Weaponry for Fighters

Just some ideas.

1. Guided Air-Air missile:
Radar guided, these missiles seek out whatever you select as target.

2. Rockets:
Unguided, intended for air-ground use.

3. Guided Air-Ground Missile:
Locks onto and hits anything considered an "entity".

4. Railguns:
Take up 2 weapon slots, but can punch a slug into a decent-sized ship.

5. Tactical Nukes:
These are roughly half the power of a full-size nuke, but it still takes up all of the weapon slots on a fighter.
(Nuke only, no gun, no rockets, no other weapons at all.)

6. Lasers:
Standard weapons. Low damage, rapid fire.

7. Unguided bombs:
Gravity bombs, 500 lbs. of high explosive on a fuse.

And lasers and railguns.

air to ground guided missiles, and bombs

and wouldn't it be space to space

Yea, some of this stuff is for jets...

Whats about Plasma Cannons?or Warp Cannons(They send out an Warp Puls which means that everything in Front of you gets Expanded or shortened)?
Also Missing Sound Cannons Which are harmless To Buildings but Explode Heads In a Far Range

I think this is intended for space fighters...

ACH0225 wrote:

I think this is intended for space fighters...

Actually... No Nukes are made for Space Fights or Electrc charged Projectiles but not an space bending weapon or an 1000°c Hot Gas
and If you didn´t notice it sound cannons are only for Planet Fights since they won´t work anywhere else

What about miniguns on your fighters? Only missiles and bombs?

hyperlite wrote:

What about miniguns on your fighters? Only missiles and bombs?

Miniguns aren´t strong enough and you can´t use MAC cannons because the projectile would melt if you firing it in an Atmosphere

Cheatmaster wrote:

hyperlite wrote:

What about miniguns on your fighters? Only missiles and bombs?

Miniguns aren´t strong enough and you can´t use MAC cannons because the mass would melt if you firing it in an Atmosphere

Euhm...you're wrong. Not a high enough drag coefficient for the projectiles to melt via friction. Mini guns can be more than powerful enough to do serious harm to other fighters and even tanks.

Avenger_7 wrote:

Cheatmaster wrote:

hyperlite wrote:

What about miniguns on your fighters? Only missiles and bombs?

Miniguns aren´t strong enough and you can´t use MAC cannons because the mass would melt if you firing it in an Atmosphere

Euhm...you're wrong. Not a high enough drag coefficient for the projectiles to melt via friction. Mini guns can be more than powerful enough to do serious harm to other fighters and even tanks.

Maybe we do´t have the same Imagination of a Fighter
For me is a Fighter something which can´t be damaged by small bullets.

Cheatmaster wrote:

Avenger_7 wrote:

Cheatmaster wrote:

hyperlite wrote:

What about miniguns on your fighters? Only missiles and bombs?

Miniguns aren´t strong enough and you can´t use MAC cannons because the mass would melt if you firing it in an Atmosphere

Euhm...you're wrong. Not a high enough drag coefficient for the projectiles to melt via friction. Mini guns can be more than powerful enough to do serious harm to other fighters and even tanks.

Maybe we do´t have the same Imagination of a Fighter
For me is a Fighter something which can´t be damaged by small bullets.

Then your idea of miniguns is VERY wrong. While miniguns are for infantry and vehicle use (either primary armament on unarmored vehicles or secondary on armored), the M61 Vulcan Cannon has been used by United States on fighters since the 1960's and is still a primary armament on our modern fighters. They are almost the same as the minigun, the only differences are from how the "mini" got its name due to it using the eaxact same mechanisms as the vulcan cannon only with a smaller caliber ammo.

And many fighters can be damaged by standard military rounds, such as the NATO 7.62mm. Even then, there are infantry weapons that only require ammo changes to armor pearcing rounds that can easily hit a jet and go through and through, making it completely unusable.

Nowadays, it isnt destroying the plane that makes it unusuable. just a bullet passing straight through wil likely destroy enough electrical wiring to render it completely useless.

Also, fighters would not carry nukes. and not tactical nukes. I hate people who have been absorbed by CoD. large explosive ordanance will e carried by bomers.

Cheatmaster wrote:

ACH0225 wrote:

I think this is intended for space fighters...

