Forums of the Megaverse®

I thought the ulti-max rail gun was 1/3 the damage.

Hunter/Vigilante would be able to whip up specialised traps.

Alrik Vas wrote:I thought the ulti-max rail gun was 1/3 the damage.

It is 1/3 the damage, half the range as well.

It says on page 43 of the original Sourcebook (the page that has the second half of the over sized picture of it) that the recharge time on it is 8 hours for 25 points of damage or less or 24 hours for anything more.

I've taken a GB with an Iron Bear PA (Spirit West), ion cannons and mini-missiles plus power claws, but you need to use terrain to your advantage to counter the GB's range. The Scorpion-Skull with it's ability to prowl, low profile and tail w/railguns is good too, slide the tail up out of cover and keep the main body out of sight. 3d4x10 MD for railgun (4000ft range) plus 28 mini-missiles on tail, plus claws for up close.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Mack wrote:Skelebots are by far the best way to take out a Glitterboy. Send in a dozen or so but don't bother with ranged attacks. Just have them swarm the GB and use their robotic strength to grapple/pin him, then just disable/destroy the suit at your leisure. Sure, you will lose a few 'bots in the assault but that's a trade the CS would make any day of the week.

Pretty good strategy.
A GB can grapple... but not so much if they're outnumbered that heavily.

I might have to run some test scenarios on this one some day.

I've never run the scenario either, but I assume it will come down to terrain and how many Skelebots the Glitterboy while they charge. For extra fun I'd equip 1 or 2 Skelebots with the mini-missile rifle from CWC to provide covering fire while the others advance... make the GB choose between shooting the missilers or the charging horde. And I'd give the horde CP-50s and hip fire micro-fusion grenades as they advance.

Aaryq wrote:

say652 wrote:I use skelebots alot. Like 100:1 for infantry.
Five dogboys, one psi stalker, five military specialists, twenty grunts, ten samas pilots, four enforcers, and around 4500 skelebots is a typical "war" party for the skull boys.

Skelebots are a standard in my CS Campaigns. They usually don't accompany my CS PC's (maybe one or 2 if they ask), but they are part of their support network. And heaven help you if you're a non-CS Character attacking the CS.
Maybe not 100:1 odds but one step higher odds. You bring a squad sized element, they bring a platoon. You bring a platoon, they bring a company. So on and so forth.

So in the Coalition War Campaign all the CS need to do is overwhelm Quebec with Skelebots.

dragonfett wrote:page 43 of the original Sourcebook (the page that has the second half of the over sized picture of it) that the recharge time on it is 8 hours for 25 points of damage or less or 24 hours for anything more.

Didn't know Ulti-Max was in a book prior to NGR.

Why don't they just replace it with a Naruni field?

Tor wrote:

dragonfett wrote:page 43 of the original Sourcebook (the page that has the second half of the over sized picture of it) that the recharge time on it is 8 hours for 25 points of damage or less or 24 hours for anything more.

Didn't know Ulti-Max was in a book prior to NGR.

Why don't they just replace it with a Naruni field?

Because Naruni is THE DEVIL Bobby!

Mechghost wrote:The Scorpion-Skull with it's ability to prowl, low profile and tail w/railguns is good too, slide the tail up out of cover and keep the main body out of sight. 3d4x10 MD for railgun (4000ft range) plus 28 mini-missiles on tail, plus claws for up close.

I like this idea.

GBAnnihilator wrote:

Aaryq wrote:

say652 wrote:I use skelebots alot. Like 100:1 for infantry.
Five dogboys, one psi stalker, five military specialists, twenty grunts, ten samas pilots, four enforcers, and around 4500 skelebots is a typical "war" party for the skull boys.

Skelebots are a standard in my CS Campaigns. They usually don't accompany my CS PC's (maybe one or 2 if they ask), but they are part of their support network. And heaven help you if you're a non-CS Character attacking the CS.
Maybe not 100:1 odds but one step higher odds. You bring a squad sized element, they bring a platoon. You bring a platoon, they bring a company. So on and so forth.

So in the Coalition War Campaign all the CS need to do is overwhelm Quebec with Skelebots.

It would at least have been a good strategy.
Instead, they launched the bots at Tolkeen.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

GBAnnihilator wrote:

Aaryq wrote:

say652 wrote:I use skelebots alot. Like 100:1 for infantry.
Five dogboys, one psi stalker, five military specialists, twenty grunts, ten samas pilots, four enforcers, and around 4500 skelebots is a typical "war" party for the skull boys.

Skelebots are a standard in my CS Campaigns. They usually don't accompany my CS PC's (maybe one or 2 if they ask), but they are part of their support network. And heaven help you if you're a non-CS Character attacking the CS.
Maybe not 100:1 odds but one step higher odds. You bring a squad sized element, they bring a platoon. You bring a platoon, they bring a company. So on and so forth.

So in the Coalition War Campaign all the CS need to do is overwhelm Quebec with Skelebots.

It would at least have been a good strategy.
Instead, they launched the bots at Tolkeen.

