Projectile or Energy?

Railguns and particle weapons.

>>48645229
Kinetic Projectiles for two reasons.
1. Portable energy weapons are unrealistic given what we currently understand the heat and energy requirements.
2. Bullets are cool.

Point two is important. IMO, nothing beats the feeling and aesthetic of bullets flying through air, ripping holes into concrete, and blasting people in a bloody pulp.

>>48645229

Kinetic weapons for handheld, energy weapons for vehicle sized weapons

I like both, depending heavily on the style of the rest of the setting. Pew-pew lasers for space opera, dakka dakka for cyberpunk.

>>48645229
Kinetic weapons for ground warfare. Energy weapons for defense systems (shooting down missiles, etc) and spacecraft.

In general, energy weapons are really, really inefficient compared to kinetic weapons. The amount of energy it takes to put a bullet through an enemy soldier's skull is minuscule compared to the amount of energy it would take to vaporize enough of the same guy to put him out of the fight.

Also bullets are cool.

File: angry_flashlight.jpg (20KB, 784x264px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 784x264px

To be fair, while shooting lasers at your enemies seems awesome, it would take an awful lot of energy to be able to burn through your target instantly. Furthermore, anything in the way of you and your target (rain, foggy windows, dust) will simply weaken the beam until you are basically just pointing a flashlight at the baddies and shouting "Pew Pew!" at them.
Projectile weapons and their cool bullets do not have this weakness.

People seems to be in favor of bullets. So, rail guns or chemical propellants?

>>48645229
any decent sci fi setting should have both.

which is "better" depends on the tech level, application and size

>>48645229
I personally use kinetic in my own sci fi setting (thermo-reactive casing that holds plasma inside of it that sheds when fired from the railgun propulsion system of the weapon) for most guns but I still have stationary laser space-to-ground weapon platforms. And I honestly prefer kinetic weapons with some energy to energy with some kinetic. Maybe that's just my inner autist speaking but it's more believable that way to me.

>using fire to propel rocks through tubes
>20XX
what am i a mouth breathing troglodyte?

>>48646201
I prefer the latter. Having spent casings flying is pretty cool.

>>48646201
I personally like rail guns more. Chemical propellants is just asking for problems. I can understand using chemical propellants if your setting is hard sci fi though.

>>48646258
So, railguns or energy weapons, then?

>>48645229
Depends on the scale and theme of the sci-fi.

Space combat at any appreciable distance should pretty much always be fought with directed energy weapons. Kinetic projectiles, even at their fastest, are just too slow to be practical. On the ground, when it comes to small arms, realistic physics would suggest that projectiles would be more feasible.

But if your setting is not about what we think is technologically feasible then whatever. If you're doing Death Planet X: Intrepid Adventures in Outer Space! then have all the rayguns you want.

>>48646343
energy weapons of any flavor
railguns are okay if you're a hipster faggot

>>48646436
I like energy weapons.
But I don't like you.

File: 308204-2.jpg (3MB, 3072x2048px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3072x2048px

>>48646532
like i give a fuck

>>48646357
Generally directed energy weapons are better for space combat, but kinetic weapons could have their place. With enough projectiles you could overwhelm the defenses of a laser-equipped ship. I could easily imagine a cheap defense weapon that would be nothing more than a box with a shaped charge, some maneuvering thrusters, and a fuckton of shrapnel. Aim at enemy ship, detonate, watch ship get perforated.

This article talks a lot about hypothetical space combat: http://www.rocketpunk-manifesto.com/2009/09/battle-of-spherical-war-cows-purple-v.html

>>48645229
Better in which regards? Inb-game or narrative-wise?

File: image.jpg (33KB, 292x257px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 292x257px

>>48646183
>filename.jpg
>kek

E-guns have significant advantages assuming that the laser + cooling + energy are small enough

+less noise
+less moving parts
+no recoil
+unified ammunition (energy is redeemable in many forms)
+near-instant muzzle velocity
if you find these advantages outweigh their many disadvantages, then E-guns can be a viable supplement to bullets

>energy weapons in space
It's like you want to get cooked by your own waste heat
>energy weapons in atmosphere
Boy I sure love me some effective ranges of <1km

>>48645229
Kinetic weapons for small arms and infantry, everything for ships or larger scale bombardment. Other than that, depends on level of tech (specifically stable energy generation and storage)

Check out the weapons in Hyperion cantos, they have everything from flechette shotguns to multi-band masers to kinetic waves to ultraviolet lance lasers to nukes to shitloads of missiles, to superheated plasma slugs, to conventional slugs, to a thing they don't even know how it works but essentially extinguishes all neural function in a human brain via quantum tunneling or some shit. Hell, most soldiers are well enough equiped and trained in that setting to level a small modern town singlehandedly.

File: 800px-WalkureHBSHB12(BD-CA).jpg (120KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 800x600px

>>48647497
>Being cooked by own heat

That is always the problem no one ever addresses. My friends and I always imagined that a dedicated space battle ship would have to be covered on heat sinks to disperse the heat of the Lazer point defense, which would be the optimal anti-missle/one man fighter/kill drone weapon.

I do like the Legend of the galactic heroes's Imperial Valkyrie fighters. The idea is to fly close to the enemy destroyers and use a plasma cutter down the hull to open it and depressurize sections of the ship

https://gineipaedia.com/wiki/Walk%C3%BCre

>>48645229

Missiles/drones are the best option for battle between space ships

>>48647439
Who the fuck calls them "E-guns"?
You colossal faggot

>>48647497
But railguns fire slower than light rounds

You know, this bring me to another question:
In the media, when any types of shields are depicted, they are always weak against physical, kinetic weapons, while strong against Explosive/heat/energy, and average against 'energy' 'bolts' and plasma 'balls'. why is this a thing?

I personally thought up the reason being that kinetics are solid material slamming against whatever that makes up the shields, and the physical presence of the ammunition apply force directly focused on a singular point of impact, which causes these barriers fuck up their intergrity. while Explosives have all the force spead out on the surface of the barrier, causing less damage. energy is mediocre because it hits with force but it squashes and dissipates on the surface like explosives. so a middle ground between kinetic and High-ex.

Thoughts?

>>48647950
I was thinking that there was some sort of physical composite armor to make up where the shields lacked in Physical Defence.

>>48645229
Kinetic is just a very dense energy weapon.

>>48646734

Narrative-wise, as well as pure "rule-of-cool".

>>48647997
>physics fag is obvious

>>48647802
>Missiles/drones
It's okay, you can just say missiles.
There's no point to making reusable munitions carriers when it takes 4x extra energy just to retrieve them from their hours-long journey to a target, and you could be using all that extra mass to carry more and larger torpedoes in the first place.

File: 1424228152775.png (425KB, 486x495px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 486x495px

>>48647439
>E-guns

>>48645229
Energy is something that seems well and all, but pure kinetics are always going to be preferred. The only time that you shouldn't be shooting a solid bullet is if you are able to some how fire pure plasma

>>48647439
iGuns
E-blasters
AOL ONLINEnergy shooters
Lasguns

So many better names then E-guns

File: Gauss Rifle.jpg (72KB, 1465x405px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1465x405px

>>48645229
Kinetic

Gauss gun is best gun. Makes me feel like I'm pointing a science fair project at someone and shooting lightning bolts at them. And there's a certain satisfaction knowing that the target was killed by a bullet and not magic.

I also like the sound effects they usually get in vidya. Although they still don't beat over-the-top shotguns and revolvers that sound like God slamming a car door.

>>48645229
Concept for a combo of both. Have the gun fire a smart projectile that has a small, intense magnetic field to hold a sheath of plasma. Higher caliber rounds could hold stronger plasma payloads for potential AoE effects.

>>48649097
E-gun = energy gun
seems pretty self-explanatory
DEW = directed energy weapon
is that better?

