Naval Units Rework Project

It forms a good skeletal structure for now.

The way I think of the future is from a conspiracy theorist's point of view. And a Sci-fi writer's point of view.

I don't think much Sci-Fi has ever been tooooo far off the mark of what could happen.

I'd like to see C2C future be an amalgamation of Terminator, Matrix, the world of Marvel Comics (and maybe some DC too but I'm not too in the know on that stuff), Battletech, Star Trek, Star Wars, and hundreds more. But more importantly to blend them into something that makes reasonable sense.

Consideration for the forms of the Droids considered here are somewhat inspired by the Matrix.

And I'm certainly not meaning to down Mr.A's work here. It was very helpful to have numerous puzzle pieces fairly logically organized in place as it is so that I could see where I felt things were simply needing a few adjustments to match the vision. I don't think the changes I'm suggesting here are actually that drastically different. That's saying a lot actually, that so much of it was already well organized and in such a logical progression as it is.

Great graphics there H! Very cool - I mean, yes, this chart is suggesting we could make an even earlier sub unit but would it even be functional as a combat vehicle or any other use? I look at the very first designs as being even more awkward prototypes and completely combat useless though the first one to destroy a ship was in the civil war even that attack destroyed the sub as well... lol. So I'm thinking the Submersible would be the first somewhat combat applicable sub unit that has emerged from these prototypes that have been worked on in the background for some time as the chart and wikipedia states.

Click to expand...

Well I put up a request for the The Drebbel. If anything it could become a Clockpunk Sub. But I agree that the Civil War Era Sub should be used.

Ok, so we'll need to add the Hero combat class and a global limit of 1 to that unit I think. (Among the rest of the adjustments that come up in this analysis stream. Glad you agree... My wife and I have both used Nautilii to far too great an early advantage thanks to them not being so limited and even with some reduced strength from this analysis it's still going to be a terribly lethal sub unit before the world is ready to face such subs making it a perfect global class unit for Steampunk access.

Click to expand...

I will take your word for it since I have not had that many games in the later eras.

Just keep in mind the nature of 'top secret' technological developments. Propaganda is always going to abound to suggest it 'can't' be done or hasn't been yet. They're not going to come out waving a flag saying hey look what we've got unless they're either bluffing to intimidate other nations (I often feel Russia does this) or even simply warning other nations of what they can do to ward off any aggressive considerations that may be developing against them. If you're on the top of the warfare tech race, however, like the US would be, then if you have something, you do all you can to make sure nobody really knows that you do for sure until you are ready to make it known (in a real and serious warfare scenario that's made it worthwhile to reveal the developments you've made so far.)

Click to expand...

Possibly, who's is to say? Such top secret programs could be making stuff we have no even thought of, while the ones we "wish" for like invisibility could still be yet to achieve. And don't get me started on the crazy ideas conspiracy theorists come up with.

That's why I often avoid the tech tree discussions... this is where I kinda suck. I have an idea of how things may develop with future military technology applications from here but actual tech tree analysis is not my strong suit.

Click to expand...

Well the short answer for you is that I think moving Invisibility out from where it is should have little impact. The way MrAzure did them when adding other techs actually has a lot of overlaps. Where you want to place Invisibility however it totally up to you. Thus I think the 2 techs it leads to could just be ...

Superstrong Alloys
Req Tech: Advanced Computers AND Biomimetics

Unification Physics
Req Tech: Antigrav AND Cybernetics AND Superstrong Alloys

Then Fusion ships would be best not to unlock immediately on Fusion tech. The first of them perhaps at Internal Shockwave Engine (I'm not sure what Azure had intended here but it seems to be a good spot for stating that the actual ship fusion engines were opened up here.) Then we get more at Warmachines and more at Photon Thermodynamics (which is probably where we should be considering Ion Cannons to be born) or a tech leading off from it.

Click to expand...

If you read the pedia for Internal Shockwave Engine. It explains it a bit. And one big impact from it seems to be not needing oil products for fuel, but instead liquid metal.

