DV to the explosion? c) Is it intentional that the Laser AMS doesn't seem to take the missiles' target size modifiers into account?
A: Yes, it is. There's a reason the Seeker Rifle, Vehicular, shares its name with the standard Seeker Rifle: it's [i]literally the same weapon system[/i], just in a different mounting with a different ammunition feed. B: Yep. C: Yep.
Erulastant wrote:
A few things: 1. The HMG railgun should probably be more powerful compared to the standard HMG. Railguns are going to scale better with larger weapons because the longer barrel gives more time to accelerate the projectiles.
It's literally the same round and barrel length as a rail sniper-rifle, just in a full-auto mounting, just like the propellant HMG is literally the same weapon as the sniper rifle, just with a BF/FA and larger ammo pool. I mean, I guess I [i]could[/i] assume that the sniper rifle and the rail-sniper rifle are equavilent to, say, a spacefuture .338 Lapua Magnum round, instead of the .50 BMG round, and then I'd have to make stats for the larger anti-materiel rifle rounds, which would then go into the HMG stats, and I'd have to adjust the current HMG stats into an MMG. That's perfectly plausible and sounds reasonable to me. A bit more extra work, though, but it's perfectly reasonable.
Quote:
2. There was no mention of recoil for the laser cannon, and you should probably put one in so that people do not assume that just because it's a laser it has none. (Photons carry momentum so a laser *does* have recoil--it's just very small relative to energy output compared to projectile weapons)
The recoil of the laser cannon is going to be absolutely negligible, especially considering that it's a single-shot weapon. Technically it would have some, you're right, but equally technically if you're out in space and you spread your arms and your legs, you're catching more solar radiation pressure and accelerating.
Quote:
3. Can the HMG or rotary cannon fire smart ammo?
Absolutely they can. And if you're firing specialized smart ammo out of a gatling gun, you're going to be chewing through your operational budget at a rate of fire that would loosen the bowels of any quartermaster.
Skype and AIM names: Exactly the same as my forum name. [url=http://tinyurl.com/mfcapss]My EP Character Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/lbpsb93]Thread for my Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/obu5adp]The Five Orange Pips[/url]
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
ShadowDragon8685 wrote
ShadowDragon8685 wrote:
Smokeskin wrote:
Me like. Nice catch on the counterotating weights on the rotary cannon. I do think they could run on small EP batteries though, given the sort of power they can deliver for morph lifting, railgun fire, lasers and such.
You can totally spin up a rotary cannon with an EP electric motor that can fit anywhere. I would expect that virtually all of them use electric motors to spin up the barrels. The problem is the demands for railgun fire at minigun rates. A minigun firing at maximum rate of fire can put out [i][b]one hundred[/b][/i] rounds in the same span of time (one Complex Action) that a regular machine gun or an assault rifle puts out [i]ten[/i]. It's literally an order of magnitude more ammo. You just can't fit the kind of supercapacitors and generators you need to sustain that kind of a rate of fire on something the size of a truck or a diatya.
You're right, you'd need 10 times the size for that. It doesn't seem to require a truck though. I've been thinking about the rotary railgun. Couldn't you just use one barrel? Keep the charge on the rail and shove slugs in there, it'll propel them all even if there's multiple slugs in there at the same time. Beefing up the loading mechanism is all you need.
Armoured Armoured's picture
Erulastant wrote:2. There
Erulastant wrote:
2. There was no mention of recoil for the laser cannon, and you should probably put one in so that people do not assume that just because it's a laser it has none. (Photons carry momentum so a laser *does* have recoil--it's just very small relative to energy output compared to projectile weapons)
I know ShadowDragon already replied, but I'd add that a laser cannon would only really have recoil in an atmosphere, and it isn't really recoil, just pushback by superheated air shock-expanding from the laser's path. The forces involved would probably be negligible due to the cannon assembly outmassing any atmospheric gases sufficiently to be unmoved.
Smokeskin wrote:
I've been thinking about the rotary railgun. Couldn't you just use one barrel? Keep the charge on the rail and shove slugs in there, it'll propel them all even if there's multiple slugs in there at the same time. Beefing up the loading mechanism is all you need.
