Oh. There is the difference? Bore or Gauge is something different than Caliber?
Both represent the 'internal diameter of the barrel'.
Maybe I am quoting the wrong parts so tell me what I have got wrong. I am no weapon smith nor am I shooting for sport (right translation?) and am not familar with all the technical terms for firearms and guns.
Technically infinite repeaters can be machine guns too, but it usually refers to lasers, ion cannons or hellbores as most machine guns tend to show poor penetration against armor and thus are usually relegated to the tertiary battery with anti personnel weaponry.
That depends entirely on the available mass, energy and volume budgets available on a vehicle. Generally you're likely to see a MAC main gun with a coaxial laser or a laser emitter as the main weapon with a low velocity payload cannon shooting some variant of armour piercing ammunition. Why low velocity you ask, well, first, that's relative, and second, because you don't want too much recoil smashing your turret to bits when you fire. It also gives you the option of canister or shrapnel shot when dealing with personnel, but frankly our Sagitta missile makes a pretty decent infinite repeater analogue as well.
Atmospheric scattering is high for UV/Vis frequency ranges and above, but fairly minimal for IR if you're smart about your frequency selection. This is the main reason to get variable wavelength laser tech, so our laser frigates can switch between high frequency anti-starship beams and lower frequency ground bombardment beams.
Oh. There is the difference? Bore or Gauge is something different than Caliber?
Both represent the 'internal diameter of the barrel'.
Maybe I am quoting the wrong parts so tell me what I have got wrong. I am no weapon smith nor am I shooting for sport (right translation?) and am not familar with all the technical terms for firearms and guns.
@Ramble is not using caliber as used for handguns, he's using it as a naval gun would. This means that the caliber of the gun actually measures length of the relative gun to the diameter.
The Iowa class Battleships main guns are 16"/50 caliber guns because the guns themselves are 300 inches long, which is 50 times the diameter.
I've honestly never heard the term caliber used like that before your last couple of posts. It's always been 350L60 (spoken as written) in those contexts where it came up at all, or just listed as diamiter in mm, length in m. (or, depending on army and era, the whole lot skipped over in favour of refering to the thing by shot weight.)
You know if the Tiger basically does everything we want out of a tank, we just need something more durable, why don't we just start working from there?
I don't really do know enough for making a whole design, but basically I'd start with a Tiger, remove most of the weapons and add more Arc reactors. We would then use the extra power in order to power that system that grants shields to other friendlies. This vehicle then goes around with a flight of Legionaries and Tigers boosting them to the point that there is even less that can threaten them. This could let the boosted units swap their loadout to a more powerhungry offensive one without increasing the risk to the unit.
You want to put a 21 meter long cannon on an MBT, a gun twice the length of an Abrams and 5 times as long as its gun? Yeah.... in addition to having to worry about fouling the barrel on pretty much any terrain, you're going to have fuck you levels of recoil, a massive silhouette, and at the end of the day simply overpenetrate the vast majority of an MBT's foes. That is essentially a small ground to orbit cannon, not an MBT's main gun. We'd be much better off with a main gun around 200mm or smaller bore and rely on higher muzzle velocity or stacking several cannons in a rotary configuration for rate of fire. We're building a vehicle to hunt and kill Tigers and provide fire support, not to reliably engage targets in LEO. A coaxial laser to slagg emitters and engage infantry is also a good idea. A two stage system with synchronized pulse-laser/MAC fire would be an interesting way to defeat most defenses we've speculated on/made.
For our new MBT design I would mainly emphasize the single main gun with Sagitta micro-missiles and automatic grenade launchers secondaries for saturation support fire as opposed to trying and reintroduce sponsons and multiple turrets. Then we can just used all the rest of the space + better arc reactors to cram on more defenses, from point defense turrets, better barriers, more armor, and maybe an active ECM system since we have the energy to run it.
Atmospheric scattering is high for UV/Vis frequency ranges and above, but fairly minimal for IR if you're smart about your frequency selection. This is the main reason to get variable wavelength laser tech, so our laser frigates can switch between high frequency anti-starship beams and lower frequency ground bombardment beams.
How about scrapping the whole coaxial side weapon and instead use two changable (Universal Hard Point) main guns on a larger turret?
That way we can give the options between:
Large Caliber Howitzer (barrel length is limited by vehicel size and at 350mm it is a stunted artillery piece and not a Cannon)
4 to 5m rotary rapid fire MAC (for saturating an area with fire. Nothing says 'Keep your head down' like 4500+ rounds per minute of a heavy Mac. Barrel length strongly influences kinetic energy of MACs)
Laser
Repulsor
Then the tanks could be equipped with whatever primary weapon they need for the current task. Even if that means firing heavy explosives into bunker entrences not accesible from orbit and under heavy defence fire.
