What is wrong with railguns?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • What is wrong with railguns?

      Seriously, what is up with these? All the other elite units are realistic (elite bomber is questionable) and this one is out of this world. I was amazed to not find a thread calling out the stats on this unit. Here are my questions:

      How are these effective vs infantry?
      They are massive guns firing hypersonic shells. Because of this, it should not be the case that it could take out more than a few soldiers per shot. It would take out maybe a single soldier, then have to reload and shoot again. It could have some sort of explosive payload, but wouldn’t that compromise the speed of these shells? One could argue that the infantry are in trucks therefore they are vulnerable, but trucks in general should be maneuverable enough to find defilade from the guns. Not to mention that a shot from a railgun is probably a lot more expensive than a well placed RPG or 50 BMG. The co-driver taking shots with a sniper rifle would be better.

      Attack range
      The anti air aspect of these units is probable, but the artillery aspect is not. For it to attack land units far away, it would have to arc its shots, which it cannot do with hypersonic shells. If it did arc the shots in a manner that would strike the target, they would lose their speed and be completely ineffective. If a railgun is in a city, and it is firing at a tank a province over in mountain terrain, it is implied that these shots are penetrating through the buildings in the city and then penetrating through a mountain before hitting the tank. Maybe the railgun thing is a cover up and it’s actually Shin Godzilla. It would explain the damage to population and buildings, as well as the anti air. Maybe I’m on to something here

      Anti-Air
      How is it that a fat, slow, low-flying helicopter does a better job at surviving this unit than a small, supersonic jet fighter thousands of feet in the sky. In comparison to guided missiles, the projectile does not possess the ability to change its course, and lacks any sort of proximity fuse system, meaning that the guidance system of the gun would have to score a direct hit from a range of up to 100!
      While this is plausible, it would be incredibly inefficient. When all factors are taken into consideration, the probability of nailing this one shot is very low, which is why weapons systems like CIWS (which does not rely on direct hits but proximity fuse) fire thousands of shots at a single target. A more reasonable system would be to take away the anti air radius and instead give it point defense values against planes, helis and missiles, as this weapon would be effective against air targets when they are coming right at them.

      Air Assault
      Don’t quite understand this one. How exactly is the thing air assaulting? It’s absolutely massive. Based on the picture it looks like it could rival TDS in terms of size. The other air assault units are air assault not because of their ability to be carried by helicopter but by their ability to be deployed rapidly from the air. Airmobile infantry just hop on the helicopter, while some bigger vehicles like tank destroyers are small and light enough to be picked up and deployed elsewhere without wasting time. The railgun, on the other hand, looks like it would have to be fully packed up before moving. The comes the issue of hauling the truck, the massive gun and whatever gives it power straight into battle. The MBTs in game would have a better time air assaulting.

      Anyway, this unit needs an overhaul. It’s no fun to have a unit that deletes everything within a 75 radius in a game about strategy and counters. I think it would be better suited to an anti-ship defense (as they are in real life) with some defense vs air targets and no defense vs infantry, since the current meta is build MRLS or Cruisers or else your coastal cities are mine. Not only would this further solve the whole Cruisers-rule-all issue, but it would give more purpose to underutilized units like Special Forces that could hunt down and kill it easily.
      Yee Haw
    • the thing with railgun. I think it is the BEST elite unit so far yet by not being stupidly op.

      My experience in the "Elite unit Hype state" with railgun before it was nerf is like.

      GOD DAMN Egypt had stack of it sitting on the Suez Canal. my god non of my ship can pass it cuz damage to ship it hell LOT.
      try to bust it with air. fuc me it is AA.
      sadly on that match i don't have a proper counter to it. (cough, mrls, cough)

      to sum up.
      it is the most balanced units where it very effective on some aspect and having a clear weekness.
      no meta, I do what meta don't do and YEET them with ridiculous tactic. - IT YEET OR BE YEETED
    • playbabe wrote:

      the thing with railgun. I think it is the BEST elite unit so far yet by not being stupidly op.

