Today we've got the E-11 Baster Rifle, favored by the Imperial Stormtroopers of Star Wars, the M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern the standard issue Lasgun of the Imperial Guard in Warhammer 40,000, and the Type-3b Phaser Rifle utelized by the Star Fleet in Star Trek.

E-11 Blaster Rifle
Weight: 2.6 Kilograms (5.73202 lbs)
Length: 438 mm (17.2441 in) (Stock Folded), 492 mm (19.3701 in) (Stock Unfolded)
Magazine Capacity: 100 (Standard Magazine), 500 (Plasma Cartirge)
Rate of Fire: 300 shots per minute
Fire Settings: Single Shot or Full Auto
Power Settings: Lethal, Stun, Sting
Effective Range: 300 meters
Sight Systems: Telescopic , Capable of intergrating with Stormtrooper Tactical HUD
Other Features: Fold Out Stock
Additional Information:
The E-11's fire is known to create molten shrapnel upon impacting with various surfaces. The E-11 is known to be considerably less accurate when fired full auto and is less accurate at longer ranges. It should be noted that the accuracy of the Stormtroopers using the E-11 is questionable. However it should be noted that when Han, Luke, and Leia are using the E-11 on the Death Star I are able to hit targets just fine. Also as Leia noted on the Falcon after the escape, the Empire let them escape so as to track them back to the Rebellion. Against individuals without plot armor, like the Rebel soldiers at the start of A New Hope, the Stormtrooper's dominate the fight taking very few losses comparatively.

M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern
Weight: 2.3 Kilograms (5.07063 lbs)
Length: 900 (35.4331 in)
Magazine Capacity: 150
Rate of Fire: 220 shots per minute
Fire Settings: Single Shot and Full Auto
Power Settings: Low and High
Effective Range: 200-300 meters
Sight Systems: Adjustable, back and front sights with optional laser sight/integral optics
Other Features: Adjustable Stock, capable of mounting a bayonet, can take a flash supressor
Additional Information:
The Lasgun is known to be insanely reliable and durable. Of energy weapons it is basically an AK-47 having a baby with an M-16 that got the superior reliability and stopping power of the AK-47 with the accuracy and lighter weight of the M-16. Lasgun power packs can be overloaded an used as IED's. At higher power settings they are capable of penetrating Space Marine power armor though this saps the power supply faster.

Type-3b Phaser Rifle
Weight: 2.88 Kilograms (6.3 lbs) (Estimate)
Length: 812.8 mm (32 in)
Magazine Capacity: Unknown, likely upwards of 200
Rate of Fire: 120 shots per minute
Fire Settings: Pulse and Beam Fire
Power Settings: 16 known settings including Stun and Disintergrate
Effective Range: Unknown atleast 200 meters
Sight Systems: Holographic Sights
Other Features: Fixed Stock, can mount a flash light
Additional Information:
The Type-3 Phaser Rifle's are known to be slightly less powerful than similar than similar Cardassian rifles and is also more complex making it slightly less reliable. Phasers do have additional beam settings though these are rarely used in combat and don't seem to have the same power as the conventional pulses or beams. It is also not well suited to hand to hand fighting as its casing is of questionable strength. Phasers are known however to be capable of completely disintegrating a target though this fuction is rarely used as it likely over takes the power supply and stresses the weapon. Phaser power packs have been known to explode either from to much stress or as a purpose built IED.

Winners:
Weight: M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern
Length: E-11 Blaster Rifle
Magazine Capacity: Type-3b Phaser Rifle
Rate of Fire: E-11 Blaster Rifle
Fire Settings: Tie E-11 Blaster Rifle and M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern
Power Settings: Type-3b Phaser Rifle
Effective Range: Tie E-11 Blaster Rifle and M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern
Sight Systems: M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern
Stopping Power: Type-3b Phaser Rifle
Reliability: M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern

Personal Take:
All three are pretty closely comparable, each having strengths and drawbacks.