They should have sent the GBK (sense it's really a D-Bee Killer anyway) at Tolkeen and had the Skelebots as backup, the used the Stiker Samas as backup for the GBK at Quebec.

Thinyser wrote:

Tor wrote:

dragonfett wrote:page 43 of the original Sourcebook (the page that has the second half of the over sized picture of it) that the recharge time on it is 8 hours for 25 points of damage or less or 24 hours for anything more.

Didn't know Ulti-Max was in a book prior to NGR.

Why don't they just replace it with a Naruni field?

Because Naruni is THE DEVIL Bobby!

Naruni is on their top five hit list. They think whoevers making it's in the West/Blackmarket! They are just a couple thousand light-years off.

ItsmeYo wrote:If they have the bots why not send thousands of mindless drones into battle??

One Mark V and crew.
And like a thousand skelebots.

Actually, a Mark V could be a pretty decent GB-Killer. Even in RUE, they can launch a volley of up to 20 mini-missiles.
Get one in range, and you could inflict 20d6x10 MD using plasma missiles in a single attack, from a mile away, for an average of 700 MD.
Then it could do the same thing on the next attack, using its other short-range launcher.
If clean-up is necessary, there's a railgun that does 1d6x10 MD, and 2 Forward Auto-Cannons that do 1d6x10 MD to a 20' radius per attack.
As long as the Mark V doesn't get ambushed, it'd probably do okay. It could potentially get a very quick kill against a lone GB.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

ItsmeYo wrote:If they have the bots why not send thousands of mindless drones into battle??

One Mark V and crew.
And like a thousand skelebots.

Actually, a Mark V could be a pretty decent GB-Killer. Even in RUE, they can launch a volley of up to 20 mini-missiles.
Get one in range, and you could inflict 20d6x10 MD using plasma missiles in a single attack, from a mile away, for an average of 700 MD.
Then it could do the same thing on the next attack, using its other short-range launcher.
If clean-up is necessary, there's a railgun that does 1d6x10 MD, and 2 Forward Auto-Cannons that do 1d6x10 MD to a 20' radius per attack.
As long as the Mark V doesn't get ambushed, it'd probably do okay. It could potentially get a very quick kill against a lone GB.

Missed that x10 in there.

Thinyser wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

ItsmeYo wrote:If they have the bots why not send thousands of mindless drones into battle??

One Mark V and crew.
And like a thousand skelebots.

Actually, a Mark V could be a pretty decent GB-Killer. Even in RUE, they can launch a volley of up to 20 mini-missiles.
Get one in range, and you could inflict 20d6x10 MD using plasma missiles in a single attack, from a mile away, for an average of 700 MD.
Then it could do the same thing on the next attack, using its other short-range launcher.
If clean-up is necessary, there's a railgun that does 1d6x10 MD, and 2 Forward Auto-Cannons that do 1d6x10 MD to a 20' radius per attack.
As long as the Mark V doesn't get ambushed, it'd probably do okay. It could potentially get a very quick kill against a lone GB.

Missed that x10 in there.

I'll fix that.

Very good sir Cyborg! With 40 Mini-missiles and all that other firepower I think you might have a good 1 on 1 contestant there.

Thinyser wrote:Very good sir Cyborg! With 40 Mini-missiles and all that other firepower I think you might have a good 1 on 1 contestant there.

Still, the Mark V generally has a decent sized crew. So I don't know that it's the thing that the OP was looking for.
Vehicle-wise, it's one-on-one... but soldier-wise, it's 5 on 1.
But I think it's in the right direction at the least.

Strategy isn't really a problem if you have unlimited resources at your disposal - a GB can be taken out by anything with a decent armament of missiles. A Grenadier would make short work of one.

say652 wrote:Two things make a GB.
One Boomgun. Negate the weapon. Tor magnetism idea is sound but Overpowered.
A magnetic field that generates a repulsion field. Repelling railgun rounds. Seems fair.

770mdc!! Since phasetech was scoffed. Maybe a shell cracker like the xiticik hunter perhaps.

Assuming the boom gun is a real railgun the ammunition not only doesn't need to be ferrous but rather benifits from not being ferrous. If that is recognized the metal used for the 200 blades is likely non-ferrous and would be unaffected by a magnetic field.

Zer0 Kay wrote:

say652 wrote:Two things make a GB.
One Boomgun. Negate the weapon. Tor magnetism idea is sound but Overpowered.
A magnetic field that generates a repulsion field. Repelling railgun rounds. Seems fair.

770mdc!! Since phasetech was scoffed. Maybe a shell cracker like the xiticik hunter perhaps.

Assuming the boom gun is a real railgun the ammunition not only doesn't need to be ferrous but rather benifits from not being ferrous. If that is recognized the metal used for the 200 blades is likely non-ferrous and would be unaffected by a magnetic field.

general consensus is that the authors general don't know a railgun from a coilgun, based on all the references to needing iron or similar metals for the ammunition. for example, to make wooden railgun rounds, you need a bit of iron inside, specifically.

also, the concept of the boomgun i don't think even works at all with a proper railgun. how would you have a canister of 200 flechettes fire properly from a railgun?

