UFO:Alien Invasion
General => Discussion => Topic started by: Adrian Magnus on June 23, 2007, 11:51:33 am
-
I commend the magnificent effort and energy put into the game by all the people involved in making UFO:AI. I love the game you guys have created. It may be incomplete, it may not yet even have all the features of the original, but down the road it's going, it stands to surpass UFO:EU in many regards. To think that you are doing this all during your free time for no monetary recompense is something amazing and worthy of praise.
Winter, in particular, stands out. In my opinion, his creative vision of trying to infuse realism in the game and keeping things down to Earth makes the game so much better. It feels more like I'm really in charge of an anti-alien fighting force, fighting a real desperate battle against a true alien threat.
I wish I could invite the lot of you for a drink, you deserve it. :D
Okay, now that I'm done saying how awesome I think you guys are, it is time for the suggestions and criticisms. I try to be polite, but please forgive me if I come-off as unnecessarily scathing, I do that on occasion. Also, I understand the game is incomplete. When I mention something that's missing, I mean it's not in the game or in the TODO lists. Note that the following are in no particular order, I just wrote them down as they came to mind.
1. The future scenario is very pie in the sky. It's basically, "yay world peace!". It really doesn't detract from the setting at all, in my opinion, but it's not exactly realistic. In particular because it completely ignores the problems that will be raised over the next century by peak oil (petroleum extraction stops going up, prices shoot through the roof, hilarity ensues), and global warming (it's happening, there's still debate over whether it's humanity's fault, but it's happening). But whatever, it's really not that big of a deal.
2. I don't like that the world has been united into six different countries. That ignores a number of geo-political realities on a large scale. I think it really is best if you just go back to the old "many sponsor nations" thing of the old game. You could probably have the European Union and US+Mexico (removes 60% of illegal immigrants by turning them into US citizens!) as new things. Along with Russia re-united with a few of their old Soviet holdings (Belarus, Kazakhstan, part of Ukraine, others). Africa, Middle-East, and Asia are never going to be united entities, at the very least not within a century. South America and Ocenia, eh maybe. It's more serious than #1 but, again, not that big of a deal.
3. Okay, this storyline problem is very important. I'm finding it extremely inconsistent that an over attack on Mumbai, followed by overt attacks on major population centres, is followed by only covert activity on the part of the aliens as well as a covert human response. "Vague statements to ease the populace" isn't going to fly, the people are going to demand action, and they're going to demand high-profile action. I think the original's approach of a covert alien incursion being met by a covert human response is both more consistent, and more realistic.
4. Plasma weapons. You guys did a good effort at trying to make the concept work, but... it doesn't. Plasma weapons are something that sounds cool and is a staple of science fiction all over, but it's also one of the most unrealistic weapons ever. While your particular version looked more plausible than the others, I decided to ask the guys at StarDestroyer.net for their opinion (they're good about that sort of thing). The results are not good. (http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=109988) The most important posts are the first two in the first page, and the first two in the second page.
(BTW - don't pay attention to anything brianeyci says)
Now, I'm not suggesting that you change it this late in the development cycle. I think your plasma weapons are really cool. I just thought you guys should know they're not as realistic as you seem to believe they are.
5. The plasma blade is actually realistic, since it's basically a glorified blow-torch. However, I take issue with some of its mechanism. The foam, it's exceedingly complicated and adds several points of failure to the whole thing. It's would be much better to change that to a magnetic field, as plasma usually has an charge. The magnetic field turns-on when the weapon is activated, no need for proximity detectors. Also you don't have to worry about a magnetic field not achieving a proper seal. One of the general principles in designing stuff is KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid), and a magnetic field is far simpler than a system for deploying magical ultra-hardening paste.
6. I'm confused regarding the shotgun. The in-game UFOpedia suggests both slugs and flechettes cause "blast" type damage. The online wiki suggests they both cause "normal" type damage. Which is it? In any case it should be slugs cause normal and flechettes cause blast, no?
7. I can get head-shots halfway across the map with the sniper rifle while the user is standing-up. I'm not sure if this can be implemented, but the way it should be is sniper rifle is accurate only when used while crouching. Those things tend to be heavier than assault rifles and quite unwieldy. There's a reason why real life snipers usually lie down on the ground, and it's not just to make themselves less visible.