The E-11 would be the best for close quarters work such as urban enviroments or the confines of a starship, thanks to its smaller size and higher rate of fire. I do question its capabilities at longer ranges though it is still possible to make shots at longer ranges with disciplined fire. Also one of its primary targeting systems only works with Stormtrooper helmet systems and I would rather not wear one of those buckets on my head.

The M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern was a real suprise on this one for its simple practicality annd tactical flexibility. While it lacks a stun setting, the number of options for sight systems, light weight, and impressive relaibility sets this weapon apart from its competition. It is however a little on the long side of things making it less manuevarble in tight quarters.

The Type-3b Phaser Rifle is a bit of a mixed bag for me. It has a lot of options for fire modes and likely the largest magazine capacity, it has to be taken with a pinch of salt. While it can disintergrate targets this fire mode is rarely used. Its alternative fire modes are likewise rarely seen and the few we do see have questionable use in a fire fight. I also don't like the limited targeting system options on the Phaser. The lack of automatic fire is also a problem and beam fire isn't all that useful in a fire fight. That said it is still perfectly servicable as combat rifle.

If I was to be dropped cold into a combat situation and I had to pick one of these three weapons I would have to go with the M-35 M-Galaxy Short Pattern. Of the three it seems to me to be the most well rounded rifle of the bunch. Its reliability will also serve better than either the E-11 or the Type-3b as both weapons have been known to have problems in adverse conditions. If I knew I was going to be in close quarter I would take the E-11 however. This is not however to say I would pass up on the Type-3b though it would not be my first choice. It has a certain amount of special utility and being able to disintegrate or at least penetrate armor would be of some value.

Which would you take and why? What other Scifi weapons would you like me to compare?

5666688

the E-11 Baster Rifle

It has +10 damage against roast turkeys!

5666688
As obvious as it is, I have to go with the Phaser Rifle. The additional settings and larger magazine capacity far outweigh the negatives in my opinion.
Plus, the ability to turn your magazines into an IED is too good to pass up. The real world Pancor Jackhammer would have done something similar with its magazine had it gone into production.

What sci-fi decedents of the greatest instrument of battle ever devised? The Battle Rifles.
TR-116 (Star Trek), Designated Marksman Rifle/Battle Rifle (Halo), etc.

Or possibly go down a step from here, you could compare energy sidearms. Though, that would be a bit of a rehash.

5666688
5666809
Personally, I'd actually go with an energy weapon from a different kind of setting altogether and therefore present the
+
Zat'nik'tel

Don't ask me how that's pronounced, not even the show's characters can agree.

The functioning is simple: the weapon is semi-automatic and will shoot one coherent beam of energy per shot that traverses at the speed of light, which is somewhat similar to phaser weapons, but superior to pulse phasers and blaster rifles in both projectile speed and accuracy. The energy source is effectively infinite and powered by an internal Naqadah reactor that is, on destruction, not radioactive.

Shots will, in order:
1. Incapacitate/stun
2. Kill
3. Completely disintegrate the target
Based on the number of direct hits to the target from 1 to 3.

By all appearances, this works equally well on any kind of target, living or otherwise, and has been demonstrated to disintegrate inanimate objects in a utilitarian way.

Energy shields cannot be penetrated, but will overload as normal under sustained fire.

Given the choice, I'd go with either this or the Star Trek hand phaser, being similar in size, power and function, although I think the Zat is more practical due to the unlimited ammunition (and also it makes a more satisfying ZAP! sound.)

Zap!

5666833
Oh I am familiar with the Zat. Watched all of SG-1 and most of Atlantis.

I disagree about it being superior though. It's more of a side-grade when compared to a number of energy weapons.
Also, I'm pretty sure they retconned the 3 shot Disintegration thing at some point.
Ergonomics on it area bit wonky too. But, given the kind of grips on some real guns....