>>48645229
Both, depending on the type of scifi setting.

File: vma005_3.jpg (17KB, 400x246px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x246px

>>48645229

Projectile for smaller weapons. Direct Energy for larger ones. Energy weapons have overheating problems in space. Keep small arms simple. Missiles are fine in either case.

>>48646201

Do you want spent cartridges flying around the compartment in zero-G? Hot brass floating inside the control panel shorting out critical components will ruin your day.

>>48645821

What about plasma?

File: HK_G11.jpg (46KB, 837x469px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 837x469px

>>48650696

>>48645229
Projectile weapons. Why? Because 99% of the time they're more efficient and can pack more of a punch at the same size. You'll be hard pressed to make a laser on infantry scale that's as powerful as a Browning Machinegun, and you'll be even harder pressed to make a laser as powerful as a railgun.

The only thing lasers are good for is point defense anyway. Shit for fighting vehicles or people.

>>48647439
Actually if you're delivering the assload of power to instantly kill somebody with a non-photonic weapon, there will be kick.

>>48645229
Kinetic projectile weapons for pretty much everything. I prefer traditional ballistics but I do like to see some railguns in space settings.

I don't mind energy weapons for like, point defense and satellite weaponry. The one exception is mecha settings - if you've already got giant robots, bring out the fucking particle beams and laser swords we're doing this.

File: Weapon_gluonpack.jpg (58KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 300x300px

How about a gun that negates the Higgs field?

>>48647439
Virtually all energy weapons have a consumable substance that is required to fire so ammunition is absolutely a thing.

Most lasers use a gas that is consumed during operation.

Plasma and particle weapons are projecting matter so obviously they need a supply of it.

Etc.

>>48647802
Of course, heat sinks suck in a vacuum. You could dump the heat into a block of something dense and then eject it but you're only doing that so many times.

File: KrautSpaceMagic.jpg (80KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1920x1080px

>>48650738
Okay but if you could actually make the kraut space magic work you could just magic up a death laser.

>>48647903
All energy weapons except lasers fire slower than light rounds and lasers have the biggest problem with heat dissipation.

>>48650931

That's why you use them only during the heat of battle. Afterwards, you need to extend the radiators.

>>48647950
It's rule of cool, there is zero scientific basis to explain the behaviour of most sci-fi shields.

Making shields strong against energy weapons only keeps armour and projectile weapons relevant

Same as the D&D bullshit about plate being heavy and encumbering exists to keep chainmail relevant.

File: kraut magic.jpg (42KB, 468x309px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 468x309px

>>48650938
>>48650738
Obligatory

>>48650957
Absolutely but there is a very real risk of hitting a point where you are unable to continue firing and that is extremely not-good.

Conventional projectile weapons have a major advantage here in that a surprisingly high percentage of waste heat is trapped in the shell casing so ensuring that you're electing those into space rather than collecting them inside the hull helps significantly.

>>48647950
The way my shields is work is that they change the inerta of the bullet via gravity manipulation. The internal computer of the shield generator has to calculate the best course to do this but because personal shields have limited energy they have to be recharged frequently. This is why both energy (basically lasers) and physical attacks work against shields, because the force either cannot be redirected due to its source (in the case of lasers) or the strength of the blow across the shield is too great (in the case of physical attacks). However, this only applies to personal shields and is harder on larger shield generators, such as on starships or mechs.

>>48650916
He said "Unified", not "Unlimited". He's still wrong though, AAA batteries will not fit in a AA lasergun.

File: 563cd20ba542b.jpg (159KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1280x720px

What about weapons firing exotic particles like the Tau Cannon?

>>48647439
>+less noise
Except for the noise of your power generation system, capacitor bank discharge, etc.
>+less moving parts
Again, forgetting your power generation system. I'm pretty sure that a gas turbine engine plus generator or a nuke plant have more parts than a firearm.
>+no recoil
For a laser, not true of other energy weapons.
>+unified ammunition (energy is redeemable in many forms)
All of the good types of laser use up their medium and need it to be replaced. Obviously not true for other types of energy weapons.
>+near-instant muzzle velocity
For lasers, not for other types.

File: 1721416-proton_pack_7.jpg (38KB, 600x287px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 600x287px

>tfw nearly every laser weapon shoots a flaccid light-bullet instead of a continuous stream of FUCK YOU

File: elysium-new-gif-guns1.gif (804KB, 360x154px) Image search: [Google]

804KB, 360x154px

>>48645229

>>48645229
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhBpwJWqMgA
Why not both?

>>48646245
Best in show.

Railguns are the best of both worlds.

They shoot projectiles that go so fast they literally ignite the air around them.

>>48651120
actually makes sense, lasers would produce a flash so brief, even if they were in the visible spectrum of light you wouldn't percieve it
>>48651098
the cooling system might sound like a continous low hum as opposed to a sudden explosion
no moving parts is considered to be true for a fallout or warhammer style laser gun
>>48651032
not chargeable fuel cells?
energy is a currency redeemable in many forms
>>48650768
even an anti-tank laser would produce way less recoil than a comparable kinetic weapon
>>48647950
i remember a movie where there are 2 shields, one for physical and one for energy, and they only stop the kind they are made for
>>48645821
lasers are also cool

>>48645229
I think there's an interesting reversion if say beam or laser weapons are widespread and considered to be more efficient, but there are some ridiculously highly powered kinetic weapons that blow them the fuck out occasionally. Think like Exia in 00 Gundam.

>>48650995
Reliability? Strange concept.

>>48645229
Lasers for the elite imperial military and certain sovereign systems, gauss weapons for fledgling colonies and dirt poor space pirates.

>>48650341
DEW is good, especially for directed kinetic energy projectiles like bullets

>>48650945
>All energy weapons except lasers fire slower than light
Wrong. There's other forces that travel exactly as fast as photons that could possibly be used as a destructive weapon. And laser light doesn't even cover all photons in the first place.

>lasers have the biggest problem with heat dissipation.
Not necessarily true, this is a very arbitrary thing to say.

I think that it's precisely because energy weapons sound so unlikely if you understand the energy requirements involved, they become all the more impressive in harder science fiction types to indicate that the user/builder is a really, really, really, really advanced society. Especially when we're talking about the truly ridiculous levels, like gamma lasers that can boil oceans across the solar system or inversion beams that turn targets into antimatter from the inside out.

>>48647525
>level a small modern town
Anon, the F.O.R.C.E soldiers from the Hyperion Cantos could very likely depopulate large sections of modern day EARTH highhandedly. Some of the settings on their rifle can be used to slice chunks off the fucking moon, FROM THE SURFACE.

>>48645229
Energy weapons make my peepee grow big. I, however, do enjoy a good 'ol dakka machine.

>>48652672
Don't be so hard, it was the world's first clockwork rifle.

>>48652982
gamma lasers are supposedly a milestone in physics that will revolutionize the world, that you can use them to create a laser that slices, as it dices, as it cancerizies is a cool bonus

>>48652705
if it delivers at least one megaton of energy you could call it a MT. DEW

>>48645229
I prefer kinetic purely because I like my guns to go bang.

Amusingly, if you're in space, it's only kinetic weapons that will look like we imagine energy weapons to. Most beams would be invisible in a vacuum. Hypervelocity projectiles will be sheathed in plasma as they leave the barrel, giving them the appearance of Star Wars like "energy bolts".

>>48653560
> sheathed in plasma

Where's this coming from? Compression of air inside the barrel before firing?

>>48653592
The outer layer of matter forming the projectile sublimating from friction as it passes through the barrel. Admittedly, this does indicate that the firing process is not as efficient as it could be, since this cool-looking process results in the loss of quite a bit of potential energy.