How about scrapping the whole coaxial side weapon and instead use two changable (Universal Hard Point) main guns on a larger turret?
That way we can give the options between:
Large Caliber Howitzer (barrel length is limited by vehicel size and at 350mm it is a stunted artillery piece and not a Cannon)
4 to 5m rotary rapid fire MAC (for saturating an area with fire. Nothing says 'Keep your head down' like 4500+ rounds per minute of a heavy Mac. Barrel length strongly influences kinetic energy of MACs)
Laser
Repulsor
Then the tanks could be equipped with whatever primary weapon they need for the current task. Even if that means firing heavy explosives into bunker entrences not accesible from orbit and under heavy defence fire.
Leaving aside the problem that is 'two recoiling guns in the same light weight turret' (the reason ships get away with it is because ships are fucking heavy relative to the recoil) this is unnecessarily complex for implementation and logistics.
When it comes to MACs you probably have two option when it comes to dealing with enemy vehicles; big guns shooting slowly or small guns shooting quickly. The first tries to break through the shield and blow out the emitter in one shot (and hopefully everything behind it), while the other tries to erode the shield through forcing it to activate repeatedly within a short span of time.
It's telling that in the games vehicles at least tend to favour big guns. Especially since this means they are also useful for cracking fortifications.
When it comes to MACs you probably have two option when it comes to dealing with enemy vehicles; big guns shooting slowly or small guns shooting quickly. The first tries to break through the shield and blow out the emitter in one shot (and hopefully everything behind it), while the other tries to erode the shield through forcing it to activate repeatedly within a short span of time.
The recoil. It is as great as the force projected. Right?
With MACs don't we have the advantage that the force the weapon projects is minuscle because the projectile is reduced to a fraction of its real weight while fired?
The game logic is kind of spotty there but the limit of the gun a soldier could carry was mainly limited by its size and weight. Not by its recoil (Krogan Shotgun).
Because of space magic Ezero tech I don't know what applys.
I honestly prefer the idea of maybe a rotary setup version of a 155mm cannon, maybe a little heavier. I mean think about it; the four primary issues with that sort of setup we already have solutions for to some extent;
Heat; we have exotic low friction alloys/materials to use in the weapon system, to say nothing of how they can apply in our heatsinks. If it was being done in ME 1, we can do it now.
Heat Sink Description: Absorbs and dissipates the heat typically generated when firing.
Frictionless Materials Description: Frictionless Materials give rounds more power at impact while minimizing weapon overheating. Highly recommended for shotguns. Also useful for sniper rifles.
Energy requirements, Gen 2 Arc Reactors enough said.
Volume of ammunition; ME MAC weapons have absolutely insane ammunition density, might as well take use of that.
Recoil; we can compensate with repulsors, potentially pulse the vehicle's Eezo core in sync with firing it to make the vehicle massive enough to resist the recoil. I wonder if we can basically use Stasis or something along those lines to absurdly increase our static friction to coincide with each shot. We have the computing for it with our FC VIs and we already have a proposal for Stasis armor on the drawing board. Then we have the absolutely nonsensical weapon mod in ME that if anyone is capable of making work it would be Revy;
Kinetic Coil Description: Kinetic Coils improve stability by reducing kickback and increase projectile acceleration for extra damage.
Which seems to work by giving Newton the bird and feeding the recoil energy back into the projectile.
So if we really want, there's room to play around with for a more effective weapon system than; "A MAC cannon, but slightly bigger and higher muzzle velocity".
The recoil. It is as great as the force projected. Right?
With MACs don't we have the advantage that the force the weapon projects is minuscle because the projectile is reduced to a fraction of its real weight while fired?
The game logic is kind of spotty there but the limit of the gun a soldier could carry was mainly limited by its size and weight. Not by its recoil (Krogan Shotgun).
Because of space magic Ezero tech I don't know what applys.
Have you fired the Mako's main gun in ME1? It has a rather noticeable recoil. So no, while recoil relative to what it should be is probably lower than you'd expect, but it's not minuscule. Also, that krogan shotgun is basically unusable outside of top soldiers (and krogan), just like the Widow, because the recoil is horrifyingly likely to injure the user.
I honestly prefer the idea of maybe a rotary setup version of a 155mm cannon, maybe a little heavier. I mean think about it; the four primary issues with that sort of setup we already have solutions for to some extent;
Heat; we have exotic low friction alloys/materials to use in the weapon system, to say nothing of how they can apply in our heatsinks. If it was being done in ME 1, we can do it now.