8. Incendiary weapons don't do the "area denial" thing described in the UFOpedia. I suppose it hasn't been implemented yet, which is understandable, but I'm not seeing it in the TODO lists. That's a bit disappointing.
9. The Aliens could use their own rocket-laucher or grenade-launcher equivalent. They had one in the original game, IIRC, it fired guided missiles. The usefulness of non line-of-sight weapons would presumably not be lost on the aliens, so I would expect them to have something to compensate their other two heavy weapons.
10. There seems to be a problem with the hospital system. I can't heal more than five soldiers at a time. I built three bases, each with its own hospital. I should be able to heal five soldiers per base, right? Well, I can heal no more than five soldiers globally.
11. There's a certain lack of difficulty in the later missions, when one have advanced weapons a plenty. I expect this is partly because you haven't implemented some of the more dangerous adversaries yet, but I'd also like to recommend that missions later in the game have you facing larger alien forces. The most I've seen is eight.
12. Regarding nanocomposite armour. Why is it that the males get this massive chest-plate and the girls get a puny little thing? It's supposed to be armour not a fashion statement, there's no reason whatsoever why the girl's version should show-off their boobs. By all rights it should be a solid plate like the dudes have, and one of equal thickness. The normal body armour doesn't have this problem, sure you can see that the females are females but it doesn't hug their breasts like the newer one does.
EDIT - This isn't related to the game itself, but the wiki's design is just terrible. I should not have to click on a link that takes me to a separate page to read just a paragraph or two. Large pages covering a broad topic is much easier nd efficient than having each and every sub-division have its own page. The worst offenders are the "Damage Type" and "Skill" pages. You could easily put everything that those links lead to in the page itself.
-
Thanks a lot for your comments, Adrian. I'll try and respond point by point.
1. The future scenario is very pie in the sky. It's basically, "yay world peace!". It really doesn't detract from the setting at all, in my opinion, but it's not exactly realistic. In particular because it completely ignores the problems that will be raised over the next century by peak oil (petroleum extraction stops going up, prices shoot through the roof, hilarity ensues), and global warming (it's happening, there's still debate over whether it's humanity's fault, but it's happening). But whatever, it's really not that big of a deal.
Since I first joined the project, I haven't been a fan of the 'world peace' premise, but it was needed to stop the rest of the backstory from getting over-complicated. I think we handled it in the most realistic way possible. Rising standards of living and enhanced personal freedoms, as well as a touch of ruthless oppression here and there.
We certainly have plans that, during the course of the game, the peace will fall apart in places.
2. I don't like that the world has been united into six different countries. That ignores a number of geo-political realities on a large scale. I think it really is best if you just go back to the old "many sponsor nations" thing of the old game. You could probably have the European Union and US+Mexico (removes 60% of illegal immigrants by turning them into US citizens!) as new things. Along with Russia re-united with a few of their old Soviet holdings (Belarus, Kazakhstan, part of Ukraine, others). Africa, Middle-East, and Asia are never going to be united entities, at the very least not within a century. South America and Ocenia, eh maybe. It's more serious than #1 but, again, not that big of a deal.
Eight, not six. ;)
3. Okay, this storyline problem is very important. I'm finding it extremely inconsistent that an over attack on Mumbai, followed by overt attacks on major population centres, is followed by only covert activity on the part of the aliens as well as a covert human response. "Vague statements to ease the populace" isn't going to fly, the people are going to demand action, and they're going to demand high-profile action. I think the original's approach of a covert alien incursion being met by a covert human response is both more consistent, and more realistic.
You have a point here, and we may change that angle at some point. Not the attacks on Mumbai, but a big military action presented as a smokescreen for PHALANX.
4. Plasma weapons. You guys did a good effort at trying to make the concept work, but... it doesn't. Plasma weapons are something that sounds cool and is a staple of science fiction all over, but it's also one of the most unrealistic weapons ever. While your particular version looked more plausible than the others, I decided to ask the guys at StarDestroyer.net for their opinion (they're good about that sort of thing). The results are not good. (http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=109988) The most important posts are the first two in the first page, and the first two in the second page.
(BTW - don't pay attention to anything brianeyci says)
Now, I'm not suggesting that you change it this late in the development cycle. I think your plasma weapons are really cool. I just thought you guys should know they're not as realistic as you seem to believe they are.