5666866
Well, since the weapon has no recoil, I think ergonomics aren't such a big deal... but removing the disintegration part would make a difference, yes. I never watched much of Atlantis, having a thorough loathing for how smug and dislikable most of the cast comes across. Richard Dean Anderson in his role as Colonel Jack O'Neill is really what made the show for me. The guy is amazingly good at portraying that particular type of character, he carries the whole thing.

And yeah, it's more of a side-arm, really, but since it's so much more powerful than even the average blaster weapon described above (a one-hit knockout on basically anything no matter the location of the hit is nothing to sneeze at) I think it would actually make a decent primary weapon. You can even dual-wield it, if that's not too silly to count for your purposes, again what with the lack of recoil.

5666884

I never watched much of Atlantis

Atlantis was pretty good. Although now that I think about it, the Wraith's sidearm was basically a Zat without the kill feature.

Colonel Jack O'Neill is really what made the show for me

He steals every scene he's in.

a one-hit knockout on basically anything no matter the location of the hit is nothing to sneeze at

If I recall correctly, the blasters also have a one-hit KO setting. Though they almost never use it. I know phasers and their predecessors phase pistols have one, but they didn't always one-hit KO because some creatures have to be hit harder to knock them out.

I think it would actually make a decent primary weapon.

True. Then again, I'm the that one guy that always picks the Revolver or similar weapons as the primary in games. So I'm already biased towards sidearms.

You can even dual-wield it, if that's not too silly to count for your purposes, again what with the lack of recoil.

I'd argue that there's no benefit to dual-wielding unless you're going for suppressive fire. Having to switch sights eats up precious time and it'd simply be faster to shift slightly to one side instead of going to a different gun.

5666919

Atlantis was pretty good.

Let me correct myself there: I watched enough of it to know I can't stand anyone in it. I think we had a similar conversation about Deep Space Nine once, it's basically the same thing. SG1 does all the same things, but better. I might give it a chance again at some point, but I'd really rather watch the other one.

He steals every scene he's in.

Does he ever. I love the movie too, but mostly for Jaye Davidson as Ra. Anderson would only have made it better, if they had cast him for that.

If I recall correctly, the blasters also have a one-hit KO setting.

I don't believe they do, being some kind of weird charged quasi-plasma gaseous projectile, as far as I'm aware, but my knowledge of the Star Wars setting comes mostly from the original trilogy and the Jedi Knight games, which never mention it, so it might just be an extended universe thing I'm not aware of.

I'd argue that there's no benefit to dual-wielding unless you're going for suppressive fire. Having to switch sights eats up precious time and it'd simply be faster to shift slightly to one side instead of going to a different gun.

I'd argue for its usefulness in close quarters and a "target-rich environment," as they say. Buildings, streets, a ship's corridors, those are basically its natural environment. As a sidearm, it isn't really meant for marksmanship to begin with, and the lack of recoil means that aiming at close quarters is literally as easy as squeezing the trigger. Repeated shots to not need to be re-aimed, target stability is basically guaranteed. The absence of having to worry about ammunition or reloading means that you can basically lay down the smackdown as fast as you can pull the trigger, even if only a quarter of all shots ever hits - which, in a situation like this, means both suppressing fire in two directions as well as, quite simply, saturating a larger area with flying bolts of energy at a time, meaning a better hit quota in total.

Sure, it's not much of a difference, given what the weapon can already do, but it also costs you nothing, so it's a net gain.

5666948

Let me correct myself there

Okay, that makes sense.

I don't believe they do...thing I'm not aware of.

Found it. It's in A New Hope.

I'd argue for its usefulness in close quarters and a "target-rich environment,"

Point taken.

5666958

Found it. It's in A New Hope.

Fair enough, it's been a while since I watched those. I'd still say the instant "hitscan" character of the weapon makes it ultimately more useful, especially at ranges, but that's something you can argue about. I'd put it with those disintegrator rifles they have in Jedi Knight, if it came in bigger and with a scope.

