Hi there, can someone help me with ALL the guns that were based on the principal of the Ion Cannon, their stats and descriptions in the manuals, their stats in the gamefiles, from each game? I'm trying to track 'the evolution of the Ion Cannon' throughout Wing Commander Canon. Thanks!
Help listing all the Ion cannon based guns?
- Thread starter gavinfoxx
- Start date
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Well, for pure gun data a good reference is this chart, which lists every set of gun specifications by appearance: https://www.wcnews.com/articles/gunchart.htm
As for the history, I guess it isn't clear.
The Kilrathi Saga manual says they're a fairly new gun, with an entry date of 2668. That fits with the games themselves, where they only appear in WC3, WC4 and Prophecy. One of Pliers' voiceovers in WC4, though, says that the Ion Cannon was "the first weapon I ever worked on"... which at least suggests it's older.
As for spinoffs...
- Wing Commander Prophecy's ICIS manual mentions that the Midway has Medium Ion Cannons for ship-to-ship work. They aren't actually simulated in the game (they are also mentioned in behind-the-screens material as being planned for inclusion).
- Arena's manual lists "Heavy Ion Cannons" on the Midway-class' specs (again, not simulated in the game).
- Secret Ops introduces the "Chain Ion Cannon" (new in 2681) which is: "The lightweight version of the normal ion cannon, this gun is best utilized in quick, close-in shots that require a fast refire rate. It operates on a principle similar to that of the ion cannon, but its ionic particles are sped up prior to launch via an ionic chain-reaction accelerator."
- Privateer 2 has a "Mass Ion Cannon", introduced in this news story (so, a new gun circa 2789): "Ballistics expert Professor Anna Wrack reveals all. My colleagues and I are pleased to announce the fruition of our latest project, the creation of a ballistic ship-mounted weapon. Known as the Mass Ion cannon, it functions round the principle of projecting positively-charged microparticles of depleted Plutonium at high velocities. It's effect on shields and armour is comparable to an average Medium Laser; however, it ahs a marked advantage over all beam weapons in that heat build-up, the Laser's greatest curse, is completley absent. This permits an extremely rapid rate of fire to be maintained for long periods of time, allowing a skilled pilot to destroy enemies very swiftly. "
- Wng Commander III's description claims that the Reaper is evolved from the Ion Cannon. Here are the (seemingly contradictory) Reaper descriptions:
Wing Commander Academy: "Similar to a particle cannon, this blaster also combines long-range effectiveness with powerful damage potential. Reaper cannon are even more powerful than neutron guns, but they also deplete blaster power very quickly. Currently in development for use on the new Confederation Wraith, these weapons represent our latest advances in blaster technology."
Wing Commander Armada: "The heaviest gun developed to date, the reaper cannon has gunned down more ships than all other weapons combined. Besides acting effectively at long range, this blaster has powerful damage potential and recharges quickly."
Wing Commander III: "(This gun will be available as soon as it completes its test cycle.) The RCX-V1 reaper cannon evolved from the standard ion cannon, and its refire rate is slightly faster. This gun delivers high-speed pulses of charged atomic particles that give off energy and radiation damage. Fighters find this gun especially useful against ships with shields that regenerate quickly, and any ship with slow shield generation is sure to take damage."
- Several games feature "Ionic Pulse Cannons" (Armada, Privateer, Arena)--but we don't know if those are related to Ion Cannons.
As for the history, I guess it isn't clear.
The Kilrathi Saga manual says they're a fairly new gun, with an entry date of 2668. That fits with the games themselves, where they only appear in WC3, WC4 and Prophecy. One of Pliers' voiceovers in WC4, though, says that the Ion Cannon was "the first weapon I ever worked on"... which at least suggests it's older.
As for spinoffs...
- Wing Commander Prophecy's ICIS manual mentions that the Midway has Medium Ion Cannons for ship-to-ship work. They aren't actually simulated in the game (they are also mentioned in behind-the-screens material as being planned for inclusion).
- Arena's manual lists "Heavy Ion Cannons" on the Midway-class' specs (again, not simulated in the game).
- Secret Ops introduces the "Chain Ion Cannon" (new in 2681) which is: "The lightweight version of the normal ion cannon, this gun is best utilized in quick, close-in shots that require a fast refire rate. It operates on a principle similar to that of the ion cannon, but its ionic particles are sped up prior to launch via an ionic chain-reaction accelerator."
