Star Wars Roleplay: Chaos

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Mower

Status
Not open for further replies.
OUT OF CHARACTER INFORMATION
  • Intent: To create a weapon for future LOOM craft to take advantage of
  • Image Source:
  • Canon Link: N/A
  • Restricted Missions: N/A
  • Primary Source: N/A
PRODUCTION INFORMATION
  • Manufacturer: LOOM
  • Model: Ulti-Class
  • Affiliation: Closed-Market
  • Modularity: Firing Rate can be adjusted
  • Production: Limited
  • Material: Duranium, Durasteel, Blaster Components
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
  • Classification: Gatling Cannon
  • Size: Ship-Mounted
  • Length: 7 m (whole system)
  • Weight: 300 kg (whole system)
  • Ammunition Type: Electrical, Blaster
  • Ammunition Capacity: Gas based system contains a maximum of 5,000 rounds, electrical is draws power from craft
  • Effective Range: 5 km (Maximum range: 10 km)
  • Rate of Fire: Maximum: 4000 rpm
SPECIAL FEATURES
  • High rate of fire
  • Armor piercing rounds
  • Electric or Gas fire
Strengths:
  • Fires very quickly
  • Gas rounds can penetrate most vehicle armors
  • Can adjust fire rate to accommodate different necessities
Weaknesses:
  • Potentially disastrous recoil on fighter craft
  • Rather obtrusive system within fighter design
  • Heat from fire has significant constraints on prolonged fire
  • Use of electric bolts draws significantly on the fighter's power source
  • Has no inbuilt defenses against ionic weapons
DESCRIPTION
The Mowers, so named after the initial testings ended in a nearby field catching fire (and its effect on infantry), are a new starship based weapon intended to be used as ground support and as a anti-fighter weapon, however with the proper targeting system and adjustments to the arrangement of components it can act as a point defense system and on larger craft. The design was based on ancient weapons designs that predated full space travel and even conventional use of energy weapons. The unit is rather obtrusive and the addition of a large gas canister into the unit creates a conundrum involving spacial issues. This along with the potential power draw, limits the additional features that could be added to the fighter. On most fighter craft this weapon must be considered the primary weapon due to its size taking up a large area of space within the fighter. Since the system runs on electricity it would make sense to create some form of protection against Electroweapons or Ion weapons, however the sizing issue became too great and it was opted to run without any natural protection. Instead any form of protection must come from the ship it is built into. If the ship is hardened against such weapons, and it covers the key components, then the system will be much less likely to fail under such conditions. If however the fighter has no such protection, a dangerous idea indeed, then the ionic or electro weapons will have a standard effect.

The weapon itself is a multi-barrel, rotating autocannon that fires mainly gas based blaster bolts. The large gas canister attached to the unit allows for a full 5,000 rounds to be fired. This canister can be attached to, or replaced with, a predesigned larger container for larger ships, which would allow cruisers or even gunships to contain more gas bolts, depending on the size of the craft. A gunship might be able to hold 7,000 rounds worth of gas, while a cruiser or larger could go as far as 10,000, unless specifically designed units are created for the craft. Each of these shots is strong enough to penetrate most vehicle armors and armored structures, needless to say all but the most powerful of infantry armor is useless against these. Of course, there are several, rare and difficult to obtain armor materials that could handle the shots with ease. When the main ammunition runs out, the unit switches over to electrical based projectiles that pull power from the ship that houses it. The draw is significant enough that it is recommended to avoid prolonged firing when drawing on fighter power. The electrical shots are far weaker than the gas based rounds. While capable of making short work of infantry, the electrical bolts are less likely to penetrate heavy vehicle armors. The draw is however significant enough to warrant avoidance of use except in extreme situations. If the fighter, as most are, utilizes a reactor of one form or other then the power draw of a three second burst will likely cause the fighter to lower shields for several seconds while the reactor attempts to catch up with the power draw.

The rate of fire is adjustable up to a maximum firing rate of 4000 rpm, this is however severely hampered by the heat of gas based fire. The barrels have been designed to handle two or three seconds bursts. While no recorded failure occurred during testing regarding overheating, the theoretical limit is ten seconds after that it is assumed that the internal mechanisms would begin to liquefy, leading to complete failure of fire and the need to replace the entire unit. Anything beyond three second bursts causes increase barrel wear and decreases the life of the barrels, which in turn makes the unit require more maintenance, high potentials of in combat failure over time, and sooner replacement.