5666833
Zat's aren't really a rifle and I personally am not a fan of the design. I like Star Gate but the zat like other Go'auld weapons is a bit impractical in design. Still able to kill but very impractical.

5666809
I'm afraid the lack of auto fire is the biggest problem I have with phasers. I'm looking at these from a tactical perspective and sadly the Phaser either doesn't have enough options or gets outclassed. It's kind of like brining a Short Magazine Lee Enfeild rifle to a fire fight where the other to options are an AK-74 and Scar H. That may be exaggerating it a bit but it is painfully close to reality.

5667025
The design is kind of arbitrary and the internal electrics can presumably be reshaped to have any form, but the goa'uld are pretty big on form before function, so I'll have to give you that one.

5667025
True, it doesn't have a traditional auto fire. Though I would argue that the beam function* fills a similar niche.
Though arguably the better comparison would be to bringing an M-14 or an M1 Garand with the sights calibrated for city/jungle fighting while your opponents are using Kalashnikov pattern Assault rifles.**
It's raw power per shot vs the capability of putting a lot shots down range. Whichever one you favor will depend upon your preferred method of fighting and the environment.

It's kind of like brining a Short Magazine Lee Enfeild rifle to a fire fight where the other to options are an AK-74 and Scar H.

I'd actually do that. Those old guns can kill just as well as the newer ones and the Lee can cycle pretty fast for a bolt action.

*There's also the other options that for some reason the writers keep forgetting about like the Wide Beam setting. The only justification I can see for not using them is that they may use exponentially more power than the standard beam or pulse (depending upon model of phaser). Which neatly explains 90% of phaser fights as they're almost always occur when back-up and resupply are unlikely and endurance is favored over the ability to put more matter downrange

** Which ties in nicely to the comparison of a Federation Phaser vs a Cardassian Disruptor. It's the difference between Stoner's AR Pattern and Kalashnikov's AK pattern.

5667082
Beam fire doesn't seem very practical to me as you end being exposed for longer to fire it. Having played more than a few shooters with beam weapons I really can't give the concept a pass except for on the larger scale of vehicle or ship passed weapons. You basically just have a big kill me sign and it isn't as practical as rapid fire.
Fair enough on the second point of the discussion but I would still prefer to have a rapid fire option.
As for part three, I would not recommend that except for at long range. The Lee Enfield may have one of the best cycles but it doesn't quite make up for Semi automatic or even full automatic fire in a fire fight. In that situation you really can't afford to miss or by the time you cycle the bolt the enemy will have gotten off a lot more rounds and you will probably need to take cover. You would very easily become suppressed, at which point you are basically a sitting duck.

Regarding a previous suggestion I'm afraid the TR-116 isn't a very practical option for analysis. My experience with Star Trek weaponry and equipment has been frustrating to say the least and the more obscure the weapon the harder it is to find data for. Considering the TR-116 only really showed up one time the amount of information we have is very limited. Further the TR-116 isn't exactly standard issue and even less standard is that transporter modification. To be honest the TR-116 also feels more like it would fit the niche of a sniper weapon system if Star Fleet actually gave a damn about ground combat. I have a feeling the ground pounders are dead last on the procurement line for new hardware development, production, and distribution. Its kind of the same situation for personal shields in Star Trek which show up very rarely and don't seem to be standard issue to the ground troops or even to officers, who you think would need it since their uniforms are basically big old kill me signs for anyone with any concept of snipers or even real ground combat tactics.

5667287
Counterpoint: "pulse rifles" are like having every round in a gun be a tracer round. It has the same effect of exposing your position for no concommitant larger gain.

5667287
The way Star Trek's phasers work is more on the idea of scaples. It is using subatmoic particales and the ones on ships show it best, they can pirce though a planet crust but unlike Star Wars, Warhammer, or whatever instead of literally breaking the crust open it tunnels a percoius hole in.

They mostly work by breaking warping or damaging the atomic particles in a object.