>>48653560
Mass Effect had cannons which fired streams of molten uranium alloy at relativistic speeds. The result looks like a red laser beam.

>>48645229
Particle accelerators. Travelling at near-light speeds a particle beam can impact with a tremendous amount of physical force, causing a flash-heating of the target molecules causing an explosion at the point of impact. Being shot by a particle accelerator would feel like pulling the pin on a grenade and then holding it flat against your chest when it explodes.

>>48653496
That's something I can see happening - engineers are often amusing in naming things, consider the planned B1 variant, the B1-Regional
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell_B-1_Lancer#Variants

In case you don't know, the B-1 is generally known as the Bone, making the B-1 R...

>>48646201
Combo. Railguns work better when you have chemical propellent to kickstart it anyway

File: laughing-man.jpg (4MB, 5184x3456px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5184x3456px

>>48646258
We use metal bullets for centuries, so yes, you are.

>>48654086
And traditional guns work better if you add electricity to them.

>>48654347
Like, to the bullets? Lead isn't very conductive. Or do you mean the inner workings? Or are you making fun of me and I'm autistic

>>48654451
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrothermal-chemical_technology

>>48654687
So inner workings then. It's not like the bullets are electrically charged or anything, it just involves electricity in the propulsion.

>>48654806
>>48654347
But yeah, in my sci fi I like pretty much every gun to be some variation on this concept. No reason to have guns that aren't using these kinds of principles.

>>48654914
>No reason

KISS

>>48654806
No, the propellant isn't the inner workings of the gun, it's the gas that pushes the bullet forward.

>>48654943
Nah, modern guns are more complex than muskets. That's not usually true if your engineerig is good

>>48654960
But the electricity isn't part of the propellent, it's just used to ignite the propellent chemicals. It's part of the inner workings

>>48655028
No, it's used to shape the propellant as it's propelling the bullet. That's why they're pointing out that it's plasma, because plasma has an electric charge and can be manipulated that way.

File: 1446227794678.png (82KB, 336x347px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 336x347px

Guys, guys, hear me out on this.

What if we had railguns that looked and fired like muskets? Just a big ole bulky firearm with extreme range and accuracy that requires a recharge period and has a long, hard barrel.

Unf, that's the stuff.

>>48655191
What about muskets that look like railguns? Double subversion!

>>48648018
For cyberpunk/near-future, projectiles are clearly pre-dominant in the genre. For space-faring sci-fi/space opera, lasers/pasers/etc are the leading genre trope. I mean... this is cut and dry. Reversing the roles in either can be considered subversion of part of the genre to some degree.

>>48655165
Yeah, I guess the propellent is electrically charged. It dissipates though, so the projectile that you're hitting people with is not. And the electricity is still part of the inner workings even if it's also present in the propellent, so that's just pedantry.

>>48655309
No, it's not pedantry. The electricity is not used on something which is a part of the gun. It's not inner workings, it's working on something separate from the weapon.

>>48655336
Except for the fact that it has to be generated and directed using actual physical parts of the gun? It's running through wires, being generated by batteries, stored in capacitors, etc. Those are inner workings. It's not just electricity after it's shaping the propellent, it's electricity the whole time

File: image.jpg (21KB, 1117x222px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 1117x222px

Either plain old chemical slugthrowers, or Star Wars style blasters if the setting is supposed to be far-future.

>>48655381
Sure, it comes from inside the gun, but then so does everything else. The point is the effect, which it has on the gas that's propelling the bullet, which is separate from the weapon itself.

Basically, it's making something happen outside of the area which is the gun itself.

>>48655455
Yeah, for sure. But in the same sense that a hammer creates a spark that ignites the propellent of a traditional gun. The hammer is a physical component of the gun, considered part of the inner (or outer) workings. The electrical system is still part of the inner workings.

>>48655488
But the electrical system, the battery and the wires, isn't the point, that's not where the action happens.

So no, describing this as inner workings seems completely wrong to me.

It's like saying the laser dot of a laser targeting system is part of the inner workings too, even though it's somewhere far away from the gun. Completely misses the point.

>>48650808

Gluon gun scaled up and powered by a nuclear reactor would also make WMD. Maybe even a planet killer.

>>48655522
But that is where the action happens, the propellent is shaped at the very ends of the electrical system. I would say the electrically charged plasma is certainly not, which is more akin to the dot of the laser. The plasma is the effect, the electrical system is the cause, just like the laser is the effect and the pointer is the cause.

>>48655576
Yes, and the electrically charged plasma is the point of the entire thing.

>>48655595
Yes? The point of contention is whether or not the electricity is involved in the inner workings. The plasma is the end effect, but it's not what we're talking about. We're just arguing about the proper way to define things, specifically what constitutes the inner workings of a gun.

>>48655629
It may not be what you're talking about, but it is what I've been talking about the entire time.

>>48655660
Your first response to me was telling me that I was wrong for saying electricity was part of of the inner workings. You're just moving the goalposts now, or you posted initially with something irrelevant to what I was saying just to he right about something. The point of a discussion isn't to win. Even if you were actually correcting something I was talking about (I never mentioned propellent being part of the inner workings) it added nothing to the thread.

>>48655712
You asked if the electricity is used on the bullets, or if it's just the inner workings of the gun that use the electricity. The answer is neither, the electricity is used on the propellant after it has already ignited and left the bullet casing as a gas.

I guess what I really need is to feel powerful when I use the weapon. That probably means a satisfying noise when it fires, hits something, or is reloaded.

I could do a laser if it fries the environment, makes painful-looking injuries, and has powerful sound effects.

>>48655721
I actually asked for clarification on what he was talking about when he said "electricity" and then posted that it was part of the inner workings, which was what you got angry about. I wasn't asking about how the tech worked, I was asking about what tech he was talking about. Remember that we're in a sci fi thread with energy weapons. "Electricity in projectile weapons" could be anything from shaped propellent (hard) to guns that have electrified bullets (soft). I was essentially asking whether he meant hard sci fi or soft sci fi, and saying that the soft sci fi thing wouldn't really work (obviously). I wasn't intending to get into a conversation about the proper way to say things

>>48655795
I wasn't angry at any point, anon. We just misunderstood each other and then ended up arguing over semantics.

>>48655815
You're right, angry isn't the right word. At least we stayed relatively civil and can move past it, and stop shitting up the thread

File: Ol Reliable.jpg (73KB, 714x214px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 714x214px

Laser based weapons if they can be as OP as a Lasgun

Note that I know that Lasguns are weak compared to the fuckstrong enemies in the 40K universe, but comparatively to our world, a gun that is solar and flame exposure powered that has no bullet drop or inaccuracies would be overpowered as FUCK

>>48652411
>the cooling system might sound like a continous low hum as opposed to a sudden explosion
no moving parts is considered to be true for a fallout or warhammer style laser gun
What is the distinct 'crack' of superheated air as a laser or other energy bolt passes through it? Lasers aren't silent except in a vacuum broski. And guess what? Projectile weapons would be silent in a vacuum too.

>even an anti-tank laser would produce way less recoil than a comparable kinetic weapon

Less recoil...than a rocket launcher? Less recoil than negligible recoil doesn't sound like much of an advantage, and at least with projectiles, you have the flexibility of being able to load differing ammo types and not cart around a bigass capacitor.

You're either massively ignorant, or too young to be posting.

File: this is essentially a station build around a giant coilgun that fires fuckhuge ferric tungsten rounds at .4% the speed of light fuck you.jpg (403KB, 1000x1536px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 1000x1536px

Kinetic because when your enemy has shields, the only appropriate way to deal with them is so punch a hole in their ship and let the vacuum do the rest

>Nail guns and taser for fights on spaceships, nobody like to break the hull while being on the ship

>Laser cannons and misilles for spaceships

>Normal firearms for anything else

>>48656065
>Nail guns and taser for fights on spaceships, nobody like to break the hull while being on the ship
This is such a stupid ass fucking meme. Your ships are rated survive missile impacts, a bullet's not fucking going to hole it. Or use a squashing hollow point bullet, we have those today.

