70 RAILGUNS VOLLEY FIRE TESTING - Space Engineers
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 เม.ย. 2024
- Lets put the volley fire mode to the test and find out just how devastating 70 railguns firing in a staggered file can be.
[ Social Links ]
➜ LSG Discord / discord
➜ LSG Patreon / laststandgameryt
➜Steam Group - steamcommunity.com/groups/LSGY...
➜Twitter - / laststandgamers
➜Facebook Page - / laststandgamers
➜Twitch - / laststandgamers
➜ Airsoft Instagram: / lsgairsoft
➜ Server Sponsor serverblend.com/ - เกม
Is a wall of lead (one big shot) better than continuous fire ?
I woud say yes
I would say continuos fire needs good way to aim, something only rotating gatling contraptions can provide. Wall of lead wins wins for me because it looks cool but needs big enough targer to justify using it
I would say both is good. But for different reasons. Continuous fire should be good for moving targets but for slow or stationary targetsa wall of lead would disperse the damage across the whole mass of the ship/station
I guess if you want to make a killzone, a wall of lead is a good way to do so if not slightly overkill for smaller targets
T o bad game sucks
but fun to build
'Open fire, destroy his framerate'
'Enemy ship returning fire, captain. Frame rate dropping.'
'If we have to crash to Desktop so will he. Prepare for ramming speed!'
Gold😂😂😂
I must learn the art of lag
We as space engineers worship the god known as Klang
"i want every gun we have to fire on that man"
"but they cant all point there"
"so put em on the front"
Reminds me of the "Temper Temper" incident from the Korean War, If you don't know it already look it up it's funny as hell.
Big Whiskey kills a mountain
North Korean unit missing presumed vapor
@@Blargerhonkdear fucking god that incident
the mountain went bye bye
Now we need to see the gravity runway in action. 😁
I second that! Those are hard to pull off. And I would like to see how well it works in Atmosphere VS Space.
Oh yeah, he didnt show off ANY of the things the ship could do in the original, I wonder why
Shipwright: “How many railguns do you want on your ship?”
The Space Engineer: “ *YES* ”
When the UNSC saw the MAC gun was their most effective weapon against the Covies, they went overboard with it
"Sir MACs are our only hope against the covies"
"Alright so you know the Punic?"
"Sir yes sir"
"Turn it into a MAC platform"
If only a MAC gun equivalent was in SE
return of the Railationship :D
Ngl I’ve always loved space engineers battles
Just wish there was more diverse battles on TH-cam
But overall absolutely love this video!!
Thankyou glad you enjoyed it.
And there it is. Very impressive.
I think it could be even stronger if the railguns were replaced by artillery, and the "artillery pods" were replaced by turrets with maybe 4 railguns.
Firing the artillery cannons in sequence like this, particularly in these numbers, would hammer through just about anything, and overwhelm anti-missile defenses. They would also be ready for another volley faster than the railguns.
When you need immediate penetration, that's when you switch to the smaller group of railguns.
In an otherwise even fight, I suspect the Rex Mortis has a slightly better chance of winning, simply because it can aim its railguns in different directions.
If the supercarrier gets the first shot, that will probably decide the fight, but if the Rex has time to begin shooting before the carrier has turned fully, it's likely a win for the Rex.
The rails would certainly be able to fire more often, and if they were manned by a player, they could aim at where they think the hydrogen tanks would be.
Maybe it would also not get banned on a server too.
Given the mass of the ship, 70 railguns really isn't all that much. In fact, it comes in at just about 1 railgun per million kilos, which isn't many at all.
Against more nimble ships (and let's be real, you won't find anything that isn't more nimble than this), railguns will be much more reliable for scoring hits, but either way, the platform is practical, and the class itself is a fad
@@Gxaps I'm not sure I understand what the railgun per unit of mass ratio has to do with this (not being sarcastic, I don't see how that is important from a technical point of view).
As for shooting at more nimble ships, that's what turrets (custom or standard) are for. The main battery of a ship like this is for when you want to bring massive destruction to a target that is big enough to warrant the resource cost, and isn't likely to move out of the way. In other words, bases and other capital ships.
That's why I think artillery guns could work better as the main battery, and railguns as turret batteries.