- Privateer 2 has a "Mass Ion Cannon", introduced in this news story (so, a new gun circa 2789): "Ballistics expert Professor Anna Wrack reveals all. My colleagues and I are pleased to announce the fruition of our latest project, the creation of a ballistic ship-mounted weapon. Known as the Mass Ion cannon, it functions round the principle of projecting positively-charged microparticles of depleted Plutonium at high velocities. It's effect on shields and armour is comparable to an average Medium Laser; however, it ahs a marked advantage over all beam weapons in that heat build-up, the Laser's greatest curse, is completley absent. This permits an extremely rapid rate of fire to be maintained for long periods of time, allowing a skilled pilot to destroy enemies very swiftly. "
- Wng Commander III's description claims that the Reaper is evolved from the Ion Cannon. Here are the (seemingly contradictory) Reaper descriptions:
Wing Commander Academy: "Similar to a particle cannon, this blaster also combines long-range effectiveness with powerful damage potential. Reaper cannon are even more powerful than neutron guns, but they also deplete blaster power very quickly. Currently in development for use on the new Confederation Wraith, these weapons represent our latest advances in blaster technology."
Wing Commander Armada: "The heaviest gun developed to date, the reaper cannon has gunned down more ships than all other weapons combined. Besides acting effectively at long range, this blaster has powerful damage potential and recharges quickly."
Wing Commander III: "(This gun will be available as soon as it completes its test cycle.) The RCX-V1 reaper cannon evolved from the standard ion cannon, and its refire rate is slightly faster. This gun delivers high-speed pulses of charged atomic particles that give off energy and radiation damage. Fighters find this gun especially useful against ships with shields that regenerate quickly, and any ship with slow shield generation is sure to take damage."
- Several games feature "Ionic Pulse Cannons" (Armada, Privateer, Arena)--but we don't know if those are related to Ion Cannons.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wedge009
Rogue Leader
According to the Secret Ops fiction, the Cloudburst is some sort of Ion-based weapon, as is the Chain Ion Cannon (as the name implies).
Last edited by a moderator:
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
I think the confusion comes from this WCSO fiction: https://www.wcnews.com/articles/sofiction/2_1_d_icis.html
It's saying that the upgrade from Ion to Chain Ion means the Black Panther's powerplant can sustain a Cloudburst, not that the two are necessarily tied together (the Black Wasp has a Cloudburst/Dust Cannon system).
The Scatter Gun as derived from the Ion Cannon (by Pliers, according to one of his voiceovers).
The Longbow in WC4 has Heavy Ion Cannons.
It's saying that the upgrade from Ion to Chain Ion means the Black Panther's powerplant can sustain a Cloudburst, not that the two are necessarily tied together (the Black Wasp has a Cloudburst/Dust Cannon system).
The Scatter Gun as derived from the Ion Cannon (by Pliers, according to one of his voiceovers).
The Longbow in WC4 has Heavy Ion Cannons.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Sorry, I didn't see your post--I went off to find my notes about WC4 weirdo guns after I started writing mine and it took longer than I expected. 
It sounds like a 'Cloudburst' might be some sort of additional modification that could be added to any gun when energy usage so-allows (or at least some guns)...
It sounds like a 'Cloudburst' might be some sort of additional modification that could be added to any gun when energy usage so-allows (or at least some guns)...
So, the full list in MAIN Wing Commander is:
Ion Gun (Might be the same as Ionic Pulse Cannon)
Heavy Ion Gun
Heavy Ion Cannon (the capital ship based one)
Reaper Gun
Chain Ion Gun
Scatter Gun
Cloudbust Gun (maybe...)
and we do know for sure that the Ion Cannon concept works equally well in atmosphere or in space....
Is it just me, or might it have been more economical for confed to change over THEIR ENTIRE NAVY to ion cannon based guns, since there is apparently an ion gun for EVERY situation, and they are the most inherently versatile gun, AND you could presumably use similar tools to work on both the advanced versions of the weapons and the simpler versions of the weapons to repair them?
Ion Gun (Might be the same as Ionic Pulse Cannon)
Heavy Ion Gun
Heavy Ion Cannon (the capital ship based one)
Reaper Gun
Chain Ion Gun
Scatter Gun
Cloudbust Gun (maybe...)
and we do know for sure that the Ion Cannon concept works equally well in atmosphere or in space....
Is it just me, or might it have been more economical for confed to change over THEIR ENTIRE NAVY to ion cannon based guns, since there is apparently an ion gun for EVERY situation, and they are the most inherently versatile gun, AND you could presumably use similar tools to work on both the advanced versions of the weapons and the simpler versions of the weapons to repair them?
Wedge009
Rogue Leader
New weapons are being developed all the time, I don't think it would necessarily be beneficial to go through all that effort. Presumably we have all these varied weapons because of each individual ship is suited to different kinds of weapons in different situations. (And also, it'd be pretty boring to have just one kind of gun in a game.)