File: 1466625779098.jpg (218KB, 1600x732px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1600x732px

>>48656257
But the ship doesnt survive a missile hit. Also when this is your normal mook, of course there are only high penetration rifles your everday carry. At least in the campgain im playing.

>>48656374
Build the ship out of whatever you build the guy's armor. It's an argument that goes off forever. Whatever you can use to casually block bullets you can reasonably use to build a spaceship out of.

SPACE SWORDS!

>>48656400
Actually it isnt, if the players likes to have mass/delta v in the game to limit fast travel with spaceships.

Also I forgot to mention that melee is actually a viable option because the ships are normaly pretty cramped and claustrophobic.

>>48656400

In spaceship design, every gram counts. So it is likely that ships follow an All-or-nothing approach concentrating armor only in key areas.

bullets.if the star fleet would use buletts instead of phasers they would have already destroyed the entire borg kollektive...but atleast phasers dont damages the wall to spall

>>48651018
There's always the potential of a one use laser similar in practice to a shell, so you get the best of both worlds.

File: 1253856776417.jpg (135KB, 1064x600px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1064x600px

>>48649058
>Energy is something that seems well and all, but pure kinetics are always going to be preferred. The only time that you shouldn't be shooting a solid bullet is if you are able to some how fire pure plasma
Bullet shooting guns still exist in Traveller, they're cheap and reliable. Ineffective against very high tech armor and a PortablePlasmaGun is defined in the rules as "anything in the way ceases to exist".

PortableFUSIONGuns ignite the air of the room they're in, fatally irradiate anyone in line of sight and vaporize everything near what they hit.

File: image.png (722KB, 948x675px) Image search: [Google]

722KB, 948x675px

>pic related

>>48660876
A weapon that launches a physical projectile with an energy payload still counts as a projectile weapon, I think.

>>48660920
But you get the best of both.
It's like that hot Trans chick in that porno you "accidentally" clicked on and still masturbated to

>>48650976
Fucking platefags.

File: 1461128639729.jpg (226KB, 680x1314px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 680x1314px

>Owing to the unique method of firing projectiles and the massive forces involved, most gauss weapons that are affordable to the average mercenary are unable to use self-loading mechanisms. Instead, most gauss weapons that aren't single-shot use more primitive and rugged methods of loading projectiles into the chamber, such as bolt and lever actions
>Gauss weapon projectiles consist of a single-use power-cell clipped onto the back of a metal slug. When the weapon is discharged and a new projectile is loaded, the discharged power-cell is forecefully ejected from the side of the weapon's receiver
>Pistol-sized slug/cell cartridges are more unstable than rifle-sized ones owing to their miniaturisation of power-cells being only a recent development. To compensate for this, a gap is left in the power-cell's circuit which can only be bridged by a hammer-mechanism in the back of the gauss-pistol. Cheaper models usually require this hammer-mechanism to be manually pulled back by the thumb before the trigger is pulled, launching it into the back of the cell and completing the circuit, thus allowing/causing the weapon to fire

Does this sound like plausible enough bullshit to justify having cowboy weapons in a sci-fi game with gauss weaponry?

both weapons will probably exist side by side, since both weapons have way different qualities that fulfill different niches or combat doctrines.

if you havent solved that pesky energy problem and your batteries are the size of vans, like in halo or mass effect, than tried and true bullets would be a better thing to give everyone, with lasers being for specialized purposes.

if you have solved that pesky power problem, either with hyper efficient batteries or Microfusion cells, like warhammer or fallout. than lasers become a lot more competitive. a lasgun or AER14 are considered tough and reliable, in the case of the former tough to the point of memery, possibly due to not containing a tiny explosive inside them. even in this case there would still be strong incentive to use regular guns, bolters and autoguns are still used, while fallout had plentiful firearms.

when deciding on what should be standard in your universe, how ubiquitous they are depends on how much your standard battery can carry compared to how strong the propellant in guns are.

the most important factor to consider is if you want to look like halo or mass effect, where they use ballistics to show them as more grounded in reality, or if you want to look like star wars or star trek, where lasers are used to show off their high technology and futurism. a laser based realisitic one is not impossible, such as the imperial guard, or vice versa, like starcraft

IRL, lasers are still exotic weapons, and kinetics are still the preferred armament by all those munchkins, and we will have to wait 2 or 3 edition before lasers get buffed

>>48661325

Dude, Treasure Planet was one of the most fun movies of our childhood and their concept of technology involved literal solar sailships with railgun cannons.

You're fine.

>>48661497
>hey fallout 4, treasure planet called, they want their automatic laser musket back

>>48661497
Damn, that was a good movie.

The ship game that came from it wasn't terrible either

>>48650938
haha epic meme xD /tg/ legion /b/rothers unite!

>>48654146
>implying humans aren't the dumbest apeoidic niggers who for millennia did not even have language, or even NUMERALS

>>48655895
>rocket launcher
>comparable kinetic weapon
An anti-materiel rifle would suit better, and it does have absurd recoil essentially stopping you from being able reasonably fire more than 1 shot

>>48645229
weapons that destroy existence where the enemy are

>>48645229

I like how Stars without Number does it. Projectile weapons pack a bigger punch but they kick, energy weapons are less deadly but have no recoil. Basic to-hit versus damage trade-off.

>>48646201
Both. A setting where railguns are common for things like well-maintained militaries and elite mercenaries, while most other people use ballistics because they're cheaper and, depending on how hard sci-fi you go, easier on logistics.

>>48665459
Railguns are ballistics dummy

File: 1451641750194.jpg (80KB, 1398x806px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1398x806px

>>48645229

>>48665497
Meant ballistics as in good ol' fashioned chemical guns.

>>48665511
Yes, I know, that's why I'm making fun of you

>>48665548

Well that's awfully mean of you.

File: explain this shit.jpg (90KB, 324x250px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 324x250px

>>48664782
what the fuck is this post-ironic memery

>>48665600
It's called shitposting

File: muhreens.jpg (98KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 800x450px

>>48660835
Are those UNSC Marines?

>>48645229
Kinetic weapons. In atmo, the laser will actually spread out, making it much less effective, and out of atmo, it can take a while for the laser to actually melt the hull of the ship. As cool as laser weaponry sounds, it's simply not effective enough to be practical.

>>48665580
>mean
Do you know where you are?

>>48665645
Generic TechLevel 8 soldiers vs a TechLevel 15 empire space marine in battledress (traveller, not 40k).

>>48645229
Narrative-wise, it depends by type. Pistols should only ever have bullets. That is just how nature works.

Similarly, Laser Shotguns always bug me. A big part of how the shotgun works is that effective wave of concussive force. Lasers shouldn't have that, and if they don't, they suck as shotguns in my brain.

Automatic weapons, I have a split. Bullets are better than "pulse" lasers, but constant lasers are really fucking cool. Most settings reserve the constant laser stream for some super special weapon, and make your basic gun a pulser, though. Give me a constant laser beam any day of the week, and I am a very happy camper.

Snipers, Laser guns no question. The point of a snipergun in precision, and you don't get much more precise than laser beams. No dropoff, no adjusting for wind speed, air resistance, temperature, timing, or anything else stupid. Just zap.

Explosive energy weapons always bug me. Either the lasers always explode, or they don't. I don't buy that some lasers explode, and others don't. "Plasma" grenades and such aren't much better.

I like the more creative feel you can get with more exotic laser guns, whether cool electricity guns that arc between people, or a laser that bounces, or other weird shit. But then, these are always more like toys than actual guns, and there isn't really a ballistic equivalent.

