Speed and Range of Projectiles

[Aeonic]

It always seemed wrong to me how lasers and kinetics worked. The way I see it, lasers as we know them are relatively short range, especially if you want to do anything more than light up a target. If you want to cut with a laser, you have to be right on top of something. Now we're assuming that 400+ years into the future things have changed a bit, but the principle aught to be the same.

On the other hand, kinetic weapons theoretically don't have a limited range. They just keep on going, although at a certain point they may stop being dangerous if they encounter enough space dust or whatever to slow them down.

So the way I see it, the pros and cons of lasers and kinetics should be:

Lasers
Pros: Really fast projectiles, easy to hit stuff accurately.
Cons: Short range, you need to be near the target to do any damage.

Kinetics
Pros: Long range, good for base bombardment.
Cons: Slow projectiles, difficult to hit moving targets at a distance.

The way it is now, there seems to be little appeal for kinetic weapons unless they do significantly more damage than the lasers, which isn't really the case. Lasers are fast, easy to hit with, and have a much longer range than most kinetic weapons.

[bluesaberist]

Laser are actually very long ranged, and very accurate.
Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_YAL-1

Laser, however, would be easier to block with a shield generator, since there is no moving objects to stop.

I agree with you that kinetic weapons should have very long ranges. It is possible that the projectile is powered however, and that the fuel gets depleted very rapidly, killing the projectile.

Maybe there shouldn't be any omni kinetic weapons. (Wait, are there any?) And laser should always be omni. And invisible. You can't see them in real life anyway, visible light laser or not. Kinetic weapons would just do a lot more damage than laser against shield generators.

[Arisaya]

Realism doesn't always make for the best gameplay. If things were realistic... this wouldn't be transcendence. Invisible lasers arn't exactly the best idea in this kind of game...

[Sponge]

Laser are actually very long ranged, and very accurate.
Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_YAL-1

There is an absolutely huge difference between a few hundred kilometers in an atmosphere and a few light seconds in a vacuum. Aeonic is, technically speaking, correct. Lasers are subject to diffraction; that is, they "spread out" as they propagate through space. As the beam diverges, the area of its spot size increases exponentially, which means the energy per area deposited on your enemy's hull decreases exponentially. This limits the effective range of lasers. Higher wavelength lasers (like X-rays as opposed to infrared) diffract much less. Kinetic particles are capable of only a tiny fraction of the speed but have essentially unlimited range. They'll gradually slow over time, because space is not completely empty, but unless they hit something they'll be moving for a long, long time.

While we're near the subject, I just want to add that particle weapons are actually very short range. They're created by accelerating charged particles (electrons, for example). Like charges repel, and so they'll push each other apart in a process known as electrostatic bloom and the beam will become totally useless after travelling a relatively short distance. A possible workaround would be to accelerate two separate streams, one positive and one negative, and fire them together. The repulsive and attractive forces between the particles should cancel (at least to a degree), improving cohesion. Sorry for the derail.

While I generally agree with Wolfy on this issue, I would like to see some sort of change to inject some diversity into weapon types. I feel like, most of the time, one weapon is just flat out better than another. Personal preference should play a larger role. I like the notion of projectile weaponry being best suited for bombardment at a range and non-projectile being suited for fast-paced combat. Giving the player choices is something Transc has always been good at, and I find it's been getting better and better of late.

EDIT: Typos galore.

[Prophet]

Personal preference should play a larger role. I like the notion of projectile weaponry being best suited for bombardment at a range and non-particle being suited for fast-paced combat. Giving the player choices is something Transc has always been good at, and I find it's been getting better and better of late.

I totally agree. I feel that the blossoming of so many new items is a great step forward but would really enjoy a niche system. Weapons created with more realistic physics would impose play style restrictions and opportunities with damage types. A freighter pilot would have little use of a laser with a short range except as a last defense but could carry hordes of stingers or larger station cracker warheads. Currently all these choices are present but the technology is not a realistic representation in all situations.

[Aeonic]

While we're near the subject, I just want to add that particle weapons are actually very short range. They're created by accelerating charged particles (electrons, for example). Like charges repel, and so they'll push each other apart in a process known as electrostatic bloom and becomes totally useless in a relatively short distance. A possible workaround would be to accelerate two separate streams, one positive and one negative, and fire them together. The repulsive and attractive forces between the particles should cancel (at least to a degree), improving cohesion.

Glad someone else looked into particles so that I don't have to. Actually it sounds pretty neat when you're moderately scientific about it, since you can then add enhancements that sort of make sense. You just suggested a great set of particle weapons: Standard particle cannons would be very short range, while a split particle cannon (for lack of better name) would have better range and probably cause more damage. Throw in a particle accelerator enhancement and you're all set!

Oh, and on the topic of lasers being more affected by shields which I forgot to address - it totally depends on the shields! A shield which used strong gravity as its principal means of protecting the ship would easily deflect kinetic and blast weapons while energy weapons might go straight through it.