In a perfect world, this would be true. However, railguns suffer the same issues as all electronic systems- heat buildup. Even with superconductors, some energy will be lost due to magnetic flux on components and the projectile, and all of that builds up. For man-portable weapons, you won't fire off more than 100 rounds at once, so it won't be too much of an issue, but when your objective is to keep shooting longer than that, you need some way to get around it. Railguns especially would degrade performance with heat buildup, as when you heat superconductors they very quickly don't conduct so well at all, snowballing the heating. At this point its probably worth pointing out that rotary weapons will probably run into problems in vacuum- one of the reasons they rotate is to allow non-firing barrels to air-cool while spinning. You could build liquid cooling systems complex enough to keep the gun running, but that would be more expensive than solving the engineering problem of spinning barrels.
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
Armoured wrote:Smokeskin
Armoured wrote:
Smokeskin wrote:
I've been thinking about the rotary railgun. Couldn't you just use one barrel? Keep the charge on the rail and shove slugs in there, it'll propel them all even if there's multiple slugs in there at the same time. Beefing up the loading mechanism is all you need.
In a perfect world, this would be true. However, railguns suffer the same issues as all electronic systems- heat buildup. Even with superconductors, some energy will be lost due to magnetic flux on components and the projectile, and all of that builds up. For man-portable weapons, you won't fire off more than 100 rounds at once, so it won't be too much of an issue, but when your objective is to keep shooting longer than that, you need some way to get around it. Railguns especially would degrade performance with heat buildup, as when you heat superconductors they very quickly don't conduct so well at all, snowballing the heating. At this point its probably worth pointing out that rotary weapons will probably run into problems in vacuum- one of the reasons they rotate is to allow non-firing barrels to air-cool while spinning. You could build liquid cooling systems complex enough to keep the gun running, but that would be more expensive than solving the engineering problem of spinning barrels.
The increased air convection cooling from spinning barrels is neglible, and it could be done MUCH simpler with fans instead. The cooling benefit comes from only 1/barrelcount of the bullets being fired through it. Also, a non-rotating system couldn't achieve such high rates of fire because you can't load a single barrel fast enough, while in rotary cannons the brass is ejected and another round instead on the barrels' way round. If it was just a cooling issue, I think you'd prefer a single, heavier barrel instead. Superconductors won't heat up, and I doubt there are many other magnetic components on a railgun, and even then the magnetix fluc heating would be no where near the heat from repeatedly exploding gunpowder inside your gun. If heat is a problem in an EP railgun firing a 6,000 rpm, then a conventional LMG at 900 rpm wouldn't work at all. Isn't diamond common in EP? Diamond is a perfect heat conductor, so you don't need a complex cooling system, just encase the hot compents in diamond and have the other end of the diamond in a heat sink, and you're golden. That setup would be less efficient with rotating barrels.
LatwPIAT LatwPIAT's picture
ShadowDragon8685 wrote:A: Yes
ShadowDragon8685 wrote:
A: Yes, it is. There's a reason the Seeker Rifle, Vehicular, shares its name with the standard Seeker Rifle: it's [i]literally the same weapon system[/i], just in a different mounting with a different ammunition feed.
It seems confusing to use the same name for the Seeker Rifle[6 minimissiles, SA fire only, personal weapon] and Seeker Rifle[100 minimissiles, SA+BF+FA capable, not a personal weapon].
ShadowDragon8685 wrote:
Quote:
3. Can the HMG or rotary cannon fire smart ammo?
Absolutely they can. And if you're firing specialized smart ammo out of a gatling gun, you're going to be chewing through your operational budget at a rate of fire that would loosen the bowels of any quartermaster.
My operational budget is "an ammo-Fabber". :P
@-rep +2 C-rep +1
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
Do Seeker Rifles have rifled
Do Seeker Rifles have rifled barrels? We had a recoilless rifles in the army, and they were obviously rifled. Some of the rounds for it had fins, and that didn't work if it was spun, so it came in an sort of rubber sleeve that formed a seal and connected with the rifle, but the rocket could rotate freely within the sleeve so it wouldn't be spun. Smart ammo wouldn't work if spun, so "seeker rifle" seems like an oxymoron, doesn't it?
