New Tech

[Syron Ward]

I'm pretty sure it's policy that you have to discuss any 'radical' new ideas with your fellow rpers before building/executing the plans and/or units. Well, this is them. Death Fleet is researching a new kind of laser that will be used as field artillery, and perhaps on capital ships. It takes the basic energy of a Disruptor rifle, DXR-6, and utilizes it as a heavy laser. Yes or no, please. And remember, no using OOC info IC. :D If this laser has already been researched, boy would I feel stupid.

[Sanis Prent]

all greek to me, Herr Goeth

[Darth Viscera]

How on earth could the basic energy of a rifle be utilized in a heavy laser, Herr Sturmbannführer?

[Alpha]

With converters?

[Syron Ward]

How on earth could the basic energy of a rifle be utilized in a heavy laser, Herr Sturmbannführer?

Well, like any turbolaser. The Disruptor rifle is like a blaster rifle, except that it's XCiter is several times the regular size, and produces a much greater volume of blaster gas. The series of galven cylinders tightly focus the beam, concentrating the blast's high-energy particles. That's how Turbolasers work, except everything is larger so the bolts can do the damage that they do. However, the range and rate of fire for the Disruptor Rifle is extremely limited, so it does have it's drawbacks. I do believe it is illegal in the New Republic, and the Empire was supposed to discourage their use.

All one would need to do would be to create a turbolaser unit and modify it, almost to the degree it is an entirely different design, and create a new one. This would, of course, have it's limitations as well. Slow rate of fire, prone to overheating, limited range. That's why there's R&D.

Edit~ And I think you mean Sturmkämpferführer, Visc. :D

[Darth Viscera]

In SW terms, translated from Star Wars to an SS order of battle, that would be Unterscharführer, not Sturmkämpferführer, which isn't even a rank. Amon Goeth was a Sturmbannführer.

Sturmbannführer=SS Major
Unterscharführer=SS Senior Corporal
Sturmkämpferführer=my (sketchy) translation is "Stormtrooper Leader", not found in the Third Reich's order of battle.

[Sanis Prent]

Silly me, and I thought that a disruptor was a phased energy weapon that relied on anti-phase subatomic particles such as antiprotons to unzip conventional matter. But now they're apparently just like turbolasers :lol

[Syron Ward]

Oh, hm. My mistake. Anyway, enough bigotry. Any objections?

[Darth Viscera]

I'm right and you're wrong! :p

[Sanis Prent]

I object :) there are no disruptors in SW

[Syron Ward]

You are mistaken there, Sanis. There are Disruptors in SW. Tenloss makes 'em. At Star's End an assassign tried to kill Solo with a Disruptor pistol, the DX-2, but died because of the slow rate of fire. They're in the SW Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology. Merr-Sonn makes it too. Disruptors are in Star Wars.


Silly me, and I thought that a disruptor was a phased energy weapon that relied on anti-phase subatomic particles such as antiprotons to unzip conventional matter. But now they're apparently just like turbolasers

The Disruptors in Star Wars rely more on brute force than technology. You're probably referring to the one in Star Trek.

[Dalethria Mal Pannis]

Yeah, he is right...

The disrupter is able to break down objects, posibly people, into ash. Now of course this would be against the rules in no killing player characters that don't wish to die.

Now putting this technology into a weapon that can disentagrate hulls of ships... would hold too high of an advantage against other players.

Tis my opinion.

[Andraq Novkar]

The Merr-Sonn MSD-32 disruptor tears apart objects at the molecular level. These devices are designed for maximum firepower per shot, and can disintegrate 0.5m³ of durasteel with a single blast (remember that unshielded TIE fighter durasteel armor can easily withstand the tremendous heat of atmospheric re-entry). These weapons are heavily restricted, and only high-ranking officers are permitted to carry them because of the inhumane levels of pain they can induce

some of the info I have on Disruptors....Merr-Sonn Produces alot of weapons, thermal detonators, etc.

Your research would have to be lengthy, you would have to find something that big to harness a blast that fast, and that much.