>>48654451
are you on crack, lead is a perfectly good conductor, that's why they used to use it to make electrical solder.

>>48645229
If you're living in a metal bubble in space, relatively mild energy weapons is the only way to go. A stray shot just makes the hull heat up a smidgen. Between said hulls, a projectile weapon can be more effective but a powerful laser won't be seen coming and dodged so easily. But if you send something (literally anything) hurtling at relativistic speeds that's not much of an issue anyway. Planetside conventional weapons give you the most bang for your buck unless you really need non fatal crowd control beyond that of rubber bullets.

>>48665614
>everyone who disagrees with me is shitposting
kill yourself, millennial liberal faggot cuck

File: orionpunit.jpg (74KB, 342x400px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 342x400px

Why not both?

Energy. Simplifies the ammunition mechanics.

Energy weapons are fucking gay.

Sincerely, a gundamfag.

>>48666533

Hey fuck you buddy.

>>48666383
>disagree
No disagreement, anon. The post in question didn't have anything to agree or disagree with.

File: 1424247651160.jpg (140KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1440x1080px

>>48666640

>>48666671
you literally called it a shitpost just because you disagreed with it

you're literally making a tumblr-tier argument

>>48666681
No, I called it a shitpost because it contained nothing but shit.

How exactly is someone supposed to agree or disagree with
>haha epic /tg/ legion hivemind, anonymous storm klan power /b/rothers united federation in the legion, upvoted xD!
?

There's nothing there, it's just an embarrassing outburst of autism.

>>48666704
>using the autism meme that was invented by a brit manlet cuck tripfag on /v/ in 2009
You have to go back now.

>>48666712
I'm fine here, thanks.

Looks like you're fine with meritless shitposting too.

>>48645229

I tend to go for energy weapons. I'm not much of a gun nut anyway (understatement), and it's easier to just have blasters without some dude that worships at the altar of the AK starting to pick out minute details and shit.

>>48666727
>everyone who disagrees with me is a shitpost
tumblr-tier millennial weak white cuckold response. die in a river.

>>48666762
I think it's just a gift that you have, honestly.

You rarely see someone make posts completely devoid of content and thought like yours are, at least here on this board.

>>48666873
epic tumblr-tier response, millennial faggot child.
go crytype some more on your blog

>>48666873
t. libcuck, millennial, social-parasite, degenerate, wretch, brainwashed UCLA idiot puppet sheep and shill

How about a kinetic hypervelocity cannon designed to smash the thermal shield to smithering followed by a laser to melt the anti-kinetic shielding?

>>48666882
>>48666888
Wow, did I make you upset? Two posts with nothing in them still amount to nothing, you know.

>>48666873
kill yourself millennial

>>48666896
t. tumblrist neo-millennial getting mad, getting desperate, the passive-aggressive crytyping tumblrism millennialism intensifying rapidly, literally trillions of gallons of libcuck tears

>>48666896
kill yourself millennial

>>48666918
>>48666934
I can't tell if you don't know how to avoid looking like you're samefagging, or if you just don't care.

>>48666945
>literally everyone who disagrees with me is the same person
hardcore neo-tumblrist neo-millennialist neo-liberalist response
kill yourself
die in a fire

But anon, you are a millenial if you were born between 1985 and 1994/2000. Generation Z or iGeneration is everyone born after 2000/1994.

File: 1462657951496.jpg (40KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x375px

>>48645229
>which do you think is the better weapon type

They both have their cons and pros, there's no ''better'' either way.

>>48666962
Well yeah, when the posts have the exact same things in them and they're all conveniently spaced the same as the posting limit on this board, it's pretty obvious.

>>48666965
He's probably younger than that. He sounds like it, anyway.

>>48645229
What am I fighting?

>>48666965
>people born before 1985 are literally not allowed to use 4chan
typical millennialist response
go die in a river fire
you do not own this world
go back to australia, home of the fags, home of the mutants, birthplace of the millennials, the cancer, the tumblr

>>48666997
Magnetically contained bullet golem.

>>48666997
The physical manifestation of ennui

>>48667010
>>48667013
I use them against each other.

>>48645229
Energy weapons are useless against anything that isn't a machine, and even against machines they require so much energy to do anything at all that they are practically useless.

Projectiles all the way.

>>48667035
The winner is the one who films it and uploads it to Youtube.

>>48645229
Energy weapons are less effective against inorganic structures like vehicles, but they're highly effective against organics.

This whole thread literally reads like a reddit thread or a tumblr post, /tg/ is fucking garbage

>>48666965

Oh hey, I finally found out what this millenial thing Americans go on about is. I never knew where the supposed borders were for this specific NEW GENERATIONS ARE BAD REEE movement. Thanks, informative anon!

>>48667094
I wouldn't say the new generation is bad, they're just stupid Exactly like we were stupid at their age, and some of them have been deceived by our parents... and frankly, some of us who were also deceived by our parents.

File: ElysianDropTrooper.jpg (120KB, 633x741px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 633x741px

I think directed energy weapons aren't too popular because they tend to be shown as unimpressive.

-weapons that kill or incapacitate without causing physical wounds, i guess that's easier for the budget in movies, but is no excuse in games.
-continuos beams that only work on a stationary target, or at least require to be mounted as an autononmous turret with a targeting AI.
-slows as fuck bolts plasma etc. that generally seem to cause shallow burn damage on the victim
-directed energy weapons are often portrayed as aesthetically non-utilitarian. They don't look like proper weapons.

Directed energy weapons could look so much cooler, and cause severe damage everybody could witness. As of now, in real life, lasers are the future, starting from point defense which will eventually lead to conventional missiles becoming obsolete. Or they at least have to change considerably. They can't afford to be unarmored and travel at only mach 3+. They will have to be much faster and armored, or they will just get zapped out of the sky. That would make them considerably heavy, and possibly unwieldy for aircraft usage. same fate could follow artillery. Generally any forms of conventional smart weapons that exist today.

Minituarization will happen, but can't say how far that can go, probably nothing nearly man portable, unless, unless, unless something... But i could see more energy efficient pulsed lasers making a breakthrough at some point. Possibly this century. They could be tuned to do damage similar to power and consistency to projectile weapons, including armor penetration, or shallow gaping craters, except at the speed of light.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/sidearmenergy.php

I know projectrho could be on it's way of becoming a meme of sort, but they explain very well why directed energy weapons, if made reality would be REALLY cool, and make some really ugly damage.

>>48661325
You're going for super soft sci-fi, you don't care about plausibility.

Railgun cowboys don't need an excuse.

>>48667593
>As of now, in real life, lasers are the future, starting from point defense which will eventually lead to conventional missiles becoming obsolete. Or they at least have to change considerably. They can't afford to be unarmored and travel at only mach 3+. They will have to be much faster and armored, or they will just get zapped out of the sky. That would make them considerably heavy, and possibly unwieldy for aircraft usage. same fate could follow artillery. Generally any forms of conventional smart weapons that exist today.

This is a very narrow prediction that disregards several alternative developments, such as PGMs becoming more difficult to detect and therefore engage with any kind of weapon, materials selection that would make them more resilient against DEWs without making them heavier, or any number of technologies that would allow for more PGMs to be carried and launched in swarms that are more difficult to 100% negate.

Advancements in the first option are happening all the time, and the third option can already be seen happening in things like the Cuda missile. The second will option will play out more as laser weapons are actually put into widespread service.

And as always, there can be any other possibility that are impossible to guess at from the standpoint of today.