Something like Nuclear Pulse Propulsion leads to Monoatomic Metals (which leads to some further biological manipulation empowerment and perhaps some further developments for nanotechnology) which leads to Anti-Gravity. There we have the Anti-grav engine and for the most part Naval, Air and Land have many unit streams blend into each other - the main rivers of upgrade chains leading to what we have represented here. But then these ships are good for orbital to planetary but not so great for beyond into near and far space so other armadas are developed for that. And it will be interesting to see how the land units blend into this picture as well but for now... this is where I see us being at Anti-Gravity (and perhaps some techs leading off of it to flesh out the rest of these 'naval' units.)

Click to expand...

Nuclear Pulse Propulsion was from the AtoM mod and thus is a type of Spaceship propulsion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

As you can see this is something you would not want planetside. Only in space. Its basically using controlled nuclear blasts to propel you though space.

Here are the space propulsion methods we agreed upon ...

Solid Rocket = 7km/s, 1mN (mega newton = 1,000,000 newtons), very limited fuel, used for moon(s)

Liquid Rocket = 14km/s, 1mN, very limited fuel, used for moon(s)

Ion Thruster = 600km/s, 1cN (centi-newton) used for solar system traversal

Solar Sails (only be used to reduce inner solar system maintenance)

VASIMR = 900km/s, 1kN settle Alpha Centauri or equivalent

Magnetic Sails (only be used to reduce overall solar system maintenance)

Nuclear Pulse Propulsion = 15,000km/s, 10tN trade with Alpha Centauri more efficiently but cannot settle with since thrust would crush a person.

ACNPP = 62,000km/s, 60tN trading only

Antimatter Rocket = 100,000km/s, 1pN (petaNewton) strictly terrestrial probes, thrust would crush anything not actually attached to the craft.

Neutrino Oscillation Pulse = 9,000tm/s (terameters) Pulse only lasts one second, but must be within a black hole's gravity range to enter a wormhole or craft would self terminate from thrust.

Wormhole traversal (needs Neutrino Oscillation Pulse to enter successfully or craft will be destroyed by the singularity, otherwise wormholes would only be used for fast communications)

Folding Space = fold limited amounts of space at any one time, roughly 1ly - 100ly (light years)(only enough to explore galaxy, game winner)

Space Creasing = fold larger amounts of space at any one time, roughly 1,000ly - 1,000,000,000ly(only enough for intra-galactic trading)

Click to expand...

Note: Anti-Gravity as a tech should really be split to take two forms, Magnetic Field Repulsion Hovering - which has a very short range to loft vehicles up from the surface that's the vehicle is being held away from (thus should replace the current Anti-Gravity tech and some of the buildings there should have the term anti-grav replaced by Magnetic Repulsion or Magnetic Field (thus Magnetic Field traps, Magnetic Repulsion Generators.) These are repulsion fields, not true anti-gravity which will probably be more of a result of understanding how mono-atomic metals when superheated can take on a less than zero density (and how to make a generator that is powerful enough to use this understanding with any great efficacy.) These repulsion fields can make for some fantastic engine systems and defensive systems and perhaps Shielding should be off of THIS tech. It should also require Advanced Electromagnetic Field Generation since that's a precursor to such a development.

This cool with you? I know it's a lot to consider! And there's a lot of other rearrangements of the late tech tree that will have to be made to take this whole 'storyline' concept into account but one step at a time right?

Click to expand...

I think we already have the Magnetic Field Repulsion Hovering at "Hypermagnetics" tech X109.

Of course they aren't trying to keep the sizes anywhere near the originals, just using inspirations of motility and form. BUT you make an interesting point. What about Barricuda? We don't have those yet but maybe somewhere... Otherwise I like the Tuna idea you proposed... just makes 'em not sound as lethal is all.

Click to expand...

How about a Marlin?

Those last two... I have a feeling we might want to keep those for later - Droids shouldn't really stop developing here - this is just the last Naval stage where Naval is still applicable. So I'm happy to keep with the animal theme... I like the Turtle concept for a landing ship and for a troopship how about a Dugong?

Or perhaps an Alligator or Crocodile for a landing ship and a turtle for the troopship?

Click to expand...

Yeah I think a giant sea turtle would be cool. And an amphibious Crocodile droid would be neat as well.

lol... a lot huh? I'm spending the weekend working on other tag evaluations for these naval units. If you can read the above post and I can rely on you to hammer out tech adjustments and assignments on these units as well as collecting and applying the unit art (or if someone else wants to help there) then I can probably balance out the unitcombat and combat details on them here. We could probably knock this out with some efficiency really.