ORCACommander ORCACommander's picture
that sealing rubber thing you
that sealing rubber thing you are referring to is called a Sabot
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
I'm pretty sure the recoil
I'm pretty sure the recoil should actually be significant enough to be worth noting, especially in zero-g. But I don't want to argue guesses, let's run some numbers. (Anything to get away from practicing for the GRE!) E=pv, so for a photon E=pc->p=E/c. Photon number will cancel out here, so we can just take the total energy delivered by a shot and divide by c to find the total impulse for such a shot. There are a couple ways we can get this energy--Either by trying to derive it from the DV of the weapon compared to the DV of other things which it may be easier to calculate energy for, or we can look at batteries. I'm going to go with the latter.
Core p299-300 wrote:
All of the powered devices in Eclipse Phaserequire electricity to function. With rare exceptions, most of them rely on solar cells, wireless energy transfers, or powerful batteries. Standard batteries are high-density, room-temperature superconductors with 25 times the capacity of the best batteries in common use in the early 21st century.
Wikipedia lists the best specific energy of a battery to be 1.59 kJ/g for a zinc-air battery. If we assume that the small, portable energy cells commonly in use in EP are the size of a 21st century D battery (Could be smaller, could be bigger), which has a mass of approximately 150g. So the total energy in an EP energy cell is about 6 MJ. The laser pulser fires 100 shots on this battery, which gives us an energy per shot of ~45 kJ assuming 75% efficiency. Now we have to scale this up for the cannon. Warning! Pointless Math Ahead!
Spoiler: Highlight to view
Energy in an explosion dissipates with 1/r^3. Damage in EP explosion dissipates linearly. This is absolutely bullshit and makes converting between the two nonsensical, but we have two equations (E=E_0/r^3, D=D_0-2r) so I'm going to solve them anyways. Solving for r in terms of D and substituting we find E=8E_0/(D_0-D)^3 or E/E_0=8/(D_0-D)^3 OK this means that if we increase our DV, a) We get a negative ratio of energies and b) We get a ratio proportional to the inverse of the difference, so very small differences will yield very high ratios and vice versa. This makes no sense so...
I'm just going to treat damage as scaling with the root of energy, because that seems as good a guess as any. This gets us around three orders of magnitude difference between the cannon and the pulser. This comes out to an impulse of 0.15 Ns. This is pretty small but not completely negligible (Wolfram Alpha tells me that it's about 0.1%-4% of the impulse from firing a bullet from a gun). Unless the cannon is mounted along a principle axis of the vehicle/morph, this could be a problem in zero-g because it causes a torque. In a gravitational field it's negligible. (But then you'll probably have atmosphere, which makes any laser weapon not ideal).
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
ORCACommander wrote:that
ORCACommander wrote:
that sealing rubber thing you are referring to is called a Sabot
It's not a sabot. It fires a fullsize 84mm rocket, not a smaller-diameter projectile. I found a manual for the weapon http://www.scribd.com/doc/28709863/79/Figure-4-4-Projectile-HEAT-RAP-FFV... and on page 150 they call it a slipping ring. It also says that rotation would degrade the performance of the hollow charge that penetrates the armor, so there's more reasons to keep things from spinning than the control surfaces of smart ammo.
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
Erulastant wrote:I'm pretty
Erulastant wrote:
I'm pretty sure the recoil should actually be significant enough to be worth noting, especially in zero-g. But I don't want to argue guesses, let's run some numbers. (Anything to get away from practicing for the GRE!) E=pv, so for a photon E=pc->p=E/c. Photon number will cancel out here, so we can just take the total energy delivered by a shot and divide by c to find the total impulse for such a shot.
Energy is not impulse. Energy is a scalar, not a vector, and there is conservation of energy, not conservation of kinetic energy. You can't assume that kinetic energy goes in one direction, then the same amount of kinetic energy goes in the opposite direction, that's wrong on both accouns. In elastic collisions (ie. all energy remains kinetic) two bodies will share the kinetic energy in inverse proportion to their masses. Since the laser cannon mases a gazillion times larger than the photons, the cannon only gets 1/gazillionth of the kinetic energy. The energy budget balances because of the electrical or chemical energy expended.