I think the Cloudburst is a separate gun in itself, though, not an augment of some sort.
Given that there was just two minutes between our posts, I thought something like that might have been the case.
I think the Cloudburst is a separate gun in itself, though, not an augment of some sort.
Do we have the actual written description of the Cloudburst somewhere, though? To see what sort of pseudoscience description they gave it, and whether the word 'ion' was mentioned?
Wedge009
Rogue Leader
Only that fiction page and page 125 of the WCP Gold manual, as far as I know.
There really shouldn't be a need to quote the most recent post when replying, though.
There really shouldn't be a need to quote the most recent post when replying, though.
Just looking at that chart...
SO/Proph:
cloudburst: 10 damage, .45 refire delay, 60 energy/shot
damage per second: 22, damage per energy: .167
chain ion: 2 damage, .1 refire delay, 15 energy/shot
damage per second: 20, damage per energy: .133
ion: 3 damage, .35 refire delay, 30 energy/shot
damage per second: 8.57, damage per energy: .1
WC4:
heavy ion: 5 damage, .35 refire delay, 40 energy/shot
damage per second: 14.2 damage per energy: .125
ion: 3 damage, .35 refire delay, 30 energy/shot
damage per second: 8.57, damage per energy: .1
scatter gun: 3 damage (x5), .35 refire delay, 100 energy/shot
damage per second: 42.86 (all hit), damage per energy: .15 (all hit)
wc3
reaper: 3.5 damage, .3 refire delay, 50 energy/shot
damage per second: 11.67, damage per energy: .07
ion: 3 damage, .35 refire delay, 30 energy/shot
damage per second: 8.57, damage per energy: .1
Hmm, is it just me or could the "reaper" and the "heavy ion" guns been the two main 'high end' guns from wc3 on (cause I'm assuming border worlds got old technology...), with Ion gun being the baseline, and chain ion being a more 'extreme speed' version of the reaper and cloudburst being a more 'big damage' version of the heavy ion? The Excalibur in particular, having 4 heavy ions and 2 reapers? Also, is my math right? And the Chain Ion looks absolutely PERFECT for hit and run light fighters...
SO/Proph:
cloudburst: 10 damage, .45 refire delay, 60 energy/shot
damage per second: 22, damage per energy: .167
chain ion: 2 damage, .1 refire delay, 15 energy/shot
damage per second: 20, damage per energy: .133
ion: 3 damage, .35 refire delay, 30 energy/shot
damage per second: 8.57, damage per energy: .1
WC4:
heavy ion: 5 damage, .35 refire delay, 40 energy/shot
damage per second: 14.2 damage per energy: .125
ion: 3 damage, .35 refire delay, 30 energy/shot
damage per second: 8.57, damage per energy: .1
scatter gun: 3 damage (x5), .35 refire delay, 100 energy/shot
damage per second: 42.86 (all hit), damage per energy: .15 (all hit)
wc3
reaper: 3.5 damage, .3 refire delay, 50 energy/shot
damage per second: 11.67, damage per energy: .07
ion: 3 damage, .35 refire delay, 30 energy/shot
damage per second: 8.57, damage per energy: .1
Hmm, is it just me or could the "reaper" and the "heavy ion" guns been the two main 'high end' guns from wc3 on (cause I'm assuming border worlds got old technology...), with Ion gun being the baseline, and chain ion being a more 'extreme speed' version of the reaper and cloudburst being a more 'big damage' version of the heavy ion? The Excalibur in particular, having 4 heavy ions and 2 reapers? Also, is my math right? And the Chain Ion looks absolutely PERFECT for hit and run light fighters...
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
There's the Medium Ion Cannon, too (capital weapon mentioned in Prophecy's manual).
I suppose you can consider making a call based on the 'science':
Ion Gun - WC3/Kilrathi Saga: "Found mainly on fighters and also used as an anti-fighter gun, the ion cannon imparts energy and radiation damage to targets. Charged atomic particles are magnetically accelerated to high speeds, then discharged in pulses. This cannon delivers more damage than a laser and can cause severe pilot injuries. However, the ion cannon has higher energy consumption and a slower retire rate than the laser."
Ion Gun - ICIS Manual: "Fires a bolt of highly charged ion particles at the target. This long-range gun does a moderate amount of damage with a high refire rate."
Ionic Pulse Cannon - Armada: "This high-power cannon fires ionized
electrical pulses that can down a light fighter with just a few shots.
It inflicts high damage at medium range but renergizes more
quickly than other guns."
(Which all sound fairly similar... but I would argue, personally, that there's probably a reason they have different names.)