I just work with the stuff I'm given, and I'm no physicist. I've registered on their forums to invite them to lend their expertise to make UFO:AI more realistic.
5. The plasma blade is actually realistic, since it's basically a glorified blow-torch. However, I take issue with some of its mechanism. The foam, it's exceedingly complicated and adds several points of failure to the whole thing. It's would be much better to change that to a magnetic field, as plasma usually has an charge. The magnetic field turns-on when the weapon is activated, no need for proximity detectors. Also you don't have to worry about a magnetic field not achieving a proper seal. One of the general principles in designing stuff is KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid), and a magnetic field is far simpler than a system for deploying magical ultra-hardening paste.
Can do that.
6. I'm confused regarding the shotgun. The in-game UFOpedia suggests both slugs and flechettes cause "blast" type damage. The online wiki suggests they both cause "normal" type damage. Which is it? In any case it should be slugs cause normal and flechettes cause blast, no?
No, 'blast' governs only explosive damage. Both ammo types should cause 'normal' damage. Which really should have been renamed to 'impact' damage.
7. I can get head-shots halfway across the map with the sniper rifle while the user is standing-up. I'm not sure if this can be implemented, but the way it should be is sniper rifle is accurate only when used while crouching. Those things tend to be heavier than assault rifles and quite unwieldy. There's a reason why real life snipers usually lie down on the ground, and it's not just to make themselves less visible.
No idea about that, I don't code.
8. Incendiary weapons don't do the "area denial" thing described in the UFOpedia. I suppose it hasn't been implemented yet, which is understandable, but I'm not seeing it in the TODO lists. That's a bit disappointing.
It will definitely be incorporated at some point. When, I don't know, but it is on the books. As for the inconsistencies -- I'm writing from the point of where the game ought to finish, not where it is right now, to save us a lot of rewriting as the game progresses.
9. The Aliens could use their own rocket-laucher or grenade-launcher equivalent. They had one in the original game, IIRC, it fired guided missiles. The usefulness of non line-of-sight weapons would presumably not be lost on the aliens, so I would expect them to have something to compensate their other two heavy weapons.
We do indeed have plans for an alien infantry launcher of some type. A projectile sniper weapon as well. However, both are still in the formative stages.
12. Regarding nanocomposite armour. Why is it that the males get this massive chest-plate and the girls get a puny little thing? It's supposed to be armour not a fashion statement, there's no reason whatsoever why the girl's version should show-off their boobs. By all rights it should be a solid plate like the dudes have, and one of equal thickness. The normal body armour doesn't have this problem, sure you can see that the females are females but it doesn't hug their breasts like the newer one does.
That armour was made by the original team, long before we took over, and they didn't have a very consistent art style. I've always hated that model to the very core of my being. Unfortunately, we have no better armour models to replace it, and no one capable of animating and texturing who can spare the time to improve it.
EDIT - This isn't related to the game itself, but the wiki's design is just terrible. I should not have to click on a link that takes me to a separate page to read just a paragraph or two. Large pages covering a broad topic is much easier nd efficient than having each and every sub-division have its own page. The worst offenders are the "Damage Type" and "Skill" pages. You could easily put everything that those links lead to in the page itself.
Believe it or not, it used to be a lot worse. There are some old bits of nastiness remaining, like the ones you quoted, but overall the wiki is a joy to navigate compared to what it was. Since the Skill and Damage Type descriptions are no longer in the in-game UFOpaedia, they haven't been updated or maintained in a long long time.
Regards,
Winter
-
I am a physicist. If you want help, please ask.
-
You have a point here, and we may change that angle at some point. Not the attacks on Mumbai, but a big military action presented as a smokescreen for PHALANX.
I'm not sure why the attacks on Mumbai need to stay, or why PHALANX itself needs to be a huge secret (well yes I do, it's to justify you controlling 8-man squads instead of mid-sized military formations), but large military action as a smokescreen for PHALANX works just fine to keep things consistent.
I just work with the stuff I'm given, and I'm no physicist. I've registered on their forums to invite them to lend their expertise to make UFO:AI more realistic.
Well, nothing's perfect. Like I said, I don't think it should be changed at this stage.
Plasma knife, magnetic fields, etc.
