Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dirst]

What do you think of shields? With railguns and etc, normal cover isn't half as effective. So a large shield mounted on one arm could be effective, right?

The rules for cover have not really changed.  If you are hiding behind something that can't stop what is being shot at you, it is "soft cover" and still has its uses so long as it obscures aiming.

An actual shield would need to have a significant energy advantage over what it defends against, either being more efficient or only snapping on when needed.

[Helgoland]

Nothing a chemist could synthetize in a lab would reach that level of elegant lethality.

Au contraire.

[Parsely]

What do you think of shields? With railguns and etc, normal cover isn't half as effective. So a large shield mounted on one arm could be effective, right?

Hell no. Anticipating projectiles traveling faster than bullets is impossible. There's a reason why soldiers just armor their vital areas instead of holding shields made of kevlar and that's because you don't know you're being shot at until the bullet hits you or flies past you. And if this isn't a person we're talking about but some kind of tank, why even have a shield? Just give it more armor and eliminate the complexity of some kind of waldo, slaved to a sensor suite, holding a metal shield. Also, if "normal" cover can't save you from this purported railgun, it begs the question: why would a shield do any better? And if the shield IS strong enough to deflect a railgun round and light enough to heft on one armor, why aren't you just wearing a suit made out of whatever the shield is made of?

[Dirst]

What do you think of shields? With railguns and etc, normal cover isn't half as effective. So a large shield mounted on one arm could be effective, right?

Hell no. Anticipating projectiles traveling faster than bullets is impossible. There's a reason why soldiers just armor their vital areas instead of holding shields made of kevlar and that's because you don't know you're being shot at until the bullet hits you or flies past you. And if this isn't a person we're talking about but some kind of tank, why even have a shield? Just give it more armor and eliminate the complexity of some kind of waldo, slaved to a sensor suite, holding a metal shield. Also, if "normal" cover can't save you from this purported railgun, it begs the question: why would a shield do any better? And if the shield IS strong enough to deflect a railgun round and light enough to heft on one armor, why aren't you just wearing a suit made out of whatever the shield is made of?

You're quoting the wrong person, but I agree with what you're saying.

[Tack]

Re: Pistols- I like the idea of the sci-fi sidearm straddling the line between weapon of last resort and multitool.
Such as a laser with a variable setting, etc- so that it can be used for anything from cauterization to cutting bulkheads, and, in a pinch, shooting things.

I think Dead Space's "pistol" is the closest I've seen that idea get.

[Dirst]

Re: Pistols- I like the idea of the sci-fi sidearm straddling the line between weapon of last resort and multitool.
Such as a laser with a variable setting, etc- so that it can be used for anything from cauterization to cutting bulkheads, and, in a pinch, shooting things.

I think Dead Space's "pistol" is the closest I've seen that idea get.

Depending on the tech ambiance, it could be a multitool that just happens to have a mode or two that cause harm.
"It's a sonic screwdriver.  Haven't you ever had to put up a lot of cabinets?"

[Rolepgeek]

What do you think of shields? With railguns and etc, normal cover isn't half as effective. So a large shield mounted on one arm could be effective, right?

Hell no. Anticipating projectiles traveling faster than bullets is impossible. There's a reason why soldiers just armor their vital areas instead of holding shields made of kevlar and that's because you don't know you're being shot at until the bullet hits you or flies past you. And if this isn't a person we're talking about but some kind of tank, why even have a shield? Just give it more armor and eliminate the complexity of some kind of waldo, slaved to a sensor suite, holding a metal shield. Also, if "normal" cover can't save you from this purported railgun, it begs the question: why would a shield do any better? And if the shield IS strong enough to deflect a railgun round and light enough to heft on one armor, why aren't you just wearing a suit made out of whatever the shield is made of?

Well, why didn't knights in ye olden times just wear two to three inches of oak over their bodies?

A shield is concentrated armor you can face where you need it to face. Especially with the advent of AI for personal soldier use which can react and track incoming projectiles much more quickly, or at least say 'oh yeah there's a dude to your right', shields could find a use. Other reasons for not having a shield certainly exist, such as it blocking vision, slowing you down when cover would typically be a lot more effective means of protection (improved armor means the cover just needs to bleed off enough energy so it doesn't penetrate), but 'unable to actually protect you' isn't necessarily one of them. It's why it's a big shield; you can't bring it up to block in time, necessarily, but if you're already in combat and have it facing where they're shooting from, and especially if your gun has it's own camera system it can feed into your helmet so you can fire, then it's a much cheaper way of having a good chunk of armor without gaps in it as there would have to be around your joints, that you can pick up or set down as needed, and can direct to the direction it's needed most(admittedly, armoring your front and just turning towards the enemy would also function like this, but you get the idea).