Click to expand...

Well at some point we need to get it into the standard form I normally post in the unit thread. Its just easier to read and sort out.

I was wondering about that. Still a few things I want to sneak in here for the release and I should take a look at my notes to see what those are. So I can try to get those few things accomplished before we go further here. Just take note that this release will have some not so optimal late navy stuff then.

Click to expand...

How close are we to the release?

I already read it completely twice now...

Don't take it too literally.Saying that Fusion will be invent 2053 (June 13th 11:23 UTC...) is just stupid. But it gives a general idea. Sure there can be breakthroughs and major setbacks,wars, etc... but this is the Page MrAzure Based our TH and Galactic era on so this is accurate for game purposes. You can'tpredict the future, but we have to stick to a plausible idea and since our TH era is already based on it, this website would be a good "future history" of C2C.
when you read through it, you will recognize a lot of our later techtree, so Mr Azure did a pretty good job here I think.

Click to expand...

Yeah MrAzure was using a timeline from Orion's Arm.

Faustmouse said:

There is! Most of the stuff Mr Azure added was based on this page. Warning, it is pretty addictive!

Click to expand...

I think it was more from Orion's Arm. Since many of the descriptions are directly from it.

About invisibility: Link 1 (this one makes me think I might be wrong about electromagnetic fields having anything to do with it...)
Link 2 This one insinuates it's a combination of both approaches and more potentially... including nanomaterials GENERATING the light bending electromagnetic fields. So I'm not as far off base as I was suddenly worried I might be.

Link 3 Yeah, looks like its a nano-web that generates the light-bending fields.

Do a search on google for Invisibility Technology 2014 and you'll pull these and so many more sites that go into even more detail. This is quite real and not just a conspiracy theory rumor.

How far along we are into implementing the technology into something that sees the battlefield is up in the air (probably now but not in great volume yet... most likely in the development stages like the stealth bomber would've been just years before going into production - but this may be an adaptation they can add to existing craft rather than requiring new vehicles to be built.)

So yeah, right around the corner. For the game's sake I'm suggesting it be suspended for a bit longer than it probably needs to be even though I'm asking it to move forward.

H said:

If you read the pedia for Internal Shockwave Engine. It explains it a bit. And one big impact from it seems to be not needing oil products for fuel, but instead liquid metal.

Click to expand...

That sounds just about perfect for the Fusion engines that unlock the Fusion Naval forces!

H said:

Nuclear Pulse Propulsion was from the AtoM mod and thus is a type of Spaceship propulsion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion

As you can see this is something you would not want planetside. Only in space. Its basically using controlled nuclear blasts to propel you though space.

Here are the space propulsion methods we agreed upon ...

Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to say it was the propulsion mechanism being used BY Anti-Grav ships planetside - and I'm happy to see there IS a difference between one and another.

Looking at the charts I'm simply trying to find a reason why navies haven't been obsoleted until the Galactic Era. If the Levitation powers of the current Anti-Gravity tech are sufficient enough to lift such large ships then we have a problem with rationale - THAT is when navies would die out. So I'm looking to the Early Galactic Era to enable the unlocking of a method of Anti-gravity technology that makes even the largest vehicles capable of travelling undersea, hovering overland, and rising to orbit with equivalent ease. They do NOT need to ALSO be distant space travel capable however. Even LARGER ships would be built to transport these vessels such distances.

So my suggestions there are for that reason. There needs to be a tech that represents new access to such ginormous vehicles which travel with ease from the deepest ocean to farthest reaches of orbital space. And preferably in comes in just a few techs after the Droid Navies are centered on Advanced Warmachines. (x114)

So if you can see a way to state this new access as coming into play at the beginning of the Galactic Era or just before it, then I'd be happy to adjust how I'm looking at it. The Anti-Gravity tech we have unlocks Levitation vehicles which I see as still being mostly dedicated land units that can hover with some limits as to how high and cannot adapt this hovering to enable submersion underwater. They could certainly INTRUDE into naval warfare (like helicopters do) but should they begin to replace the necessity for naval units yet? I'm hoping not so we can have some more naval development stages.