We know that from using them... but the same test says the guns that Victory Streak claims don't work in an atmosphere perform identically to in space, too.
(ie, the laser works just fine in WC4 atmospheric missions.)Well, I'd make a few points:
- The WC3 manual tries to justify different guns by having four different types of damage--blast, heat, radiation and energy. The ion cannon was said to impact only two of these.
- Why the ion cannon at all? IIRC, running the numbers the most 'efficient' gun statistically is the tachyon.
- If the Ion Cannon is introduced in 2668 then it's only around for 1-2 years of the Kilrathi War to begin with.
- These guns are in a constant state of deveopment--limiting use to a single type will prevent future developments. The ion cannon leads to the reaper and the scattergun and so forth... and the mass driver leads to the CMD and the Dust Cannon and so on.
- Military purchasing isn't necessarily aout which weapon is the single best. It's in the Confederation's interests to be subsidizing all sorts of weapons developers rather than just one line, for both economic and strategic reasons.
- There may be even complex factors we don't know about. We're told specifically that the laser is almost self-maintaining... what if the Ion Cannon is much, much harder to keep operating? A weapon that requires an hour of downtime between missions versus one that needs to be reassembled by a team of experts is a huge difference. What if it requires a particular type of powerplant or mounting area not found on all spacecraft? I would assume gun choices are much more complex than an easy plug-and-play system.
Yea, I guess you're right...but if you will notice in SO, they did start updating more and more ships to use the ion cannon. To me, I'd just change that, as much as possible, to the ion/heavy ion/reaper trio. Also, I thought laser/photon was supposed to work in atmosphere, but have lesser range?
Still, I'd be interested in seeing how a 2 Heavy Ion / 2 Reaper Cannon ship performs against Nephilim...
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
The photon just says it works 'best' in space... but the laser says that "in atmospheric conditions, rays refract and lose their effectiveness" and the meson blaster says that "atmospheric conditions render this gun ineffective".
... so what do they go and arm the atmosphere-specific Ekapshi with? Lasers and mesons.
I think the reason we see more ions in WCP/SO is because it's the newer gun--it's introduced in WC3 and continues expanding (while older weapons are being retired, like the neutron).
The odd man out is the Reaper, supposedly a wonderful new weapon in 2669... which goes nowhere after the war that we can see (and in fact doesn't show up on later models of the Excalibur).
One other thought--if the Ion Cannon is new at the end of the war, it was quite possibly derived from some other familiar gun type.
I know! They should TOTALLY have armed the Ekapshi with laser and photons, not laser and MESONS! Two different light guns that only work okay in atmosphere, rather than one type of light gun and a gun that shouldnt be able to work in atmosphere AT ALL! 
And as near as I can see, Reaper going nowhere after the war was an oversight on Origin's part... blargh...
If I wanted to put the Ionic Pulse Gun as a variant of the normal Ion Gun, I'd take 'whatever stats of the ion gun of the era' and change it to 3.3 damage and 37 charge instead. Sort of make it, from lightest to heaviest, the only stats that are different in these three are damage and charge required, Ion, Ionic Pulse, Heavy Ion. But seriously, with that small of a difference, you only really need the Ion and Heavy Ion, I can see why the Ionic Pulse variant could go out of favor, it's a middle child, seems to have most of the bad qualities of the ion and heavy ion... Maybe Ionic Pulse is representative of the earliest version of this gun, before it was refined into the Ion and Heavy Ion?
Hmmm, you would've thought that by Prophecy Era, they would've had something like this:
Ion: 3 damage, .35 refire, 25 energy/shot, dps 8.57, dpe .12, eps 71.42, dpspeps 0.119
Reaper: 3.5 damage, .25 refire, 40 energy/shot, dps 14, dpe .075, eps 160, dpspeps 0.086
Heavy Ion: 5 damage, .35 Refire, 40 energy/shot, dps 14.29, dpe .125, eps 114.28, dpspeps 0.125
Oh, by the way, for the "needs lots of maintenance", I can see that for Tachyon Cannons and Light Tachyon Cannons, totally. I can See it for Particle Guns and Pulse Particle Guns. I can see it For Plasma guns. I can see it for Chain Ion, Cloudburst guns, and even for Reaper Cannons, and maybe even Heavy Ion Guns. But I can't really see it for NORMAL Ion guns.
dps = damage per second (during rapid fire), higher is better
dpe = damage (for one shot) per energy use of that shot, higher is better
eps = energy use per second (during rapid fire), lower is better
dpspeps = damage from one second of firing per energy use from one second of firing, higher is better
And could you guys check my math? Please? Those seem to be the four main metrics for figuring out what's best 'all shots hitting'...