Energy requirements, Gen 2 Arc Reactors enough said.
Volume of ammunition; ME MAC weapons have absolutely insane ammunition density, might as well take use of that.
Recoil; we can compensate with repulsors, potentially pulse the vehicle's Eezo core in sync with firing it to make the vehicle massive enough to resist the recoil. Then we have the absolutely nonsensical weapon mod in ME that if anyone is capable of making work it would be Revy; Which seems to work by giving Newton the bird and feeding the recoil energy back into the projectile.
So if we really want, there's room to play around with for a more effective weapon system than; "A MAC cannon, but slightly bigger and higher muzzle velocity".
MAC guns are unlikely to be rail guns and very likely to be coil or ME accelerated weapons. Simply because of the much lower wear and tear on the gun. We don't need low friction materials, we need high conductivity materials in both the thermal and electrical sense for cooling and power transmission for the guns.
Energy requirements are a solved issue only on the powerplant end. Transmission and use are still limited by whatever materials are used.
MAC weapons have insane ammunition density because they all basically use small ball bearings or tooth picks of varying size.
As for recoil; just having the repulsor strength necessary to make it a non issue doesn't mean you have the positioning necessary to make it a non issue. And I don't think having a jet of superheated plasma backlighting your vehicle is a very popular proposition with soldiers, or for that matter with foresters and fire departments.
Have you fired the Mako's main gun in ME1? It has a rather noticeable recoil. So no, while recoil relative to what it should be is probably lower than you'd expect, but it's not minuscule. Also, that krogan shotgun is basically unusable outside of top soldiers (and krogan), just like the Widow, because the recoil is horrifyingly likely to injure the user.
You want to put a 21 meter long cannon on an MBT, a gun twice the length of an Abrams and 5 times as long as its gun? Yeah.... in addition to having to worry about fouling the barrel on pretty much any terrain, you're going to have fuck you levels of recoil, a massive silhouette, and at the end of the day simply overpenetrate the vast majority of an MBT's foes. That is essentially a small ground to orbit cannon, not an MBT's main gun. We'd be much better off with a main gun around 200mm or smaller bore and rely on higher muzzle velocity or stacking several cannons in a rotary configuration for rate of fire. We're building a vehicle to hunt and kill Tigers and provide fire support, not to reliably engage targets in LEO. A coaxial laser to slagg emitters and engage infantry is also a good idea. A two stage system with synchronized pulse-laser/MAC fire would be an interesting way to defeat most defenses we've speculated on/made.
For our new MBT design I would mainly emphasize the single main gun with Sagitta micro-missiles and automatic grenade launchers secondaries for saturation support fire as opposed to trying and reintroduce sponsons and multiple turrets. Then we can just used all the rest of the space + better arc reactors to cram on more defenses, from point defense turrets, better barriers, more armor, and maybe an active ECM system since we have the energy to run it.
To be fair, the MBT I was envisioning would be something like 200-400 tonnes rather than the Abram's 60.
I'm very much erring on the side of overkill because that's what bullshit space magic lets you do, though I still need @Hoyr to tell me at what limit a tank stops being a tank and starts being a PSU.
That depends entirely on the available mass, energy and volume budgets available on a vehicle. Generally you're likely to see a MAC main gun with a coaxial laser or a laser emitter as the main weapon with a low velocity payload cannon shooting some variant of armour piercing ammunition. Why low velocity you ask, well, first, that's relative, and second, because you don't want too much recoil smashing your turret to bits when you fire. It also gives you the option of canister or shrapnel shot when dealing with personnel, but frankly our Sagitta missile makes a pretty decent infinite repeater analogue as well.
True enough, though the term Infinite Repeater only refers to the armaments of the secondary battery with armor penetrating characteristics. Sagitta missiles would probably be decent at anti-vehicle stuff and anti-infantry, but it's not anti-armor so that disqualifies it. It would probably be relegated to the tertiary battery or something.
...Huh. So, not even full-body prosthetics + advanced xenobiology + P&P skills would allow us to slot into an asari-type body with all the features working?
No, the ANI isn't quite good enough. it's much better though. I was planning a news segment for next quarter abou this, though I've been debating including it in the Liara update.
I wonder how it's viewed, both by aliens and by humans themselves. I mean, what, say, amish, are thinking about it? What about asari? Quarians? Salarians? If someone made an omake with media coverage of the project, that would be great. It would really add flavour and depth.