Either way, the Shielding tech needs to be moved far forward still because it MUST come BEFORE the Fusion navies are built. (And Arcologies are mostly an Anti-Nuclear defense device as well as a contained air filtration system for the cities that are growing so heavily over-polluted, so pretty much means the end of the MAJOR threat nukes represent from the 80s to the near future) And perhaps it should be a prereq for Fusion - it could BE the tech that we were needing between Imaginary Physics and Invisibility (for the enhanced generation and manipulation of electromagnetic fields).

Also sounds like we may need to consider that Meta-Materials tech for another Invisibilty prereq based on that reading material above.


Otherwise I'm pretty much open to wherever we put these but I'm trying to space out the late-game naval clusters so they don't obsolete each other all too quickly (though the Droid Navies shouldn't to the Anti-Grav ones and can reasonably be just a few tech grids earlier than we start to unlock the Anti-Gravs.)

H said:

How about a Marlin?

Click to expand...

That could work for me - a swordfish as it were.

H said:

Yeah I think a giant sea turtle would be cool. And an amphibious Crocodile droid would be neat as well.

Click to expand...

Perfect! I can see the crocodile-like maw opening up and Droid land units swarming out!

H said:

Well at some point we need to get it into the standard form I normally post in the unit thread. Its just easier to read and sort out.

Click to expand...

Ok... I just have to design them with the whole structure of their upgrades and such in mind for the combat details so yes, eventually we compile them into a one after another expression. I got side-tracked yesterday and I know I've got some issues to sort out pre-release so I'm pausing for a moment and if it looks like we can get enough time to get these compiled before the freeze then I'm ALL for quickly coming back to finish off the evaluations that need to be done here. They shouldn't take too overly long to finish up with.

About invisibility: Link 1 (this one makes me think I might be wrong about electromagnetic fields having anything to do with it...)
Link 2 This one insinuates it's a combination of both approaches and more potentially... including nanomaterials GENERATING the light bending electromagnetic fields. So I'm not as far off base as I was suddenly worried I might be.

Link 3 Yeah, looks like its a nano-web that generates the light-bending fields.

Do a search on google for Invisibility Technology 2014 and you'll pull these and so many more sites that go into even more detail. This is quite real and not just a conspiracy theory rumor.

How far along we are into implementing the technology into something that sees the battlefield is up in the air (probably now but not in great volume yet... most likely in the development stages like the stealth bomber would've been just years before going into production - but this may be an adaptation they can add to existing craft rather than requiring new vehicles to be built.)

So yeah, right around the corner. For the game's sake I'm suggesting it be suspended for a bit longer than it probably needs to be even though I'm asking it to move forward.

Click to expand...

Wow! Very cool. I guess technology is progressing aster than I thought. So yeah near future sounds good for Invisibility tech.

That sounds just about perfect for the Fusion engines that unlock the Fusion Naval forces!

Click to expand...

So are we putting the Fusion ships here? Or we calling them "Shockwave" ships? Because in my new units I had a Shockwave APC listed which would run on this new type of engine.

Looking at the charts I'm simply trying to find a reason why navies haven't been obsoleted until the Galactic Era. If the Levitation powers of the current Anti-Gravity tech are sufficient enough to lift such large ships then we have a problem with rationale - THAT is when navies would die out. So I'm looking to the Early Galactic Era to enable the unlocking of a method of Anti-gravity technology that makes even the largest vehicles capable of travelling undersea, hovering overland, and rising to orbit with equivalent ease. They do NOT need to ALSO be distant space travel capable however. Even LARGER ships would be built to transport these vessels such distances.

Click to expand...

Indeed that spacecraft would takeover the seas, air and land, however there would be a new type of divide, short range spacecraft and long range spacecraft. The short range would be the ones like you said that could go in the ocean or hover on land or fly in the sky and even orbit, bit these crafts would not be able to to the long journey from star to star. It would take the big ships to do that.

I see it working like this ...

1. Carrier/Transport Starships - These can hold the smaller spacecrafts. And go faster than those can, however are still slower than #2.

