General > Discussion
Alien propulsion won't work IRL
Jon_dArc:
--- Quote from: Nutter on May 30, 2012, 07:28:35 pm ---The pistol quip, I'm presuming is an assault on the 7.62x25mm Tokarev used since before the second world war.
--- End quote ---
Well, serves me right for not actually going back and rereading the description. Though rereading does once again point out how much time is spent extolling the armor-penetrating virtues of the starting human weapons which perform extremely badly against armor.
--- Quote ---The 4.73x33mm, got dumped when the German reunification effed some of the stuff up and the G11 rifle stopped being worthwhile.
--- End quote ---
This time it serves me right for not going and looking up the round (and I'm a G11 fan too, for shame). And someone's gone and made base damage and damage type the same for the AR and MG, meaning that sharing the same ammo isn't dumb anymore.
As substitutes, permit me to submit the bit where the UFOpedia claims that Small Hangars are a base entry point (different kind of dumb, granted), or the plasma blade being an "anti-armour weapon […] except designed to kill armoured infantry and small vehicles rather than tanks"—that is to say, a non-anti-armour weapon.
~J
Nutter:
Hey, armour-piercing bullets aren't used on tanks, either. Point of the name is that it's supposed to defeat armour. Doesn't necesairly mean armour in the tank sense. Though, I suspect a current tank wouldn't be able to resist that stuff. It's a shaped charge without all the bits that make using it fun. Namely, the rocket strapped to its back. Maybe R&D could fix that?
Honestly, the entire point of the blade is rather silly. Sticky bombs on tanks were bad enough during the forties. Trying those stunts on infantry...well, you're not getting out alive. But the aliens have reserves. We don't.
And I think the small hangars might've been planned as an entry point at some point in developement. Seems to me quite a lot of the text remained unmodified as developement changes happened.
Though, I think there might be some rethinking going on regarding bases as well and that's why nobody bothers with changing that. At least, I hope. Not a fan of the current stuff, to be honest.
And yes, their performance against armour is rather poor untill it's time for some friendly fire. I think it's more of an issue of the friggin aliens you spend most your time shooting at just having annoyingly resilient shit.
TrashMan:
Ya know, I think I might actually open a new thread with re-done descriptions of items and text.....to make everything better. Everyone is free to contribute ;D
headdie:
Something to chew on. I knocked together a little comparison of the rounds in blender and came out with this.
4.7 UFO:AI UFO:AI Assault Rifle and Machine Gun
5.56x45 NATO NATO standard Assault Rifle Round and also used by M249/FN MINIMI light Machinegun
12.7×99mm NATO Used in the M82 Barret Anti Material Rifle
20x102mm Cannon round used in M61 Vulcan, Anzio 20mm. Vulcan Anti Material Rifle and likely candidate for UFO:AI Sniper
Jon_dArc:
--- Quote from: Nutter on May 30, 2012, 08:40:44 pm ---Hey, armour-piercing bullets aren't used on tanks, either. Point of the name is that it's supposed to defeat armour. Doesn't necesairly mean armour in the tank sense.
--- End quote ---
Given the reference to the Panzerfaust (which I omitted in my post) in the text, I think it's clearly implying armour in the same sense as "armoured column"—that is to say, tanks, APCs, self-propelled artillery, etc.
~J
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version