>>48667593
>conventional weapons will become obsolete
I sincerely doubt that any sort of conventional weapon will become obsolete, at least not for a very, very long time. Missiles are already starting to move into hypersonic speeds and hypersonic missiles will likely be common long, long before we get laser defense systems to be common. The immense amount of energy require is a massive obstacle and even if you can keep up with power cost you lose any and all indirect fire capabilities. Not to mention anything that could scatter the beam makes it far less effective. Getting attacked by missiles while it's raining? There goes your laser defense system's effectiveness, if there's anything like smoke or dust in the air the laser also becomes equally as ineffective.

>>48667711
keep in mind the first guns wouldn't work at all when it was humid, and real life lasers are still in their infancy, so in a sci-fi universe perhaps lasers will have overcome many deficiencies that modern lasers have.

and nobody would every rely solely on just 1 weapons system, and lasers will supplement existing systems so that no one weakness can

>>48667800
Lasers will still ALWAYS be scattered by atmospheric effects, thermal blooming and so on, by the time it becomes negligible we'd likely be far, far into the future. The matter of weaponry not working when it was humid was more of an issue of not being able to store the powder in a dry place, a drizzle won't cause a black powder weapon to fizzle out reliably really, pouring rain might though. Finally, if lasers only supplement the more conventional systems haven't been made obsolete by the introduction of lasers..

>>48667845
we can squeeze about 300m on experimental weapons today, so it wouldn't be a stretch to think that this would only get higher as time went on

>>48667593

What about nanomaterials resistant to lasers?

>>48667869
I imagine this is 300 meters in perfectly clear day time conditions with absolutely nothing obscuring the perfectly still target correct? Sure it could be pushed out farther, but that still won't make the laser any more likely to be put in use as long as projectiles are far more efficient, and for a long time far more effective.

File: 1424982649543.jpg (4KB, 117x126px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 117x126px

>>48645229
Kinetic will almost always be a more effective and efficient method of transferring energy to your target.

I mean yeah a laser will set shit on fire and kill pretty well but you could use a raw chemical propellant and just hurl a lump of metal really fast instead, then you don't have to deal with shit like atmospheric distortion or blooming that you'd have with lasers or the short range of plasma.

>>48667898
the easiest way to resist a laser is to put a dense material between you and it

this applies to non-lasers as well

>>48667924
just remember to keep that chemical propellant away from heat, unless you like a little cook-off

File: 135perlauncher.png (297KB, 1080x906px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1080x906px

>>48667671

Of course lasers still have a lot to improve, and progress will not stagnate to wait for the lasers to become more efficient.

There will be stuff in between. I particularily like this concept of mini missiles tightly packed in a launcher unit compact enough to be mounted on vehicles. Like a compact version of Iron Dome used by Israel but capable of engaging far more targets.

But it's still very inefficient compared to what lasers could become. Those missiles are expensive as fuck and will run out quickly, if major powers were to clash. Lasers will work as long as there's electricity, and in an aircraft carrier that would be 30 years. And it's much easier to hit a moving target, if there's no need to compensate for velocity or bullet drop.

I'm not trying to be a fanboy or anything, it just makes too much sense.

>>48667945
there will always be a niche for a weapon with projectiles that move at the speed of light, and fires cheaply and quickly

>>48667943
That's perfectly fine, we do a pretty good job of that now a days with the scientific world constantly improving propellants to be more resilient to cook off while squeezing more and more velocity out of projectiles.

>>48667945
My post didn't say anything about lasers beings inefficient. I was responding to the assertion that they would make conventional weapons obsolete, because that reasoning assumed that the ONLY way for PGMs to survive against lasers was to become heavier, and that's flat-out wrong.

>>48667959
at least until you have a star destroyer, than your ship's payload will be 49% fuel, 49% highly explosive chemicals 2% cargo

>>48667986
oh yeah, thats about right
kinetic weapons will always serve an important battlefield role
they carry bigger payloads, and can indirectly fire

>>48667800
>>48667845

Pulsed lasers have no issue with blooming.

Also
http://panoptesv.com/SciFi/LaserDeathRay/ThermalBlooming.html

>>48667945

Shit, forgot the link on the missiles.

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/04/lockheed-2-foot-long-missiles-for.html

>>48667994
Well I just said that we're making propellants less susceptible to cook off, so more like
>49% Fuel
>49% not very explosive ammunition
>2% Cargo
Seriously why does every sci-fi setting forget that the only research in weaponry goes to the firing device and not the propellant/explosive/capcitor/whatever the fuck.

>>48668029
a puled laser seems to make the most sense,given that fiction usually depicts lasers as having a very brief but powerful blast

>Oh-My-God particle
>3×1020 eV or 3×108 TeV.
>40,000,000 times that of the highest energy protons that have been produced in any terrestrial particle accelerator.
>A single proton with the kinetic energy equivalent of a baseball travelling at about 26 m/s (94 km/h; 58 mph)
>Speed of 99.99999999999999999999951% of C
>This is so near the speed of light that if a photon were travelling with the particle, it would take over 215,000 years for the photon to gain a 1-centimeter lead.

>>48668063
a gun that shoots granules of these.
it will kill the shooter, the target, and everything that can see it, and a lot of things beyond that

>>48667869
The various megawatt range chemical lasers used in the experimental systems like, THEL, YAL and MIRACL were all capable of destroying all kinds of ordnance at extremely long ranges. However these were abandoned due to the hazardous nature of the chemicals used in them.

The relative ineffectiveness of more recent experimental laser systems is due to the switch to solid state lasers, which are generally much less powerful, but don't require huge amounts of incredibly toxic chemicals. With the recent testing of LaWS by the US Navy it's very apparent that current fire control systems are entirely adequate, so every defense contractor you can name is rushing to try and produce a sufficiently powerful solid state laser (several hundred KW or greater) for it to be viable.

It should also be noted that gun based CIWS is virtually worthless versus a remotely modern missile anyway.

>>48668063

This has so much energy that particles going at these speeds crash against lonely photons part of the cosmic background radiation, losing speed and energy on the process.

>>48668063

What if Gamma Ray Bursts are the ultimate weapon for an alien species? And that that is how you solve the Fermi Paradox. Because there is literally no way to detect and then prevent a gamma ray burst from destroying a planet?

What if the occasional GRBs we see are an alien race exterminating another planet and we are just bystanders?

>>48653626
If I recall correctly that was a molten Tungsten alloy, assuming you're talking about the Thanix Cannon.
Spectacular weapons though, very potent for their size.

>>48667986

Well, makes sense specialized materials to increase ablation could utilized to make missiles more resistant. Or you could try overwhelm defenses with numbers. These might work very early on.

But on long term:

The material
Pulsed lasers could be adjusted to drill through thick materials.One would have hard time finding material for a tiny missile that could withstand a beam capable of drilling through inches of steel.

Swarms of missiles to overwhelm defenses sounds highly inefficient. And may not even kill or incapacitate your target if the target is something big and armored, like a ship. In such a case, a hypersonic missile with considerably armor is more likely to get through and kill the target. And frankly, it's dubious even those will keep working forever. Sure it's so fast it can't be intercepted by conventional weapons, and is armored, but it's speed is still nothing compared to speed of light. Anthing that manages to track it can point a beam at it.

And the detection... I'm not sure what do you meant by being hard to detect? By radar? Well, it's no use when optical sensors and image recognition are present, unless you can make you missiles invisible.

>>48664747
Other apeoidic niggers still don't have them, so its not that bad. At least we know that you don't use stone bullets anymore.

>>48668406
How much more ablative and numerous would you consider shells and (railgun) slugs, compared to a missile?

I know a missile isn't exactly fragile, given how fast they fly, but, at least by current design principles, isn't a big shell or a railgun slug much more durable?

Shells have the high RoF, at least compared to current railguns, but until lasers are optimised for bigger, heavier targets wouldn't gun-ordnance be effective, given it's easier to spam it?

Also, assuming surface lasers eventually do get amazing, does that make torpedoes the big anti-ship threat again?