2. Explore/Trade Starships - These go extremely fast and would crush any living thing inside. Robots and Androids might be useful on these but not biological.

Note that all this goes out the window once you get to folding and creasing space. But for slower than light travel those would be the 2 types of long range ships.

Perfect! I can see the crocodile-like maw opening up and Droid land units swarming out!

Click to expand...

Ok... I just have to design them with the whole structure of their upgrades and such in mind for the combat details so yes, eventually we compile them into a one after another expression. I got side-tracked yesterday and I know I've got some issues to sort out pre-release so I'm pausing for a moment and if it looks like we can get enough time to get these compiled before the freeze then I'm ALL for quickly coming back to finish off the evaluations that need to be done here. They shouldn't take too overly long to finish up with.

Click to expand...

Here is an example unit for you ...

Hydro said:

So are we putting the Fusion ships here? Or we calling them "Shockwave" ships? Because in my new units I had a Shockwave APC listed which would run on this new type of engine.

Click to expand...

Oooh... I like the name change! Shockwave Naval forces sounds much cooler than Fusion naval forces!

By the way... I'm ONLY looking at what really unlocks these vessels core design features (what really unlocks the 'upgrade stage') but if we want to have some variation in which techs unlock
each actual unit among those upgrade clusters that would probably be optimal so that not all of the units become available at once. I figure I'll turn those individual more intricate tech access definitions for each individual unit over to you to figure out whatever seems to make sense. I just ask that the units within a given upgrade clusters stay FAIRLY close to each other and don't overlap on the x grid with other units from other clusters. Does that make sense?

Hydro said:

Indeed that spacecraft would takeover the seas, air and land, however there would be a new type of divide, short range spacecraft and long range spacecraft. The short range would be the ones like you said that could go in the ocean or hover on land or fly in the sky and even orbit, bit these crafts would not be able to to the long journey from star to star (And may even be considered too slow for effective planet to planet travel and would benefit at least from a faster interplanetary transport). It would take the big ships to do that.

I see it working like this ...

1. Carrier/Transport Starships - These can hold the smaller spacecrafts. And go faster than those can, however are still slower than #2.

2. Explore/Trade Starships - These go extremely fast and would crush any living thing inside. Robots and Androids might be useful on these but not biological.

Note that all this goes out the window once you get to folding and creasing space. But for slower than light travel those would be the 2 types of long range ships.

Click to expand...

Yes, cool... You're following my thinking here quite accurately. We can work on those space travel vessels once these ships are complete and for all intents and purposes we may need multi-maps to make those longer range ones really work anyhow. These 'last' naval vessels still need a tech at the early stage of the Galactic(or is it Future? Whatever the grey ones at the end are) Era that explains why we haven't seen such incredible absolute anti-grav capable units until then. They need to come in AFTER the Droid ships and if the Droid ships have such ultimate hover capacity themselves then why would they bother with a navy at all? And it's too cool to have them IMO!

Hydro said:

Here is an example unit for you ...

Click to expand...

You know there's a few important details you often leave out of these right? Like unit AI, conscription values etc... Not much but it shows in the xml sometimes where the weakspots were in the design. Not saying that needs to be addressed yet though since at some point some of those things will need a massive audit to correct across the board anyhow.

So yes, for my evaluations I need to see them all at once and only consider a portion of their abilities but for expressing the unit once all evaluations have taken place we can certainly express them here in that format. (Aside from my brief and less than significant feedback on what's missing, I've been loving the way you share the data on a new unit that goes back to when we started here and has evolved with a few improvements but is still much how it has already been... that consistency has been a benefit all this time!)

Thunderbrd said:

You know there's a few important details you often leave out of these right? Like unit AI, conscription values etc... Not much but it shows in the xml sometimes where the weakspots were in the design. Not saying that needs to be addressed yet though since at some point some of those things will need a massive audit to correct across the board anyhow.

Click to expand...

Or do I? When I put ...

Notes: Use Hi-Tech APC as a Base

Click to expand...

This means the unit maker will use the code from that unit as a starting point and then add the changes above for the new unit. So things like unit AI, etc would already be present in the unit code we are copying. I try to find an existing unit that is the most similar to the one I want them to make so it takes them less work.

Here is an attempt to make your ideas into a unit.