[Syron Ward]

Thank you, Dale. :)

I'm not going to address the notion on it being illegal, because any weapon to kill others would be made illegal then. You'd have to go by the rules, killing puppets or whatnot. Why look, I addressed it.

Anyway...


Now putting this technology into a weapon that can disentagrate hulls of ships... would hold too high of an advantage against other players.

Can't the same be said for the Force? There are more force-adept people in these forums than non-forcers. It'd be a strategic advantage and sometimes disadvantage on the battlefield, like cloaking.

Yes, I completely agree, Andraq. DF will role-play it out if need be.

[Andraq Novkar]

Yes, I can imagine it would be a big roleplay. That is if that it is approved and no one minds it that much.

[Dalethria Mal Pannis]

Yes, but cloaking is an advantage to not be seen. Once that person is ready for battle, they appear and then so the fighting begins be it a ship or a person. It isn't an instant kill.

Being able to destroy something in one hit is too much IMO be it hand held or on a ship.

On a side not, Force users or not ... there are ways to defeat them without a weapon such as this. And I don't mean those rat creatures either =P

[Sanis Prent]

Yeah, no one-kill wonders. Tis why we banned superlasers in the first place.

[Syron Ward]

:lol "rat creatures"

The canon wouldn't be able to make an instant kill. It would have to penetrate shields, and then the hull. This would take a long time, considering the recharge rate of regular DXR-6s. During this time, many things could happen. It would have it's disadvantages Dale. A shrewd leader could exploit them.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Combining a Distruptor with a blaster?!?

Sorry, it makes no sense to me at all.

To be honest, I'm becoming more and more against new tech, because it's just going too far and not in the spirit of Roleplay. Like the latest round of ship designs. It's really starting to get out of hand and some restraint should be shown.

[Syron Ward]

Ah, Disruptors are just heavily modified blasters, DT. Just another step in the evolution of warfare. It'd be upgrading a disruptor - a modifed blaster - to a level in which it could compete with turbolasers.

[Dalethria Mal Pannis]

Disruptors can go through personal shields, so if somehow you could manage to figure out how it would make sense to put a laster and a disruptor together, it could go through the force field.

Sense of fair play rule is in jeopardy here :)

[Sanis Prent]

If you want a tech upgrade, make a longer lasting light bulb, but a weapon of that capability is going against common sense and fair play, and it won't be supported.

[Syron Ward]

What, strategic advancement is not allowed here? Someone can't have an advantage over another?

[Dalethria Mal Pannis]

No, strategic advancement is allowed as long as it doesn't involve being able to rip through force fields, hulls, armor and well.. a body :)

[Marcus Telcontar]

A blaster competing with a turbolaser?!?!


:huh

[Syron Ward]

That's any turbolaser. That's any lightsaber. They can easily destroy and kill anything as much as a Disruptor can. Just by different means.

[Andraq Novkar]

It's what a hand- held disruptor can do also.

(not meaning to be mean just trying to see something)

Since Darth Vader's armor is made out of Durasteel. If I take a shot at him with a disruptor that can rip through it. I cant?

Because it just basically makes Darth Vader a simpleton?

[Sanis Prent]

Disruptors would negate shielding, negate armor, and essentially become everything that a superlaser is, in a compact form. It vastly intensifies that kill factor, without a countercheck. So no, it won't be allowed.

We don't allow time machines, transporters, and sun crushers either, so despite the possibility to exist, its not guaranteed.

[Syron Ward]

He would probably have taken the rifle or pistol before you could've shot it. There are many things that could've happened, but yes. If Vader was on the floor, unconcious, you could shoot him with a Disruptor and he'd most likely die.

[Andraq Novkar]

To my knowledge I dont believe that lots of people in the SW universe used a bunch of Disruptors.

Also every weapon has its weakness.

[Andraq Novkar]

(jsut adding onto a reply to Syron)

Ah yes, but since a person doesnt use the force you can have an exponential amount of Ysalamiri.

Which would totally screw Vader over, he would be a walking tin-can. Slow as hell, and basically defenseless.