ORCACommander ORCACommander's picture
My mistake.
My mistake.
ShadowDragon8685 ShadowDragon8685's picture
LatwPIAT wrote
LatwPIAT wrote:
ShadowDragon8685 wrote:
A: Yes, it is. There's a reason the Seeker Rifle, Vehicular, shares its name with the standard Seeker Rifle: it's [i]literally the same weapon system[/i], just in a different mounting with a different ammunition feed.
It seems confusing to use the same name for the Seeker Rifle[6 minimissiles, SA fire only, personal weapon] and Seeker Rifle[100 minimissiles, SA+BF+FA capable, not a personal weapon].
A machine gun is a machine gun, whether it's being toted by a soldier and fed from a large box magazine, or mounted coaxially in a tank turret and feeding from a 1,000-round mega-belt.
Quote:
ShadowDragon8685 wrote:
Quote:
3. Can the HMG or rotary cannon fire smart ammo?
Absolutely they can. And if you're firing specialized smart ammo out of a gatling gun, you're going to be chewing through your operational budget at a rate of fire that would loosen the bowels of any quartermaster.
My operational budget is "an ammo-Fabber". :P
[/quote] I hope you've got heavy earthmoving machinery, a mine, and a lot of time to fab massive ammo supplies, then. :)
Skype and AIM names: Exactly the same as my forum name. [url=http://tinyurl.com/mfcapss]My EP Character Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/lbpsb93]Thread for my Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/obu5adp]The Five Orange Pips[/url]
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
Smokeskin wrote:Erulastant
Smokeskin wrote:
Erulastant wrote:
I'm pretty sure the recoil should actually be significant enough to be worth noting, especially in zero-g. But I don't want to argue guesses, let's run some numbers. (Anything to get away from practicing for the GRE!) E=pv, so for a photon E=pc->p=E/c. Photon number will cancel out here, so we can just take the total energy delivered by a shot and divide by c to find the total impulse for such a shot.
Energy is not impulse. Energy is a scalar, not a vector, and there is conservation of energy, not conservation of kinetic energy. You can't assume that kinetic energy goes in one direction, then the same amount of kinetic energy goes in the opposite direction, that's wrong on both accouns. In elastic collisions (ie. all energy remains kinetic) two bodies will share the kinetic energy in inverse proportion to their masses. Since the laser cannon mases a gazillion times larger than the photons, the cannon only gets 1/gazillionth of the kinetic energy. The energy budget balances because of the electrical or chemical energy expended.
Photons carry momentum which is directly proportional to their energy. A laser emits photons and causes them to move in a direction. Momentum is conserved, so the laser gains opposite momentum to the emitted photons. Also, when you say a gazillion, you're understating it by quite a bit. Photons are massless, so the laser by definition has infinitely more mass.
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
Erulastant wrote:
Erulastant wrote:
Photons carry momentum which is directly proportional to their energy. A laser emits photons and causes them to move in a direction. Momentum is conserved, so the laser gains opposite momentum to the emitted photons.
That is correct. But that is not the calculations you made earlier.
Quote:
Also, when you say a gazillion, you're understating it by quite a bit. Photons are massless, so the laser by definition has infinitely more mass.
If photons didn't have mass, they wouldn't have impulse. Impulse = mass x velocity. Since there is conservation of impulse that would mean no laser cannon recoil, no solar sails. Photons don't have rest mass, but they do have mass (it's from their energy).
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
Talking about 'relativistic
Talking about 'relativistic mass' as such tends to be misleading, as it does not function precisely identically to rest mass (Examples: Photons paths are bent by passing by a gravitational field by approximately twice as much as massive particles. Also, parallel photons exert no gravitational force on each other, though I think the latter might be due to gravity propagating at c). The modern approach to discussing relativity (Or at least the one I am being taught) focuses on momentum and energy as the quantities to consider to avoid this sort of confusion. (And the calculation I did earlier was E/c=p, which is in fact how photon momentum is calculated. Go back and check if you want--I needed to find the energy because that was required to get at photon momentum. Kinetic energy never came up in my math.)