Antigrav Behemoth
Graphic: Here
Icon: ?
Type: Nuclear Ship (and stuff) [Should be a new type than Nuclear]
Strength: 288
Movement: 13 [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
Cost: 7300
Req Tech: Antigrav
Req Resource: Antigrav Generator
Req Building: -
Upgrades To: -

Special Abilities

• +100% vs Wooden Ships
• +100% vs Steam Ships
• +100% vs Diesel Ships
• +50% vs Nuclear Ships
• Can Perform Ranged attacks
• Range Bombard Distance: +4 [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
• Ranged Bombard Accuracy +50%
• Ranged Bombard Damage +50%
• Ranged Bombard Damage Limit: +50%
• Ranged Bombard Max Targets: +4 [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
• Can Bombard City Defenses (-35%/Turn) [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
• Cause Collateral Damage (Max 80% to 8 Units) [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
• This Unit is Tradable
• Invisible to Most Units
• Can See Stealth Units
• Can See Submarine Units
• Ignores Terrain Movement Costs
• +4 Per Turn [Maybe More]

Notes: Use Fusion Battleship as a Base

Hydromancerx said:

Or do I? When I put ...



This means the unit maker will use the code from that unit as a starting point and then add the changes above for the new unit. So things like unit AI, etc would already be present in the unit code we are copying. I try to find an existing unit that is the most similar to the one I want them to make so it takes them less work.

Click to expand...

True... but I've found that some of the progressions, noteably in iConscription, aren't well arranged. But again, those are only minor points imo.

Hydromancerx said:

Here is an attempt to make your ideas into a unit.

Antigrav Behemoth
Graphic: Here
Icon: ?
Type: Nuclear Ship (and stuff) [Should be a new type than Nuclear]
Strength: 288
Movement: 13 [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
Cost: 7300
Req Tech: Antigrav
Req Resource: Antigrav Generator
Req Building: -
Upgrades To: -

Special Abilities

• +100% vs Wooden Ships
• +100% vs Steam Ships
• +100% vs Diesel Ships
• +50% vs Nuclear Ships
• Can Perform Ranged attacks
• Range Bombard Distance: +4 [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
• Ranged Bombard Accuracy +50%
• Ranged Bombard Damage +50%
• Ranged Bombard Damage Limit: +50%
• Ranged Bombard Max Targets: +4 [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
• Can Bombard City Defenses (-35%/Turn) [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
• Cause Collateral Damage (Max 80% to 8 Units) [Maybe Should be Adjusted]
• This Unit is Tradable
• Invisible to Most Units
• Can See Stealth Units
• Can See Submarine Units
• Ignores Terrain Movement Costs
• +4 Per Turn [Maybe More]

Notes: Use Fusion Battleship as a Base

Click to expand...

Yeah, all those red 'should be adjusteds' and more still need evaluating. I made a list for myself of all those items that still need further evaluation then like an idiot closed it without saving. So I'll have to go back and recreate that list - urgh!

You make a good point about needing another CC for these new stages.

Why aren't Railgun ships being considered? I thought the next big thing in naval warfare was the railgun which might even bring the battleship back.

Hmm... there IS a slot for battleships in the Next War group and a Railgunship could suit that purpose. People might feel a little better with a fully manned, heavily armored, lethally weaponed meaty beast being present to ensure that if the unmanned units start going haywire they can be put down.

I haven't read enough about railgun technology apparently. But anyhow, there is a valid slot for such a vessel... and as the concept of tactical nuclear strikes becomes more and more assumed to be that 'line nobody would dare to cross' I can see the battleship's concept making a comeback in the near future. Only problem is it hasn't been currently proposed yet by Naval thinktanks so far as I can see and most of the Nextwar stuff is based on the published 'vision of future warfare' that the US Navy has proposed. Then again, I might be overlooking something by not having done much research on the railgun.

A few questions:
1) when would Railguns be currently set to open up on our current tech tree?
2) is it something different than a massive fully automatic weapon or shellfire weapon? Enough to warrant its own Weapon Combat Class?
3) what kind of constraints would it have in terms of the size of the weapon? How much space would a railgun take up?

Any links that explain the Railgun concept would be appreciated though if I can find a moment here I'll go do a search and see what I can find myself.