      My experience in the "Elite unit Hype state" with railgun before it was nerf is like.

      GOD DAMN Egypt had stack of it sitting on the Suez Canal. my god non of my ship can pass it cuz damage to ship it hell LOT.
      try to bust it with air. fuc me it is AA.
      sadly on that match i don't have a proper counter to it. (cough, mrls, cough)

      to sum up.
      it is the most balanced units where it very effective on some aspect and having a clear weekness.
      It was even stronger? Dear god

      I’m not sure if I would consider it OP. It is definitely close. I think even after the nerf it is still ridiculous. Right now if there were 5 maxed rail guns sitting in a city with lvl 5 bunkers how could it be countered? MRLS should not be the answer to everything. I think units like these still need a clear weakness, just like how AIP subs are still vulnerable to destroyers, or Elite tanks are still defenseless vs SF etc
      Yee Haw
    • Colonel Waffles wrote:

      playbabe wrote:

      the thing with railgun. I think it is the BEST elite unit so far yet by not being stupidly op.

      My experience in the "Elite unit Hype state" with railgun before it was nerf is like.

      GOD DAMN Egypt had stack of it sitting on the Suez Canal. my god non of my ship can pass it cuz damage to ship it hell LOT.
      try to bust it with air. fuc me it is AA.
      sadly on that match i don't have a proper counter to it. (cough, mrls, cough)

      to sum up.
      it is the most balanced units where it very effective on some aspect and having a clear weekness.
      It was even stronger? Dear god
      I’m not sure if I would consider it OP. It is definitely close. I think even after the nerf it is still ridiculous. Right now if there were 5 maxed rail guns sitting in a city with lvl 5 bunkers how could it be countered? MRLS should not be the answer to everything. I think units like these still need a clear weakness, just like how AIP subs are still vulnerable to destroyers, or Elite tanks are still defenseless vs SF etc
      Sorry to inform you but MRLS is usually the answer to everything :|
      There is no easy counter to MRLS + SAMS + ASF (and radar) and it can usually defeat all other ground strategies if payed correctly.
      Tbh you could use Mobile artillery vs max railguns instead they still outrange them.

      Railguns are generally not overpowered unless your opponent does not know how to deal with them (MA/MRLS). When you are facing a good player railguns are generally only "fancy anti air" and nothing more.
    • Hi Waffles,

      valid questions asked - here some answers from our research into the topic:

      1) How are these effective vs infantry?
      In the newest experimental designs, railguns fire hypersonic explosive munitions with multiple guided warheads. Anti Personnel among them. The designs we checked when researching were frightening in their capabilities.

      2) Attack Range
      They are indeed artillery and as such do have ranges beyond sight.

      3) Anti-Air
      Railguns are exceptional at anti-air due to their immense speeds when coupled with strong targeting computers.
      In fact they are being contemplated vs Missiles for exactly that reason.

      4) Air Assault
      Please note that it's only the last tier of railguns that we decided to give air assault capabilities. This is of course assuming that they are fielded and consequently developed & improved in the conflicts to come.

      Hope I could share some light on the high design...

      //G
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • It wouldn't be a single railgun, likewise a single infantry unit isn't a single infantry unit.
      The population requirements is thousands for a single unit.

      Railguns, would be what flak cannons were in WW2, which were by all means very effective vs infantry and tanks.

      Ultimately we are talking about a developing, emerging weapon system that is suppose to fire very cheap ammunition. Quantity over quality and as such they deal damage.

      But while everyone says MRL are the counter, what if its 5MRL and 5Railguns? Counter that!
      End of the day, you need to use tile effectiveness to your advantage, but if you really want to counter Railguns, you don't do it on the battlefield, you do it in the homecities by trashing their buildings while they are upgrading these guns. Because they need upgrades and with those upgrades comes insane building levels for production.