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
uwtartarus uwtartarus's picture
I need to convince my GM to
I need to convince my GM to let me use these with our earthbound Fenrir kill team (circa A.F. 15) as that would be the best.
Exhuman, and Humanitarian.
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
Erulastant wrote:Talking
Erulastant wrote:
Talking about 'relativistic mass' as such tends to be misleading, as it does not function precisely identically to rest mass (Examples: Photons paths are bent by passing by a gravitational field by approximately twice as much as massive particles. Also, parallel photons exert no gravitational force on each other, though I think the latter might be due to gravity propagating at c). The modern approach to discussing relativity (Or at least the one I am being taught) focuses on momentum and energy as the quantities to consider to avoid this sort of confusion.
You're getting a bit too advanced for me there, but on the surface it seems to be the exact same thing you're doing? p=E/c is just p = mv and E=mc^2. Isn't that using relativistic mass?
Quote:
(And the calculation I did earlier was E/c=p, which is in fact how photon momentum is calculated. Go back and check if you want--I needed to find the energy because that was required to get at photon momentum. Kinetic energy never came up in my math.)
You are right. My apologies.
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
Quote:Erulastant wrote:
Quote:
Erulastant wrote: Talking about 'relativistic mass' as such tends to be misleading, as it does not function precisely identically to rest mass (Examples: Photons paths are bent by passing by a gravitational field by approximately twice as much as massive particles. Also, parallel photons exert no gravitational force on each other, though I think the latter might be due to gravity propagating at c). The modern approach to discussing relativity (Or at least the one I am being taught) focuses on momentum and energy as the quantities to consider to avoid this sort of confusion. You're getting a bit too advanced for me there, but on the surface it seems to be the exact same thing you're doing? p=E/c is just p = mv and E=mc^2. Isn't that using relativistic mass?
Two points. First, yes and no. I think E=mc^2 does find its way into some derivations of p=E/c, but it's not so straightforward as just taking p=mv and substituting for m. (You can see above my really sort of sloppy, probably doesn't actually prove anything but explains the relationship in such a way as to have it make sense to non-physicists derivation in my original post, E=pv ->p=E/c (Taking magnitudes of the vectors involved). Holy run-on descriptors, Batman.) I can dig through books trying to find a better/more complete explanation, but I'd rather just wait until Tuesday when I can ask my GR professor. Second: On the surface they look very similar because they are very similar. Terms like "relativistic mass" are just language that we use to describe physical phenomena. We (used to) use it because it is a simple way of describing some phenomena in such a way that they will make intuitive sense to physics students. We now try to avoid using "relativistic mass" because it implies a fundamental relationship which is not exactly true which can confuse things later on. TL;DR if you prefer to use relativistic mass to describe photon momentum, you're not wrong, but you have to keep in mind that it does not behave like rest mass. (This is actually particularly important with lasers--See above how parallel photons have no gravitational pull on each other. Otherwise our laser would have a beam width that oscillates in space, and the beam would have average velocity (minutely) slower than c due to taking a curved path)
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
TheGrue TheGrue's picture
+1
Much approval. Love to have some big guns to throw at my less-subtle players. :D
Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.
Chrontius Chrontius's picture
Lasers Have (Nearly No) Recoil
The math is not simple, but it is solved. The cheat-sheet is "300 freakin' megawatts to get one lousy newton". Also, light does move ever so slightly slower than C, which is now the speed of neutrinos, since it occasionally pauses in the form of virtual particles to take a breather, losing time every time this transition takes place. For further reference, I cite Atomic Rocket Ship's page on Reactionless Drives where I quote: "(ed note: the photon drive, where one lousy Newton of thrust takes three hundred freaking megawatts!!)"