1) Railsguns (smaller ones) are working today. Main problem is the power supply, which would take up the most mass of the weapon. Thus they can't be really used on cars or handheld. Also, we do have a Railguns Tech in our Techtree. 2020-2034 should the first military railguns enter the battlefield.

2) It doesn't have to be massive or fully automated. Railguns are like a "Cannon", except that no Gunpowder is used to fire them but magentic fields.

3) As I said, you can have them any size (I saw a youtube video of someone build it with Car batteries that shoots projectiles smaller then a corn of rice.)

In general they are a pipe with a projectile in it. You induce a magnetic field just in front of the projectile that attrakts the projectil and one behind it that rejects it. This will move the peojectile foward. Once it comes near the attraktive field, both fields are turned off and another attraktor7rejector pair is induced a bit further etc. This is repeated quite often and happens in miliseconds - or less. It is enough to speed the projectile to Mach 5 or more. Funny thing: No explosives are used at all. The impulse alone causes the devastating effect of the impact. Plus, the projectile can be controlled in flight and they can fire pretty fast. Therefore, Railguns aer basically a Long range (350km range or more), guided machine gun with the power of small nuclear bombs and minimal costs per shot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6sAUHwTP4A

This video gives you an idea about the size (this baby is Mach 10). There is almost no recoil (dispite the high speed, the mass is very low compared to the battleship). the flames you can see are not explosives but the air in front of the projectile that gets compressed so hard that it becomes a plasma an ignites.

Some very interesting stuff there... and some very interesting quotes on wikipedia:

Many critics of weaponized railgun systems claim running at a suitable exit velocity and rate of fire would consume too much power, though this would likely not be a problem for nuclear-powered systems such as on large warships or submarines.

Click to expand...

I'd think subs would not benefit so much due to the great size of the weapons unless they were very small grade ones. So I can see high grade and low grade versions of railguns. Subs could certainly use those, as could most of the current military vessels. However:

The U.S. Navy plans to integrate a railgun that has a range of 160 km (100 mi) onto a ship by 2016.[25] By that time the Navy expects to have a weapon that can fire multiple projectiles per minute. The hyper-velocity rounds weigh 10 kg (23 lb) and cost about $25,000 each. They have command guidance but are planned to be self-guided in the future.[26] The 18 in (460 mm) shells are fired at Mach 7.[27] Currently the only ships that can produce enough electrical power to get desired performance are the Zumwalt-class destroyers; they can generate 78 megawatts of power, far more than would be necessary. Engineers are working to derive technologies from the DDG-1000 series ships into a battery system to store enough energy so other warships can operate a railgun.[28] Even if current ships, such as the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, can be upgraded with enough power to operate a railgun, the space taken up on the ships by the integration of an additional weapon system may force the removal of existing weapon systems to make room available.

Click to expand...

So I'm thinking they'd only use the smaller ones, even for the Cruisers considering such a massive amount of cargo hold on Cruisers is dedicated to Missile systems. THIS is what would necessitate the return of the Battleship... the LARGER the gun, the MORE POWERFUL and the more energy it will require which also means the larger the reactor system that will be necessary to generate such power (and armor to make it somewhat safe to operate such a size reactor!) Only the Battleship concept could really embrace this and based on the timelines they're giving here I suspect they'll realize the return of the need of the battleship much sooner than anything that had been stated on the wiki section regarding battleships. Yes... I think the Next War slot is perfect for this weapon and for the Battleship. The interesting note about the concept of giving such weaponry to unmanned naval vehicles even hints as to exactly where it should be on our upgrade stages here.

We really need to identify the exact tech to where the Railgun becomes commonly in use. And it doesn't sound as far off as it may currently be sitting (much like Invisibility has been determined to be.) And that tech must be a prereq for the Next War category ships that do utilize them. Perhaps not all of them would though... they were talking about the heat issue and how it can be a giveaway for stealth units... not to say they might not be able to develop it by then. But at least it would be a reason the Huge Railgun Battleship may not yet see action - stealth is, at least for a bit, more important in naval tactics for the 'Now' era on the groupings of ships as they've been established so far. Once the stealth is pretty much trumped, which it quickly becomes, then we whip out the big guns and stick 'em on the battleships and pretty much say to hell with stealth. Who needs it when you've got guns like these?