Can do that.
Exellent! I can help if you want.
No, 'blast' governs only explosive damage. Both ammo types should cause 'normal' damage. Which really should have been renamed to 'impact' damage.
Okay, so the description of 'blast' damage is wrong, since it says buckshot qualifies as 'blast' damage. Though now we are faced with a different issue. Why would I want to use the shotgun saboted slugs when flechettes do more damage? If slugs are 'normal' and flechettes are 'blast' then you'd use slugs against armoured opponents because their armour is not as strong against that as against flechettes. But with both the same, I see no reason for using slugs at all.
Sniper rifle, crouching, accuracy.
No idea about that, I don't code.
Well, it's not a high priority thing anyway. Just look into it when convenient. If it can be done, great. If not, then that's unfortunate but not a huge detriment.
It will definitely be incorporated at some point. When, I don't know, but it is on the books. As for the inconsistencies -- I'm writing from the point of where the game ought to finish, not where it is right now, to save us a lot of rewriting as the game progresses.
I just wanted assurance that you haven't forgotten about it, since I didn't see it in a TODO list anywhere. If you are planning to incorporate it at some later date, then good.
That armour was made by the original team, long before we took over, and they didn't have a very consistent art style. I've always hated that model to the very core of my being. Unfortunately, we have no better armour models to replace it, and no one capable of animating and texturing who can spare the time to improve it.
Ah, I see. You noticed the model sucks but can't do anything to fix it at this time.
Believe it or not, it used to be a lot worse. There are some old bits of nastiness remaining, like the ones you quoted, but overall the wiki is a joy to navigate compared to what it was. Since the Skill and Damage Type descriptions are no longer in the in-game UFOpaedia, they haven't been updated or maintained in a long long time.
Well, glad to know you've worked on it.
nohting
You seem to have skipped items 10 and 11. Well, 10 is really a bug report, guess this wasn't the right forum anyway. I want to revise 11 in any case:
In the late game, the frequency of missions with 6-8 aliens needs to increase and the frequency of missions with 4-5 aliens needs to decrease. I think it's a waste of the player's time to have a squad outfited with nanocomposite, plasma weapons, and particle weapons, only to have to fight four aliens, one of which is waving around a sword and gets shot before it can do any damage.
-
I didn't respond to 10 or 11 because they're not in my area of expertise. You need to talk to one of the coders about that.
Still, since we're already planning variable-size PHALANX teams, larger alien forces should be incorporated at some point.
The main difference between flechettes and sabots are close-range power vs. medium-range accuracy. Sabots are supposed to be a lot more accurate across the board while flechettes excel at the close-up kill. Not very much stat balancing has been done, though, because most of us are busy busy people.
What I'd really like to see is some kind of 'repository' for various people's modded .ufo files, so that lots of people can playtest with lots of weapon stat variations. Then, with feedback left by the testers on the repository, we can home in on the stats that work best together.
blondandy, do you mind if I ask about your exact credentials?
Regards,
Winter
-
10) the hospital system is currently going to be rewritten
11) yes - a known fact - but as the campaign and mission definitions are only script files we just have to tweak some values like alien equipment and alien amount - feel free to contribute (see wiki section about scripting)
-
I don't think plasma weapons are too outlandish. Inductively coupled plasma torches exist today, and are used to literally atomize things at around 10,000 degrees C. All you need is a way to launch the plamsa across a distance with mangetic fields (like a railgun?), and you've got a sweet weapon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductively_coupled_plasma
http://www.spectroscopymag.com/spectroscopy/data/articlestandard/spectroscopy/452001/1096/article.pdf
-
I don't think plasma weapons are too outlandish. Inductively coupled plasma torches exist today, and are used to literally atomize things at around 10,000 degrees C. All you need is a way to launch the plamsa across a distance with mangetic fields (like a railgun?), and you've got a sweet weapon.
You fail to understand what plasma is: very hot ionized gas. In a gas, all the particles are almost independent of each other, and they move at great velocity in all directions. The hotter the gas, the faster these particles move. In plasma the particles are moving at incredibly high velocities. What this means is that as soon as you shoot the plasma out your gun it will dissipate. The fact that, by virtue of its high temperature, plasma is extremely diffuse, doesn't help. The very air, which we solid beings don't find a hindrance at all, is almost like a brick wall to plasma. Trying to compress it only compounds the dispersal problem as compressed gases expand faster.