ORCACommander ORCACommander's picture
yep light has 3 different
yep light has 3 different speeds. one for vacuum one for gases and one for solids
ShadowDragon8685 ShadowDragon8685's picture
Chrontius wrote:The math is
Chrontius wrote:
The math is not simple, but it is solved. The cheat-sheet is "300 freakin' megawatts to get one lousy newton". Also, light does move ever so slightly slower than C, which is now the speed of neutrinos, since it occasionally pauses in the form of virtual particles to take a breather, losing time every time this transition takes place. For further reference, I cite Atomic Rocket Ship's page on Reactionless Drives where I quote: "(ed note: the photon drive, where one lousy Newton of thrust takes three hundred freaking megawatts!!)"
In other words, firing off a laser with a sufficient TWR for the recoil to be noticeable would require a post-miracle-tech laser weighing less than a disposable plastic spoon and powerful enough to shoot down Death Stars?
Skype and AIM names: Exactly the same as my forum name. [url=http://tinyurl.com/mfcapss]My EP Character Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/lbpsb93]Thread for my Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/obu5adp]The Five Orange Pips[/url]
Chrontius Chrontius's picture
ShadowDragon8685 wrote:In
ShadowDragon8685 wrote:
In other words, firing off a laser with a sufficient TWR for the recoil to be noticeable would require a post-miracle-tech laser weighing less than a disposable plastic spoon and powerful enough to shoot down Death Stars?
Got it in one. But if you pulled it off, you'd have a seriously nice slower-than-light space engine. Just watch out for weaponized exhaust - "retro-rockets" makes a great euphemism. :D
ORCACommander ORCACommander's picture
for point of scale the
for point of scale the honorverse energy weapons require tetrawatts per graser mount
ShadowDragon8685 ShadowDragon8685's picture
ORCACommander wrote:for point
ORCACommander wrote:
for point of scale the honorverse energy weapons require tetrawatts per graser mount
Terawatt, you mean? There's no such thing as a Tetrawatt, unless they're using made-up units of measurement, in which case there's no point in bringing it up. Anyway, a 1-tW laser would produce 3,333.33(repeating,) Newtons of force. That is a significant number, as that would be enough force to accelerate 3,333.33(repeating) Kg of mass at one meter per second^2. That said, somehow I have the feeling that the masses of the ships involved are going to be so high as for that force to be rendered insignificant again, even if they fired a full broadside and their weapons were "cook" lasers and not single-discharge lasers, especially in the face of whatever drives they use for maneuvering.
Skype and AIM names: Exactly the same as my forum name. [url=http://tinyurl.com/mfcapss]My EP Character Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/lbpsb93]Thread for my Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/obu5adp]The Five Orange Pips[/url]
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
The importance of 0-g recoil
The importance of 0-g recoil is never in the force, it's in the torque. In most 0-g combat situations (where heavy weapons would be appropriate), long distances are involved relative to target size, so a very small angular shift can cause a miss. Also, c is most certainly not the speed of neutrinos (Which are massive and therefore strictly slower than light). c is defined as the speed at which [i]any[/i] massless particle (Rest mass zero, if you're using the relativistic mass model) moves at any time when you care to observe it. This of course includes photons. Photons do not pause in the form of virtual particles--A high energy photon might create a particle-antiparticle pair, but then it hasn't really stopped [i]moving[/i], it's stopped [i]existing[/i], and talking about its speed at that point becomes meaningless. Virtual particles are, depending on the theory, a mathematical convenience which explains (real) particle interactions and pair production. They have nothing to do with photons except in the aforementioned pair production case, or the circumstance where the photon is a virtual photon. (Which, incidentally, still travels at c, as we can tell from the propagation speed of the electromagnetic forces) The "speed of light" varies in matter* not because the photons are moving slower, but because they are being absorbed and re-emitted inside the matter, so the [i]signal[/i] is moving slower than c. If you look at any photon, no matter where it is, no matter how fast you are going, it's speed relative to you will always be c. *Depending not on the state (gas/liquid/solid/plasma) of the matter, but rather its dielectric/diamagnetic constants. |v|=(εμ)^-1/2
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
TheGrue TheGrue's picture
Erulastant wrote:The
Erulastant wrote:
The importance of 0-g recoil is never in the force, it's in the torque. In most 0-g combat situations (where heavy weapons would be appropriate), long distances are involved relative to target size, so a very small angular shift can cause a miss.