Shark_Force wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

say652 wrote:Two things make a GB.
One Boomgun. Negate the weapon. Tor magnetism idea is sound but Overpowered.
A magnetic field that generates a repulsion field. Repelling railgun rounds. Seems fair.

770mdc!! Since phasetech was scoffed. Maybe a shell cracker like the xiticik hunter perhaps.

Assuming the boom gun is a real railgun the ammunition not only doesn't need to be ferrous but rather benifits from not being ferrous. If that is recognized the metal used for the 200 blades is likely non-ferrous and would be unaffected by a magnetic field.

general consensus is that the authors general don't know a railgun from a coilgun, based on all the references to needing iron or similar metals for the ammunition. for example, to make wooden railgun rounds, you need a bit of iron inside, specifically.

also, the concept of the boomgun i don't think even works at all with a proper railgun. how would you have a canister of 200 flechettes fire properly from a railgun?

Sabot

On a good day, a Mark V could take out two GBs.

Shark_Force wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

say652 wrote:Two things make a GB.
One Boomgun. Negate the weapon. Tor magnetism idea is sound but Overpowered.
A magnetic field that generates a repulsion field. Repelling railgun rounds. Seems fair.

770mdc!! Since phasetech was scoffed. Maybe a shell cracker like the xiticik hunter perhaps.

Assuming the boom gun is a real railgun the ammunition not only doesn't need to be ferrous but rather benifits from not being ferrous. If that is recognized the metal used for the 200 blades is likely non-ferrous and would be unaffected by a magnetic field.

general consensus is that the authors general don't know a railgun from a coilgun, based on all the references to needing iron or similar metals for the ammunition. for example, to make wooden railgun rounds, you need a bit of iron inside, specifically.

also, the concept of the boomgun i don't think even works at all with a proper railgun. how would you have a canister of 200 flechettes fire properly from a railgun?

What?! The lack of military and technology knowledge of PB I grant you. And even them assuming that all EM weapons use the same forces to fire.

However, YOUR understanding is also lacking. The canister of "flechette", because regardless of what PB calls them they're blades as a flechette is a dart, was likely confused with sabot or just a complete misunderstanding of what a flechette is due to a lack of simply looking it up. All in an attempt to try to base the GBs mythology on the mythology of the M1 Abrams with the ammo being the equivalent of the APFSDS munitions. Now, your misunderstanding. Almost anything can be launched from a railgun, a railgun uses an armature to launch its load. Its essentially a catapult. In the case of a boomgun, they may have unwittingly designed a working cartridge. One of the problems with a railgun is that the armature can get welded to the rails. One of the ways they stop this is by "launching" the armature into the rails. So the reason why the boom Huns cartridge looks like a shotgun round and there's an ejection port on the gun is because the rear of the cartridge is powder and primer and shoots the whole front section between the rails. The casing is actually the armature and the blades are kept secure until the casing/armature ejects out the end of the weapon. Most sabot style munitions release their payload after exiting the barrel, which is simply caused be air resistance, the Boomgun's sabot/casing/armature like other railgun armatures turns into plasma, producing a muzzle flash on a weaponany wouldn't expect to have one, just of plasma and electrical arc instead of burning gasses... Which would explain the flash suppressor/muzzle break on the boom gun. So the boomgun would actually go bang CrAckOW BOOM

Thinyser wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

say652 wrote:Two things make a GB.
One Boomgun. Negate the weapon. Tor magnetism idea is sound but Overpowered.
A magnetic field that generates a repulsion field. Repelling railgun rounds. Seems fair.

770mdc!! Since phasetech was scoffed. Maybe a shell cracker like the xiticik hunter perhaps.

Assuming the boom gun is a real railgun the ammunition not only doesn't need to be ferrous but rather benifits from not being ferrous. If that is recognized the metal used for the 200 blades is likely non-ferrous and would be unaffected by a magnetic field.

general consensus is that the authors general don't know a railgun from a coilgun, based on all the references to needing iron or similar metals for the ammunition. for example, to make wooden railgun rounds, you need a bit of iron inside, specifically.

also, the concept of the boomgun i don't think even works at all with a proper railgun. how would you have a canister of 200 flechettes fire properly from a railgun?

Sabot

Darn your Doomish single word response.

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

say652 wrote:Two things make a GB.
One Boomgun. Negate the weapon. Tor magnetism idea is sound but Overpowered.
A magnetic field that generates a repulsion field. Repelling railgun rounds. Seems fair.

770mdc!! Since phasetech was scoffed. Maybe a shell cracker like the xiticik hunter perhaps.

