1. The forum will be closing soon permanently. Please read the announcement here

    Note: User registration has been closed. We do not accept any new accounts.

Rockchucker vs condensor cannon (gravity weapons)

Discussion in 'General' started by Mike55520, Aug 24, 2015.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. Mike55520

    Mike55520 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    438
    So the standard gravity gun simply loads x amount of ammo then fires it, usually resulting in a shotgun effect, but months ago I built what I call a condenser cannon, it loads the rounds, the. Packs them all into one tight ball of individual rocks via a specifically set gravity field, when it fires, it stays packed and on target for vast distances. This means it takes a long time to load, but strikes accurate from long range(it has crippled heavily armored ships from 2500m.)






    Lately I have been playing with a simple shotgunlike design and I want other opinions: are they Worth it? What style do you prefer, and what is the best ammo?
     
  2. Dax23333

    Dax23333 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    657
    Shotgun designs are good at ranges similar to that of turrets, perhaps out to 1.5km too. A fixed one on a small warship can prove very effective.

    In my experiments the reason for the spread of the ore cannon is that the ore at the back of the chamber travels slightly furthur in the gravity feild that that at the front. The result is that the ore at the back hits the ore at the front breaking up the lump into a scatter. Less concentrated damage results. A simple way to fix this is to turn of the gravity feild before any of the ore leaves it. This means every peice has been in the feild for the same distance, resulting in the same velocity for each and a much tightler clump. This is tricky to do manually, but should be possible with timers.
     
  3. Shabazza

    Shabazza Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    689
    I would say: For an anti-capital ship weapon, the packed shot is more devastating when it comes to destruction of certain compartments of the enemy ship.
    You can punch holes and destroy everything in your way, even when heavily armored (and thus potentially valuable).
    But you obviously need to line up your shot well, which makes your ship susceptible for counter attacks.
    So I wouldn't recommend this in a 1vs1 battle if the enemy is already aware of you. Otherwise: Snipe it! ;)
    While the "shotgun mode" is good to spread damage over a large area e.g. the normally broad profile top or bottom side and bringing ship defenses (turrets) in an area down quickly.
    But it may not pack enough punch to incapcitate a warship in one blow. It more or less can prepare the enemy ship quickly for following fighter attacks or boarding at the weakened area.

    But I don't prefer one, since I love peace. :D
     
  4. Dwarf-Lord Pangolin

    Dwarf-Lord Pangolin Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,597
    Tristavius' Onager is probably the best rock-based gravity gun I've seen, and falls into the condensor category; it's very effective. I personally prefer player-created projectiles, but those are admittedly more prone to blowing up your own ship without exercising care.
     
  5. mhalpern

    mhalpern Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,119
    and projector based are prone to jamming when reloading while moving.
     
  6. iN5URG3NT

    iN5URG3NT Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,132
    And Ore Cannons are countered by Grav Shields. Obviously it's balancing. Well played Keen. :D
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. tankmayvin

    tankmayvin Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,864
    Do "floating objects" (ore/ingots/comps) still do impact damage in .096?
     
  8. Mike55520

    Mike55520 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    438
    If y are asking if a dropped motor will still bore a hole through your floor, idk
     
  9. tankmayvin

    tankmayvin Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,864
    Floaters need some critical velocity before they do deformation damage, never mind generate volumetric explosions. My question is if they do either even at 104 m/s anymore.
     
  10. Dax23333

    Dax23333 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    657
    Ammo wise, I think everything works as well as everything else. Stone would be by far the easiest to get lots of as a byproduct of mining operations, and is less useful than other materials. I use stone as ammo for all my ore cannons.
     
  11. JoeTheDestroyer

    JoeTheDestroyer Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    573
    I've been meaning to ask about this and it seems like you guys messing w/ grav guns would know the answer. Anyways, I was investigating after watching @w4stedspace 's recent video on a planetary ore launcher. He had noticed that ore was traveling higher than it should and there was some weird speculation about the game storing energy/momentum above the 104.5m/s speed cap.

    I suspected (and have seen) that the reason is much simpler: floating objects (and astronauts) have a much higher speed cap than 104.5. Using (64x) gravity generators and a programmable block + sensor to measure instantaneous speed, I have seen the following max speeds:
    Stone pellets: 202.8 m/s
    Astronaut (jetpack off): 147.7 m/s
    (Large and small block spaceballs are always 104.5m/s, as expected.)

    So the ore pellets he was shooting have almost twice the expected speed. This also means they have 4x the kinetic energy and thus will reach 4x the height before they start falling again (due to gravity).

    So my question is, does anyone know how long this has been going on?
     
  12. Dragon0G

    Dragon0G Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    550
    Like this:

     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Mike55520

    Mike55520 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    438
    Hubba...
     
  14. w4stedspace

    w4stedspace Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    43
    I thought the object traveling beyond max speed thing had been fixed really quite a long time ago, prior to the introduction of modable max speed etc.. guess I was wrong :s (or it's back)
     
  15. JoeTheDestroyer

    JoeTheDestroyer Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    573
    That makes me feel better. I thought I remembered it not working this way before, but I couldn't remember when, so I thought I might be going crazy :)

    The odd thing is I first tested this in a source build (on a planet) and there the limit for floating objects ~177m/s (rather than the 202 in the official build). I've dug around in the source a bit, but I have yet to find where this difference in speed limits is coming from. It's also odd that the astronaut has two different speed limits, depending on whether the jetpack is on, and both are different from floating object limit.
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.