The twentieth-century reader, mind poisoned by the fantastic science-fiction of television, might wonder why there are so many bullets, and so few blasters, phasers, masers, lasers, light-sabers (sorry, Mr. Lucas) or other futuristic weapons in this sequence.
The fact is, bullets are incredibly versatile. Stunners are often easy to shield against, and on board a space station or space craft heavy energy weapons have an annoying tendency to breach the hull. Bullets, however, are nearly perfect.
Not really, a railgun round would be travelling at or near as fast as a laser weapon.Any kinetic weapon is space will be painfully slow compared to a directed energy weapon or even some sort of smart missile (which will keep accelerating due to a lack of air resistance).
'Literally' doesn't really work, however. Because one is a kinetic weapon and the other is a laser wespon, which is at the core of what we're arguing.Thaluikhain said:Er...when you say "like", do you mean "literally"? Though, the most common one was the UK Sterling.
Interestingly, there's a lot of that sort of thing, but usually with a blank firing weapon covered in plastic rubbish to obscure the original, rather than something that doesn't need to fire with extra bits added on.
Really? Honestly the blasters have so much more character than the lightsabers, however. I like how many Rebel blasters have seemingly homemade stocks and look like the weapons a rag tag militia might have. Imperial blasters look awesome as well...DrownedAmmet said:[I never liked the Star Wars blasters actually. The stormtrooper ones are okay but when their too obviously just regular guns with backwards scopes seems lazy
Plus I get too distracted by there not being a magazine where there should be
Why?Laughing Man said:Not really, a railgun round would be travelling at or near as fast as a laser weapon.Any kinetic weapon is space will be painfully slow compared to a directed energy weapon or even some sort of smart missile (which will keep accelerating due to a lack of air resistance).
I wouldn't exactly say that my experiences in Fallout games about some of those nuances has been too terribly bad OR good in regards to the points you made. With great versatility of bullets comes great need of looking for supplies OF those different calibers, whereas when you find your steady supply of laser (or plasma, or whatever), you're pretty set. Finding supplies for energy weapons CAN be rough, admittedly, but it still pays off. I was referring to all Fallout games, of course, but this does seem mostly relevent in more recent games, since I could handle Deathclaws in Fallout 2 with a Super Sledge, but anything past the Fallout 3 mark requires kick-ass super weapons and lightning reflexes.immortalfrieza said:True, but that said if we're talking about Fallout kinetic weapons have significantly more versatility and the ammo is a lot easier to get a hold of, while laser and plasma weapons in Fallout and it's spiritual predecessor Wasteland tend to get shafted in some way and aren't as easy to get a hold of and supply ammo for. Either they aren't able to cause as much damage as kinetic weapons except against a specific type of defense if they aren't just weaker in general and can't be silenced.
because it's sci-fi why wouldn't they have more advanced versions of the tech we have now? Firing tiny rounds via a railgun that come close to the speed of light when leaving the barrel would have tremendous energy, At least that is the way they are depicted in The Expanse which as far as I can remember is really the only sci-fi that I've encountered that has used railguns (although they haven't used them in the TV series yet), most other scifi seems to use energy based weapons.Why?
As it's fiction, this could be due to literally any reason.Laughing Man said:because it's sci-fi why wouldn't they have more advanced versions of the tech we have now?
Yes...so? That doesn't mean that sci-fi stories that have railguns need to have projectiles going at a certain speed. In any case, if you have anything travelling near lightspeed you are moving from sci fi to fantasy, both to propel something that fast and to not be destroyed by recoil.Laughing Man said:Firing tiny rounds via a railgun that come close to the speed of light when leaving the barrel would have tremendous energy,
No reason why all scifi railguns must be like the oes in Expanse.Laughing Man said:At least that is the way they are depicted in The Expanse which as far as I can remember is really the only sci-fi that I've encountered that has used railguns (although they haven't used them in the TV series yet), most other scifi seems to use energy based weapons.