Transphasic Torpedoes - Page 4

DirectorTsaarx · #31 May 29th, 2001, 10:39 PM

I think the Temporal Shifter says something about "sending the ship back to the beginning of time". But it's been a while since I read the actual weapon descriptions (even though I usually use Temporal tech).

Anyway, it's probably better to create a new race tech based on chaos/order. Maybe call it the Melnibonean Empire? With Emperor Elric at the lead? We could add weapons that "call upon uncontrollable Chaos Gods to smite the enemies"...

zen. · #32 May 29th, 2001, 10:55 PM

heh heh...yah, play balance THAT!

I'm just thankful the Wave Motion Gun doesn't actually vaporize -everything- in its path!

Taqwus · #33 May 29th, 2001, 11:05 PM

I'm not sure I *want* my crews/master computers to periodically go beserk, wipe out their comrades-in-arms, and take off for a while...

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

rdouglass · #34 May 30th, 2001, 06:16 AM

quote:
Originally posted by DirectorTsaarx:
I think the Temporal Shifter says something about "sending the ship back to the beginning of time"...

I kinda' like to think of it as trying to send parts of the ship back in time. Imagine a 5 meter square random chunk of your ship being transported in time......

EDIT) ..aw gawd, I hate referring to Star Trek, but remember in STNG where the crew blended with the ship...

[This message has been edited by rdouglass (edited 30 May 2001).]

Magnum357 · #35 May 30th, 2001, 09:27 AM

JEEEEZZZZUSSSS!!!! Now I'm glad I don't watch Voyager where I live anymore. Sounds like to me that they are getting to "God-like" weapons in the show. Now they are getting stuff from the futue. "Oh, lookie here! Found a new fangeled weapon from the future that kicks butt!"... ooooooo how conveinent. Man, too bad Voyager wasn't participating during the dominion war! Would have turned those Gem Hedar Battleships into scrap heap with weapons like that! I'm sorry, but I have to agree with Sucide Junkie on this (LAMO!). I know one thing, I will not put a weapon this powerful in my mode unless it has some validity in science (yes, even some Star Trek Tech can be proved with a science) and this weapon must be balanced in the game. I think all weapons in SE4 should have a weakness (I just don't beleive in the "Ultimate" weapon).

As for the crusie missle idea going back in time say during WWII, I wouldn't be so sure of that. Unless the Cruise missles and a Tactical Nuke, I think some of the Crusiers and Battleships of the day could easily withstand a shot from a conventional cruise missle.

zen. · #36 May 30th, 2001, 03:12 PM

Maybe there should just be a 'Theoretical Weapons' Category that allows certain powerful weapons that have drawbacks or are unstable, reflecting their experimental/prototype nature.

Suicide Junkie · #37 May 30th, 2001, 04:07 PM

Well, if MM gets around to implementing my "explode when destroyed" ability idea, then your unstable experimental weapon could do 500 damage to your own ship if it gets nicked by a meson bLaster

zen. · #38 May 30th, 2001, 07:13 PM

Sure, that'll teach them to build easily accessible exhaust ports.

jc173 · #39 May 30th, 2001, 11:51 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Magnum357:

As for the crusie missle idea going back in time say during WWII, I wouldn't be so sure of that. Unless the Cruise missles and a Tactical Nuke, I think some of the Crusiers and Battleships of the day could easily withstand a shot from a conventional cruise missle.

I don't know, some of the Russian anti-ship cruise missiles pack some pretty impressive warheads. Although what would probably be more dangerous is a modern homing torpedo.

Baron Munchausen · #40 May 31st, 2001, 01:23 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Magnum357:
As for the crusie missle idea going back in time say during WWII, I wouldn't be so sure of that. Unless the Cruise missles and a Tactical Nuke, I think some of the Crusiers and Battleships of the day could easily withstand a shot from a conventional cruise missle.

The German V1 was essentially a "Cruise Missile" though a very crude one. It's guidance was based solely on timing. It as designed ('programmed' is hardly the right word for mechanical timing) to simply dive into what was supposed to be its target after flying a fixed amount of time. A variation on ballistics, really.

As for contemporay weapons and older ships, this is really an odd 'blind spot' in peoples thinking. Do you suppose that armor and armor-piercing weapons have stood still for 50 years? Why? Just because weapons are delivered by planes and missiles instead of huge guns? Contemporary weapons would make swiss cheese out of WW II era ships. Did you hear about the bomb they developed during the Gulf War to cut through 100+ feet of soil and concrete to destroy underground bunkers? If they can do that to soil/sand/concrete which is far harder to penetrate than steel, what do you think they could do to a big fat battleship?

That doesn't mean there isn't any armor on modern ships, either. A lot of WW II era munitions would pretty nearly bounce off of a Nimitz class carrier, I suspect. You'd better believe they are armored. It's just that the fashion of bragging about how many inches thick your armored belt is like they used to with battleships has been changed. Now they don't even mention armor, but they've probably got all sorts of layers of metal and kevlar-type protection. Sure, it's better to have good ecm and not be hit at all, but if you are hit you still want at least some armor.