5667287

Beam fire doesn't seem very practical to me as you end being exposed for longer to fire it. Having played more than a few shooters with beam weapons I really can't give the concept a pass except for on the larger scale of vehicle or ship passed weapons. You basically just have a big kill me sign and it isn't as practical as rapid fire.

I actually have the exact opposite experience. I do far better with beam weapons than almost any other type of weapon. It could be that your preferred play style doesn't mesh well with that style of weapon.

As for part three, I would not recommend that except for at long range. The Lee Enfield may have one of the best cycles but it doesn't quite make up for Semi automatic or even full automatic fire in a fire fight.

Point taken, a Lee isn't exactly the best tool for that kind of work. But I tend to go for weapons that can easily switch between roles

Actually, that could explain something about the phaser rifle. At any given time, we only see one type issued almost entirely across the fleet. It could be that the phaser is a weapon designed as a jack-of-all trades instead of filling a niche. Sort of like how modern militaries keep trying to design a Universal Rifle that can fill any role with some modifications to streamline logistics.
Looking at it from that perspective, the design choices make a little more sense.

Regarding a previous suggestion...

Well the only reason I even mentioned the TR-116 was because the writers actually devoted some time to fleshing out its backstory, but I know what you mean. It is a pain in the mikta trying to dig up anything remotely accurate on Star Trek small arms.

Its kind of the same situation for personal shields in Star Trek which show up very rarely and don't seem to be standard issue to the ground troops or even to officers, who you think would need it since their uniforms are basically big old kill me signs for anyone with any concept of snipers or even real ground combat tactics.

That's probably because most of the time we only see shipboard/station/planetside security. The combat uniform/surface operation blacks only appears in Nor the Battle to the Strong and Siege of AR-558. With the later having regular uniforms mixed in with the troops because they were down to 1/3rd strength and those were actually the rear-echelon troops having to fill in the front line until a relief force could arrive.


They even lack rank insignia to prevent easy identification of officers.

5667330

The way Star Trek's phasers work is more on the idea of scaples

Funny thing about that....

In 2367, the phasers of the USS Enterprise-D were used like a scalpel to excise an infant spaceborne lifeform dubbed Junior from its deceased mother. (TNG: "Galaxy's Child")

5667382
That's why i made the compression as you can't do something like that with a Star Destroyer or A Imperial Battleship.

5667398
Right, it's the difference between a War Rapier and a Mace.

5667312
In which case just use a kinetic rifle with actual bullets.

5667330
That is the first genuinely interesting explanation o how Phasers work I have ever seen. Its actually a fairly interesting approach to the idea. Thank you.

5667332
Damage over time weapons that aren't cause some kind of status effect to do the damage really don't work for me. They also tend to have low base damage which means their not great for rapid response fire or when you are under heavy fire.
So basically the phaser is a jack of all master of none? Interesting concept but typically doesn't work very well in most cases. And again the lack of Automatic fire and proper suppression fire kills it for me.
I have however been considering comparing the Battle rifle to a comparable weapon from Mass effect. Like wise I was considering doing the lancer or avenger from mass effect vs the MA5C of halo vs the Lancer from gears of war.
One problem I have with that is the relief troops show up in standard Starfleet uniforms at the end of AR-558. I'm sorry to say this but Star Fleet's ground game is painfully underdeveloped which is a shame is the troops are clearly well trained and conditioned. To use another World War I related metaphor they are basically the British Regulars at the start of the war; highly trained and well organized, but poorly equipped for a proper ground war against a comparable foe, with to much focus having gone to the navy leaving the ground pounders high and dry.
Looking back on AR-558 just imagine how many lives could have been saved if they had had just one or even two machine gun type weapons? The Jem'hedar don't exactly wear great armor or have shielding and they were advancing across relatively open ground on a position with good cover an ample rifles to back up the heavy guns.

5668803

In which case just use a kinetic rifle with actual bullets.

