Fixed Cannon Shot Speed Outrage VS Gimbal Cannon

[ironhammer500]

What i dont get is why does the cannon shell have a such a low max speed? Its fire in space there is no resistance so the shells max speed would be almost the speed of light, since it would continue to accelerate until it lost to much energy with Gravity or impacts with objects.

What i never understood about ED was the short engagement ranges ok i guess they gotta make it dogfight style for fun and balance, but its not realistic by anymeans.


Also try using fixed weapons in a Cutter...

 

[Muetdhiver]

What i dont get is why does the cannon shell have a such a low max speed? Its fire in space there is no resistance so the shells max speed would be almost the speed of light, since it would continue to accelerate until it lost to much energy with Gravity or impacts with objects.

What i never understood about ED was the short engagement ranges ok i guess they gotta make it dogfight style for fun and balance, but its not realistic by anymeans.


Also try using fixed weapons in a Cutter...

No. In space the shell speed will stay at the muzzle velocity (instead of bleeding out speed from friction).
Once out of the barrel, the shell does not accelerate anymore.

And yeah, some longer range weapons would not hurt (i.e. large ships would start to engage at 10km with standoff weapons)

 

[Jukelo]

What i dont get is why does the cannon shell have a such a low max speed? Its fire in space there is no resistance so the shells max speed would be almost the speed of light, since it would continue to accelerate until it lost to much energy with Gravity or impacts with objects.

The shell isn't self propelled (that would be a rocket), so its velocity will be the muzzle velocity. This is limited by how long the shell is being accelerated and by how much. You don't keep accelerating just because there's no air resistance: you also need a force to provide said acceleration.

 

[B1rdy]

ED was never meant to be a sim in the sense of realistic simulator like DCS and such.

So, it's a bit silly to complain about the lack of realism (since it's more of an arcade game).
That does not mean that we should not hope for consistency, a department in which ED is quite
lacking TBH.

128t sensors that can't sense a multimegawatt powered ship past 5-6km...
Shooting armed targets with howitzer shells instead of SABOT rounds...
Missiles with a range of 5km... and generally weapons with point blank ranges...

I'm sure it could be improved without unbalancing things too much. To me it's way
more immersion breaking than instant ship transfer times, but hey, that's just me ^^

But it´s the way the game mechanics are designed. FDev wanted WWII style dogfights. That is why kinetic weapon projectiles are so slow, otherwise they would pretty much handle like lasers.

 

[ironhammer500]

No. In space the shell speed will stay at the muzzle velocity (instead of bleeding out speed from friction).
Once out of the barrel, the shell does not accelerate anymore.

And yeah, some longer range weapons would not hurt (i.e. large ships would start to engage at 10km with standoff weapons)

What i was getting at is with no air in the barrel 700 m/s seems very unrealistic, also we are forgetting the ships velocity, any near by gravity well...the shell could and will continue to accelerate as there would be external forces like gravity, ok you cant simulate that in a game. I mean no one has recorded firing a gun in space but im sure you don't lose kinetic energy only store it so your right without any forces it would remain constant. Still doesn't mean the cannon fires at 700 m/s seems very slow for a weapon fired in space.

 

[Muetdhiver]

But it´s the way the game mechanics are designed. FDev wanted WWII style dogfights. That is why kinetic weapon projectiles are so slow, otherwise they would pretty much handle like lasers.

If that is indeed is the goal, then why do MC bullets have a 1600 m/s speed, instead of a WWII 850 m/s for a .50 BMG ?

I mean, consistency & all...

I get that FD is going for the WW2 feel. However it does not have to preclude consistency within this framework. I think limited yaw is great,
and makes for a better flight model. Top speed limitation I'm much less a fan, but whatever.

Last, WW2 had radars weighting less than 128 tons able to detect tiny planes 10's of km away ^^
Seriously, spoting ships by eye before the hi tech radar does is just [haha]

About shell cannon speed : the air pressure in the barrel has little effect on muzzle velocity (only the pressure differential matters),
as for external force like gravity, please do remember that all bodies in the same referential will be subject to those (ships and shell). I.e. as
long as relative motions are concerned, they have no effect.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

If that is indeed is the goal, then why do MC bullets have a 1600 m/s speed, instead of a WWII 850 m/s for a .50 BMG ?

I mean, consistency & all...

I get that FD is going for the WW2 feel. However it does not have to preclude consistency within this framework. I think limited yaw is great,
and makes for a better flight model. Top speed limitation I'm much less a fan, but whatever.

Last, WW2 had radars weighting less than 128 tons able to detect tiny planes 10's of km away ^^
Seriously, spoting ships by eye before the hi tech radar does is just [haha]

About shell cannon speed : the air pressure in the barrel has little effect on muzzle velocity (only the pressure differential matters),
as for external force like gravity, please do remember that all bodies in the same referential will be subject to those (ships and shell). I.e. as
long as relative motions are concerned, they have no effect.

Please stop making sense.

 

[Vorxian]

Don't know about you guys, but i'm having trouble stopping laughing at gimbals firing slugs slower than the same coming from a fixed.

uhmm yeah.

 

[Muetdhiver]

Ne ne my friend. Consistency != reality.
The connection to WWII fighters is a very casual one and never officially declared as the consistent base for everything combat or weapon related. That would be nonsense anyway, I mean lasers in WWII...?

I'm speaking of overall consistency. And sorry, but the whole elite has SW flight feel is everything but never officially declared. You know that SW = WWII flight model, right ?
Then again, it's FD's game. If consistency is not their forte, nothing we can do.

 

[Sysmon]

Is there really an issue? Fixed, and presumably more solid mounts allow for higher muzzle velocities, while some of the energy may bleed into the more complicated gimballed mounts thereby both losing velocity as well as not allowing too strong a recoil. That's not really that different from allowing a larger charge to propel a slug faster for a cannon build that can take the punishment without degrading too fast between shots.

S

 

[Ziljan]

Gimballed weapons hit more often, and giving fixed increased speed makes up for this... a little. It's not a huge deal, and if you think it makes fixed "OP" then I encourage you to start using fixed ballistics. Lol. Then you'll see you're making a fuss over nothing when you whiff repeatedly.

 

[Siranui]

If they're OP, best you start using them and owning up!

 

[B1rdy]

Pardon? WWII flight model for ED? But this I can't take seriously, NOT AT ALL. Have you ever played Warbirds by any chance? What has atmospheric flight in common with the flight physics of our spaceships in ED? Doesn't matter whoever or whatever authority stated that, that is sheer nonsense.

I don't say the flight model in ED is ultra realistic but what all our spaceships actually have in common with WWII planes are some of the engine sounds that are vaguely inspired by them - and that pretty much is it.

The combat distances are almost the same, due to speed and weapons range.