@@patrikhjorth3291 Yeah, it was a bit out there. But just in general, it's really simple to make a ship with lots of upwards thrust, spin with space and q, and be virtually immune to artillery. Railguns are definitely stilla good choice for fixed weaponry, but there's no reason why this many guns couldn't be mounted on a smaller, more nimble platform
@@Gxaps That's a fair point.
That said, I think the main function of this supercarrier is less about being practical, and more about being over the top and striking awe into anyone who sees it in action ;-)
I just can't help but think about how to make things "better" or at least different, even when I know that isn't the point.
Explosive tanks is just another good incentive to use ions or atmospheric engines as well. I go with the hybrid thruster setup in most of my ships
Space them out and use blast doors
i do, or buster blocks when using mods. Since I play mostly on survival though, I really don't want to lose ships quickly
Wow, what fun!!! Thank you for posting this!
Thanks for going back and testing out those rail guns!
Love the details
Maaan, it's so nice to see you actually cared enough about the comments to make an entire video ;)
Rex mortis, hands down, turreted railguns give way more versatility than a fixed forward array.
I feel like the railgun volley will rarely disable/destroy a ship (unless you aim it at a great spot) but the amount of holes they make will make it difficult for the crew to operate effectively.
In my eyes it fits the ship perfectly, it is a carrier after all. The railgun volley will cripple the target and then with the Gravity runway the smaller fighters can finish it off.
To quote Major Payne" if he's in there he ain't feeling good "
I want to see a nose-to-nose railgun volley. I wonder how far a railgun will go through a ship when it's given the entire length of the hull.
Nice a Part 2
Love you’re content☺
Thankyou glad your having fun watching !!!
Damn, all your ship testing and reviewing video's make me want to refit and update al my older ships, if it weren't for these video's I'd barely know what's new anymore 😅
All I have to say is....
Legend of the Galactic Heroes: DNT
Now that's a lot of damage, it's weird being here early
Rex Mortis would win if there's only one player in the carrier. The main reason is the sloped armour plus the turrets for the railguns. Also not as rough on sim speed. I'd say if you got 6-12 players per ship then hell yeah that's a good fight for both, especially the carrier. After all, without fighters it's incomplete. Final note for the carrier is I'd say it works best as a projection of power. I'd probably remove most of the railguns, reducing it to 2 columns rather than 5 and swapping a good portion of the hydrogen for ion. Then again I just prefer the less explosive option.
Last thing of note, the space usage in the Rex Mortis leaves more empty internals that you aren't necessarily supposed to see, while the carrier has almost none with most empty space being hangars. One is a space battleship, tho other a mobile station. On a sufficiently beefy server, I'd say the carrier alongside a sufficient escort would be preferable, while the Rex would be better off with support of something not too much smaller, and only a few.
Imagine if that ramp wasnt there and it was all railguns.
Imagine if a ship is in motion and they fly past the bow of the railgun vessel mid volley, they would be in a million pieces.
Overkill is highly underrated
Collective bargaining works again!
The only shotgun made for huntin elephants.
Legend of galactic heroes asf ship
you could set volley fire between the rows of railguns like 2 rows fire at a time that way you can keep a steady bombardment as an option as well
Hey that’s not how they decommed Voyager, she was put into a museum then hijacked by Burnham
Every shot that misses. You can feel the pain of money.
I would love to see what you could do with that wall of cannons vs some AI fighters.
How many railguns do you want on your ship? Yes
best case scenario, each ship has a crew so every station can be manned, i feel the rex would have the advantage of having its guns on turrets as opposed to fixed weapons, gyroscopes can only turn a ship so fast
Federation deflector shields are not effective against projectiles of heavy mass hitting it. And these projectiles likely has steering jets to keep it locked on target. The navigational deflector could be more effective but it would have to be put on maximum output to deflect the incoming projectiles away from the ship but it can point in only the foward direction.
Helldivers 2 ships whenever a Stratagem comes through
Epic in theory, but there should also B a broadside option, just in case.
Space America must have made this
😂
美麗的野獸，帝國需要你的才能
Good ole Star Trek ships. Lets put the bridge on top the circle like a big bullseye.
10:16 Now you're talkin' my language!
I think these might do more damage through the length of the target
Energy equals mass times velocity, so in physics terms, you'd do more damage with the same mass of projectiles, combined into a single projectile, at the same velocity
(E=MC[squared]).
Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared
Which applies to calibers also. In theory, a bullet that is wider, would dump more energy into a target, than a narrower bullet of the same weight. In practice, and in an atmosphere, a conical shape is probably best, as opposed to a Sphere, which would have less trajectory. Minié balls come to mind. The back end has a hollow in it, which expands under pressure and engages the rifling.
Should space the timing of the rail guns so it continually shoots nonstop. Do the same for the artillery rounds, but keep a segment of the volley fire. Split the artillery into 4 fire groups and they can evenly space the timing between reloads to have a consistent fire just like the rail guns.
Cool stuff.
"Getting so close to an enemy ship never made sense to me. Even WW2 Navy carrier battles were fought beyond the horizon and hundreds of miles apart.. even Battleships fought over the horizon. Some battles were fought where you could actually see the enemy, but everything was moving in 3 dimensions. Up-Down (waves and swells), left-right and forward-backwards. Even then they had to fight against ships on not where they are at the moment, but where they will be in the near future (leading a target). In space you now have to add gravity, light speed and 'time'.
Ever read "Forever War"? Their space battles were light minutes or even light hours apart. The first ship to spot their enemy fires lasers, projectiles, missiles and such, where the computers believe the enemy ship will be X mins ago or a few hours. So they are essentially fighting each other in each others past.
The people in the ships strap into space suits and are emersed in a liquid vat that dampens their molecules from being blown apart due to the g-forces the ship will be under making themselves harder to hit by randomly changing speeds and directions.. It is a battle between AI, math and physics. Humans would have very little input at all unless they are literal genius at spatial math and physics.
That is for example 5 light minutes apart.. (the Sun is like 8-9 minutes away). You see the enemy where it was 5 minutes ago.. you will never see it how it is unless you get as close as your video. You fire a laser at it.. the laser won't hit for 5 more minutes (that's 10 minutes since spotting the enemy). You shoot some railguns at it or missiles, and they won't reach the target for hours or even days... or weeks even. If you decide to move closer to get more accurate shots, it works both ways, and the windows get more narrow.
I found these battles interesting as hell. If they spotted you first by 5 minutes, your ship will be under laser fire before you even knew the enemy was there." - / geek - me
must be the USG Ishimura i see.
nice.
dont play this game but wondering:
do they have things you can launch and self assemble once they hit the target?
like a shell that delivers a demolition drone payload or something to rip apart enemy ships?
Janeway just had a very bad day.
I literally just got this carrier
So now I want a ship like the Rex Mortis with all the railgun turrets plus it having the 70 railgun front volley fire. Just completely lag my game to a halt till all the enemy ship is turned to scrap.
That's poor Excelsior 2 class starship
Is that the USS ENTERPRISE?
It didnt even damage the kitchen of the enterprise!
feels like enough reaction mass to get the ship moving pretty quick. Does the game have a specified mass for the rail gun projectile?
Temper, temper
Excuse me i need to change my undergarments
How do you fire such a weapon without completely draining your ship's power?
Needs more Dakka
Need more than two pilots. If fighting against the carrier, let it have fighters?
It doesn't matter how much guns it has if it isn't placed right.
Majority of your guns if not all of it is facing forward meaning you have to face them.
They have turrets it can face any direction. Which also means the can broadside you, meaning they can do a lot more damage to more of your ship you will only be able to
Damage to a small portion to your ship.
And if they place their shots right.
They could take out your engine
Your FTL, possibly even your gravity, your shealds, your bridge and even your hangers for your fighters. Can't really launch fighters if you're hanger is taken out.
And also have to remember in real combat they are not going to wait in one place waiting for you to shoot them. And on tip of that most likely you're not the only one who will have carriers. Fighter will be attacking to and I don't see any point defense weapons.
has anyone thought about making a No Man's Sky freighter in space engineers ❓❓❓
Looks like a ship from "Legend of Galactic Heroes"
Check out a ship called The Ambassador, it's incomplete enough for someone the change what they like about it.
Does the ship power down and float adrift in space for an hour when fired in survival mode?
No need railgun when framerate is the most dangerous ennemy !
how do you have such a big (proper size) planet below
My custom UNSC frigate: The railguns are brilliant but i like 1 BIG HONKING GUN THAT MAKES STUFF GO BOOM.
all the "engines" aka star wars repulsors are internal.