Which loses the entirety of the "lighter, no recoil, no arcing, less ammo restriction, more utility uses" benefit that energy weapons are there for to begin with. Besides, your argument is kind of arbitrary. There is nothing about shooting a beam that actually exposes you for longer. A lot of real-world lasers are UV and you can't actually see them and even lasers in the visible spectrum are usually invisible from the side unless you guide them through a fog or other cloud of particles that will scatter the ray. There is also no reason to assume that they need to be maintained for longer than a single shot from a kinetic weapon would be - and if you did, that would effectively be equivalent to full auto, because a continuous beam does continuous cutting, too.

That is the first genuinely interesting explanation o how Phasers work I have ever seen. Its actually a fairly interesting approach to the idea. Thank you.

Well, feel free to explain it to me, then, because not only did that make no physical sense to me, I couldn't even figure out what half the words are actually supposed to be. WTF is a scaples?

5668821

because a continuous beam does continuous cutting, too.

This. We see in Trek that phasers can fire their beam continuously with enough power to cut through doors, walls, even drill through rock. I see no reason that cannot be used the same against people, just because we don't see it in the show dunnut mean it's not possible.

The only drawback I can think of is potential overheating/extreme energy use, but even then when they do something like cut through a bulkhead they run the phaser just fine for up to minutes at a time. So it can't be too bad.

5668821
scalpels sorry. Phasers are particle weapons that use subatomic particles to damage objects demanding on the setting they can be used to cut clean though a object, melting and warping the object, to outright destroying the atomic bonds of the target. Ship Phasers which are basically the same as the handheld kind but far bigger can cut though a planet's crust but unlike Star wars, Warhammer and the like they don't destroy the crust but create a clean cut right though the object.

5668845
Exactly. Mind you, overheating is a problem with kinetic weaponry, too. Certain models of stationary MG tend to glow cherry-red after continuous firing, they get that hot.

5668852
Oh, that actually makes sense, then. Fair point. Molecules tend to bond together through one of two ways, which is either electromagnetic attraction between dipoles or Van-der-Waals forces for more uncharged structures. If you could disrupt these selectively, you could probably affect specific types of molecular matter arbitrarily without interacting with other kinds. It's a bit handwavey, but it's something I can see happen.

5668803

Damage over time weapons that aren't cause some kind of status effect to do the damage really don't work for me. They also tend to have low base damage which means their not great for rapid response fire or when you are under heavy fire.

Where I tend to love them because of they tend to have high precision at range and and they also come with a chance for stun-locking enemies. Plus, the ability to use the beam to quickly sweep across an area at around chest height to find any cloaked foes can make the difference between victory and defeat.

So basically the phaser is a jack of all master of none? Interesting concept but typically doesn't work very well in most cases.

It also works with what we know of the Federation's design mentality. Almost all of their ships are multi-role platforms or platforms that can be easily adapted into new roles.

I have however been considering comparing the Battle rifle to a comparable weapon from Mass effect. Like wise I was considering doing the lancer or avenger from mass effect vs the MA5C of halo vs the Lancer from gears of war.

I did some checking, the closest equivalents for the Battle Rifle in Mass Effect are the Vindicator and the Mattock. It'd definitely be interesting how the workhorses of FPS measure up against each other.
Actually, that brings up an interesting thing to debate. Mass Effect Weapons: Internal Heatsink or Disposable Heatsink?

One problem I have with that is the relief troops show up in standard Starfleet uniforms at the end of AR-558. I'm sorry to say this but Star Fleet's ground game is painfully underdeveloped which is a shame is the troops are clearly well trained and conditioned. To use another World War I related metaphor they are basically the British Regulars at the start of the war; highly trained and well organized, but poorly equipped for a proper ground war against a comparable foe, with to much focus having gone to the navy leaving the ground pounders high and dry.

Well I can't say you're wrong. Though I interpreted the relief forces coming in regular uniforms as replacements for the Rear-Echelon troops that were killed in combat or as a sign that the Federation had secured orbit permanently so they could afford to station standard security instead of leaving frontline troops there when they'd be needed on the ever-moving front lines.