>>48666137
Solder is specifically designed to be higher resistance than the wires you're soldering to avoid shorts, which is why they use lead. They use it because it's a bad conductor, not a good one.
www.metalsupermarkets.com/which-metals-conduct-electricity/

>>48668473
depends on the distance, the longer the range the easier it would be to intercept, so you would carry a mixed payload to suit the need

>>48668473

When comparing cutouts of artillery shells and missile warheads, the artillery shells are somewhat denser and have rather heavy looking fuse in the nose. Missiles have guidance system in their noses under thin metal cover, sometimes some sort of glass or other translucent material, if they employ laser guidance or something.

It's evident that missiles are much, much lighter in construction than shells. Probably because they're self propelled and one would want to maximize their range and maneuverability. And obviously a solid slug is going to be mostly solid metal and therefore very durable.

>Shells have the high RoF, at least compared to current railguns, but until lasers are optimised for bigger, heavier targets wouldn't gun-ordnance be effective, given it's easier to spam it?

Absolutely yes. Current aim of lasers is to provide area cover against missiles, rockets and slow arching artillery, or mortar shells.

But there's nothing you can about against a massive artillery spam. But maybe one day. I hope... That would need be some really fancy ass sensor fusion point defense laser clusterfuck. At that point, i wouldn't call them point defenses any more, i would start calling them a fucking forcefield.

>Also, assuming surface lasers eventually do get amazing, does that make torpedoes the big anti-ship threat again?

I totally forgot underwater existed. I have no idea. Aren't torpedoes a threat anymore?

File: supercavitation-8-638.jpg (123KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 638x479px

>>48668473

Supercavitating torpedoes.

>>48649121
next time I play a gun weilding character that is how I will describe my kill shots.

"Like god slamming a car door"

>>48667087
But that's wrong. Organic bodies contain water with vaporizes and therefore protects the body from more serious injuries.

>>48668710

Actually it is meant to carry a nuclear warhead and to be used against Carrier Groups.

>>48650938
Funny thing is they did get it working, they made massive strides in performance reliability in ammo and the rotating chamber mechanism in the 24th to the 28th prototypes, with G11K1 being pre production variant 29 approved for full serial manufacture, about 4 months before they cancelled the program because of reunification costs, they actually made the first order of 1k rifles and 1mil round of ammo and were on the trucks to the first units when they got recalled.

H&K still has the tooling, the guns and the ammo sitting locked up in storage.

>>48668737
No, that's wrong, the vaporization is so fast that it explodes, causing more damage than there would be to something inorganic.

>>48668759
a laser strike on a person would create a ragged bleeding wound specifically because the water vaporises

>>48665702
Which edition?

>>48668766
Depends on the frequency and intensity of it.

But lasers aren't nearly the only "energy weapon".

If you want to take it in this direction, a laser being deflected off a machine because hey, it's just light, is a much more troubling argument for your side.

>>48650701
If we ever manage to create an efficient and practical containment and projection technology for it, Plasma weapons would be OP as fuck.

>>48656515
It would depend on how powerful the engines are or how advanced the ship is. Though the Hull doesn't necessarily mean armor. Space vessel hulls are designed to withstand space debris.

>>48668785
>a laser being deflected off a machine because hey, it's just light
We already know that isn't the case. The US government managed to equip lasers on airlines that could shoot down missiles. Of course, the batteries needed to get enough energy to shoot just once also filled the entirety of the airplane, so it proved completely useless. Against organic matter they did even less.

>>48668703
>But there's nothing you can about against a massive artillery spam.
Cool

>At that point, i wouldn't call them point defenses any more, i would start calling them a fucking forcefield.
Also cool

Yeah, they still are, but they just have a much lower total kill count, bring big and expensive and not as easy to use as bombing a fucker - post WWII there have been about 5 torpedo kills, but then there hasn't been many naval engagements at all

>>48668943
Because the missiles weren't designed to resist the light, and the laser was selected to cut through aluminium and not flesh. Yeah, you're right in a very specific situation, that doesn't mean that's the normal state of affairs.

>>48662973
>The ship game that came from it wasn't terrible either

My gentleman of nubian descent
It was pretty good craic for what it was, though it took me ages to work out it had the same engine as SotS

Having 'dumb' kinetics around would make a lot of sense for marines and ground armies. Weapons that would function on battlefields hit by EMPs or covered in "dampening fields" and soldiers trained to fight that way.

>>48669638
EMPs like you get in movies don't really exist - any EMP device we can think of currently will be strictly limited range, and useful only against civilian targets, as EMP-hardening has been a thing for ages

There is a chance you could end up on a battlefield where EMP effects are present and are over a wide area, but that would be the least of your worries, as you'd be on a nuclear battlefield.
Which is why military stuff is EMP-hardened

>>48646201

Electromagnetic guns have practically the same power supply issues as directed energy weapons, so I can't see infantry hauling around a railgun rifle.

So chemical, or at best, electrothermal propellant, for infantry weapons, and EM guns and DEW weapons for vehicles.

>>48645229
I like the way things work in 40k
Lasers and Projectiles coexisting, with different tactical applications.

>>48666383

>/pol/ack detected
>shitposter
>not even remotely funny
>must be A FUCKING LEAF

fuck off, eh?

File: PersonalRailGun.jpg (76KB, 864x436px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 864x436px

>>48645229
Like most people here, I like a combination.

Plasma weapons for lighter small arms that fire quickly with lesser accuracy and range. Since they are plasma they don't have instant travel time like lasers. I like throwing in some railguns that are kinda clunky and fire slower but pack a big punch.

Vehicle mounted guns can be anything, but rapid firing anti-infantry / missile defense should be using energy weapons. I like shielding force fields and energy shields to be different things with each defending against a different type of weapon.

Overall, railguns are my favorite. The effects of kinetic trauma beat explosives or burning any day. I just miss the flying brass from a conventional gun.

>>48672168

>Overall, railguns are my favorite. The effects of kinetic trauma beat explosives or burning any day. I just miss the flying brass from a conventional gun.

Kinetic trauma is not ubiqutous in it's ugliness. What's so special about spent casings except it's familiarness and making a mess indicative of battle?

File: 1470158490712.jpg (26KB, 540x553px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 540x553px

>>48661325
No not really. What's the point in making single shot power cells? Why not just have a larger cell in the gun? And why can't they use self-loading mechanisms?

Basically if you want to have Wild West in space it's not going to make sense no matter how you cut it, so why bother trying to explain it. If you're doing light hearted goofy sci fi there's no point anyway.

>>48673390

It doesn't make sense.

>>48673502

Like really, i think i'm good at handwaving stuff like this, but this where it ends.

>>48673537 (You)

Ok, maybe i can to some extend. It might require the world to be isolated or something with people having lived for generations in primitive conditions, yet have manufacturing capability leftover from earlier colonization or something. Like perhaps an automated factory requiring minimal human operation capable of producing some very specific products including these power cells. The society on this world has regressed down to a early industrial or pre-industrial level and don't know or haven't reinvented basic machinery like recoil operation etc.

>>48647497
> Hard sci-fi

> Space combat

Pick one. The velocities, range of engagement, power requirements, cost of space travel etc. Makes having spaceships fight each other a fantasy realm from the get-go.

File: 1450533738046.jpg (2MB, 2250x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2250x1500px

>>48645229

>>48668741
No it really isn't.

It's very specifically an anti-submarine weapon intended to compensate for the disparity in detection systems between US and Soviet submarines. Either by being fired in the direction of a transient that indicates the presence of a submarine without the submarine having actually been detected, or being used as a snapshot weapon to force a ship that has already launched torpedoes to perform torpedo evasion maneuvers and sever its guidance wires, leading to reduced hit probability.

The Type 65 torpedo is the russian torpedo intended for use against large surface ships.