I was figuring that each set of sensors was either its own die roll or contributed to a single aggregate sensor roll: radar, IR, lidar, ultrasound. Modern materials (eg Advanced Ceramics tech, AB, Superalloys) give small, across-the-board bonuses to stealth. Invisible Man gives a huge bonus to anti-lidar stealth, but only a small bonus to everything else. Invisible Fighter lets that same bonus apply to anti-radar and ultrasound, while Invisible Tank applied it to anti-IR.
Hmm... that's interesting, but at he same time IDing people with IR is pretty easy isn't it? Just seems kind important. Sound less so, but still most of the upgrade tech are for making those better.
As for rolls aggregating probably, mass of dice=messy. Though if you have a hole, and they have a sensor that covers that hole you have a problem.
By the way, just for reference: this is rank 3 of 12 under the ME1 system, or Rank 2 of 4 under ME2. On a more RL comparison, it's also 157 pounds, which isn't all that much when thinking in terms of punches. At this level it's not so much "punch" things with your brain as "give them a quick jab" with your brain. Even the highest levels only barely reach what the average martial artist can do with a quick reverse punch, let alone the kinds of crazy things they get up to when they're breaking concrete blocks with their fists, or what a professional boxer can throw out.
It's a ~7m/s2 hit to a 100kg (~220 "Pound") target.
Yeah is silly esp as that's enough to knock a person around in ME game land (or send them flying at higher levels). I believe that the missing component is the time the force is applied for the "punch" gets to travel with the target after all.
"Wide beam mode" sounds to my ears a lot like "diffraction-limited mode". This idea makes me wonder if we can just sit outside of our optimum range, use our high-powered laser at a wide diffraction-limited angle to wipe out the shields, then use our MAC to destroy the target ship.
Not at the 5GW power level, it's all about W per m2 at target and having a big enough hit area. I'm getting ranges around 1 thousand km for current suggested weapons.
Yeah, you know what? Our low GigaJoule range lasers (@Hoyr, is that strength at the lens, and does lens size matter? Because that would be a major limiting factor no matter how large the amplifying system) can't match that level of boom.
Can it attack positions with GARDIAN laser defenses? That's the only current tactical need. Eventual expanding out to counter mobile enemies with laser might be a plan.
Note that with mass effect tech barrel diameter is mostly irrelevant. Gun power is depended on length and probably mass effect. Size of the round does effect penetration, with larger round penetrating less. And yes over penetration is a thing.
Of course if you you actual shells that changes things, but most people are going to stare at you if you suggest actual shells.
Game logic. I retreat all previous statemants.
MAC are fired by sheering a grain of from a metal block and firing it at obscene speeds.
Really large caliber guns (frigat and upwards) use shells again.
Weapons archive explosiv effects by apllying the explosive weapon mod or one of its unnamed inbuild variants.
What is left:
MAC with really high projectil velocity. Lower rate of fire because the transistors (or how they are called for real to handle the energy) need to be charged higher.
MAC with high rate of fire but relatively lower velocity. Archive rate of fire by pulsing ezero faster at lower 'charge/frequenzy'.
Base dmg of MACs is strictly based on length of barrel with: 'longer barrel gives more hurt"
True enough, though the term Infinite Repeater only refers to the armaments of the secondary battery with armor penetrating characteristics. Sagitta missiles would probably be decent at anti-vehicle stuff and anti-infantry, but it's not anti-armor so that disqualifies it. It would probably be relegated to the tertiary battery or something.
When the enemy does not or cannot field vehicles of sufficient toughness to count as armour you don't need better than mass firing Sagitta. Our main enemy in the near future is going to be the Batarian Hegemony. Focus on what they can bring to the front.
MAC with really high projectil velocity. Lower rate of fire because the transistors (or how they are called for real to handle the energy) need to be charged higher.
Yes, should give us a significant boost to our disintegration miners, now that I think about it. The only problem with disintegration mining is that we need to find a way to extract the eezo first (which is why I'm kind of hoping that spin-mining can actually work); if we're vaporizing material and sending it through an ion source in order to separate it into different elements while there's eezo still in the mix, then we'll have some rather impressive explosions on our hands.
TIR is interesting, but in atmosphere/on the ground it spews out a lot of lethal radiation because of the atmosphere impacting the FTL-quality barriers, which have to be up all the time to block incoming laser strikes. This is apparently not an issue for the combatants, because of ME universe BS-level radiation shielding tech, but it will irradiate the soil and any unshielded civilians, which I regard as not quite neighborly enough to do when not fighting Reapers or a similar extinction-level threat. We're going to need something else to block laser strikes on the ground; currently the best we can do is use ablative armor.
Not at the 5GW power level, it's all about W per m2 at target and having a big enough hit area. I'm getting ranges around 1 thousand km for current suggested weapons.
