Gauss cannons are in reality electromagnetic guns that blast particles at high velocities. (1)
I'm hoping the usage of Gauss in this game is a mistake, as any form of electro magnetism would disable devices and destroy. (2)
A gauss gun or any type of Gauss weapon/railgun should NOT be blocked by any form of technology, it should be able to disable technology. (3)
A coilgun or Gauss gun is a type of projectile accelerator that uses one or more electromagnetic coils to accelerate a magnetic projectile to high velocity. (4)
A coilgun uses magnetic dischage without contact. (5)
Granted the disacharge has no electric current, but a magnetic discharge nontheless shouldn't be stopped by technology. (6)
And a small gauss gun would only be able to take out small objects. (7)
But were talking gauss cannons on what is warships, 100's of miles long. These should at least be able to disable medium sized ships. (8)
...
It's simply a emp gun shooting plain magnetic particles. (9)
And why does it take huge amounts of antimatter, when it has no electric current running thru it? (10)
The simple fact that railguns have been the preferred method of choice by the Navy since the 70's shows which is the more destructive weapon. (11)
...
After thinking about it, considering how technically advanced the civilizations of Sins is, a Gauss gun is a complete and utter waste.
Even if it's magnetic, considering the amounts of computer tech, if it slams into a huge carrier it'll only take out 3-4 computer systems. (12)
(1) They don't blast 'particles' unless by 'particles' you mean macro-sized bullets. Then yes.
(2) I think perhaps you misunderstand that a Gauss canon does not have some kind of EMP surge associated with it. It is simply a device that uses magnets to accelerate a bullet instead of explosive high-pressure gases (like in a regular rifle).
(3) You have a strange use of the word 'technology'. A Gauss canon's projectile is basically a bullet so anything that won't block a bullet won't block a Guass canon.
(4) The projectile is not magnetic, the accelerators are magnetic. The projectile is just a conductor that is easily affected by a magnetic field.
(5) I'm not really sure what you even mean by this. There definitely IS contact somewhere, or the thing couldn't accelerate. The bullet, at the least, is in contact with the strong magnetic field.
(6) I feel that perhaps your wording could be a bit more precise here. I'm a physicist and have no clue what it is you're trying to convey.
(7) A bullet travelling at significant velocity would impact with the same energy as its mass in TNT (or even higher if the velocity is higher and so on). So I don't see why the arbitrary limit.
(8) A larger array of accelerators can put out a higher speed, yes, but there is no arbitrary 'bullet size determines damage rule' with relativistally-fast travellilng projectiles.
(9) It is definitely not an EMP gun, and it definitely does not shoot 'magnetic particles.' It fires ordinary macro-sized bullets just like any other gun.
(10) And how would you create a magnetic field that can be turned on and off at will without an electric current?
(11) The real reason is probably that they are cheaper to build for the velocities that the Navy is looking at. But this is another topic altogether.
(12) And you did this calculation how?
Let's try an easy calculation. We'll take a .5kg (rather large, yes) bullet and see how much energy it can do when fired at a significantly high velocity.
.5kg of TNT is at 2.092e6 J
Let's take our .5kg bullet and fire it at .5c (that's 50% the speed of light, that may or may not be practical in the future with these large war machines - we'll just try it).
Kinetic energy = Total energy - rest energy
so
= (mc^2)/sqrt(1-[v^2/c^2]) - mc^2
so [.5 (299,792,458)^2]
all divided by
sqrt(1 - (.5)^2)
minus
[.5 (299,792,458)^2]
comes out to ~6.952e15 J
In case that's a little too big to imagine, it's over 3 Billion times the energy of the same amount of TNT if used as explosive. That's about 1.6 Megatons. You have the energy of a nuclear warhead in the impact of a half of a kilogram bullet. (Keep in mind it was a rough 2 minute calculation using idealized conditions and so on to leave complications out. Corrections are welcome!)
Anyway, the whole point of this is that these weapons were designed to outdo the velocities attainable by pressurized gas, and there doesn't seem to be any fundamental stopping point for how arbitrarily fast you can accelerate something using these kinds of weapons. In the future in space, one would imagine we could control energies high enough to have weapons of these kinds of yields.
So your argument from realism doesn't work out.