Basically the weapon you propose will not be a "sweet weapon", as your shots will billow out and dissipate before reaching the second metre. You might as well just get a flamethrower, cheaper, more efficient, longer ranged, and overall deadlier. You could shoot the plasma so fast that it doesn't have time to dissipate. However, we're talking c-fractional velocities here. At that point you might as well just make a particle gun.
That is why AI's approach of enclosing the plasma in a container is somewhat more plausible than many other plasma weapons. It allows it to stay together long enough to reach the target. The only problem is that the uber plastic it describes would make a perfect armour against plasma bolts. If it can withstand the heat for the fraction of a second it takes for the bolt to reach the target, it can withstand the heat from the fraction of a second the plasma is in contact with the target before dissipating. If instead of using a thin uber plastic film you use a thick uber plastic plate as armour, then the wearer would be nigh invulnerable.
As you point out, plasma torches do exit. However, you many notice that the plasma stays very close to its generating source. The reason for this are the problems I listed below. Hell, I've seen people standing but a metre or two from an open plasma torch with naught but eye protection. It dissipates that quickly. Incidentally, that is the reason why the plasma knife is the only truly realistic plasma weapon in the game. The plasma knife is basically a glorified blow-torch, and it is a good weapon for breaching armour and frying the person inside.
For more information see this essay (http://stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/PlasmaWeapons.html) by Mike Wong.
-
That is why AI's approach of enclosing the plasma in a container is somewhat more plausible than many other plasma weapons. It allows it to stay together long enough to reach the target. The only problem is that the uber plastic it describes would make a perfect armour against plasma bolts. If it can withstand the heat for the fraction of a second it takes for the bolt to reach the target, it can withstand the heat from the fraction of a second the plasma is in contact with the target before dissipating. If instead of using a thin uber plastic film you use a thick uber plastic plate as armour, then the wearer would be nigh invulnerable.
What I'm thinking is, could there not be a reason why the plastic only holds together for (say) a tenth of a second after it's spun, making it useless as armour? Except reactive armour, of course, which would be awesome to incorporate.
Regards,
Winter
-
What I'm thinking is, could there not be a reason why the plastic only holds together for (say) a tenth of a second after it's spun, making it useless as armour?
I can't think why there would be one. But we are already dealing with fantasy materials here so I suppose we can make-up some fantasy properties, at least in the interest of internal consistency. I would suggest that in the description instead of saying "plastic" you use "plastic-like compound". Then mention the property you suggested. The compound solidifies very quickly, but is only stable for a short while. It's not what I would call scientifically sound, but it is internally consistent. You'd also need to say that the rifle and blaster can spin a somewhat stronger compound on account of being larger.
-
Problem is that plasma is hot. By definition it is so hot that the electrons have been totally stripped off the nucleii.
Any material that tried to contain plasma is still limited by the bond strengths of its molecules. if the sci-fi material is made of electrons, neutrons and electrons it will break up when it touches anything as hot as plasma.
I suggest that having the plasma projectiles with a small magnetic field generator in is more plausible.
The projectile would still need a container outside the containing field to stop air scattering the plasma. The particles in the plasma are charged, and so can be contained with fields, but air molecules are uncharged and would be able to enter the fields.
perhaps i should do a sketch. (no time now)
-
Perhaps the plastic shell has an extremely complex system of minaturized electromagnets that keeps the plasma together for a fraction of a second.
Alternatively, compress the plasma to a high density in the gun and shoot it out at such an insane speed that the stuff stays together just longn enough to reach the target. Of course I know this is completely impractical in the real world as has been pointed out, but then so are laser pistols and most other sci-fi weapons.
As an aside, a portable ICP torch would be a sweet melee weapon for heavily-armored opponents. :twisted:
-
Now that I think about it, if you could line your armor with some kind of electric field generator, it might deflect or slow down plasma rounds. Maybe this armor might be extra vulnerable to EMP-based weapons...
-
Perhaps the plastic shell has an extremely complex system of minaturized electromagnets that keeps the plasma together for a fraction of a second.
I like you idea but not its hilarious complexity. Just have the material have an inherent charge. You know, like a fridge magnet, but orders of magnitude stronger.
