Your kidding right... rails IRL have SHITLOADS of recoil. I could live with rails in game having tons of recoil if the dmg went up like it should. Rails should technically be the most damage inducing weapons with high heat output on firing turning the cannon into a sniper.
Oh, for some reason I was thinking because rails used magnets instead of some type of explosive propellent the recoil wouldn't be as bad. Especially when you add in that it shouldn't have extra gases escaping the front of the barrel. I've never seen one though.
Still puts exactly the same amount of force as a chemical propellant would. The difference is negligible.
http://www.military.com/video/guns/naval-guns/with-a-bang-navys-new-railgun/3442621894001 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun Rail-guns take something small and pretty heavy and accelerate it incredibly fast to a ludicrous speed in a VERY short amount of time/space. edit: wut!? mach 10? We have something else that fast? anyways... the current gun thats going to be on a navy ship sometime in 2016 fires at mach5 and the ammo undergoes 60,000G's in firing.
The ratio might be the same, but the end force is most definitely not Recoil adds nothing to the gameplay thanks to source and pc controls. You can just keep pulling your mouse down all the time and its effect is all but negligible while adding pointless strain on the player. Really, we could use reworks of the old classics by now, but i know of maybe one active person who does anything map related now
Do newton's laws mean anything to you people? IRL, rails have no propellant mass, which means the entire mass of the round is the mass of the projectile. I.E. instead of putting a small piece of metal and propelling that with a lot of heavy explosives, you just have a BIG piece of metal. So you have more mass. As in, for rails, NONE OF THE MASS JUST STICKS AROUND AFTER THE EXPLOSION, all is propelled. Then you accelerate it *MUCH FASTER* than possible with explosive. It's all moving at MACH 7 velocities. The amount of recoil force being equal to MASS X ACCELERATION, you have a megafuckton of recoil for an essentially fast as possible and heavy as possible metal slug. EDIT: Apparently everyone either already pointed out the stupidity, or revised their position, in an attempt to retract their stupidity. My faith in humanity has been slightly restored. P.S. If Candles needs something to do, Vicki was complaining yesterday about how her flashlight stays on when she respawns. Putting it in her own sage words, "Why would I need my flashlight on when I spawn?" Go fix that.
Well one point of the EM guns is that you can use a less massive projectile to deliver the same amount of kinetic force to the target. Obviously you could have a bigger projectile but it isn't implied by design. It still has some mass to accelerate that is analogous to a chemically propelled catridge - the armature is a "slider" that connects the two rails / completes the circuit and pushes the projectile forward. Because it remains in contact with the rails and moves very fast it generates alot of heat - so much so that the armature is at risk of welding itself to the rails.
^_^ So, lets assume for a moment that in this particular rail gun, we have an armature, and it isn't consumed. Then yes, you may be right. However, that is usually not the case in modern rail guns. Either the armature is designed to be so small that it is essentially consumed by the arcing of electricity by the time it leaves the barrel (I.E. less and less mass as it travels down the barrel, evaporating and no longer needing to be accelerated) or it doesn't even exist, because the projectile itself would be the armature. Why have a secondary piece of metal for electrical conduction and magnetic field generation when you can simply have the primary piece of metal fill that role? When Phase II cooling is implemented, rail guns will likely not need armatures, unless there is simply a need for a less magnetic and more optimal kinetic material in the projectile.
funny enough, density of both impactor and hit object as well as shape (especially diameter and its relation the the projectiles length) and angle are more important for penetration then pure mass (though ofc its not neglectable) at least thats what newton said ... edit: oh its about kickback <.<
Clearly, if we turn the other barrel of the tank 180 degrees, both forces would nullify each other, no recoil.
What could possibly go wrong. I know there are plasma rail guns without armatures but I thought these were only good for use in a vacuum.
I thought the military rail guns did not have armatures. Shit is just suspended in field while being fired.