The unit is such that if simply centering the rotary center to that of the fighter, the recoil will push the fighter off target, and can cause severe damage to the system unless proper measures are taken to reduce the recoil or change its affect pathway. While not affecting the flight speed very considerably, the recoil is enough to through the fighter around unless properly centered. The necessary method of installation is to have the unit placed in such a way that the gun is slightly off-center, so that the firing barrel is at the center line of the craft to limit the recoil throwing off the aim of the pilot. Otherwise the recoil of the shot will cause the craft to be pushed around.
 

Netherworld

Well-Known Member
Hello, I'll be the factory judge reviewing your submission. If you have questions, please feel free to respond to this thread once we are underway.
 

Netherworld

Well-Known Member
[member="Ultimatum"]

[LOOM] Operations: Production of Robotics based Tech, Armors, Droids, Cybernetics Vehicles, starships, and small numbers of clones.
  • This is a weapon. Thus your company cannot make it. Please find an appropriate manufacturer, or I can archive this until you've expanded your operations.


Ultimatum said:
Production: Mass-Produced
  • This is a very powerful weapon. Drop the Production to Limited.

Ultimatum said:
Potentially dangerous recoil

Ultimatum said:
The unit is such that if simply centering the rotary center to that of the fighter, the recoil will push the fighter off target. While not affecting the flight speed very considerably, the recoil is enough to through the fighter around unless properly centered. The suggested method of installation is to have the unit placed in such a way that the gun is slightly off-center, such that the firing barrel is at the center line of the craft to limit the recoil throwing off the aim of the pilot.
  • The second excerpt from your Description seems to contradict your Weakness. Please clarify this, or replace it with an actual, solid Weakness.


Ultimatum said:
Rather obtrusive system within fighter design
  • Why is this a weakness? Is it particularly vulnerable to attack? Does the huge gas canister explode so violently that the whole starfighter is blown to smithereens?


Ultimatum said:
This along with the potential power draw, limits the additional features that could be added to the fighter. On most fighter craft this weapon must be considered the primary weapon due to its size taking up a large area of space within the fighter.
  • This should be listed under weaknesses.


Ultimatum said:
needless to say most if not all infantry armor is useless against these
  • There are materials that won't have trouble dealing with blaster bolts. Please alter your language to reflect that.


Ultimatum said:
When the main ammunition runs out, the unit switches over to electrical based projectiles that pull power from the ship that houses it. The draw is significant enough that it is recommended to avoid prolonged firing when drawing on fighter power. The electrical shots are far weaker than the gas based rounds. While capable of making short work of infantry, the electrical bolts are less likely to penetrate heavy vehicle armors.
  • This requires some serious elaboration. Electrical-based how? Do you have a canon basis for this kind of technology?
  • The power-draw should be listed under Weaknesses. What systems does it draw the power from? How does it affect the fighter?
  1. How does this weapon fare against Ion/EMP damage?
 
[member="Netherworld"]

LOOM has produced several weapons in the past and I have accomplished a thread some time ago about making the facility to produce weapons. I do not know why it is not in the list of operations. I have requested a change in order to fix this.

I dropped the submission to Limited as requested

The second paragraph is intended to show a mechanical method by which to change the danger of the recoil. I've added a small part in order to create a more definitive weakness.



Netherworld said:
Why is this a weakness? Is it particularly vulnerable to attack? Does the huge gas canister explode so violently that the whole starfighter is blown to smithereens?

Netherworld said:
This should be listed under weaknesses.
These two are related. The fact that the whole unit is so obtrusive (large) makes it take up more space in the fighter.



Netherworld said:
There are materials that won't have trouble dealing with blaster bolts. Please alter your language to reflect that.
These are intended to be anti-armor blaster bolts, rather than simple blaster bolts. eg. a rifle versus x-wing cannon



Netherworld said:
This requires some serious elaboration. Electrical-based how? Do you have a canon basis for this kind of technology? The power-draw should be listed under Weaknesses. What systems does it draw the power from? How does it affect the fighter?
It fires electric bolts, instead of plasma its just concentrated electricity. I don't know if there is a canon thing behind this, but I had assumed that it was fairly normal.
It would draw power from the ship's power source. Whether it be reactor or some form of fuel system, whatever makes the ship's power will be drawn from by this. It depends on the strength of the fighter I would suppose.

This whole thing is sort of based off of the real world autocannons found in jets, my template for this one is specifically the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger.
 

Netherworld

Well-Known Member
[member="Ultimatum"]



Ultimatum said:
This canister can be attached to, or replaced with, a predesigned larger container for larger ships, which would allow cruisers or even gunships to contain more gas bolts.
  • Given the power of this weapon, I'm not comfortable with this virtually 'unlimited' ammo cap on larger ships. Please specify a maximum ammo capacity for bigger craft.


Ultimatum said:
These are intended to be anti-armor blaster bolts, rather than simple blaster bolts. eg. a rifle versus x-wing cannon
  • I understand that. There are a number of RM materials who still wouldn't be shredded by these, so please – edit your language to reflect that.