Assuming the boom gun is a real railgun the ammunition not only doesn't need to be ferrous but rather benifits from not being ferrous. If that is recognized the metal used for the 200 blades is likely non-ferrous and would be unaffected by a magnetic field.

general consensus is that the authors general don't know a railgun from a coilgun, based on all the references to needing iron or similar metals for the ammunition. for example, to make wooden railgun rounds, you need a bit of iron inside, specifically.

also, the concept of the boomgun i don't think even works at all with a proper railgun. how would you have a canister of 200 flechettes fire properly from a railgun?

Sabot

Darn your Doomish single word response.

It's not a rail gun it's a Mass Driver. A rail gun has a super electromagnet at the end of the barrel that draws the projectile up and out. A Mass Driver has multiple super electromagnets lining the inner barrel for the projectile to gain more speed each time it passes a magnet.

Is he (Doom) still around? I haven't seen anything posted by him since I've been back.

GBAnnihilator wrote:It's not a rail gun it's a Mass Driver. A rail gun has a super electromagnet at the end of the barrel that draws the projectile up and out. A Mass Driver has multiple super electromagnets lining the inner barrel for the projectile to gain more speed each time it passes a magnet.

Well a railgun doesn't work by having a single electromagnet at the tip of the barrel to draw out the projectile. It uses a pair of "rails" that carry a huge current to an armature that allows the electricity to flow from one rail to the other. The armature is accelerated down the barrel by a magnetic force created behind the armature that pushes it down the rails. This link has some nice graphics to show how they work. http://science.howstuffworks.com/rail-gun1.htm

What you refer to as a mass driver is actually a Coilgun

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/qu ... ilgun-work

Physics, its not always rocket science!

Thinyser wrote:Is he (Doom) still around? I haven't seen anything posted by him since I've been back.

I haven't either.

Should start giving out Doomies for correct single word answers besides obvious yes, no, maybe stuff.

Thinyser wrote:

GBAnnihilator wrote:It's not a rail gun it's a Mass Driver. A rail gun has a super electromagnet at the end of the barrel that draws the projectile up and out. A Mass Driver has multiple super electromagnets lining the inner barrel for the projectile to gain more speed each time it passes a magnet.

Well a railgun doesn't work by having a single electromagnet at the tip of the barrel to draw out the projectile. It uses a pair of "rails" that carry a huge current to an armature that allows the electricity to flow from one rail to the other. The armature is accelerated down the barrel by a magnetic force created behind the armature that pushes it down the rails. This link has some nice graphics to show how they work. http://science.howstuffworks.com/rail-gun1.htm

What you refer to as a mass driver is actually a Coilgun

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/qu ... ilgun-work

Physics, its not always rocket science!

dang ya beat me to it while I was responding to you.

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

say652 wrote:Two things make a GB.
One Boomgun. Negate the weapon. Tor magnetism idea is sound but Overpowered.
A magnetic field that generates a repulsion field. Repelling railgun rounds. Seems fair.

770mdc!! Since phasetech was scoffed. Maybe a shell cracker like the xiticik hunter perhaps.

Assuming the boom gun is a real railgun the ammunition not only doesn't need to be ferrous but rather benifits from not being ferrous. If that is recognized the metal used for the 200 blades is likely non-ferrous and would be unaffected by a magnetic field.

general consensus is that the authors general don't know a railgun from a coilgun, based on all the references to needing iron or similar metals for the ammunition. for example, to make wooden railgun rounds, you need a bit of iron inside, specifically.

also, the concept of the boomgun i don't think even works at all with a proper railgun. how would you have a canister of 200 flechettes fire properly from a railgun?

What?! The lack of military and technology knowledge of PB I grant you. And even them assuming that all EM weapons use the same forces to fire.

However, YOUR understanding is also lacking. The canister of "flechette", because regardless of what PB calls them they're blades as a flechette is a dart, was likely confused with sabot or just a complete misunderstanding of what a flechette is due to a lack of simply looking it up. All in an attempt to try to base the GBs mythology on the mythology of the M1 Abrams with the ammo being the equivalent of the APFSDS munitions. Now, your misunderstanding. Almost anything can be launched from a railgun, a railgun uses an armature to launch its load. Its essentially a catapult. In the case of a boomgun, they may have unwittingly designed a working cartridge. One of the problems with a railgun is that the armature can get welded to the rails. One of the ways they stop this is by "launching" the armature into the rails. So the reason why the boom Huns cartridge looks like a shotgun round and there's an ejection port on the gun is because the rear of the cartridge is powder and primer and shoots the whole front section between the rails. The casing is actually the armature and the blades are kept secure until the casing/armature ejects out the end of the weapon. Most sabot style munitions release their payload after exiting the barrel, which is simply caused be air resistance, the Boomgun's sabot/casing/armature like other railgun armatures turns into plasma, producing a muzzle flash on a weaponany wouldn't expect to have one, just of plasma and electrical arc instead of burning gasses... Which would explain the flash suppressor/muzzle break on the boom gun. So the boomgun would actually go bang CrAckOW BOOM

That is a really interesting explanation for how the Boom Gun functions. I like it's innovation. At first I thought it was over-complicated, but once I worked out all the angles you listed, it's a really good set of explanations for how it's depicted in the artwork

I do have a few differences of opinion, however. I agree with the powder and primer being on the shell, but not quite for the same reason. I see it more as a priming charge to launch the forward section of the canister at speed so that the magnetic coils don't have to work so hard just to begin the acceleration, thus focusing all of the energy to the greatest acceleration possible. The unburned powder residue, being swept along the barrel in the vacuum wake of the shell, could easily ignite into plasma due to extreme pressurization, leaving a smoking barrel.