...however, in the case of a laser weapon(which is what the discussion about recoil is regarding), said shift is not relevant. The beam has already left by the time the emitter lens moves the minuscule distance it is displaced by "recoil". In classic Internet Argument form, you have now progressed this discussion from being about a specific case, to being about semantics and strict definitions. Well done.
Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
TheGrue wrote:Erulastant
TheGrue wrote:
Erulastant wrote:
The importance of 0-g recoil is never in the force, it's in the torque. In most 0-g combat situations (where heavy weapons would be appropriate), long distances are involved relative to target size, so a very small angular shift can cause a miss.
...however, in the case of a laser weapon(which is what the discussion about recoil is regarding), said shift is not relevant. The beam has already left by the time the emitter lens moves the minuscule distance it is displaced by "recoil".
Which is absolutely fine if you're not planning a second shot. Here, let's have some math. Assuming one dorsally mounted laser cannon on a 2 million kilogram rod 40 meters long and 10 meters in radius (A rough approximation of a NASA space shuttle), I=ML^2/12 = 3.2*10^9 kg m^2. |ΔL|=|Δv r|=1.5 J s Δω=1.5 Js/3.2*10^9 kg m^2≈5*10^-8/s Assuming max rate fire for 10 seconds: Δφ=Δω*3/4 (seconds/shot)*Σ_1^12=3*10^-6 This is on the same order as diffraction angle, which is the limiting factor in laser range, meaning it will come into play in any sufficiently long-range engagement. (~.01 ls) Of course this can be reduced by keeping the weapon in line with your center of mass, or just having a higher moment of inertia. But it is something that needs to be actively accounted for.
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
TheGrue TheGrue's picture
If only laser weapons in
If only laser weapons in Eclipse Phase could have some kind of built-in computer system - oh wait, they do!
Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
I never said it wasn't an
I never said it wasn't an easily-compensated-for effect. I said it was an effect that needed to be compensated for, ie. non-negligible.
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
TheGrue TheGrue's picture
You'd have a point, except
You'd have a point, except the similar forces from, you know, kinetic weapons are already sufficiently compensated for that they have no significant impact on use. Regardless, the laser weapon being discussed here is of the single-shot variety. Please refer to my earlier post about pointless semantics. Consider reading the rest of this thread, too, as you seem to have missed crucial context in your eagerness to show everyone how smart you are.
Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.
Chrontius Chrontius's picture
"Single shot" does not mean
"Single shot" does not mean you'll never have to pull the trigger twice. Erulastant, as for neutrinos beating light, new details have emerged suggesting that virtual particle interactions are a thing, but I'm having a hell of a time finding anything on the supernova-neutrino thing that was on NPR a couple weeks ago. This is notably [i]not[/i] through the method proposed in the OPERA experiment, but a proposal for a different mechanism entirely, which posits that over sufficiently long distances, light can be observed to travel ever so slightly [i]slower[/i] than [i]C.[/i] I'll update this if I ever find the story I heard.
TheGrue TheGrue's picture
Chrontius wrote:"Single shot"
Chrontius wrote:
"Single shot" does not mean you'll never have to pull the trigger twice.
psyduck.jpg Are you ****ing kidding me? Yes, you're right - but in the context of this discussion, the Single Shot fire mode in the Eclipse Phase roleplaying game means that, conceptually, you get one shot for every time you pull the trigger. And since pulling the trigger exerts more force on the weapon than "recoil" from the laser beam, it is not relevant in any way to the weapon's performance characteristics. Can we please, seriously tone down the pedantic one-upmanship now?
Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
TheGrue wrote:Chrontius wrote
TheGrue wrote:
Chrontius wrote:
"Single shot" does not mean you'll never have to pull the trigger twice.
psyduck.jpg Are you ****ing kidding me? Yes, you're right - but in the context of this discussion, the Single Shot fire mode in the Eclipse Phase roleplaying game means that, conceptually, you get one shot for every time you pull the trigger. And since pulling the trigger exerts more force on the weapon than "recoil" from the laser beam, it is not relevant in any way to the weapon's performance characteristics. Can we please, seriously tone down the pedantic one-upmanship now?
