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
'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!'
I don't know why, but the first that came to my mine when seeing them firing is not the MAC guns, but the pegasus charging head first in Battlestar Galactica. Though the looks of the ship itself does give off heavy UNSC ship vibe.
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.
hands down space engineers has got be one of the most awesome creative building games so far in human history :-) love your vid's dude i dare not try this myself my PC would literally catch fire for even daring to think about installing the blueprint let alone load the game and copy and past it in hahahahaha cheers 🙂
This, recruits, is a 20-kilo ferrous slug. Feel the weight. Every five seconds, the main gun of an Everest-class dreadnought accelerates one to 1.3 percent of light speed. It impacts with the force of a 38-kiloton bomb. That is three times the yield of the city buster dropped on Hiroshima back on Earth.That means Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-bitch in space. Now! Serviceman Burnside! What is Newton's First Law?
whaaaat an insane volley that ship is capable of.....I hope when Keen sit down to make space engineers 2, they aim for performance it would have been so nice if the rendering for railgun had not of cut out, lets hope for future if there's even an engine capable of doing it 🙂
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 😅
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.
When you meet someone better than yourself, turn your thoughts to becoming his equal. When you meet someone not as good as you are, look within and examine your own self.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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?
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
One thing he didn’t do in this video was fire The rail gun from the front of the ship. I wonder if some of the rounds would go through more of the ship and cause more damage because a lot of the rounds that hit the side were over penetrating.
With how slowly the ship turns l, I think the forward mounted fixed railgun battery wouldn't get a chance to hit the other ship that has top mounted turrets. (I'm only assuming that the guns are mounted in turret configuration🤷)
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
Mutually Assured Desktop
@@elysiumplays5215 everyone except one mexican dude
"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
A runway in space? Wha?
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
@@WildmanTrading thats can be achieved using KLANG tech, but some aren't brave enough to practice dark arts
@@WildmanTrading There's a mod for that
I don't know why, but the first that came to my mine when seeing them firing is not the MAC guns, but the pegasus charging head first in Battlestar Galactica.
Though the looks of the ship itself does give off heavy UNSC ship vibe.
Shipwright: “How many railguns do you want on your ship?”
The Space Engineer: “ *YES* ”
Ngl I’ve always loved space engineers battles
Just wish there was more diverse battles on UA-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.
return of the Railationship :D
That can be taken out of context 😂
hands down space engineers has got be one of the most awesome creative building games so far in human history :-) love your vid's dude i dare not try this myself my PC would literally catch fire for even daring to think about installing the blueprint let alone load the game and copy and past it in hahahahaha cheers 🙂
This, recruits, is a 20-kilo ferrous slug. Feel the weight. Every five seconds, the main gun of an Everest-class dreadnought accelerates one to 1.3 percent of light speed. It impacts with the force of a 38-kiloton bomb. That is three times the yield of the city buster dropped on Hiroshima back on Earth.That means Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-bitch in space. Now! Serviceman Burnside! What is Newton's First Law?
Maaan, it's so nice to see you actually cared enough about the comments to make an entire video ;)
With the realization of ones own potential and self-confidence in ones ability, one can build a better world.
To quote Major Payne" if he's in there he ain't feeling good "
whaaaat an insane volley that ship is capable of.....I hope when Keen sit down to make space engineers 2, they aim for performance it would have been so nice if the rendering for railgun had not of cut out, lets hope for future if there's even an engine capable of doing it 🙂
Thanks for going back and testing out those rail guns!
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
Rex mortis, hands down, turreted railguns give way more versatility than a fixed forward array.
More powerful than the will to win is the courage to begin.
When deeds and words are in accord, the whole world is transformed.
imagine just flying through space and then getting hit by 70 railguns
The tumbleweed refused to tumble but was more than willing to prance.
Engineer: There's the problem right there. Somebody blew a hole through the ship!
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 😅
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.
Wow, what fun!!! Thank you for posting this!
All I have to say is....
Legend of the Galactic Heroes: DNT
When you meet someone better than yourself, turn your thoughts to becoming his equal. When you meet someone not as good as you are, look within and examine your own self.