Though, really, true deflection is unlikely. Probably end up kinda like that cover; might twist the projectile's path a bit, bleed off some energy, so it doesn't fully penetrate your armor, but other than that...I mean, a railgun is unlikely to be a basic infantry weapon, simply because of maintenance costs in comparison to coilguns and the like, but still.

I still like idea of melee combat becoming a thing with boarding actions and cramped spaces in ships, and the whole 'projectiles in pressurized environment=bad' thing. Unlikely to actually occur, though. Would require hefty defenses that outstrip offense significantly.

Speaking of which, what do you guys think actual laser 'rifles' would look like? Oversized hand mirrors?

[Tack]

A large shield mounted on one arm could be effective, right?

Hell no.

To be fair, shields were often used to stop arrows, and are still used today by riot squads.
However, the biggest gripe about them isn't the reflex time but just the fact that they aren't bulletproof.
If there were to be a light, laser/bulletproof shield, then I'd use it. It's an extra 30% of your body which is covered, especially when breaching or holding an area.

[Parsely]

Well, why didn't knights in ye olden times just wear two to three inches of oak over their bodies?

I still like idea of melee combat becoming a thing with boarding actions and cramped spaces in ships, and the whole 'projectiles in pressurized environment=bad' thing. Unlikely to actually occur, though. Would require hefty defenses that outstrip offense significantly.

Speaking of which, what do you guys think actual laser 'rifles' would look like? Oversized hand mirrors?

Because if you wanted the same amount of protection as metal armor, the suit would be bulky as all get out and be way way heavier. Wooden shields (reinforced with metal) were a thing because they were really easy and cheap to make. Are you saying that this hypothetical shield that can protect you from railgun rounds is to plate armor as plate armor is to a wooden shield? What's it made out of then?

In Legend of the Galactic Heroes you get exactly that. The marines have ceramic armor that is sort of immune to lasers and gunfire (the joints are vulnerable and you occasionally see them die from shots to the neck), so they fight using axes that can crack the armor. There's also zephyr particles but that's such a dumb excuse that I mostly ignore it.

To be fair, shields were often used to stop arrows, and are still used today by riot squads.

If there were to be a light, laser/bulletproof shield, then I'd use it. It's an extra 30% of your body which is covered, especially when breaching or holding an area.

Yeah arrows, rocks, and glass bottles are not bullets.

Maybe in some very limited circumstances. Infantry shields just aren't really practical on a modern battlefield, especially when you consider what you're sacrificing. You definitely can't use an assault rifle while holding a shield.

[Rolepgeek]

We have ERA on our tanks. Shields seem like a great place to mount that shit. Shields back in the day were often good for just a battle; maybe these would be too. Plus all the other stuff I mentioned.

The real issue with melee weapons is that the question always become 'why not put that in a cannon so you can use it from a distance?' which is only really resolved in favor of melee if the weapons are expensive enough that it's not feasible, and have capabilities that are far enough above the current ranged weapons that they become necessary.

[Parsely]

The real issue with melee weapons is that the question always become 'why not put that in a cannon so you can use it from a distance?' which is only really resolved in favor of melee if the weapons are expensive enough that it's not feasible, and have capabilities that are far enough above the current ranged weapons that they become necessary.

I mean the only real option is very large rifles which are not the best weapons for fighting in close quarters. No doubt in open combat on planets soldiers wearing that armor are easily cheesed by autocannons and high power lasers.

[Rolepgeek]

Oh, I see what you meant now. Interesting.

[Amperzand]

Re: Pistols- I like the idea of the sci-fi sidearm straddling the line between weapon of last resort and multitool.
Such as a laser with a variable setting, etc- so that it can be used for anything from cauterization to cutting bulkheads, and, in a pinch, shooting things.

I think Dead Space's "pistol" is the closest I've seen that idea get.

Depending on the tech ambiance, it could be a multitool that just happens to have a mode or two that cause harm.
"It's a sonic screwdriver.  Haven't you ever had to put up a lot of cabinets?"

Admittedly, this would be for an active military, so it'd be rather more deliberate than that, but yes, exactly.

[Amperzand]

Also, grenades. To avoid projectiles and enhance usefulness in close quarters, use thermobarics.

Perhaps some kind of chemical-propellant harpoon/speargun? Use fancy runic blade-thingies, with enhanced range capabilities and the possibility of reuse.

[Sheb]

Nothing a chemist could synthetize in a lab would reach that level of elegant lethality.

Au contraire.

I stand corrected. I wonder what's the addressing mechanism. Wow, that's nasty.