I also see the flechette rods as hitting the target largely together, as opposed to the kind of spread one would see from a shotgun. This would be the only way to keep the shell on target at the range of two miles. To that effect, I believe that the outer shell is little more than a thin ferrous sleeve with a base. This would basically carry the entire payload to the target, allowing air resistance to peel away the sleeve.

I still disagree with the prodigious damage of the Boom, Gun, however. Flechette rounds from a weapon that size are invariably anti-personnel, not anti-armor.

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:Is he (Doom) still around? I haven't seen anything posted by him since I've been back.

I haven't either.

Should start giving out Doomies for correct single word answers besides obvious yes, no, maybe stuff.

Woohoo I have one "Doomie"!

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:

GBAnnihilator wrote:It's not a rail gun it's a Mass Driver. A rail gun has a super electromagnet at the end of the barrel that draws the projectile up and out. A Mass Driver has multiple super electromagnets lining the inner barrel for the projectile to gain more speed each time it passes a magnet.

Well a railgun doesn't work by having a single electromagnet at the tip of the barrel to draw out the projectile. It uses a pair of "rails" that carry a huge current to an armature that allows the electricity to flow from one rail to the other. The armature is accelerated down the barrel by a magnetic force created behind the armature that pushes it down the rails. This link has some nice graphics to show how they work. http://science.howstuffworks.com/rail-gun1.htm

What you refer to as a mass driver is actually a Coilgun

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/qu ... ilgun-work

Physics, its not always rocket science!

dang ya beat me to it while I was responding to you.

I wanted to just type "No" in response to that post but instead I was nice.

glitterboy2098 wrote:

Alrik Vas wrote:However, 1 for 1, so far we have air elements that most can get behind as a better GB killer. What ground units, 1v1 would do the job best?

i'm rather fond of the Ultimax for it actually.. you have a main railgun with nearly the same range and power, plenty of minimissiles for closer up, good armor, and the forcefield (if you have a version with it) gives you the ability to shrug off an extra hit from the boomgun. (possibly multiple times, depending on how your GM rules on it's recharge rate, which was never listed in canon)

Ulti max is not a bad option due to its high amount of missiles. Even then though it has some issues as the GB main gun is about twice the range of mini missiles and the ulti max is even slower than the GB is. The force field helps but you are still going to wind up taking about probably 12 or so attacks worth of incoming fire before they can even launch their mini missiles if detected at max range.


Ideally for a GB killer you have something like the samson missile man varient that can do a sizable alpha strike of short range missiles. Otherwise you want something that is really fast that can blow through the GB's range advantage and then agile enough that once up close enough is agile enough to try to stay behind it. Things like the predator are good for this durable enough to survive a couple hits and fast enough to close into its own weapon range.

Thinyser wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:

GBAnnihilator wrote:It's not a rail gun it's a Mass Driver. A rail gun has a super electromagnet at the end of the barrel that draws the projectile up and out. A Mass Driver has multiple super electromagnets lining the inner barrel for the projectile to gain more speed each time it passes a magnet.

Well a railgun doesn't work by having a single electromagnet at the tip of the barrel to draw out the projectile. It uses a pair of "rails" that carry a huge current to an armature that allows the electricity to flow from one rail to the other. The armature is accelerated down the barrel by a magnetic force created behind the armature that pushes it down the rails. This link has some nice graphics to show how they work. http://science.howstuffworks.com/rail-gun1.htm

What you refer to as a mass driver is actually a Coilgun

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/qu ... ilgun-work

Physics, its not always rocket science!

dang ya beat me to it while I was responding to you.

I wanted to just type "No" in response to that post but instead I was nice.

You weren't just nice you were educational... He should pay for that

Giant2005 wrote:Strategy isn't really a problem if you have unlimited resources at your disposal - a GB can be taken out by anything with a decent armament of missiles. A Grenadier would make short work of one.

Yup if you can swing it really the best way to take a GB is missiles and a lot of them. Its a very shiny reflective target so easy to spot on radar and visually at long range. The problem with this is it gets really expensive to kill GB this way because ideally you are using at least short range missiles as mini missiles put you well inside the engagement envelope of the GB. A mini missile has a range of about 5280 feet and the GB boom gun has a range of about 11k feet. That said if there is any target worthy of blowing ones load of missiles on GB are probably it.

One thing to remember one on one the GB for all its power and durability has some flaws that you can exploit but things like the GB legions of quebec would be scary forces to deal with. When you have an entire force built to use and support the GB that you can let the GB do its main trick to its full capability it would be a very powerful force indeed.