[Aeonic]

While we're expanding the damage types, ion weapons would likely be similar to particle weapons - extremely short range with a strong potential for EMP damage.

Just to comment, one of the things I'd like to see reworked in this game is the range of weapons, which is partly the reason I brought this up. In the early game, most of the encounters are close range because the weapons are short range and you have to basically be dog-fighting with the enemy in order to defeat them. Later in the game, especially with weapons like the katana star cannon, long-range bombardment becomes the thing to do. Most of the time you won't even see the enemies until they're dead and you're only getting close to loot the wreckage. Long range isn't very fun, IMO. Having long range kinetic/blast weapons which are also slow would alleviate a lot of this problem, since you'd have to get in close to actually hit anything.

[Aeonic]

Having stayed up way too late reading up on this nonsense in the Wookiepedia (to make sure we got the facts!) I wrote this:

A note on shields: There are essentially two kinds of shields, energy shields and particle shields. Energy shields are used for deflecting energy-based attacks, such as lasers. Particle shields are used for deflecting physical forms of attack, such as projectiles and missiles. Theoretically these shields can be used in combination for create hybrid shield types.


LASER CANNONS
A laser cannon was the standard weapon for use by most starships and other vehicles. - Wookiepedia.

Features:
- Short range.
- Very accurate.
- Very destructive.

Variants:

Dual laser cannon A
- Fires two repeating, alternating shots.
- 200% energy requirements.

Dual laser cannon B
- Fires a dual shot.
- 200% energy requirements.

Quad laser cannon A
- Fires four repeating, alternating shots.
- 400% energy requirements.

Quad laser cannon B
- Fires two repeating, dual shots.
- 400% energy requirements.

Point-defense laser cannon
- Half damage.
- Half energy cost.
- ICX enabled.


TURBOLASER
The turbolaser was a heavy laser cannon equipped with large banks of capacitors, allowing them to build up and store far more powerful energy bursts than standard cannons. - Wookiepedia

Features:
- Longer range than regular lasers.
- Slower firing rate (usually 1-2 seconds between volleys).
- Higher energy requirements.
- Roughly three or more times the power of a regular laser.
- High risk of overheating.
- Powerful enough to incinerate a shielded starfighter.
- Generally larger than regular lasers.

Variants:
Dual turbolaser A
- Fires two repeating, alternating shots.
- 200% energy requirements.

Dual turbolaser B
- Fires a dual shot.
- 200% energy requirements.

Quad turbolaser A
- Fires four repeating, alternating shots.
- 400% energy requirements.

Quad turbolaser B
- Fires two repeating, dual shots.
- 400% energy requirements.

Heavy turbolaser
- Slightly longer range.
- 50% longer delay between volleys.
- 150% damage.
- 200% power usage.

Quick-recharge turbolaser
- Less delay between volleys.
- 150% power usage.

Cryo-cooled turbolaser
- Diminished overheating issues.
- 125% power usage.

Long-range turbolaser
- Significantly longer range.
- 200% damage.
- 400% power usage.


KINETIC WEAPONS (Mass Driver)
They inflicted damage by hurling projectiles at high velocities, which imparted kinetic energy and force to the target upon impact. Damage was thus a result of the mass of the projectile and its velocity. They also had the benefit of bypassing shields entirely, to slam into a targeted ship's hull. - Wookiepedia

Features:
- Long range.
- Slow projectiles.
- Low energy usage.
- Requires ammo.
- Ignore more shields.

Variants:
Chaingun
- Extremely fast firing rates.
- Uses ammo very quickly.
- Easily overheated.

Rail gun
- Extremely high projectile velocity.
- Long delays between firing.


PARTICLE CANNONS
...

Features:
- Short range.
- High velocity.
- Splash damage.

Variants:
Split particle cannon
- Longer range.
- More damage.
- Higher power usage.

Particle beam
- Fires multiple repeating blasts consecutively.
- Longer delay between firing.


ION CANNONS
An ion cannon was a weapon which fires highly ionized particles or highly ionized plasma. These particles seriously interfere with the operation of electronics and computer systems, shorting circuits and often disabling them outright. The actual physical damage will sometimes result in fused joints on machines, due to the heat produced. - Wookiepedia

Ion cannons are excellent for disabling shields.

Features:
- EMP effects:
- Disables shields.
- Disables movement.
- Damages devices.
- Disrupts visual display.
- Slow firing rate.


PLASMA CANNONS
The Plasma cannon (or Pulse cannon) is a type of weapon that fired plasma balls at enemy vehicles or starships, causing massive electrical disturbances and disabling the target for a time. - Wookiepedia

POSITRON CANNONS, Etc...

Well into the realm of science fiction here. Use your imagination.

[bluesaberist]

Ok, I'm going to have to take me time answering that, to make sure I don't make a mistake. So this post is a placeholder for my answer.

First, it is a grave mistake to reference only one source, such as Star Wars, without looking at some others, such as Star Trek, Battlestar, etc.