Thanks for the links; the first one especially is useful. From the Electrobolt assault rifle article:
Electrobolt rifles fired bolts of condensed electrical energy and were more useful for jolting and stunning a target into unconsciousness than actually killing them. It typically took four hits to kill most targets.

Contrast this with your target damage:


Ultimatum said:
The electrical shots are far weaker than the gas based rounds. While capable of making short work of infantry, the electrical bolts are less likely to penetrate heavy vehicle armors.
  • I'm willing to allow a higher level of power since this is a ship-mounted weapon. However, if you want to keep it at what you have now, I'd like for the draw on the fighter's power reserves to be made far more significant. This is a large, fast-firing, power-hungry weapon, and currently it lacks in the way of Weaknesses.


Ultimatum said:
The second paragraph is intended to show a mechanical method by which to change the danger of the recoil. I've added a small part in order to create a more definitive weakness.
  • Please annotate that the recoil will throw the fighter around if the weapon is mounted in any other way but ventrally.


Netherworld said:
How does this weapon fare against Ion/EMP damage?
  • Please address this question.
 
Netherworld said:
Given the power of this weapon, I'm not comfortable with this virtually 'unlimited' ammo cap on larger ships. Please specify a maximum ammo capacity for bigger craft.
I believe I have taken care of that.



Netherworld said:
I understand that. There are a number of RM materials who still wouldn't be shredded by these, so please – edit your language to reflect that.
Okay I made some adjustments, does that work? (I have a question about that. Been bugging me for a while, but I will ask at the end of this post)



Netherworld said:
I'm willing to allow a higher level of power since this is a ship-mounted weapon. However, if you want to keep it at what you have now, I'd like for the draw on the fighter's power reserves to be made far more significant. This is a large, fast-firing, power-hungry weapon, and currently it lacks in the way of Weaknesses.
I believe I have made appropriate additions.



Netherworld said:
Please annotate that the recoil will throw the fighter around if the weapon is mounted in any other way but ventrally.
I believe it is done



Netherworld said:
Please address this question.
I have made the necessary adjustments. (I have a question for this one two. Which will be addressed in just a moment)


------------

Okay, so here is the part where the two(ish) questions I have in mind are asked. If you would be willing to humor me in this area.

1. In regards the RMs and their vaunted immunities. While a lightsaber cannot pierce them, and a blaster cannot break them, what is to stop the heat of either from melting the metals? (Not complaining, I have used them myself and simply wish to clarify)

2. This has happened several times. Where I do not state the effect of EMP/ion on a particular device. Why must it be elaborated at all times? If it not stated that it is immune to the effects, something that would quickly be done, then isn't it fairly plain that the device is vulnerable to it? (Again, not complaining, just wishing to clarify.)

I am not attempting to be impertinent, or to find any loopholes in any system. And if you do not believe that these questions are worth answering, or would prefer not to, then I can live without. Thank you ahead of time if you do answer.
 

Netherworld

Well-Known Member
[member="Ultimatum"]



Ultimatum said:
1. In regards the RMs and their vaunted immunities. While a lightsaber cannot pierce them, and a blaster cannot break them, what is to stop the heat of either from melting the metals? (Not complaining, I have used them myself and simply wish to clarify)
  • Well, being highly resistant to lightsabers means in and of itself the metals are highly resistant to high temperatures – in the case of a lightsaber, it's only through extremely high temperatures that the weapon even cuts. By that vein, if a lightsaber has trouble melting it, a blaster will face much bigger problems still, as they don't come nowhere close to lightsabers in terms of temperature.


Ultimatum said:
2. This has happened several times. Where I do not state the effect of EMP/ion on a particular device. Why must it be elaborated at all times? If it not stated that it is immune to the effects, something that would quickly be done, then isn't it fairly plain that the device is vulnerable to it? (Again, not complaining, just wishing to clarify.)
  • The purpose of all factory submissions is to present all available information about a piece of tech, as plainly and obviously as possible. If something isn't specifically stated at this point, potential issues can arise later from this ambiguity – and that's why judges ask you to make such things unequivocally clear.
  • It's for the same reason that beskar submissions are asked to list lightsaber resistance in strengths. It might be 'plainly obvious' to some, but not everyone. The same goes for the reverse; if it's vulnerable to something, this should be reflected in the weaknesses section.



Netherworld said:
This is a weapon. Thus your company cannot make it. Please find an appropriate manufacturer, or I can archive this until you've expanded your operations.
  • Finally, we'll full circle back to this. Have you expanded LOOM's operations yet, or should I archive this submission until you've done so?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom