[OOC] Nexus Of Worlds Multiverse

[LeeRoy]

Pfft. Energy weapons. I use a fucking long range air compressor as a weapon.

[MelonHead]

GreivousKhan said
Also I'm not sure why everyone wants to get up close to or sneak up to a jedi or Sith, when a gun is largely a ranged weapon. Snip that foo form half a mile away, once he hears the sound of the bullet firing he is already dead.

Except force users tend to be able to sense threats upon their person regardless of range.

[Schradinger]

Except that if you can generate enough power for it (which is entirely conceivable in a sci-fi setting), then any directed energy weapon that can fire a sustained beam is going to be able to massively out-perform any weapon that fires a physical projectile with regards to damage output. Add in the fact that it requires only energy as ammunition and the "projectile" travels at or near the speed of light, and you have a gun that can't be evaded and isn't affected by gravity or atmospheric conditions at long ranges, and there's nothing stopping you from making the beam invisible and silent. Perfect sniper weapon.

Star Wars just did it wrong.

[LeeRoy]

Speaking of weapons that Star Wars didn't do right. Ever hear of a Rod of Wrath?

It's like a lightsaber.

Except it came out in the 40s, has indefinite range, can't be easily blocked, and is instant death for anyone who's in the way.

[ImportantNobody]

LeeRoy said
.I may or may not be sitting down and coming up with the perfect counter for a Jedi.

I can create a master and padawan combo for battle in another arena thread. Bring it!

But I still say a master should be able to deflect metal bullets with the force long enough to escape, and if they come up with a shotgun they could easily reach them with the force of a quick burst of movement to disarm them with a quick lightsaber swing to the gun. The padawan using the force to deflect metal bullets is a bit iffy, though. They's just have to dodge from the get go.

[LeeRoy]

If that's how you'd want to do it I'd be willing to create two bounty hunters of comparable skill to a Master and Padawan.

It'd take a wee bit though, and they'd be rather flat characters. As they'd be created exclusively for the one fight.

But I'd be more than willing to do it.

[Schradinger]

I've already got some merc/bounty hunter characters from that Star Wars site I write on that I could use. Though I can think of quite a few other weapons a Jedi would have trouble with besides just slugthrowers. :)

Edit: Bloodshot is actually an adaptation of one of them, so his tier 4 self would give a good indication of what you'd be up against.

[GreivousKhan]

Schradinger said
Except that if you can generate enough power for it (which is entirely conceivable in a sci-fi setting), then any directed energy weapon that can fire a sustained beam is going to be able to massively out-perform any weapon that fires a physical projectile with regards to damage output. Add in the fact that it requires only energy as ammunition and the "projectile" travels at or near the speed of light, and you have a gun that can't be evaded and isn't affected by gravity or atmospheric conditions at long ranges, and there's nothing stopping you from making the beam invisible and silent. Perfect sniper weapon.Star Wars just did it wrong.

Well let's consider the weapons of today. Most are projectile weapons, they propel a projectile at the enemy. When this projectile hits a target it inflicts damage. The damage varies on the type of bullet and its velocity. For example a 22 caliber bullet can hit a person in the head, skim the skull and 'pop' out the back of the head without penetrating the skull. A 22 can also fail to penetrate muscles. A .50 caliber round can tear a person in two.

As technology advances so would of cours weapons and the projectiles fired from them. When guns were first invented they fired metal balls, now they come in all shapes, sizes and materials.

But why would a handgun be better than a laser imo? If the objective is to kill the enemy then the handgun would probably be better. Several things must be considered after all.

When a projectile enters the human body it leaves an opening that blood can exit and blood loss can kill an enemy. The opening also allows diseases and germs to enter the wound and infect the body. The projectile may pierce a vital organ which can also cripple or kill the target.

Since the body is over sixty percent water (some say 70% I think) a round entering the body can create 'waves' depending on the velocity and size of the bullet. These waves can create hydrostatic shock and disrupt the normal operations of organs. The military and many police agencies usually teach the double tap method, two rapid shots to the body. What this does is create two 'waves' in a human body and when the 'waves' collide they cause additional internal injury and a higher chance of death. It has been said that someone hit by a double tap suffers the same amount of damage as someone who has been shot four times. A dum-dum is especially designed to expand in the human body and amplify the effects of hydrostatic shock.

The type of round and its size have a big effect on hydrostatic shock. A large caliber round, or an expanding bullet create more of a cavity as it passes through the human body. When that cavity is 'sucked' closed by the rest of the body and the sudden 'vacuum' a hydrostatic shock wave is created.

In addition to hydrostatic shock, the bullet can lodge in a human body and increase the chance of infection and death. Removing the bullet can further threaten the target's life.

Some bullets have different effects. For example, the 5.56mm (NATO) and the 5.45mm (WARSAW) rounds have a high velocity and when they penetrate the human body they are more likely to ricochet off bones but remain inside the skin. A great deal of internal injury can be inflicted. This can be a lot better since it does not necessarily kill the enemy. If an enemy soldier is wounded then he must be evacuated and cared for, which can become a massive drain on enemy resources. (which is a point for attrition warfare)

A laser on the other hand would burn a whole in the target, cauterizing the wound. The subject would not bleed to death, suffer severe hydrostatic shock or be at risk from infection. The advantage of a laser however, could be that it is invisible (certain spectrums only), is line of sight (don't have to worry about windage and elevation or gravity) and it could be used to 'slice' a target in two (if weapon design allows which it sounds like that example would allow). At lower powers it could also be used to designate targets for other munitions or determine range. Overall, a laser would not be as dangerous as a projectile weapon which would likely be cheaper and easier to make (that super laser your talking about hardly sounds economically viable which puts it as a specialist weapon and not a mass produced one). Lasers can also be easily defeated by mirror (imagine that super laser being turned or reflected on your own men). Protection against bullets is much heavier in some cases.

Another advantage of projectile weapons is an electromagnetic pulse (like from a nuclear explosion) will not fry the electronics of the weapon. While most energy weapons are probably not harsh weather or environment friendly.

If a 'new' weapon is used the writer should consider what effect it has its target and what people could do to defend themselves against it. How would the weapon effect vehicles and equipment?

What about the weapon's ammunition capacity? Why would the military (usually very traditional) turn away from older, battle tested weapons toward something else? What does the new weapon have to offer that the old kind can't compete with? Is it a military weapon or can civilians get one?

Military units may employ new or special weapons within a unit to supplement the abilities of other weapons if it can do things current weaponry cannot. For instance, it would be great to equip every trooper with rocket launcher but the weight and ammunition requirements make it impractical. It would also be too dangerous in close quarters like house to house, or room to room fighting etc.

Plus, ME made a good example of a weapon that was cheap, could fire near light speed, and had basically unlimited ammo. Using the Mass Accelerators.

All in all I just prefer kinetic weapons. :K

And thus ends the mini rant.

[LeeRoy]

I literally just thought up a weapon that would be a nightmare for Jedi.

It's a lot like the chainsword, except made from Mandalorian Iron, coated in a spray paint made from blended cortosis.

[ImportantNobody]

You guys could team up, like two bounty hunters who both got the same assignment?

It will be interesting to see how long a master would last against these troublesome weapons of yours.

[GreivousKhan]

ImportantNobody said
I can create a master and padawan combo for battle in another arena thread. Bring it! But I still say a master should be able to deflect metal bullets with the force long enough to escape, and if they come up with a shotgun they could easily reach them with the force of a quick burst of movement to disarm them with a quick lightsaber swing to the gun. The padawan using the force to deflect metal bullets is a bit iffy, though. They's just have to dodge from the get go.

You still got to think of this in a practical combat scenario. This may work (at least for masters) against one or two, but what about an army as they usually fight? Made up of tens of thousands? All firing electromagnetically accelerated railgun rifles at near light speed with almost near ammo?

Heck, a modern would put them in their place real quick. :P

[GreivousKhan]

LeeRoy said
I literally just thought up a weapon that would be a nightmare for Jedi.It's a lot like the chainsword, except made from Mandalorian Iron, coated in a spray paint made from blended cortosis.

That is basically what a Vibroblade with cortosis weave is man.

[LeeRoy]

It's similar, but I meant an electric chainsaw on a stick.

[GreivousKhan]

The Vibroblade would seem to be superior due to the mere fact it is more easily concealed and would not alert an enemy with a loud buzzsaw scream. Not to mention be much lighter.

But to each their own.

[ImportantNobody]

Someone charging a jedi master with a melee weapon might not be a good idea.

[LeeRoy]

Sound plays a part in combat as well, if the sound is too loud one of two things can happen:

A: The sound is distracting, which would be incredibly dangerous in a 2 on 2 fight.
B: The sound is blocked out with focus, but that leads to another problem. Not hearing where it's coming from.

[Schradinger]

And that, my dear Khan, is why I prefer particle beams to straight up lasers. Same concept as the guns of mass effect, but firing millions of atomic particles instead of one sand-sized one. Much more energy delivered on-target, with the advantage of being a sustainable attack if one shot doesn't get the job done. They also have only one of the disadvantages you listed for lasers (EMP's), and all of the advantages of them combined with most of the advantages of traditional projectiles.

And the EMP thing isn't even a weakness exclusive to directed energy weapons, as chemical propellants can only push a bullet so fast. If you want to exceed that limit, you have to get into the realm of rail guns and then you have the same EMP problem as pure energy weapons.

[ImportantNobody]

That's a good idea, actually, to use sound to inhibit concentration on the force. Still, unless they were an expert at close combat a jedi master would be able to outmaneuver them and cut them down moving too fast for a normal person to react in time.

[Vordak]

Hey.

First of all, the slightest "fog-of-war" (dust and vapour particles) would actualy impede the work of laser weaponary, not to mention rainstorms or fog. Atmospheric conditions fucking up you laser? Check.
Second of all, a laser powerful enough will still punch through a mirror, having only part of it reflected.

[Schradinger]

Also, I'd be fine with teaming up, though Bloodshot would definitely fall into the master category.