And as near as I can see, Reaper going nowhere after the war was an oversight on Origin's part... blargh...
If I wanted to put the Ionic Pulse Gun as a variant of the normal Ion Gun, I'd take 'whatever stats of the ion gun of the era' and change it to 3.3 damage and 37 charge instead. Sort of make it, from lightest to heaviest, the only stats that are different in these three are damage and charge required, Ion, Ionic Pulse, Heavy Ion. But seriously, with that small of a difference, you only really need the Ion and Heavy Ion, I can see why the Ionic Pulse variant could go out of favor, it's a middle child, seems to have most of the bad qualities of the ion and heavy ion... Maybe Ionic Pulse is representative of the earliest version of this gun, before it was refined into the Ion and Heavy Ion?
Hmmm, you would've thought that by Prophecy Era, they would've had something like this:
Ion: 3 damage, .35 refire, 25 energy/shot, dps 8.57, dpe .12, eps 71.42, dpspeps 0.119
Reaper: 3.5 damage, .25 refire, 40 energy/shot, dps 14, dpe .075, eps 160, dpspeps 0.086
Heavy Ion: 5 damage, .35 Refire, 40 energy/shot, dps 14.29, dpe .125, eps 114.28, dpspeps 0.125
Oh, by the way, for the "needs lots of maintenance", I can see that for Tachyon Cannons and Light Tachyon Cannons, totally. I can See it for Particle Guns and Pulse Particle Guns. I can see it For Plasma guns. I can see it for Chain Ion, Cloudburst guns, and even for Reaper Cannons, and maybe even Heavy Ion Guns. But I can't really see it for NORMAL Ion guns.
dps = damage per second (during rapid fire), higher is better
dpe = damage (for one shot) per energy use of that shot, higher is better
eps = energy use per second (during rapid fire), lower is better
dpspeps = damage from one second of firing per energy use from one second of firing, higher is better
And could you guys check my math? Please? Those seem to be the four main metrics for figuring out what's best 'all shots hitting'...
ChrisReid
Super Soaker Collector / Administrator
Or an engine limitation. As they added new guns to WC4, they cut out guns from WC3. Guns that were only used on one or two fighters that weren't seen often didn't have unique special guns (the Ion got spread around a lot), and then this got carried into the new engine after that.
Based on what?
Because they put normal ion cannons on a LARGE number of very very 'basic' ships, throughout the series, like the Hellcat, the Arrow, etc. Presumably they would use normal ion guns on those ships for 'normal' folk because they are easy on the maintenance. Plus, Border Worlds used them, and they started putting ion guns on ships that previously only had lasers later on. And the Ion gun was never written as a very high end, high tech weapon -- that was always the Reaper Cannon, or something like it.
ChrisReid
Super Soaker Collector / Administrator
I think spending time trying to quantify that kind of stuff is missing the point. If we're not using facts and references from the universe, it's like multiplying one unknown by another and forgetting what you're talking about it in the first place. The concept that perhaps a certain gun has low maintenance is an excellent abstraction that can be used to describe how some unknowns and intangibles influence why things are within the universe.
Maintenance itself can be branched out into a thousand things that are potential influencers. What about maintenance is difficult? Is it because replacement parts/components/consumables are hard to come by? Is it because tools/equipment/utilities necessary for service are not readily accessable? Is it because the mechanics on hand are not trained/experienced enough to service a particular thing? It's super easy to get lost on the details of something like this, and unless there's something specifically in a game or a book we're trying to bring to the forefront, the details are meaningless.
The reason we bring things like that up is to show that we don't know what the specifics on something are, so we can't know completely why certain guns are used in some situations compared to others. If we take it a step further and then start making guesses about how this gun has X amount of undefinable maintenance versus Y gun with that amount of unknown maintenance, we've gone off on a tangent and missed the point of what we were talking about.
Maintenance itself can be branched out into a thousand things that are potential influencers. What about maintenance is difficult? Is it because replacement parts/components/consumables are hard to come by? Is it because tools/equipment/utilities necessary for service are not readily accessable? Is it because the mechanics on hand are not trained/experienced enough to service a particular thing? It's super easy to get lost on the details of something like this, and unless there's something specifically in a game or a book we're trying to bring to the forefront, the details are meaningless.
The reason we bring things like that up is to show that we don't know what the specifics on something are, so we can't know completely why certain guns are used in some situations compared to others. If we take it a step further and then start making guesses about how this gun has X amount of undefinable maintenance versus Y gun with that amount of unknown maintenance, we've gone off on a tangent and missed the point of what we were talking about.