Ship Builds & Load Outs Multi-Cannon changes

[CMDR Jacobra]

So I've been playing around with class 2 multi-cannons lately and I've noticed some thing that I think should be changed with these things.

For those fellow gun lovers out there I am sure you have noticed the striking similarities of the multi-cannons to modern day miniguns (specifically the M134 and the GAU-8 imo). I am also sure that you have noticed how the weapon feed through separate 90 round magazines. I know that these obviously are not the same weapons but surely the people of the future would not knee cap a weapon like this by having it feed from different mags. It makes no sense! I would love to see the Devs change the weapon to feed from one large 2400 round reservoir. Also, it stands to reason that, in the future, they would have the ability to generate very high RPMs on a weapons like this as we do now. The reason RPMs are so important on these weapons is because their design is based off the original Gatling gun. The faster you turn the crank on the Gatling, the faster it will shoot. The same principle applies here. It wouldn't be unreasonable to say that the gun should have a higher rate of fire than it does at the moment.

Right now in ED it seems like you can be quite successful only running a loadout of exclusively energy weapons. All you've got to do is target the power plant and the ship blows up fairly easily. The only reason not to use all lasers is the heat and with enough heat sinks and some trigger discipline that can be circumvented.

I think that for the multi-cannons to be as attractive an option as energy weapons they need to a slight boost to subsystem damage along with feeding from one ammo pool and the ROF bump. Also lasers need to do less damage to subsystem on the external areas of the craft and significantly less damage vs. kinetics on internal components i.e. the power plant.
Let me know what you thinks gents!

P.S. Here is what a dream multi-cannon would be like for me https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBXrogB8L08

 

[Stealth Gamer92]

I agree the 90 round limit is dumb should be more like 150 minimum, however the ROF of the Warthog's gun is way too fast for the type of combat in elite unless they introduced a High Calliber Multi-Cannon made to let small craft hurt big crafy at the cost of having to get close due to the weapon bouncing around alot when fired, maybe also limited to 100 round clip with same rate of fire as current gun or just slightly faster and smaller pool with 3-4 reload's.
.
Also the Gatling Gun did not work that way past a certain point, because past a certain turn speed you almost garauteed a jam.

 

[Geraldine]

I agree that multis could be better. One thing I'd like to see is different sorts of ammunition for them, say one that is more suited to taking down shields (something for example that causes splash or EMP damage to overload shields) and (once the shields go down) another ammo type that damages hulls and components (something like armour piercing) that you could swap out on the fly or just have two or more multis with different ammo types in them. Effectiveness of the ammo would of course would be balanced with whatever type of armour the target ship has. Having multiple ammo types available then it would make more sense to have smaller magazine sizes because you would be swapping between different ammo types more often in a fight. A knock-on effect of this is it might give traders flying the bigger ships a real chance in a fight.

Cannons could also do with something like this too as I recall firing two big fixed cannons on my Viper at point blank range at an Anaconda and it just shrugged em off. I felt a little let down considering these were big guns with a slow refire rate. I was hoping for more from them especially at close range. Shields were still up on the 'conda with little apparent damage. This was a while ago though so perhaps its been patched since then. Needless to say I didn't last very long in that fight with only two little pulse lasers to fall back on.
As for the refire rate of the multis, I guess because they have to work in a vacuum perhaps this slows them down some as they cant dissipate heat as well as their planet bound cousins. But would it matter if the ammo you used did more damage?

 

[Stealth Gamer92]

Cannons could also do with something like this too as I recall firing two big fixed cannons on my Viper at point blank range at an Anaconda and it just shrugged em off. I felt a little let down considering these were big guns with a slow refire rate. I was hoping for more from them especially at close range. Shields were still up on the 'conda with little apparent damage. This was a while ago though so perhaps its been patched since then. Needless to say I didn't last very long in that fight with only two little pulse lasers to fall back on.

Right now cannon's have one purpose, and that is punch through the hull and dameage the internal module's. Rail Gun's are the same excepth they also damage shield's at the cost of high power draw.

 

[CMDR Jacobra]

I agree that multis could be better. One thing I'd like to see is different sorts of ammunition for them, say one that is more suited to taking down shields (something for example that causes splash or EMP damage to overload shields) and (once the shields go down) another ammo type that damages hulls and components (something like armour piercing) that you could swap out on the fly or just have two or more multis with different ammo types in them. Effectiveness of the ammo would of course would be balanced with whatever type of armour the target ship has. Having multiple ammo types available then it would make more sense to have smaller magazine sizes because you would be swapping between different ammo types more often in a fight. A knock-on effect of this is it might give traders flying the bigger ships a real chance in a fight.