One thing to remember is that laser cannons in Star wars are not lasers. They are energy packets that happen to look like lasers.

[Fossaman]

One thing that's always bugged me about lasers is that I've never been able to determine if their velocity is tied to ship velocity or if it's a proper constant like it should be. One of these days I need to mod a ship up and do some tests. All I'd really need was a long-lifetime laser and a ship with a speed of C or so and really good thrust...

[Atarlost]

If you're aiming for realism wookipedia shouldn't even be on your list of stops. http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/index.html is the goto source for realistic SF.

Quick summary:

And twin charged beams don't work. They produce arcing that will harm the firer more than the target. Ion weapons don't work for the same reason. Neutralized particle beams (firing usually protons and then injecting electons) have quite a lot of spread from neutralisation, but no electrostaric bloom. They still have thermal bloom though. Neutron beams, if a way were available to accelerate them, would have only thermal bloom and an consequently relatively long range. Particles except neutrons are very easy to shield against. Short chain hydrocarbons work well. So does water or water ice. They all would cause radiation kills though if the outer layer of armor was breached and they hit the metal hull.

Lasers are king of the beam weapons. They're hard to sheild against, hard to armor against at short range, and short wavelength lasers (like x-ray laser) will kill biologicals and all but the most incredably hardened computers even with very large spot sizes.

Plasma weapons are a joke.

Blast weapons are peanuts compared to kinetics

Nukes can be effective, but even they would pale before the biggest kinetics.

Since the best kinetic is 90% C antimatter might still top it, but antimatter is either going to be used in a particle accelerator, in which case the KE is likely to dwarf the contribution of the antimatter and you're left with a slightly stronger particle weapon, or the antimatter is going to be used in a torpedo which is going to be easier to defend against than a relativistic kinetic.

That's ultimately why Transcendence is unrealistic. Realistic space combat is pretty much limited to a handful of effective weapon types. That's fine for a book or film or an RTS, but it's boring for a Shooter. As long as the fluff text isn't total nonsense I can ignore the physics being wonky for the sake of gameplay. Most people won't even notice that the physics are wonky.

[Aeonic]

One thing to remember is that laser cannons in Star wars are not lasers. They are energy packets that happen to look like lasers.

Yeah but I figured since regular lasers are red and turbolasers are green in this game, just like in Star Wars, that was probably the inspiration. They also look just like them.

And as we already pointed out, real lasers are invisible.

I looked at Ion cannons at a variety of sources, but most of them cannot agree on what they are, although they more often than not have EMP damage as their primary function.

[Aeonic]

I don't know why realism keeps cropping up, I never said anything about realism. I just don't see why energy weapons which are going to dissipate rapidly would have a longer range than kinetic weapons which don't' dissipate at all. After that I'm just having fun with it.

Random thoughts:

If most of the game consisted of short range weapons while long range kinetic weapons were popular for base bombardment, it would be reasonable for most bases to come equipped with kinetic reflecting shields so avoid that. The only that to engage a base would be a direct, point blank conflict.

[Atarlost]

Removing long range bese busting is going to change the balance too much. Bases have too many advantages over ships. Giving them shields that deflect the common WMD weapons would make them unbeatable when armed and terribly boring to take out when not.

[bluesaberist]

OK, lets get back to basic physics here. The most important thing that affects damage is how much energy you put into the shot. Assuming perfect efficiency, firing a laser and kinetic weapon with the same amount of power usage will cause the same amount of damage. Now this doesn't take into account shields and armor that are designed to resist one or the other.

So, taking a look at the basic laser cannon (from transcendence) and recoiless, they both use the same power per shot, but the recoiless causes more damage. So you could say the laser cannon is less efficient. However the laser cannon has higher fire rate. The damage ratio between the two works out to be 5:6 laser to recoiless. So the recoiless actually does more damage over all. So you could say that this take into account the dispersion of laser energy.

Now, Aeonic, you should have have read the blaster article while on Wookieepedia. The are two types of blaster (in star wars), plasma and particle. However, reading how the particle weapons (theoretically) work, they basically form a plasma also. However, they are both called particle weapons in the article, proving just how untrustworthy the wookiee is.

Now for some personal opinions:

The laser cannons we have now should be switched to plasma damage since they are not actually lasers, and laser cannons should be a late game weapon.
Some real lasers should be added to the game to fill in the hole. These would fire continuously like a laser, be invisible and should not have a fire rate, but overheat instead. Maybe since they are invisible, they should also have a safety that doesn't let you fire at friendlys. They would be the basic legal civilian weapon after all.
Plasma damage should be very nasty against armor, but less so against shields.
Particle should be like a cheap laser cannon, less energy, low range, less damage, but still better than blast/explosives.



Ok, Atarlost, how can you think that high explosives and nukes wouldn't be extremely effective compared to kinetic? Their very nature means they release more energy, which means more damage done. Nukes have the added effect of releasing radiation, which affects the shield even more.


Ok, I'm done now.