Actually... No Nukes are made for Space Fights or Electrc charged Projectiles but not an space bending weapon or an 1000°c Hot Gas
and If you didn´t notice it sound cannons are only for Planet Fights since they won´t work anywhere else

He's right. read the OP carefully.

And Tac Nukes take ALL the weapon slots on a fighter, basically turning it into a marginally effective kamikazi.

Random fact of the day, we tested a nuke in space. It worked beautifully, up to the big plasma ball. Anyone live in Hawaii?

Keon wrote:

Random fact of the day, we tested a nuke in space. It worked beautifully, up to the big plasma ball. Anyone live in Hawaii?

What do you Want To tell us with this?

Cheatmaster wrote:

Keon wrote:

Random fact of the day, we tested a nuke in space. It worked beautifully, up to the big plasma ball. Anyone live in Hawaii?

What do you Want To tell us with this?

A big EMP is generated by detonating a nuke in space. Affects an area about the size of the Pacific.

Cheatmaster wrote:

Keon wrote:

Random fact of the day, we tested a nuke in space. It worked beautifully, up to the big plasma ball. Anyone live in Hawaii?

What do you Want To tell us with this?

People were saying nukes didn't work in space.

Two things:
1.) Get back on-topic and discuss nuke mechanics elsewhere.

2.) I don´t think you will be able to do major changes at your fighters weaponary after you built it, meaning that there won´t be any senseful way to possibly fit a tactical nuke into a fighter.
As said previously, use bombers to deliver them.

Also, heres a funny quirk-

People have been building fighters, when i have yet to see anything going against the mac's statements fighters will be craftable, like escape pods.

scout37 wrote:

Also, heres a funny quirk-

People have been building fighters, when i have yet to see anything going against the mac's statements fighters will be craftable, like escape pods.

We want something to put in our hangars until then. Although I've considered retexturing some of Manus's Vipers, 'cause that's what I want at least some of my fighters to look like.

Last_Jedi_Standing wrote:

scout37 wrote:

Also, heres a funny quirk-

People have been building fighters, when i have yet to see anything going against the mac's statements fighters will be craftable, like escape pods.

We want something to put in our hangars until then. Although I've considered retexturing some of Manus's Vipers, 'cause that's what I want at least some of my fighters to look like.

Please do not mention the name manus

He has made all the work others actually put in by screwing around in techne for a while. While i can't denie his models are amazing, he ruins things for others by making every single model he can think of so wen someone else makes it for their pack and does it to fit in, then they are accused of copying manus. God, if only i hadn't banned techne's IP...

Keon wrote:

Cheatmaster wrote:

Keon wrote:

Random fact of the day, we tested a nuke in space. It worked beautifully, up to the big plasma ball. Anyone live in Hawaii?

What do you Want To tell us with this?

People were saying nukes didn't work in space.

You missunderstood this a little bit Rockets will have no effect (non-shildbreaking rockets)
A nuke generates an huge amount of electromagnetic-waves wich will damage the shields Significantly

Cheatmaster wrote:

Keon wrote:

Cheatmaster wrote:

Keon wrote:

Random fact of the day, we tested a nuke in space. It worked beautifully, up to the big plasma ball. Anyone live in Hawaii?

What do you Want To tell us with this?

People were saying nukes didn't work in space.

You missunderstood this a little bit Rockets will have no effect (non-shildbreaking rockets)
A nuke generates an huge amount of electromagnetic-waves wich will damage the shields Significantly

The power behind them is the kinetic energy. There's a LOT of that.

ACH0225 wrote:

Cheatmaster wrote:

Keon wrote:

Cheatmaster wrote:

Keon wrote:

Random fact of the day, we tested a nuke in space. It worked beautifully, up to the big plasma ball. Anyone live in Hawaii?

What do you Want To tell us with this?

People were saying nukes didn't work in space.

You missunderstood this a little bit Rockets will have no effect (non-shildbreaking rockets)
A nuke generates an huge amount of electromagnetic-waves wich will damage the shields Significantly

The power behind them is the kinetic energy. There's a LOT of that.

The Kinetic Energy is useless in Space you Need an Dirty nuke which destroys Shields