I think that is a really good idea. It would open up a lot of possibilities for ships that are kind of short on power and let them use all their utility mounts without worrying about overloading the power plant. On my vulture I used to have to manage everything fairly closely when it came to power. Speaking of the Vulture, I would really like to see some Class 3 multi-cannons.

Also, the point made about dissipating heat in a vacuum is an excellent one. It is much harder to get the heat away from the space craft when you don't have convection on your side. I would still like to see a bump in the rate of fire even if there is a heat penalty because it would just be a ton of fun to use (not on the level of the warthog's gun. I knew that wasn't an option before i posted it, although I wish it wasn't).

 

[Alex Brentnall]

Devs have said before that Multi-cannons were a bit of a nightmare to balance like the railguns. Which is why they don't have a class 3 or 4 variant since the nerf would be so obvious it would break the internet.
I imagine the rate of fire, reload time, clip size and everything else has been quite carefully balanced to make them usable but not overpowered.

Basically it boils down to the old Realism vs Gameplay. At the end of it Frontier are here to make a game and not a simulator.

 

[Morbad]

Why the 90 round limit?

With only 90 rounds together at any given time the possibility of a an ammunition explosion, from the weapon being hit or experiencing a cook-off, destroying the whole ship is minimized.

Why the low 500-600 rpm rate of fire?

Because the barrels in this weapon are radiating excess heat into space (less load on the weapon's liquid coolant system, which probably only reaches the motor and chamber) not conducting it into a turbulent physical media (air) for cooling. Your GAU-8 example would not last very long in a vacuum; it would probably be glowing white hot after a few hundred rounds.

Cannons could also do with something like this too as I recall firing two big fixed cannons on my Viper at point blank range at an Anaconda and it just shrugged em off. I felt a little let down considering these were big guns with a slow refire rate. I was hoping for more from them especially at close range.

Why would they do better at close range? There is no change in velocity from the time the projectile leaves the barrel to the time it connects with your target because space is effectively a vacuum.

 

[Geraldine]

Why would they do better at close range? There is no change in velocity from the time the projectile leaves the barrel to the time it connects with your target because space is effectively a vacuum.

True there is no change in velocity but the shells are relatively slow moving so I got in close to make sure I got a decent hit which I did. Strange thing was there was a big explosion where there shells hit the hull of the 'conda but no damage. Very strange indeed. Maybe it was a bug as it was a few builds ago.

 

[Alex Brentnall]

Yeah we don't know the exact mechanics behind the kinetic weapons but I have used cannons extensively with mixed results. I believe a lot depends on the angle to target and exact impact point.
When not targeting subsystems on an enemy Anaconda I did hull damage between 0% and 4% per shot (with a verified hit).
On subsystem targeting it was anywhere between 10% and 40% for a direct hit.

I imagine doing damage to subsystems takes away damage from hull and vice versa but have no real evidence to back this up.

Best results came when I was hitting the Anaconda at a direct 90 degree angle from the top but no promises.

 

[Geraldine]

Maybe your onto something there Alex, but I think either rail guns or plasma accelerators on average tend to do better. But they sure need plenty of power to fire making them a hard choice for some of the smaller ships. At least with multis/cannons combo power requirements are lower. To be honest though since that experience with the 'conda I've never used cannons since and when I do use multis they are always backed up with energy weapons even if they are small ones. I only tried the really big cannons in the Alpha & Beta and I really liked them then. I just have not had the time to earn my way upto a ship capable of fitting them presently. When I did try them though there was just something cool and "battleship" about having them on your ship.
Coming back to the topic of multis, yes I must admit I do like to see them spin up with tracers flying off into the distance hungry for something to chew into. So yes I do still like those and use em on my old knackered T6. Not that I get into any serious battles with that mind you!

 

[Morbad]

True there is no change in velocity but the shells are relatively slow moving so I got in close to make sure I got a decent hit which I did. Strange thing was there was a big explosion where there shells hit the hull of the 'conda but no damage. Very strange indeed. Maybe it was a bug as it was a few builds ago.

You probably hit a subsystem.

Cannon have good penetration so if you land a hit with a subsystem in the path of the projectile, the bulk of the damage will go to that subsystem.

I imagine doing damage to subsystems takes away damage from hull

That's exactly how it works.

Damage is split between hull and subsystem based on the penetration value of the weapon and (seemingly) the angle of attack.

 

[InMemoriamSirocco]

Anyone remember the weapons of the Colonial Viper in Battlestar Galactica? I just wish our multicannons had that fire rate....

Viper Tribute

 

[Morbad]

Anyone remember the weapons of the Colonial Viper in Battlestar Galactica? I just wish our multicannons had that fire rate....