In the CS vs free quebec fight skelebots would likely be useful and given that they clearly were given variable frequency lasers for specifically this reason. The issue then becomes can enough of them close distance with a GB legion for their swarming to be useful.

Thinyser wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:Is he (Doom) still around? I haven't seen anything posted by him since I've been back.

I haven't either.

Should start giving out Doomies for correct single word answers besides obvious yes, no, maybe stuff.

Woohoo I have one "Doomie"!

Hey, hey now I didn't say I was giving them out. We need to form a counsel to draw discussions out too long just to figure out if the one word is deserving of a doomie

@wyrmraker. The casing doesn't need to be ferrous, just conductive. But if the casing is the armature, it isn't a matter of if you thing it would evaporate into plasma or fly on. Railgun mechanics says that's what's going to happen. Also gun powder residue and gasses aren't going to become plasma. Regardless of your plasma or the plasma that should be created... They wouldn't smoke. IF PB knew what they were doing and all other "railguns" in the game that have burst values are coilguns and the boomgun is the only railgun then that certainly explains the high damage. With the idea that the Gb is supposed to be analogous to the Abrams and the boomgun ammo to the APFSDS round it also explains the damage. Blades however are going to end up tumbling and causing more damage to soft targets, but if they replace it with actual darts then it should be anti armor.

ItsmeYo wrote:Why couldn't lone star design a mutant with the specific task of killing glitterboys??

Be cheaper and wouldn't lose as many soldiers.

Not to mention they'd be self repairing and reproduce.

ItsmeYo wrote:Why couldn't lone star design a mutant with the specific task of killing glitterboys??

Be cheaper and wouldn't lose as many soldiers.

They might be able to. And I do like your idea posted up above, but not sure they can do that. I'm not overly familiar with Lone Star's full capabilities but if they can give their mutants ANY super powers they want then it would be pretty easy to make a GB-Killer.

Lone Star can't design a creature that can consistently win against a Xiticix Super Warrior, when it was supposed to hunt enough of the bug-men to limit their population growth. Their single attempt to harness mankind's potential for psychic mutation led to tiny, frail addicts with extremely limited scope.


Skelebots are a good CS choice against GBs, either with their infinite ammo variable frequency rifle or with their railgun (which is probably a better choice against the GB's, since they don't really need infinite ammo if they're all gonna die!). No one cares if they die, they can rush forward at an impressive speed, they don't lose their nerve, and if they close they are strong enough to swarm the thing. They don't have to do the job alone, but they're great support.

The Ulti-Max (original), while a great Power Armour (or robot, either way it's one of my favourites), is terrible against the GB. It's not only slower (96km/h vs 70km/h), it's LESS manueverable with not only NO ability to jump, but also no way to match the GB's jet assisted jumps. It's forcefield lets it take one hit without taking damage, and then it's relying on slowly closing the distance against a tougher opponent with a longer range gun.


Although it's more expensive than the GB, an old UAR-1 actually does a pretty good job against one, especially if it has the gunner along with the pilot. 6 Medium range missiles (fire up to 4 at once) 10 Short range missiles (fire up to 4 at once) and a mini-missile launcher with 20 missiles (4 at once), plus a railgun and good ground speed. Pilot keeps the thing moving and dodging and it has a handful more attacks than the GB all combined.

my understanding of a railgun was that the projectile is generally made to roll down the rails. perhaps I've misunderstood the explanations I've been given though (certainly, it seems like a rolling projectile would have substantially less friction resistance for the same reason a wheeled cart has less friction resistance than a sled on any surface that will support the wheel).

Shark_Force wrote:my understanding of a railgun was that the projectile is generally made to roll down the rails. perhaps I've misunderstood the explanations I've been given though (certainly, it seems like a rolling projectile would have substantially less friction resistance for the same reason a wheeled cart has less friction resistance than a sled on any surface that will support the wheel).

Nope not at all. It slides, which causes erosion of the rails both through friction and arc erosion as the massive current sparks across the tiny gaps between the armature and each rail.

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:

GBAnnihilator wrote:It's not a rail gun it's a Mass Driver. A rail gun has a super electromagnet at the end of the barrel that draws the projectile up and out. A Mass Driver has multiple super electromagnets lining the inner barrel for the projectile to gain more speed each time it passes a magnet.

Well a railgun doesn't work by having a single electromagnet at the tip of the barrel to draw out the projectile. It uses a pair of "rails" that carry a huge current to an armature that allows the electricity to flow from one rail to the other. The armature is accelerated down the barrel by a magnetic force created behind the armature that pushes it down the rails. This link has some nice graphics to show how they work. http://science.howstuffworks.com/rail-gun1.htm

What you refer to as a mass driver is actually a Coilgun

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/qu ... ilgun-work

Physics, its not always rocket science!

dang ya beat me to it while I was responding to you.

I wanted to just type "No" in response to that post but instead I was nice.