>>48665779
there are particle beams that can explode on target, but the particles have to be generated to explode exactly there in 3d space.

>>48671269
>everyone who disagrees with me is le /pol/ boogeyman
>everyone who disagrees with me is le shitposter boogeyman
>everyone who disagrees with me is le leaf boogeyman
kill yourself millennial tumblrist

>>48673855
murder finds a way.

>>48675945
no, just unfunny /pol/ tier shitposters. now fuck back off to your containment board, eh.

>>48676333
Cry more.

>>48678607
>LITERALLY everyone who disagrees with me is le cry boogeyman
kill yourself millennial tumblrist AND /v/-memer

>>48678701
No, I'm just telling you to babby your ass off, and cry. More. Because you're doing a great job, faggot.

>>48668714
>next time I play a gun weilding character that is how I will describe my kill shots.
>"Like god slamming a car door"

If anyone asks you where you got it from, I first heard it from the game reviewer Yahtzee. I believe it was in reference to sound effects from Serious Sam.

>>48646265
What if the casings were single-use high energy batteries attached to the bullets? Pull the trigger, battery charges the weapon and fires the bullet, useless battery is expelled and a fresh battery/bullet combo loaded into the chamber.

>>48683265
Bitch tears, nigga. Gimmie some more.

>>48645229
Particle, duh.
Delicious kinetic energy with a whole lot of heat and charge to transfer too.

It's easier on the reactor than getting same kind of damage from just lasers, and can slowly generate more ammunition from energy what with pair generation or matter conversion.

Sure technically in the short-term your ammunition's limited, but compared to projectile weapons the capacity's downright cavernous, and you'll be making more.

Special bonus: As part of your shots are particles and waves, certain types of target have a harder time ignoring the whole thing...

With that level of tech, you might want a second similar system by nanolathing/replicating missiles (slower production, lower ammo, but intelligent and more stored power).

>>48647802
One thing people forget about waste heat (not that it isn't a problem) is that right now efficiency is extremely low RIGHT NOW. We've got massive waste heat from having very shitty laser tech, which one would be insane not to assume won't have vastly improved by the time we're equipping them on motherfucking starfighters.

similarly, heatsinks are constantly improving as well, and while their performance is limited to 'radiative' in vacuum, this doesn't mean we cannot have fairly effective ones - though it's possible the majority of a craft's surface may have to be made of the stuff.

It could be made directional or shielded in various ways though, to avoid everyone showing up on IR too easily or quickly. Always worth it if it makes you a little slower to get detected than the other guy (the ACTUAL meaning of stealth, that "lolnostealthinspace" people very blatantly ignore)

>>48660835
Gauss and the like will work though.

Get some battledress and even plasma's having a hard time.

File: 12_GigaWaveCannon.jpg (6KB, 284x172px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 284x172px

>>48664939
Sometimes that really is the only way to do any damage.

Fuck you, space, stop being full of evil shit.

File: tumblr_nngbgmAHZi1r4gei2o1_400.gif (766KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

766KB, 320x240px

>>48684543
TRIGGERED!
AW, TRIGGERED,AW YEAH, YEAH, TRIGGERED! OH YEAH TRIGGERED,TRIGGERED!

>>48684568
There have been at least 3 people mocking you at this point, you spazzing faggot.

why are there so many posts talking about triggering and /pol/ in a thread about DEWs?

on topic: should the lasers be depicted a lasguns or fallout lasers, or as star wars blasters, which arent actually lasers but are generally used as an example of all-energy warfare?

>>48684778
It's one guy who's just shouting random things because you haven't reported him yet. Basically exactly like a drunk hobo bothering everyone walking past him.

Energy weapons play havoc with relative shielding. Kinetic either punches right through or disintegrates depending on your universe.


All in all depends on the universe both flavors taste great when not used in a gay run about fashion where energy weapons are as easy to make as a garage bike or railguns with power enough to punch a hole in 20 meters of carbon steel can be made the same way.

I don't care if the TV show is "genius dude does" it's just bad use of good material.

>>48684855
>announcing your reports

Enjoy your ban.

>>48673855

Space combat in hard sci-fi works amazingly. Combat is done hours or days apart and beyone sight range. The Black Fleet trilogy does it outstandingly

>Tfw neckbeard permavirgins are still post fighting

>>48684942
I didn't though. :^)

>>48684994
you literally did

>using the shitpost emoticon invented by /s4s/

kill yourself millennial

get banned on

>>48685003
Did not. :^)

>>48685007
you literally did

>using the shitpost emoticon invented by /s4s/

kill yourself millennial

get banned on

>>48685126
yeah sorry man reddit actually invented that

>>48684778

People misunderstand rule of cool as rule of nonsense.

It's cooler and less annoying if they work like they would really work. Lasguns are where it's at from most portrayals. Fallout comes close, but could be messier wtih less red laser colored paint leftovers.

They could be portrayed super messy instead of pristine clean they are most of the time. That's what they probably would be in real life. They produce waste heat, lots of vapour from heating the hair. They could suffer from occasional coil whine etc. technical problems. Non body shots that are not immediately fatal cause wounds that make people die from blood loss due to ruptured femoral artery while being temporarily paralyzed around wound area and in additional agony from pain nerves having been fired up to 1000% by the strong electromagnetic pulse cause by plasma that forms when the pulse hits the body.

All based on real life, but never used in fiction.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7077-maximum-pain-is-aim-of-new-us-weapon/

I don't know what came of that. But it gives a perspective science fiction was not able give. A huge contrast between real life and fiction, in which fiction is bland as hell.

>>48646201
shipbased railguns with chemical propellants for the smaller shits. cheap mass produced semi-dumbfire missiles ftw tho.

ATOMIC BULLETS
http://www.pravdareport.com/science/tech/19-11-2014/129079-atomic_bullets-0/

>>48685468
so a laser pulse hitting with the energy of a bullet, will cause a wound like a bullet?

i guess 80s media watchdogs are to blame for making lasers ranged punches

If a gun goes *bang!* or *brrrrrrap* it's cool and brutal.

If it goes "pew" or "freem" it's lame and faggy.

>>48686214
i actually like the pew pew noise

>>48686230

But you would agree it's less brutal than the bang right?

>>48686416
yeah, that is part of the charm, the weapon is almost toylike, firing mass-less, almost noiseless, photons, than vaporizing your intended target. the dissonance between the weapon and its effects are pretty hilarious

>>48668741
>>48674417

Second strike weapon for when the poopski is running down the Soviet captain's leg.

>>48686214
>freem
TSOALR?

>>48686214

It's going be very audible in the receiving end. Audible as in bullet levels of energy getting dumped in less than a millisecond. Even more so than a bullet, since it's going to involve material in the target being vaporized and superheated into plasma.

It's quite audible even with the DIY pulsed lasers, if you look those in the youtube. Then multiply that by orders of magnitude.

The weapon itself might make some sound depending what goes on when it's fired. It's probably going to involve some powerful capacitors and those do make a sound. At least when they are used to destroy something. Anyways, something is going to be excited a lot in the guts of that weapon in order to produce all that light. It could make some sort of an audible crack at least.

>>48668737
So steam explosions inside your body are less damaging that a burn through/cut?

>>48674710
I think you're thinking of the traveler muon blasters which used old science to produce muon with a lifespan specifically generated to decay into particles that would interact with matter in the middle of enemy ships. The idea was mons would pass stright through matter until they decayed.

Regular old particle weapons are gonna explode against the first thing they hit.

>>48688951

If we aply real life physics to then yes, you are right. Also, there are settings, 40k for example,where it is said that las weapons make a cracking sound.

Still, my post was about your typical, older sci-fi blaster\phaser\whatever. Those things always look and sound silly for me.

>>48690274
Sufficiently Advanced calls them inversion beams.