Possiblities are unbeleivable

Which brings me to another Subject. Are Ysalamiri Allowed?

[Sanis Prent]

Yes, but they have drawbacks, such as limited range, can be killed, and are extremely unwieldy and cumbersome.

In regards to disruptors, unless there's some kind of remarkable change to the formula, my decision on them will stand as not being allowed.

[Syron Ward]

Yes, Andraq. Disruptors would be vulnerable to everything a blaster is, except it also has a longer recharge rate, is prone to overheating, and has a vastly limited range.

They wouldn't negate armor. It'd take several volleys from a Disruptor Turbo-Canon(whatever we'll call it if we ever get permision) to punch through a capital ships' armor. I admit it'd take less time than a turbolaser, but that's why it's a technological advancement.

[Sumor Rayial]

On the topic of this disruptor. I'm pretty much against it. If it lacked the ability to go through sheilds it would be somewhat reasonable to me because of the long recharge rate, but the way they are, no.

And DT:


I'm becoming more and more against new tech, because it's just going too far and not in the spirit of Roleplay. Like the latest round of ship designs. It's really starting to get out of hand and some restraint should be shown.

Not really sure if you are addressing this to any specific design or designs, or to any one group. TSE and now the Conclave only really have what I consider one big ship and that's the Apoc SD's, and there is and only will be two of them as long as I have the designs in my possession.

If there are other designs of ours that you are somewhat dismayed at I would like it if you could IM me if possible about them. Would help me identify problem areas and eliviate them in new designs.

Oh and one other thing. Not all designs that are R&Ded actually make it to production.

[Syron Ward]

Ah, I see now. Thank you Sums for pointing that out. Sanis, is your problem with the shields-pass through? If it is, I am willing to eliminate it.

[Andraq Novkar]

I see...

I would have liked to have seen this played out, but such is the way the world turns.

Syron, IM me, I would like to discuss some ideas about fleet.

SN- Andraq Novkar

[Sanis Prent]

Yes, very much against complete immunity to both shielding and armor, and this goes on a ship scale as well as personal scale.

[Syron Ward]

How about this then:

*The blast will have the same effect against shielding that regular turbolasers have.

*The blast will have to destroy armor the same as turbolasers, just at 2x faster rate. ie: If a turbolaser takes 10 seconsd to punch through armor, it would only take the Disruptor Laser 5. Half the time.

*The Disruptor Laser unit on the ship will have to recharge 10 seconds before it can fire again(turbolasers are only 2 seconds)

*The blast will only have 2/3rds the range of a regular turbolaser

Any objections or other preferences?

[Sanis Prent]

So why not use heavy turbolasers, save yourself the range penalty and the R&D time.

[Syron Ward]

Oh, god I'm stupid. Scratch all that except the recharge rate. So:

*The blast will have the same effect against shielding that regular heavy turbolasers have.

*The blast will have to destroy armor the same as heavy turbolasers, just at 2x faster rate. ie: If a heavy turbolaser takes 10 seconds to punch through armor, it would only take the Disruptor Laser 5. Half the time.

*The Disruptor Laser unit on the ship will have to recharge 15 seconds before it can fire again(turbolasers are only 2 seconds)

*The blast will only have 1/2 the range of a regular heavy turbolaser

Sorry. That was my mistake. |I Hope that doesn't change your mind. I reset some of the limits.

[Sanis Prent]

double-heavy turbo then...or a quad? Same argument applies.

Or do you just want to call it a disruptor for differences sake?

[Neros Longstreet]

OOC: This is Syron

:) Yes, it does use a different ah... blast mechanism, so it'll be a D-Canon or something. So Sanis, you have no objections now?

[Anbira Hicchoru]

I guess so then

[Khendon Sevon]

edit: this was all already stated-bah, I have to change what I was going to say now.

The weapon wouldn't be the best against smaller/faster targets, but it might be a great weapon for a volley at point-blank. It's still rather a limiting weapon.

Due to its limitations, it's not something I'd really research, but I see no fault in design which would make it so that it's not allowed; we still have shields and armor to protect us.