You weren't just nice you were educational... He should pay for that

It's the same thing just a different name. Plus Mass Driver sounds more badass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_driver

Mechghost wrote:I've taken a GB with an Iron Bear PA (Spirit West), ion cannons and mini-missiles plus power claws, but you need to use terrain to your advantage to counter the GB's range. The Scorpion-Skull with it's ability to prowl, low profile and tail w/railguns is good too, slide the tail up out of cover and keep the main body out of sight. 3d4x10 MD for railgun (4000ft range) plus 28 mini-missiles on tail, plus claws for up close.

Make it be able to hover in case the GB can detect it with the seismic sensors on its drill tips. Maybe also give it the huge Super Samas intake by the front and thrusters on the sides of tail, for when the GB gets ready to fire it can move fast when needed.

GBAnnihilator wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Thinyser wrote:Well a railgun doesn't work by having a single electromagnet at the tip of the barrel to draw out the projectile. It uses a pair of "rails" that carry a huge current to an armature that allows the electricity to flow from one rail to the other. The armature is accelerated down the barrel by a magnetic force created behind the armature that pushes it down the rails. This link has some nice graphics to show how they work. http://science.howstuffworks.com/rail-gun1.htm

What you refer to as a mass driver is actually a Coilgun

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/qu ... ilgun-work

Physics, its not always rocket science!

dang ya beat me to it while I was responding to you.

I wanted to just type "No" in response to that post but instead I was nice.

You weren't just nice you were educational... He should pay for that

It's the same thing just a different name. Plus Mass Driver sounds more badass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_driver

And this is an excellent example of why Wikipedia isn't allowed to be used for college research. Most mass drivers are depicted as something where the load is placed on top. This is not possible with a coilgun because the load has to pass inside the coils and magnetic field. So only if a mass driver is depicted as having to go through a barrel is it anything like a coilgun if it uses electrified rails and has something riding on top or in the open, its probably a railgun, there is another option, the technology used by maglevs where it is magnet vs. Magnet. Again tail would be better because it is more efficient and converting electricity to momentum.

The description saying it uses a reusable sled does not equate to an armature so you saying my description of a railgun is a coilgun because via this bad wiki write up of a mass driver says that a mass driver with a sled is ESSENTIALLY a coilgun is erroneous.

Railgun armature lorentz forces pushes a load between charged rails
Coilgun pulls ferrous load or carrier accelerating load as it passes through gauss field
Maglev superconductor generates magnetic field that pushes against another magnetic field.

Railgun electricity to movement
Coilgun electricity to gauss field to movement
Maglev electricity to gauss field^2

Point argument is wrong Wikipedia is misleading.

EDIT: of I missread you let me know, cuz the alternative is you agree but.just think massdriver is a better word. I'd still disagree on a personal level though. I apply mass driver to the big devices meant for large masses, not side arms. Mass driver is also misleading as it can refer to any means of accelerating mass. Hmm so is a stern look a child mass driver?

GBAnnihilator wrote:It's the same thing just a different name. Plus Mass Driver sounds more badass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_driver

Railguns are also mass drivers, so are cannons for that matter. All coilguns are mass drivers but not all mass drivers are coilguns. One should use the specific term that best describes the item, especially online, because accuracy of language is important. You don't want to mix up your squares with plain old rectangles.

I, being late to this discussion, vote both...
Long Range(I like 'smart' mortars and guided missiles that allow for remaining behind cover for the deed) to blast away that Boom Gun, melee to close in and finish the job, since(traditional) Glitterboys tend to be light on close-on armament.
The Arkhons of South America had nasty little backpack mortars with smart-bombs that would be great for top-attacking GBs. Pop up to do a quick look-see where the enemy generally is, then start battery-fire from behind a hill or building. Just make sure you don't make the mistake and standing still so the GBs can backtrack your shells' trajectories and run up to pay you a visit.

Zer0 Kay wrote:@wyrmraker. The casing doesn't need to be ferrous, just conductive. But if the casing is the armature, it isn't a matter of if you thing it would evaporate into plasma or fly on. Railgun mechanics says that's what's going to happen. Also gun powder residue and gasses aren't going to become plasma. Regardless of your plasma or the plasma that should be created... They wouldn't smoke. IF PB knew what they were doing and all other "railguns" in the game that have burst values are coilguns and the boomgun is the only railgun then that certainly explains the high damage. With the idea that the Gb is supposed to be analogous to the Abrams and the boomgun ammo to the APFSDS round it also explains the damage. Blades however are going to end up tumbling and causing more damage to soft targets, but if they replace it with actual darts then it should be anti armor.

I am going to disagree on that darts are anti-armor. They lack sufficient mass to properly affect armor. That is the exact reason why the M1ASeries Abrahms tank uses 50+lb finned darts as anti-armor weapons. The 120mm dart has enough mass to penetrate armor, whereas finned darts the length of mini-missiles will mostly bounce off of hard armor. The short answer is that the Glitter Boy's Boom Gun is magical, because it violates all the known laws of ballistic physics.