I mean, if you want truly pedantic one-upmanship, this is an artillery piece. It doesn't have a trigger that gets pulled. I'm actually not sure why you brought up that it was single-shot anyways? That was already the assumption I was working under so I don't see how pointing it out changed anything. For that matter, I'm not sure why you're so involved in this discussion at all. You've shown a surprising amount of vitriol in your assertion that my definition of "not negligible" is in fact negligible. Chronitus, I'd be interested to see that neutrino thing if you can find it. I'm really skeptical though. Neutrinos are massive, so they shouldn't be able to move at c. Also I've been reading up on virtual particles--I knew they were a thing but not much about them--and it seems like, what with their energy conservation violations and all, a photon that is temporarily a virtual particle/antiparticle pair may still move at c? Regardless of whether or not that's the case, light being slowed down by being not-light doesn't really change the speed of light, does it? The speed of any photon that is a photon will always be c, even if signal velocities are lower.
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
ShadowDragon8685 ShadowDragon8685's picture
Would you kindly cease the
Would you kindly cease the back-and-forth sniping at one another so we can get back to the discussion of blowing sh%t up with huge f^(king guns and other weapons of (m)ass destruction?
Skype and AIM names: Exactly the same as my forum name. [url=http://tinyurl.com/mfcapss]My EP Character Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/lbpsb93]Thread for my Questionnaire[/url] [url=http://tinyurl.com/obu5adp]The Five Orange Pips[/url]
Smokeskin Smokeskin's picture
How about some short range
How about some short range weaponry? A lot of EP combat will be in habs where very long is mostly unimportant.
Erulastant Erulastant's picture
"Heavy weapons" and "in
"Heavy weapons" and "in-habitat fighting" don't really go together. If you want to wreck the place, hit it with a large rock from the outside. If you want to keep it intact, no heavy weapons allowed. A high-powered neutron gun might work for that sort of scenario, but it won't do shit against synths and it's easy enough to shield against if you know it's coming. It can shoot through many common barricades though. The chemthrower and microwave cannon could both be suitable for use inside a habitat.
You, too, were made by humans. The methods used were just cruder, imprecise. I guess that explains a lot.
Chrontius Chrontius's picture
You know, a while back on the
You know, a while back on the Orion's Arm Yahoo!™ group, there was discussion of the "One Megajoule Handgun". Between diamond molecular-spring batteries, nanoformed propellant grains, and electrothermal ignition and assist, it could in fact deliver a megajoule of kinetic and explosive energy [i]directly[/i] to the fighting face of that titan's armor plate. Granted, it was probably the size of a bolt pistol, would break the wrist of anything short of a Fury, and the manufacturer "recommends using both hands" like the IRS "recommends having your taxes filed on time", but if you absolutely need to kill that big ugly motherbleeper you didn't actually anticipate showing up, accept no substitutes. I remember it was about a 1" bore, fired gun-launched seekers, and packed a charge of metallic chlorine to seriously screw up any hostile nanotech that might try patching up the damage you just caused… I trust their math that it's possible, and I'll go digging for details later.
TheGrue TheGrue's picture
So how many shots would you
So how many shots would you say you could get out of, for example, a rotary particle bolter with a backpack power source?
Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.
Chrontius Chrontius's picture
I'd say your primary
I'd say your primary limitation would be recoil bracing - because that's something like a small, ultra-high-performance space drive there - which shouldn't be too hard, it might feel like a pressure nozzle with air in the line, but over long enough ranges... Your biggest limit will be heat, if you have a backpack fusion reactor and a big bladder of heavy water, all being fused into helium or something nifty and aneutronic like that. How fast will you cook in your own well-ventilated waste heat? Do you actually have enough heat sink capacity in the local environment? If you do, do you have too much? Thermal gradients being too steep, things might start to get microfractures, and if that's coolant lines or things spinning very very fast and under rotational acceleration, then those microfractures might expand into macrofractures. I'd say something like a day's sustained firing - rather like guns in mass effect running out of bullets, it'd be something that can happen but you'll likely run into other limiting factors first.