Shadow Lane Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 I'm scrambling to rebuild by aerial fleet after I lost most of it in the update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daemonCaptrix Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 ...Yeah, Im gonna go through a little development, specifically ground weaponry, I probably won't be fighting much.Currently working on a ground MAC gun. When I get it on a vehicle, want to battle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briansun1 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 @ corgi read the first post and yes the 2x has areo spikes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theattackcorgi Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 I suck at building and wish i could use all of your stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartwo Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 Use mine until you actually build something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daemonCaptrix Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Perhaps the mainsail is too powerful for MAC gun use... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Lane Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Mainsails make for terrible weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Eagle 1 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Perhaps the mainsail is too powerful for MAC gun use...I have been interested in building a railgun for my spacial fleetso I guess my 3 questions are1: are they really efficient2: are they accurate3: if yes to both, can I have a download to reverse engineer one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartwo Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 I have been interested in building a railgun for my spacial fleetso I guess my 3 questions are1: are they really efficient2: are they accurate3: if yes to both, can I have a download to reverse engineer one?-Depends what you mean-If built correctly-Deamon and comrade only have working ones now,I'm obsessed with having a restockable M.A.C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Lane Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 No. It depends. Maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathsoul097 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 @SpartwoCan you update the front with my proper flag? I posted a link a few pages back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartwo Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 I didn't see it sorry,what page? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartwo Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) Meet the X1, testbed for the experimental slipstream-drive powered by flappy technology (patent pending). The slipstream-drive is capable of accelerating the test plane to speeds upwards of mach 3.5 near sea-level while maintaining a constant velocity, but loses speed at higher altitudes.Expect to see these engines in use on Eve, as the thicker atmosphere will increase engine efficiency.http://i.imgur.com/l0f7mZb.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/hRJW5eA.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/nJsKS8u.pngMind if I try to build a slipstream engine? Edited October 31, 2013 by Spartwo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathsoul097 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Page 259 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daemonCaptrix Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Mind if I try to build a slipstream engine?Sure, but the atmospheric drag makes Eve a no-go at high velocities.I have been interested in building a railgun for my spacial fleetso I guess my 3 questions are1: are they really efficient2: are they accurate3: if yes to both, can I have a download to reverse engineer one?They are really efficient, accurate at close range (I built a shotgun round that's accurate at longer range), and generally ineffective because they want to glitch through their targets instead of hitting. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Eagle 1 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Sure, but the atmospheric drag makes Eve a no-go at high velocities.They are really efficient, accurate at close range (I built a shotgun round that's accurate at longer range), and generally ineffective because they want to glitch through their targets instead of hitting. :/so use them at short range so they wont glitch through? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Lane Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 They are horribly inefficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daemonCaptrix Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 so use them at short range so they wont glitch through?They like to glitch through at any range. I think the problem is the bullets are too small, and bullets being small is the only advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Eagle 1 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Ok would you say its worth it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daemonCaptrix Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 They are horribly inefficient.They are very efficient. The word you're looking for is "ineffective".Ok would you say its worth it?Only if you can work the bugs out of them. They are an engineer's nightmare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Eagle 1 Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 Ok, I ll take is as a challenge but I wont do it until Thanksgiving or Christmas time frame so I have plenty of time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartwo Posted November 1, 2013 Author Share Posted November 1, 2013 They are very efficient. The word you're looking for is "ineffective".Only if you can work the bugs out of them. They are an engineer's nightmare.#1:what?An I-beam screaming at you at 240m/s isn't effective,and that speed is at any range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Lane Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 No, they're less efficient, you see them as being more efficient because you're using less fuel. But, you're getting less effect because the bullets are too small and because it becomes much less efficient the farther it's being pushed away from the engine. But, at the same Time, because it's more efficient, more powerful, the closer that it is to the engine, it turns into a big mess which would just bounce off of the enemy plating if it wasn't so broken that it failed to hit them to begin with. The only thing that makes it more efficient is the fact that the engine doesn't have to push itself, nor does it have to push any fuel, but pushing itself and the fuel increases the mass even if it does decrease the speed which means it all works out anyway. You simply see the projectile going faster and assume that it makes it better when it really doesn't, you're just using less fuel to get less of an effect, all the while making a horribly inefficient and impractical weapon that should never, ever be used by anyone ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daemonCaptrix Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 #1:what?An I-beam screaming at you at 240m/s isn't effective,and that speed is at any range.Don't ask me why it doesn't work. It just doesn't.No, they're less efficient, you see them as being more efficient because you're using less fuel. But, you're getting less effect because the bullets are too small and because it becomes much less efficient the farther it's being pushed away from the engine. But, at the same Time, because it's more efficient, more powerful, the closer that it is to the engine, it turns into a big mess which would just bounce off of the enemy plating if it wasn't so broken that it failed to hit them to begin with. The only thing that makes it more efficient is the fact that the engine doesn't have to push itself, nor does it have to push any fuel, but pushing itself and the fuel increases the mass even if it does decrease the speed which means it all works out anyway. You simply see the projectile going faster and assume that it makes it better when it really doesn't, you're just using less fuel to get less of an effect, all the while making a horribly inefficient and impractical weapon that should never, ever be used by anyone ever.I get the feeling you've never actually seen one in action. What you described is logical, but it doesn't describe the results of actual experimentation. There is no fragmenting of the ammunition, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Lane Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 Please define: "No fragmentation of the ammunition." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts