Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Didnt that convince you to buy an idris ? Because that should totally convince you to buy an idris.
Yes, but only with one hand.
Railgun topic
I ve been following railgun technology for some years now which means I m still a novice in regards to its actual workings but once again I feel like in Star Citizen where many project defenders trying to explain reasons to me come across like complete ignorants showing their cluelessness on full display and the more they try the deeper they dig their holes without even noticing.
If CIG doesnt care about actual technology they could very much use whatever word they want for whatever purpose....its a video game after all but any criticism or correction in that matter is deserved and justified and remains true. This isnt even something big, just another 1 second blip on CIGs incompetence radar but leave it to some people to drag this out for another 5 pages because they cannot accept even the slightest hint of criticism directed against their pet project. Its really not surprising we are arguing over SCs development start to this day ^^
Last time I checked railgun technology today already exceeds 10-12 mach by the way with far higher limits projected. And missile technology doesnt sleep either as the russians have showed recently so it remains to be seen if rail technology becomes a standard or even gets to operative mode at all to begin with....hey...just like Star Citizen than ^^ Also atmosphere....or rather the lack of one would make even conventional handguns reach and maintain speeds of 1000m/s+ so really, there is nothing impressive here
Not only is it not cool military hardware usually comes down to efficiency. It doesnt need to be good looking or comfy, it just needs to provide you an advantage or the means to overcome your opponent. I guess CIG could have a slow railgun in their game if they really wanted but if they cared for realism (lol) they would ve come up with a reason that would justify using railgun technology in the first place (which is extreme) when the payoff is a result that can be achieved by any cheap donky butt howitzer today. A "slow" railgun would aquire its destructive potential from projectile size rather than speed but at such slow speeds your projectile needs to be the size of a house to overcome military grade armor and theoretical shields.
As always, reading this thread is funny as hell because of the posts, thanks all ^^
I ve been following railgun technology for some years now which means I m still a novice in regards to its actual workings but once again I feel like in Star Citizen where many project defenders trying to explain reasons to me come across like complete ignorants showing their cluelessness on full display and the more they try the deeper they dig their holes without even noticing.
If CIG doesnt care about actual technology they could very much use whatever word they want for whatever purpose....its a video game after all but any criticism or correction in that matter is deserved and justified and remains true. This isnt even something big, just another 1 second blip on CIGs incompetence radar but leave it to some people to drag this out for another 5 pages because they cannot accept even the slightest hint of criticism directed against their pet project. Its really not surprising we are arguing over SCs development start to this day ^^
Last time I checked railgun technology today already exceeds 10-12 mach by the way with far higher limits projected. And missile technology doesnt sleep either as the russians have showed recently so it remains to be seen if rail technology becomes a standard or even gets to operative mode at all to begin with....hey...just like Star Citizen than ^^ Also atmosphere....or rather the lack of one would make even conventional handguns reach and maintain speeds of 1000m/s+ so really, there is nothing impressive here
Not only is it not cool military hardware usually comes down to efficiency. It doesnt need to be good looking or comfy, it just needs to provide you an advantage or the means to overcome your opponent. I guess CIG could have a slow railgun in their game if they really wanted but if they cared for realism (lol) they would ve come up with a reason that would justify using railgun technology in the first place (which is extreme) when the payoff is a result that can be achieved by any cheap donky butt howitzer today. A "slow" railgun would aquire its destructive potential from projectile size rather than speed but at such slow speeds your projectile needs to be the size of a house to overcome military grade armor and theoretical shields.
As always, reading this thread is funny as hell because of the posts, thanks all ^^
.
the railgun on the Idris shoots at approximately 2000m/s. That’s pretty fast
compared to what? Because for weaponized railgun technology its really not.
Compared to current server tickrate (and the 30 ticks per second end goal). ^^
I’m not a railgun specialist but Wikipedia gives it muzzle velocities between 2000 and 3500 m/s
of course we need to remember it’s just a videogame and every little detail is always good for a good rant here in this forum
I get that two kilometers per second is ridiculously fast, its almost impossible to picture but in the end its just a number and conventional weapons approach these speeds already without space and energy requirements railguns have. Missiles and even bullets today even have guided capabilities making evasive actions or in-flight corrections possible. Railgun projectiles dont have that (yet).
Railgun benefits are ultimately engagement range and cheap ammunition cost. I d like to say "you can take anything really" and thats the theoretical goal but in reality railgun ammunition needs to be specially manufactured, you cant just take whatever stone or object you find. Still, munition cost is a fraction of missiles or explosive ordinance. The cost factor comes at the front of the whole thing.
I’m not a railgun specialist but Wikipedia gives it muzzle velocities between 2000 and 3500 m/s
of course we need to remember it’s just a videogame and every little detail is always good for a good rant here in this forum
I am no railgun expert either but my knowledge comes from a bit more than a single wiki entry about the whole thing ^^ So 3500 is already vastly more than 2000m/s and I guess you never read what I wrote either but thats not surprising I understand that reading posts on a forum is the last thing people want to do
As far as criticism goes the displayed railgun technology in Star Citizen either is none or really inferior to what we have today. Its nothing dramatic or critical. As has been mentioned, its a video game so it not reflecting reality is a given. So the critique is valid and stands. Leave it to the people who cannot tolerate anything slightly negative to justify, excuse and play the victim card on behalf of CIG. Thats why this threadnaut is such a gold mine. I guess people who only occasionally "pop in" cannot comprehend the fascination ^^
I’m not a railgun specialist but Wikipedia gives it muzzle velocities between 2000 and 3500 m/s
of course we need to remember it’s just a videogame and every little detail is always good for a good rant here in this forum
Just remember that in Elite rail guns are hitscan and have infinite velocity. And they do alot of damage, unless they travel something like 4000 meters and then they do no damage.
Anything different from these stats is not realistic.
Last edited:
Not even by today's standards, no.
Hey, I know. It's an underwater railgun. For the z levels below zero! Also there are supercavitation torpedoes. That's CAVITY you ignorants probably think now, but superCAVITATION is not about your teeth. It's a rocket under water traveling in a bubble of exhaust gas which makes it like super lubricated condom. No idea what that might be good for but there you are. It can go way faster than normal torpedoes. They just need to put each railgun round in superlubri condom and off they go at insane speeds.
(just to pick some low hanging fruit...) Compared to the pace of development?
Well practically having conventional propellant using cannon is more rational approach than slow rail gun. Weapon system is lighter, simpler, does not need external power.
In fact 500 m/s is quite slow for modern artillery muzzle velocity. Of course shell looses some velocity by atmospheric drag (and gravitational pull at top of its trajectory).
Typically, yes. Propellant driven guns max out somewhere in 1500 m/s, adding more propellant gives out very diminishing results while adding heat problems, barrel erosion and so on.
ED's weaponry is a joke catering to the dogfight/balance/arena/pvp crowd, and not just railguns. But is it that wrong to expect better from the BDSSE and it's no-compromise approach to fidelity with no shortcuts?
Standard for which size of rounds ? The rounds fired by the Idris are pretty massives (at least 6 meters long for 0.6 meter diameter). 2 km/s for this mass is pretty good by today's standards no ?
Wait a minute, you’re telling me a weapon in a game is not 100% realistic??? Shocker.
The point why I reacted was that we had a whole page here laughing at a 500m/s railgun and I’m laughing at the bad basic math and useal brainless outrage that followed on it