Now that's a lot of damage, it's weird being here early
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.
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.
Nice a Part 2
Love you’re content☺
Thankyou glad your having fun watching !!!
Overkill is highly underrated
the battery power to recharge all of them for decent fire rate must be immense.
Car safety systems have come a long way, but he was out to prove they could be outsmarted.
She felt that chill that makes the hairs on the back of your neck when he walked into the room.
How many railguns do you want on your ship? Yes
“Engineer!”
“Yes?”
“See that enemy ship?”
“Yes?”
*“I don’t want to.”*
*“Yes.”*
Legend of galactic heroes asf ship
One of my friends run a Space Engineers server that allows these big ships that have absurd firepower.
Legend of the Galactic Heroes called, they want their style back
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.
The beginning of wisdom is found in doubting; by doubting we come to the question, and by seeking we may come upon the truth.
We choose our joys and sorrows long before we experience them.
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
美麗的野獸，帝國需要你的才能
You can never cross the ocean unless you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.
This is one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen...
wtf
@@goku445 70 rail guns going off one after the other I'm amazed they pulled that off
Space America must have made this
😂
Collective bargaining works again!
Love the details
A suit of armor provides excellent sun protection on hot days.
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
Every shot that misses. You can feel the pain of money.
The only shotgun made for huntin elephants.
That poor Star Trek ship has been through too much
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.
I would love to see what you could do with that wall of cannons vs some AI fighters.
Modern space version of broadside volley with old fashion wood plank wet navy ships
Bloody Hell... There's nothing left.
Anyone else get activity in the pants at the mere notion of this?
A wise man will make more opportunities than he finds.
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
That could probably destroy a slow moving space rock
Fire everything at the bow through the length of the ship. Will it split the ship in two when the H2 tanks all explode at once?
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.
I literally just got this carrier
How do you fire such a weapon without completely draining your ship's power?
Frack!!! We missed!!!
Epic in theory, but there should also B a broadside option, just in case.
The only person who never makes mistakes is the person who never does anything.
Some people thrive on huge, dramatic change. Some people prefer the slow and steady route. Do what's right for you.
For a vanilla weapon those things are OP af
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.
Good ole Star Trek ships. Lets put the bridge on top the circle like a big bullseye.
feels like enough reaction mass to get the ship moving pretty quick. Does the game have a specified mass for the rail gun projectile?
The door swung open to reveal pink giraffes and red elephants.
Same time it means a smaller ship armed with a MAC can get a lucky shot and do catastrophic damage to a super carrier
You brought Spain to space.
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?
That would be feasible to make with some of the new AI blocks and some clever engineering. I'd be shocked if nobody's done it yet.
Hey that’s not how they decommed Voyager, she was put into a museum then hijacked by Burnham
Well, just to mention, the players dont play for the server admin. They play to have fun
70 sychroneous railgun shots and no recoil?
I think these might do more damage through the length of the target
how does he turn the artillery side pods using the camera?
10:16 Now you're talkin' my language!
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
Yeah but those cooling systems have to be insane.
how do you have such a big (proper size) planet below
looks like a first rate to me
where can i find the carrier that you used?
Search space engineers crescdendo
Average Legend of Galactic Heroes ship
"What dat railgun do?"
Does the ship power down and float adrift in space for an hour when fired in survival mode?
Helldivers 2 ships whenever a Stratagem comes through
T'au protection fleet armaments design be like:
GUN
One thing he didn’t do in this video was fire The rail gun from the front of the ship. I wonder if some of the rounds would go through more of the ship and cause more damage because a lot of the rounds that hit the side were over penetrating.
Heavy went to the future and 'borrow' some tech, new weapon destroyed space boat... not big surprise
With how slowly the ship turns l, I think the forward mounted fixed railgun battery wouldn't get a chance to hit the other ship that has top mounted turrets. (I'm only assuming that the guns are mounted in turret configuration🤷)
I think he didnt turn on the gravity drive gyros