Looking back on AR-558 just imagine how many lives could have been saved if they had had just one or even two machine gun type weapons? The Jem'hedar don't exactly wear great armor or have shielding and they were advancing across relatively open ground on a position with good cover an ample rifles to back up the heavy guns.

Given the absolutely horrifying defenses the Jem'Hadar had set up prior to losing control of the communication center, I wouldn't be surprised if the troops had landed with an equivalent to the machine guns and those were destroyed early on. Since neither Starfleet nor the Dominion could maintain space-superiority over rate planet, it would have been near impossible to do a proper resupply and replace that equipment. If they even knew it needed to be replaced.
Of course, that's me reaching and theorizing a bit. The only evidence I could offer for that claim is the fact that we have seen a mounted, manually-operated phaser cannon in Star Trek: Nemesis.

5668873
Let's save heat sinks for another thread.
The problem I have with that idea of them just being standard security instead of frontline troops is we never see or hear anything to imply that the security guys aren't the frontline troops. Last time we saw anything close to resembling marines in Starfleet were the Mako's from enterprise and to my understanding they were disbanded. Considering that the Security guys are also the ones who seem to do the bulk of the fighting even in situations where in theory there should be a proper marine detachment doing the job instead doesn't help the case either.
I would have to agree that is reaching by quiet a bit. Considering the skills and technology available to Starfleet engineers I would be shocked if they couldn't either replicate replacement parts or repair damaged parts to make the serviceable. The likely situation as I see it given the nature of Starfleet in the years prior to the Dominion war it would seem more likely that Starfleet simply doesn't have such a weapon in their arsenal. Considering the rarity of ground wars in Star Trek it would not surprise me if the Federation had allowed its ground arm to atrophy both in terms of its forces and their arsenal. It fits with the more passive and diplomatic nature of the Federation prior to conflicts with the Borg and the Dominion, and given that they hadn't had a major conflict on the ground in many years. "If its all just sitting around gathering dust why bother keeping it or improving on it?" tends to be the view the politicians and some military commanders tend to take in such cases.

5668914

"If its all just sitting around gathering dust why bother keeping it or improving on it?" tends to be the view the politicians and some military commanders tend to take in such cases.

Which is way when war comes they get caught off guard and lose ground fast. The mentality of "peace now so peace tomorrow" is actually stupid in itself. Just look at the Galactic republic who had a best a small judicial fleet and peacekeeping force (outside the jedi). If it wasn't for the sith preparing a clone army the Republic would have lost almost imeddemtty and evenn then some sentators (*cough* Padme *cough*) where to idealistic for there own good. True the sith where playing both sides but the Sepertist movement would have happened regardless.

As for Starfleet after the Klingons became friendly they started to demilitarize themselves and even though the Dominion was forced to attack them early they still had a huge chance of winning against everyone.

"In times of Peace Prepare for War"

5668914

Let's save heat sinks for another thread.

That's the idea.

The problem I have with that idea of them just being standard security instead of frontline troops is we never see or hear anything to imply that the security guys aren't the frontline troops. Last time we saw anything close to resembling marines in Starfleet were the Mako's from enterprise and to my understanding they were disbanded. Considering that the Security guys are also the ones who seem to do the bulk of the fighting even in situations where in theory there should be a proper marine detachment doing the job instead doesn't help the case either.

Well DS9 alluded to a proper army or the equivalent of in the two parter DS9 episode Homefront/Paradise Lost. But I can see your point.
Also, MACO not Mako. It stands for 'Military Assault Command Operations'.

I would have to agree that is reaching by quiet a bit. Considering the skills and technology available to Starfleet engineers I would be shocked if they couldn't either replicate replacement parts or repair damaged parts to make the serviceable. The likely situation as I see it given the nature of Starfleet in the years prior to the Dominion war it would seem more likely that Starfleet simply doesn't have such a weapon in their arsenal. Considering the rarity of ground wars in Star Trek it would not surprise me if the Federation had allowed its ground arm to atrophy both in terms of its forces and their arsenal. It fits with the more passive and diplomatic nature of the Federation prior to conflicts with the Borg and the Dominion, and given that they hadn't had a major conflict on the ground in many years. "If its all just sitting around gathering dust why bother keeping it or improving on it?" tends to be the view the politicians and some military commanders tend to take in such cases.