      Honestly, i ask myself why MRL cannot combat helicopters and aircraft.

      If you see railguns, then attack them, you may take some loses but by enlarge upgraded railguns are irreplaceable.
    • crazystoner wrote:

      It wouldn't be a single railgun, likewise a single infantry unit isn't a single infantry unit.
      The population requirements is thousands for a single unit.

      Railguns, would be what flak cannons were in WW2, which were by all means very effective vs infantry and tanks.

      Ultimately we are talking about a developing, emerging weapon system that is suppose to fire very cheap ammunition. Quantity over quality and as such they deal damage.

      But while everyone says MRL are the counter, what if its 5MRL and 5Railguns? Counter that!
      End of the day, you need to use tile effectiveness to your advantage, but if you really want to counter Railguns, you don't do it on the battlefield, you do it in the homecities by trashing their buildings while they are upgrading these guns. Because they need upgrades and with those upgrades comes insane building levels for production.

      Honestly, i ask myself why MRL cannot combat helicopters and aircraft.

      If you see railguns, then attack them, you may take some loses but by enlarge upgraded railguns are irreplaceable.
      eh
      by far the biggest weakness is how underwhelming they are before T3
      I am the basline for opinions
    • crazystoner wrote:

      Railguns, would be what flak cannons were in WW2, which were by all means very effective vs infantry and tanks.

      Wouldn’t a HE shell fired from an MBT or Artillery gun be more practical for this specific purpose though? I would rather get the job done with a cheap explosive shell fired from a versatile and reliable platform than a (taking into consideration the use of explosive railgun ammunition) high tech shell being fired from an expensive railgun which in comparison to other platforms is very big and sensitive? Not to mention that they use god knows how much electricity to fire. Though maybe I’m wrong in this regard. Germanico mentioned a anti-personnel warhead for these weapons, and the existence of such a warhead suggest it could be practical after all.
      Yee Haw
    • Colonel Waffles wrote:

      crazystoner wrote:

      Railguns, would be what flak cannons were in WW2, which were by all means very effective vs infantry and tanks.

      Wouldn’t a HE shell fired from an MBT or Artillery gun be more practical for this specific purpose though? I would rather get the job done with a cheap explosive shell fired from a versatile and reliable platform than a (taking into consideration the use of explosive railgun ammunition) high tech shell being fired from an expensive railgun which in comparison to other platforms is very big and sensitive? Not to mention that they use god knows how much electricity to fire. Though maybe I’m wrong in this regard. Germanico mentioned a anti-personnel warhead for these weapons, and the existence of such a warhead suggest it could be practical after all.

      Files
      • NO.jpg

        (18.39 kB, downloaded 29 times, last: )
      *** Warning: This poster is on double secret probation ***

      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Germanico ().

    • playbabe wrote:

      the thing with railgun. I think it is the BEST elite unit so far yet by not being stupidly op.

      My experience in the "Elite unit Hype state" with railgun before it was nerf is like.

      GOD DAMN Egypt had stack of it sitting on the Suez Canal. my god non of my ship can pass it cuz damage to ship it hell LOT.
      try to bust it with air. fuc me it is AA.
      sadly on that match i don't have a proper counter to it. (cough, mrls, cough)

      to sum up.
      it is the most balanced units where it very effective on some aspect and having a clear weekness.
      Ship get easily more range than RGs though

      Not to mention that RG get damage debuff is most provinces, even in mountains which are normally strong terrain for artillery.

      RGs are fun, but as artillery they are still subpar.
    • Colonel Waffles wrote:

      Germanico wrote:

      2) Attack Range
      They are indeed artillery and as such do have ranges beyond sight.

      Kalrakh wrote:

      Not to mention that RG get damage debuff is most provinces, even in mountains which are normally strong terrain for artillery.


      Completely missed the terrain debuffs, which increases the realism aspect considerably

      Not sure, what your point is supposed to be.