Huh; I thought we were talking around 5-10,000 km, unless I'm reading your post wrong. At any rate, I thought the idea was that the shield emitters were more fragile than the regular ablative armor, so a valid strategy would be to sit say 2-3x times further away than our "effective" range, spray our diffraction-widened laser over the enemy's hull, knocking out the shield emitters, then blast away with our MACs while our Warp barriers gleefully tank any shells our Repulsors don't dodge.
Relevant infographic:
If I'm reading this right, the key here is that around 10,000 nm there's a 90% transmittance window, and there's a few good 80% transmittance windows around 2,000 nm, but if you start shooting out lasers in the UV/Vis spectrum you're going to lose half or more of your laser to atmospheric scattering, which is a problem because you're liable to blind everyone in a wide radius around your target and rip a giant hole in the target planet's ozone layer.
Can it attack positions with GARDIAN laser defenses? That's the only current tactical need. Eventual expanding out to counter mobile enemies with laser might be a plan.
This makes it three times now that @Hoyr has specifically called out GARDIAN turrets as something we'll want to be able to defend against and disable/destroy. I'm sure that's a coincidence.
Lasers are important for now because they completely ignore barriers; low-speed bombardment shells are much less effective against strong shields.
Yes, should give us a significant boost to our disintegration miners, now that I think about it. The only problem with disintegration mining is that we need to find a way to extract the eezo first (which is why I'm kind of hoping that spin-mining can actually work); if we're vaporizing material and sending it through an ion source in order to separate it into different elements while there's eezo still in the mix, then we'll have some rather impressive explosions on our hands.
TIR is interesting, but in atmosphere/on the ground it spews out a lot of lethal radiation because of the atmosphere impacting the FTL-quality barriers, which have to be up all the time to block incoming laser strikes. This is apparently not an issue for the combatants, because of ME universe BS-level radiation shielding tech, but it will irradiate the soil and any unshielded civilians, which I regard as not quite neighborly enough to do when not fighting Reapers or a similar extinction-level threat. We're going to need something else to block laser strikes on the ground; currently the best we can do is use ablative armor.
Huh; I thought we were talking around 5-10,000 km, unless I'm reading your post wrong. At any rate, I thought the idea was that the shield emitters were more fragile than the regular ablative armor, so a valid strategy would be to sit say 2-3x times further away than our "effective" range, spray our diffraction-widened laser over the enemy's hull, knocking out the shield emitters, then blast away with our MACs while our Warp barriers gleefully tank any shells our Repulsors don't dodge.
Relevant infographic:
If I'm reading this right, the key here is that around 10,000 nm there's a 90% transmittance window, and there's a few good 80% transmittance windows around 2,000 nm, but if you start shooting out lasers in the UV/Vis spectrum you're going to lose half or more of your laser to atmospheric scattering, which is a problem because you're liable to blind everyone in a wide radius around your target and rip a giant hole in the target planet's ozone layer.
Wasn't it mentioned before that we could use eezo's ability to change the relative speed of light to shift the wavelength of lasers and make them shoot hard radiation? If I'm reading the graph correctly we could use microwaves and fry targets with very small amount of scattering and almost no absorption.
Wasn't it mentioned before that we could use eezo's ability to change the relative speed of light to shift the wavelength of lasers and make them shoot hard radiation? If I'm reading the graph correctly we could use microwaves and fry targets with very small amount of scattering and almost no absorption.
Microwaves are bad because of diffraction; the beam will spread too much to be useful as a weapon outside of a few dozen kilometers. But yes, variable wavelength lasers are on the tech tree, behind both miniaturized energy weapons and UV lasers, and as far as I can tell they're only good for rapidly adapting mining lasers, and so we can easily move from anti-ship UV/X-ray lasers to anti-ground IR lasers without having to install two separate weapon systems.
When you are talking about orbital artillery (as we were here), that's not that important. Because in that case, deploying a large amount of low to high yield atomic warheads in atmosphere through orbital bombardment will crack shields nearly as well. And with a careful selection of materials for fusion and an antimatter kickstarter, this can be done with minimal fallout without running the risk of the entire bombardment blowing up in orbit because one of the shells got destroyed.
Seriously though, unless we're talking about places we don't care about getting blown to bits (which won't include garden worlds so long as the Council has anything to say about it) we can always just drag one of the old dreadnoughts in or keep pounding away with the collective MAC armament of half a fleet.
Heh.
From 'center pieces of intergalactic strategy' to 'shore bombardment vessel.' Don't think most dreadnought drivers will like that idea.