[QUOTE=acds;34445901]You have 2 more directions to think about so yeah something that is symmetrical would be better. However if we consider the use of tactics and strategy, it would be better to have something that focuses firepower and armour in a single direction. Sure a sphere will be equally armoured and armed all around, however with tactics you could only keep one side facing the enemy, and gaining a huge advantage to armour and firepower compared to the sphere.
Also kinetic weaponry would work great, though not what we currently use (unless we have a air chamber where the kinetic energy is transferred to the projectile, then let out into space). Magnetic propulsion should work great, missiles as well as long as you manage to keep the propellant burning.
A pistol in space would be fearsome though, no air resistance so the bullets wouldn't sterilize themselves by the time they are in the wound.[/QUOTE]
The bigger issue with kinetic weapons in space is distance really. The fact they are cheap won't mean terribly much when you won't be able to hit any opponents. At all, ever. Since even an orbital installation will have maneuvering thrusters to dodge anything that can't track it.
So while a railgun or coilgun might be a good idea on earth at semi large distance, against targets that can't dodge (but are stationary or move on a stable trajectory) it will be pretty meh in space
Energy weapons are a tad better since they hit at light speed, but you have problems with dispersion when they are concerned. From that, you can assume that the weapon of choice as far as space warfare goes will be missiles. Probably including a maser, laser, xaser or whatever other beam gun of choice, that get's set off by the charge.
Since an exposive charge is also pretty useless in space without atmosphere.
[QUOTE=Robber;34447987]Exactly. "Soft scifi" like Star Wars is future fantasy while LotR is medieval fantasy and Harry Potter is current day fantasy.
And to all those saying that realistic scifi would suck. In my experience I enjoyed more realistic scifi a lot more. Take Battle LA for instance. If it wasn't just infantry combat action scenes for 90 minutes but instead the aliens were far more powerful (as one would expect from aliens that can travel light years and build robot soldiers) and the movie focused more on their motivations and technologies it might not have sucked as hard.[/QUOTE]
The issue with Battle LA was, just like skyline, that it only claimed the superiority of the aliens. It didn't show it terribly well. Sure an alien grunt was a bit better than a human grunt, but as far as their tech was concerned we didn't see much of it on screen against compareable human tech. And most of the alien tech we saw, acted very clunky.
[QUOTE=TomZa;34448330]I've never seen that much dumbs on one OP[/QUOTE]
If OP doesn't get perma'd in a month, someone should give that to him as a title.
There is a reason that it is called Science [b]Fiction[/b].
If we were to base these narratives solely upon real scientific discoveries, then they would be boring as fuck. "Beam me up Scotty - oh wait, you can't, because that technology doesn't exist and it would also result in the death of my current conciousness, not to mention the risks involved and the almost certain impossibility of fully replicating my body within a matter of seconds. Sorry about that."
[QUOTE=Arachnidus;34440329]As much as I love Halo...it's not even remotely as realistic as you're saying, OP. The designs look realistic because they're based on modern day ones. They're supposed to evoke feelings of modern humanity fighting an alien foe, so that the player can sympathize. Halo still falls into many a plot hole; artificial gravity, time travel, slipspace, etc. And then there's the whole 10k-diameter ring world/superweapon.
[editline]28th January 2012[/editline]
And don't get me started on the simple mechanics of MJOLNIR armor, the [I]Pillar of Autumn's[/I] liftoff at the end of Reach, and a bunch of different things about Covenant technology.[/QUOTE]
Huh, I forgot about the Covenant. Plasma weapons are some of the most implausible weapons around.
For fucks sake guys we fucking get why its called science fiction stop reposting it constantly and read the fucking thread first
[QUOTE=Death_God;34449513]For fucks sake guys we fucking get why its called science fiction stop reposting it constantly and read the fucking thread first[/QUOTE]
And ironically, the people who keep bringing it up, is wrong, pretty much everything in the entire OP is Science Fantasy, not pure Sci Fi.
op, I think you should go outside.
[QUOTE=Jasun;34448897]There is a reason that it is called Science [b]Fiction[/b].
If we were to base these narratives solely upon real scientific discoveries, then they would be boring as fuck. "Beam me up Scotty - oh wait, you can't, because that technology doesn't exist and it would also result in the death of my current conciousness, not to mention the risks involved and the almost certain impossibility of fully replicating my body within a matter of seconds. Sorry about that."[/QUOTE]
It's not entirely impossible. It doesn't violate any laws of nature. But there is no excuse for unrealistic space ship designs. There is no benefit to them except that they look "cool". I'd take Avatar's or 2001's space ships over the X-wing any day. Same goes for technologically impaired/retarded aliens or non-robot soldiers. It might make it a bit harder to write, but the end result will most certainly be better.
Have you ever watched Gattaca, AI or 2001? They are realistic and are some of the best scifi films in existence.
You brought up the worst points ever.
"HELLOOOOO??? WHERE'S THE PROPER GRAVITY?!?"
"THEY [B]ALL[/B] SPEAK ENGLISH?!? WHAT???"
Or in other words; "THIS ISN'T POSSIBLE IRL!!!"
Are you 12?
[QUOTE=Robber;34449558]It's not entirely impossible. It doesn't violate any laws of nature. But there is no excuse for unrealistic space ship designs. There is no benefit to them except that they look "cool". I'd take Avatar's or 2001's space ships over the X-wing any day. Same goes for technologically impaired/retarded aliens or non-robot soldiers. It might make it a bit harder to write, but the end result will most certainly be better.
Have you ever watched Gattaca, AI or 2001? They are realistic and are some of the best scifi films in existence.[/QUOTE]
Well, in movies there is an excuse, aesthetic preferences, and if a ship is meant to go into atmosphere, having a slightly aerodynamic design is needed, but if its not, well then, it can be any shape you want or need.
Besides, since humanity is used to constructing naval vessels, its not suprising that space faring vessels may take a similar form. The Space shuttle is only the shape it is because at our current levels, its whats needed.
The one thing that bothers me are explosions. Explosions show only dust and a fucking shockwave. Not some fancy fireball.
I always wondered why no one ever bothered to leave the USS Enterprise a sitting duck by blasting the thin engine supports in Star Trek.
[QUOTE=toastman;34449651]The one thing that bothers me are explosions. Explosions show only dust and a fucking shockwave. Not some fancy fireball.[/QUOTE]
Thats more really to sci fantasy shows being a visual medium than bad science fantasy.
[QUOTE=Stonecycle;34449679]I always wondered why no one ever bothered to leave the USS Enterprise a sitting duck by blasting the thin engine supports in Star Trek.[/QUOTE]
I heard that the idea was to keep the warp cores as far from the main ship as possible. It's still kind of silly though.
There's a reason that we hear aliens all speaking English - Universal translators.
And with the ship design, does hull geometry matter all that much when you're in space, where aerodynamics don't matter and you're propelled by faster than light space travel?
Frankly, Aliens all speaking English i can live with, because its a form of entertainment, and its much easier just hearing it than it is having it subbed.
if you even consider writing a piece of media that begins with "top 10 fails" you are automatically declared artistically vacant and are banned from creating anything ever again.
Hey fuck you op you raggety ass motherfucker, you come into my house and insult the deadalus and the p90 and then expect sympathy from me!?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH
No wait was he serious?
...
HPHPHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
I find it really funny that he would say this
[img]http://www.bungie.net/images/Games/Reach/intel/weapons/ar.png[/img]
is realistic.
I mean, just look at it. Guns have never, nor will they ever, look like that for a reason.
Pointless waste of metal to make something as bulky, ugly and as hard to use as possible.
So Stargate, Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, and Star Wars are all shit but Halo is amazing?
What is the point of this thread?
[QUOTE=I am Error;34450274]HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH
No wait was he serious?
...
HPHPHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
I find it really funny that he would say this
[img]http://www.bungie.net/images/Games/Reach/intel/weapons/ar.png[/img]
is realistic.
I mean, just look at it. Guns have never, nor will they ever, look like that for a reason.
Pointless waste of metal to make something as bulky, ugly and as hard to use as possible.[/QUOTE]
Why not ? Bullpup design makes the weapon lighter and more compact. Also, where do you see waste of metal ? The top compartment holds the electronics for the scope, the back compartment holds the other electronic. No waste anywhere.
I legitimately didn't see that coming. All this stuff about Science Fiction pulling all sorts of bullshit and then sudden praise over the Halo universe.
Well played, OP.
[QUOTE=I am Error;34450274]HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH
No wait was he serious?
...
HPHPHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
I find it really funny that he would say this
[img]http://www.bungie.net/images/Games/Reach/intel/weapons/ar.png[/img]
is realistic.
I mean, just look at it. Guns have never, nor will they ever, look like that for a reason.
Pointless waste of metal to make something as bulky, ugly and as hard to use as possible.[/QUOTE]
Are you trying to suggest that all those NATO guns designed during the Cold War never actually happened?
Because the Halo AR is based off of Cold War era bullpup designs, specifically the FN2000 IIRC
See?
This (Real Life):
[IMG]http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/assault/as41/fn_f2000_1.jpg[/IMG]
To this (Halo):
[IMG]http://media.moddb.com/images/downloads/1/10/9991/rifle.jpg[/IMG]
Ermm, let me point this out once more - IT'S. NOT. REAL
[IMG]http://images.wikia.com/firefly/images/1/11/Firefly_class_ship.jpg[/IMG]
Best ship of all ships.
What did I just read?
And why is OP so deeply knowledgeable on worthless subjects?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