Viper Tribute

What's the ratio of tracers to standard rounds on the Colonial Viper's cannon?

 

[Daynen]

I've ever been a fan of high fire-rate weapons, and the multi-cannon is no different. The spin-up and the resulting DAKKA DAKKA is always satisfying; even moreso when you know you're drilling into a powerplant. I can understand why the devs decided C3 multis were hard to balance, but I believe I have at least a hint of a solution.

Higher classes of gun have more room for safety and cooling. Instead of simply increasing the damage per shot, increase other parameters, such as magazine size. A bigger gun should have more room to ventilate before needing to stop, to say nothing of simply carrying more ammo. Alternatively, bigger multis could simply be a true multi-barreled weapon, firing off two, three or even four rounds per tick when mounted on corvette-class ships. Granted, this might turn high class MC's into rapid-fire shotguns, but a this kind of huge MC would empty its commensurately bigger clip just as fast as the single shot multis we have now. It might also suffer a loss of accuracy due to the increased recoil, and it would probably have a slightly longer spinup time to compensate, but I'm no gun engineer, so I'm spitballing with what we've got.

Actually, maybe the accuracy of MC's is what's making them so hard to balance; unless your target is actively weaving between shots, there's little to no deviation in the path of subsequent rounds--impressive for such a high caliber weapon at that RoF...I wouldn't mind a bit of shot spread if it meant MC's could be diversified more.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

I can understand why the devs decided C3 multis were hard to balance, but I believe I have at least a hint of a solution.

Actually I think the real reason they don't exist is that a six meter wide twelve meter long (or whatever the numbers are) minigun just looked stupid. No other reason.

What you suggest does exist with missiles and needs to exist with more weapons.

That being said, I wouldn't be against the no-clip multi-cannon, if its spin up time was a third of a second longer.

 

[CariadocThorne]

I think a possible balance for class 3 MCs would be a higher damage per shot with lower RoF. The base DPS wouldn't have to be much higher, since being a class 3 would mean no damage penalty against large hulls anyway, and the lower RoF would also mean you'd need to reload less often, and run completely out of ammo slower.

So overall, the benefits would be slightly higher DPS vs small and medium hulls, notably higher (but not too extreme) DPS vs large hulls, and more sustainability.

With a lower RoF, you could even move away from multi-barrel to a single barrel design, which wouldn't risk looking as bad, and could also allow another discrete advantage by removing spin-up time.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

I'm amazed that multicannons can be found weak. They are my default fit for every single class 2 hardpoint in the game. They rip everything to shreds quickly and get a good module penetration once you are close enough. And while they reload I just fire my meanwhile cooled down beams. Two are a bit meh, but on ships that can run quad multis they're simply devastating. And they last quite a bit longer than cannons.

 

[Geek SHO]

Does Frontier have any data on the scale of things? As in, how big are the slugs of a C1 multicannon vs a C2? A C3 multicannon might be like making a gatling gun that's so big it could only fit on a battleship turret. Cool, but totally impractical.

 

[slothman320]

Does Frontier have any data on the scale of things? As in, how big are the slugs of a C1 multicannon vs a C2? A C3 multicannon might be like making a gatling gun that's so big it could only fit on a battleship turret. Cool, but totally impractical.

My guess is this. The basic multi cannon is spitting either a 5.56mm or 7.62mm since it looks about the size of an actual modern mini gun. Now that bigger multi looks like it's more akin to the GAU-10 mounted on AC-130s and A-10 warthogs, a 20mm rotary cannon. But my actual largest complaint about them is this... Why do they fire as slow as the mini gun in doom? I would rather see a solid stream of tracers doing the SAME dps than a slow shooting mini gun. Just give us a machine gun at that point.

 

[CariadocThorne]

My guess is this. The basic multi cannon is spitting either a 5.56mm or 7.62mm since it looks about the size of an actual modern mini gun. Now that bigger multi looks like it's more akin to the GAU-10 mounted on AC-130s and A-10 warthogs, a 20mm rotary cannon. But my actual largest complaint about them is this... Why do they fire as slow as the mini gun in doom? I would rather see a solid stream of tracers doing the SAME dps than a slow shooting mini gun. Just give us a machine gun at that point.

I think scale is decieving in ED.

Once I compared the size of my DBS to the size of the pilot I can see through the canopy, I realised it's A LOT bigger than I had thought. I suspect that even the class 1 MC is larger than 25mm.

The damage would support that, since 5.56mm rounds make almost no impression on modern tank armour, so even firing hundreds of rounds would do absolutely nothing to the hull of most ships in ED.