Point taken. The only known improvement in small arms tech since the introduction of the phaser* was the introduction of regenerative phasers for use in energy dampening environments as discussed in Field of Fire (DS9) and up until the brief Federation-Klingon War of 2372, the Federation hadn't engaged in large-scale ground operations since... well, the founding of the Federation. Going 200 years without a large scale ground conflict and only dealing with raid sized ground forces would put very little pressure to improve small arms tech. Hell, the largest attack before that war that was on screen was the Gorn Raid in 2267 (TOS: Arena).

*This is not including the switch from Plasma Weapons to Phase Pistols in Enterprise, nor the phase out of Laser technology, nor the change in phaser model between seasons and series.

5668931
It's a common and entirely reasonable attitude to have, though, in economic terms. The reason weapon technology tends to advance at rapid rates in times of war is because the rest of the time, it is actually good financial sense not to over-invest heavily in a precaution that may or may not ever see any use before it becomes obsolete again. An arms race is a massive drain on the economy, especially so if it's a race you're pretty much having with yourself. I'd point to all the horrible things this kind of behaviour is doing to the US economy at this point, but I think none of us want to go there.

Plus, there is the basic truism that force wants to be used. An overstaffed, overfunded and over-equipped military is historically a guarantee for a military coup at some point down the line, unless you find some kind of external enemy for them to exert themselves against. If they can't find an enemy, they will make one.

It can and often does demonstrate good sense to benevolently neglect that kind of thing. Being over-prepared can be as harmful as being under-prepared.

5668803

Damage over time weapons that aren't cause some kind of status effect to do the damage really don't work for me. They also tend to have low base damage which means their not great for rapid response fire or when you are under heavy fire.

Even though in the show we usually see the beam having to be held for a time, I don't think that's actually how it is. If you notice the guy being shot at starts going down pretty much the instant the beam hits him, I think the only reason it's held at all is due to the operator simply feeling the need to hold it until he/she can actually see the target falling.

Sure, the longer you sustain a beam on a target the more damage it's going to inflict, but I'm pretty sure phasers have more than enough of an initial impact to be "pulsed" in quick succession, but since the weapon itself has no mechanism for regulating beam duration, instead being entirely operator dependent, we don't typically see it used as such. (There are some instances in the show when we see phasers being shot fairly rapidly if there are a lot of targets and few shooters, so there is canon support to this.)

5668945 Get on Skype.

5668981
Oh don't tell me there's some sort of shitstorm going on again. I was in the middle of something.

5668983 No, I need to talk to ye faget.

5668981
Besides, if we're already being silly and talking about it in MMORPG terms like "damage over time weapon," we may as well go all the way and point out that it's all about the DPS, yo. What a beam weapon does in continuous fire, an automatic projectile gun simply does in discrete packets. There is no functional difference.

5668986
...Just wait until I'm normally on.

5668990 Ye.

But I think he was referencing how in Trek we usually see very low rates of fire from phasers because they normally hold the beam on a single target for about 2sec before going to fire again.

5668991 It involves the future of muh fic though.

5666688
I have a questionable entry for this contest.

The Geth Plasma Rifle from Mass Effect.

It doesn't really shoot plasma, but a highly charged metal donut that shatters on impact. Electricity arcs between the shards turning the air at the impact zone into plasma.

I think it's an interesting take on the plasma gun concept.

5666688
Another good one is the Laserkraftwerk from Wolfenstein: The New Order.

It starts out as just a normal BFG laser cannon but with the upgrades it gets pretty interesting.

5669252
Might be for another episode

5672675
possibly