As an example, the 120mm cannon on the GAW M1A3 (Merc Ops, p.127) 120mm cannon using Armor Piercing rounds does a mere 1d4x10 MD at 6000 feet. If it's using the original DU APFDS round (50+ lbs, speed Mach 5, range 3 miles; this is all real life), does it make sense that a flechette round the length of a mini-missile would do more than three times the damage? No, no it doesn't. Railgun mechanics in Rifts have zero basis in actual science, instead having their foundations in the Rule of Cool.

wyrmraker wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:@wyrmraker. The casing doesn't need to be ferrous, just conductive. But if the casing is the armature, it isn't a matter of if you thing it would evaporate into plasma or fly on. Railgun mechanics says that's what's going to happen. Also gun powder residue and gasses aren't going to become plasma. Regardless of your plasma or the plasma that should be created... They wouldn't smoke. IF PB knew what they were doing and all other "railguns" in the game that have burst values are coilguns and the boomgun is the only railgun then that certainly explains the high damage. With the idea that the Gb is supposed to be analogous to the Abrams and the boomgun ammo to the APFSDS round it also explains the damage. Blades however are going to end up tumbling and causing more damage to soft targets, but if they replace it with actual darts then it should be anti armor.

I am going to disagree on that darts are anti-armor. They lack sufficient mass to properly affect armor. That is the exact reason why the M1ASeries Abrahms tank uses 50+lb finned darts as anti-armor weapons. The 120mm dart has enough mass to penetrate armor, whereas finned darts the length of mini-missiles will mostly bounce off of hard armor. The short answer is that the Glitter Boy's Boom Gun is magical, because it violates all the known laws of ballistic physics.

As an example, the 120mm cannon on the GAW M1A3 (Merc Ops, p.127) 120mm cannon using Armor Piercing rounds does a mere 1d4x10 MD at 6000 feet. If it's using the original DU APFDS round (50+ lbs, speed Mach 5, range 3 miles; this is all real life), does it make sense that a flechette round the length of a mini-missile would do more than three times the damage? No, no it doesn't. Railgun mechanics in Rifts have zero basis in actual science, instead having their foundations in the Rule of Cool.

it doesn't have to have enough mass if it has enough velocity. But as I've already said they were TRYING to make it like an M1 but better and to them more "darts" equals better and with an unknown velocity they decided mach 7 at sea level was good. I don't think mach seven for such small "darts" is fast enough to even equal an M1 let alone surpass it.

I mostly agree with you, except a 2oz projectile could do the same as an apfsds round IF it had enough velocity.

Zer0 Kay wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:@wyrmraker. The casing doesn't need to be ferrous, just conductive. But if the casing is the armature, it isn't a matter of if you thing it would evaporate into plasma or fly on. Railgun mechanics says that's what's going to happen. Also gun powder residue and gasses aren't going to become plasma. Regardless of your plasma or the plasma that should be created... They wouldn't smoke. IF PB knew what they were doing and all other "railguns" in the game that have burst values are coilguns and the boomgun is the only railgun then that certainly explains the high damage. With the idea that the Gb is supposed to be analogous to the Abrams and the boomgun ammo to the APFSDS round it also explains the damage. Blades however are going to end up tumbling and causing more damage to soft targets, but if they replace it with actual darts then it should be anti armor.

I am going to disagree on that darts are anti-armor. They lack sufficient mass to properly affect armor. That is the exact reason why the M1ASeries Abrahms tank uses 50+lb finned darts as anti-armor weapons. The 120mm dart has enough mass to penetrate armor, whereas finned darts the length of mini-missiles will mostly bounce off of hard armor. The short answer is that the Glitter Boy's Boom Gun is magical, because it violates all the known laws of ballistic physics.

As an example, the 120mm cannon on the GAW M1A3 (Merc Ops, p.127) 120mm cannon using Armor Piercing rounds does a mere 1d4x10 MD at 6000 feet. If it's using the original DU APFDS round (50+ lbs, speed Mach 5, range 3 miles; this is all real life), does it make sense that a flechette round the length of a mini-missile would do more than three times the damage? No, no it doesn't. Railgun mechanics in Rifts have zero basis in actual science, instead having their foundations in the Rule of Cool.

it doesn't have to have enough mass if it has enough velocity. But as I've already said they were TRYING to make it like an M1 but better and to them more "darts" equals better and with an unknown velocity they decided mach 7 at sea level was good. I don't think mach seven for such small "darts" is fast enough to even equal an M1 let alone surpass it.

I mostly agree with you, except a 2oz projectile could do the same as an apfsds round IF it had enough velocity.

Makes me think of the rail gun rifles in "Eraser" You have a tiny aluminum slug that is fired at a "C-Fractional" velocity. Sounds good but it would vaporize before it left the barrel and you would have a muzzle blast of plasma. Beyond a certain speed and the air a small object is passing through would soak up all the energy before it hit the target. Now for a space born weapon it could work well but then you deal with the recoil and if you are accelerating even a half ounce slug to 1/10th the speed of light in a 2 foot long barrel the recoil would be incomprehensible.