I figure these things in their ultimate development form will be basically hugely explosive (simply due to the massive force of impact), extraordinarily long range Fully Automatic Shellfire! Yeah... very powerful!

And the smallest ones will even be handheld for even small arms units once major small power generation mechanisms are developed. Laser fire will certainly have a lot to live up to to exceed the strength of these things but I've seen some laser mechanisms in my dreams (literally) that suggests it certainly can eventually do so... eventually. And the combination of the two will make handheld weaponry just... terrifying!

Ok, so I'm onboard with these weapons now. I apparently do need a new combat class - they ARE that significant - and a rework on the rbombard stats in regards to them (and ion and laser since those would come after) - and navaly begin to introduce them into the Next War unit lines, particularly onto the battleships there. The one thing I wonder with this is if I'll need a Handheld Railgun, Small Vehicular Railgun and Large Vehicular Railgun category or if one will do... at the moment I'm thinking I'll need all three! Particularly for keeping equipment access separated later.

Thanks for bringing these to my attention!


Some further support for some of the above statements:

wikipedia said:

The Navy is looking into other uses for railguns other than land bombardment like air defense. With the right targeting systems, projectiles could intercept aircraft, cruise missiles, and even ballistic missiles; the Navy is also developing directed energy weapons for that use, but it may be years before they could be effective. A railgun's 100-mile range provides protection from most land-based anti-ship missiles, which the Navy calculates is a minimum of 65 nmi (75 mi; 120 km) from shore. Its range is further than laser weapons, which travel straight through line-of-sight and eventually off into space, while projectiles follow a ballistic trajectory. The Navy sees a fleet's future offensive and defensive capabilities in layers; lasers provide close range defense, railguns provide medium range attack and defense, and cruise missiles are retained for long-range attacks, though railguns will cover targets up to 100 miles away that previously needed a missile. Current Arleigh Burke-class and Zumwalt-class destroyers can carry 96 and 80 cruise missiles, respectively, that each cost millions of dollars. Smaller and cheaper railgun projectiles allow warships to afford to and be able to carry hundreds of rounds.

Click to expand...

And then eventually the railgun becomes obsoleted (well somewhat... differing armor types would protect against one type but not well against the other so it would remain effective but would be somewhat superceded) by ION beam weaponry (Imagine what would happen if you took the Cern super-accelerator, condensed it but lost NO power in doing so, then found a way to focus the beam on a target... yeah, pretty much nothing stands against it!)

Well the Railgun and Fusion are in the same column. So I would guess ships around that era could use railguns.

Maybe Railguns are to far away then. Fusion is sheduled around 2050 while railguns are ssaid to be used in the next 10 years...

Well the Transhuman Era is 23 columns wide. Fusion and Railguns are 7 columns in.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spr...Dl2a2tIYkVQSjBIRjRSb29YLW9NZ2c&hl=en_US&gid=0

From your spreadsheet, I could see them 2 columns earlier, X 96. Requireing Meta Materials and Military Robots.

(we should be at X93/94 right now IRL)

Faustmouse said:

From your spreadsheet, I could see them 2 columns earlier, X 96. Requireing Meta Materials and Military Robots.

(we should be at X93/94 right now IRL)

Click to expand...

From the outlook of this naval evaluation I think we'll need them even earlier. I don't have us quite applying x92 quite yet - working on it, developed it but putting it into common application is where we said the tech is 'achieved'. For where it would fit into a picture of graduating military strength, x92-x94, somewhere around there, is where the railgun should come in. I say this not currently looking at the tech tree... I'll take another look later. (Edit: maybe x94 from a prereq of Rapid Prototyping)

Movement:
You'll notice that I've added/removed/edited units according to the discussion we've had so far in this thread and what was copied to it at the beginning. Wooden ships will eventually need to be reconsidered in full with Faustmouse's guidelines as well though otherwise these will not be quite right in-game.

I still think that everything over 5 movement is too much. maybe it will work with the changes to the navigation promotions and the techs... But we should have more techs that increase line of sight over water like optics does. Maybe at Radar and Satellites?