Has side hangars.
Rear hangar and lower lift bays.
Many weapons.
Is fun.
My super star destroyer that will always remain 80% complete.
Play on xbox.
Can't finish the ship because the game refuses.
Cant load a world with it.
Just missing the cityscape in the middle.
See, I use mods to build.
The star wars repulors genuinely make my life easier as they are powerful and can be hidden inside...
I should start building again lol.
Where has there been any mention of SE2?
You just made swiss cheese
looks like a first rate to me
Me and two mates decided to live on separate planets in survival with no alliances, I made a dreadnought piloted my me myself and I with a broadside of 34 artillery cannons and holy shit that ship was unstoppable, quite swift for a dreadnought aswell. I went to my mates base on mars 2km away and bombarded his whole base and carrier before it could get off the ground, he after 6 minutes of bombardment surrendered half his resources to me and I moved onto my next mate. He had his carrier 1km above his base after hearing the news of the other guy and got onto my broadside, instead of ruining his base I turned onto his ship and let it rip, he had his ship damn near cut in half long ways after a few minutes of fighting my ship. I later grounded the ship for emergencies 🤣
where can i find the carrier that you used?
I think the Rex has the advantage. Doesnt need to slowly aim with the entire ship and as far as i know, each battery is its own and independently targeting volley. so the attack could even be interrupted to adjust the targeting.
But more importantly: i would have loved to see you try attacking one of the big ships from the front to test out if the destruction reaches through to the stern. That would have been either spectacular or crashed the game
Disappointed you can’t see through the ships and out the other side after the rail gun rips right through them
not even stagger stacking them to fit more on the front surface area smh
where the 70 klang cannon volley tho?
what cpu you use?
70 sychroneous railgun shots and no recoil?
WTF!!! wow
I'd prob'ly not exceed 30, 12 on each side, & 6 for the front. Or 6 each side & 4 in front, absolute minimum. If we're talking not overpowering a ship.
but how practical is this is in survival?
Why would server admins not like so many railguns?
The physics engine in Space Engineers is a lot less than efficient. As he said in the video it would crash/bring the sim speed to nothing on the server. I do not know his system specs but I am pretty sure he in not running a potato PC and you notice his FPS dropped to single digits or maybe low teens.
@@scooterjes It's not so much the physics engine, as it is the game constantly creating new gameObject grids for each piece of debris. Every grid object has an "overhead", cuz it comes with all the properties of a grid, despite being just a piece of debris.
I hope they design SE2 with this in mind, and make debris it's own thing, that can be converted into a grid, if the player wants, rather than being forced to be a grid.
hydrogen explosions are too powerful
then only way to have survival capable h2 ship is to have lots of tanks
but one explosion and ya ship is gone
its not balanced just like the guns
What are your PC specs?
With respect mate... what are your computer specs?
I just checked out your twitch and there nothing there..
This was miserable for 2024.
The resource requirements for a ship like that would stop you long before any admin ban hammer should become a concern. Ships that large are prohibitively expensive to build, run, and maintain.
Commence exterminatis.
Sir thats a ship.
I DON'T CARE
star trek ship with shields up and ability to move would make swiss cheese of that ship. 1 quantum Torpedo.
2/10 Yay Space. Yay Railguns. 8/10 physics failure.
Is this game still so badly optimized that whenever you do anything major it just stops lol
Eve online ragnarok doomsday
Make this nearly auto please
That's my issue with this game it's really cool but the optimization it needs to be optimized like two times more than it already is and it would be so much better..... I understand it's a massive technical undertaking but there's so much wasted potential for really truly massive builds and space battles because of shity optimization
First!
I would love this game but the fact that you are limited to 110m/s REALLY FREAKING KILLS IT. Like seriously. Its a space game. And you have a 110m/s speed limit??? That is pathetically slow. just under 400 km/h for a space ship???? once I found that out quit I instantly quit playing the game because of just how stupid that limit is. was a 9/10 game for me right up until that point and that core mechanic failure put it to a solid 3/10 for me.
Love it but weapons are not as powerful as you make out everything you show is light armour and no1 uses it unless they are new to the game heavy armour would be a complete different story
I bet Officer Megan Hull! could take all those shots!