Alternatively, compress the plasma to a high density in the gun and shoot it out at such an insane speed that the stuff stays together just longn enough to reach the target.
That would be a particle gun, which we already have in the game.
Of course I know this is completely impractical in the real world as has been pointed out, but then so are laser pistols and most other sci-fi weapons.
Laser and particle guns are no impractical. With sufficient technology they would be viable weapons and even desirable over conventional firearms. Hell, we already have working laser weapons (http://youtube.com/watch?v=9V1pkTMCZ0M).
-
From the discription of Plasma Grenade:
Rapid expansion of the plasma causes the casing to burst, spraying high-velocity fragments and plasma particles all over the area of effect. Due to the unstable nature of uncontained plasma, the grenade has a limited blast radius, beyond which the plasma particles cool and slow down too much to be dangerous. This radius is approximately 50% larger than that of a standard human frag grenade.
How much is that? a few metres or so for plasma particles, imagine what the range of a bolt of this kind of plasma would be.
Not that its realistic, just the Plasma Grenade is probably even more crazy.
The containment material for the plasma weapons is currently some sort of plastic, which as you say would instantly catch fire and burn away. Is it possible it could catch fire, but burn slow enough for the bolt to reach its target?
The name of the plasma grenade for the grenade launcher is "25mm PB Grenades", and is possible to misunderstand (annoying with shortenings that means more than one thing). I first thought it was Particle Beam, until I read the UFOpedia saying Plasma Burst. What about finding a new name for the PB Grenades?
-
Just had an idea. How about the ammunition being some sort of capsule containing a few chemicals, which can be triggered by the weapon to undergo an extremely exothermic reaction when it is fired. By the time they reach the target, the contents have become hot enough to melt through the shell and do some damage.
-
The energy from exothermic chemical reactions comes from the bonds. It is not possible to have them give up enough energy to create a plasma (ie totally dissociate the electrons).
What you describe is a conventional explosive.
-
Guess my school chemistry isn't taking me very far :P
-
I don't like the idea of using tachyons, as physicists are pretty sure they don't exist. Besides, a tachyon grenade would explode before you pulled the pin! :D
If you really need an exotic "sci-fi" explosive, you might consider antimatter. Don't know how you'd store antimatter, tho...
-
If you really need an exotic "sci-fi" explosive, you might consider antimatter. Don't know how you'd store antimatter, tho...
Then read up, we're using it pretty extensively in the context of craft engines and weapons already.
We don't have antimatter weapons in tactical combat, though. And I'm fairly sure we never will.
-
Anti-matter is not something you want in any sort of tactical weapon. It has a tendency to make very big booms. A mere 100 grams (.1 kilograms), for comparison the M67 frag grenade has a filling of a ~180 grams, of anti-matter being annihilated would yield...
E=MC^2
E=(.1)(300,000,000 m/s)^2
E=(.1)(90,000,000,000,000,000)
E=9E15 joules
A kiloton is equal to 4.184 terajoules, that is 4.184E12 joules. Therefore the complete annihilation of the 100 grams of anti-matter would cause cause an explosion of...
9E15 / 4.184E12 = 2151 kilotons, or 2.2 megatons. However, nothing is 100% efficient, let us assume just 60% efficiency. That gives us 1.4 megatons.
Congratulations, your grenade sized anti-matter bomb just wiped-out the aliens along with your entire team, as well as all civilians and structures for kilometres around. If you're going to be flinging nukes it would be much better to use very small nuclear weapons, probably shot from recoil-less rifles, as combat damage won't accidentally initiate them and they are far cheaper. Of course, if you are willing to level an area with sub-kiloton warheads then why bother sending in a ground troops at all? That's what bomb trucks filled with conventional explosives are for.
Incidentally, we could employ nuclear tipped air-to-air and ground-to-air missiles to down UFOs. The real world has had those since the late 50s or early 60s. No need for direct hits, close enough is good enough :twisted: .
(I'm joking of course, PHALANX would probably be scared shitless of nuking the aliens because the aliens might just nuke back.)
-
energy conversion can be 100% efficient when you are converting to heat. conversion of mass-energy to heat-energy using antimatter is 100% efficient.
You will get some kinetic energy and energy stored in photons along the way. but you can be sure that it will end up as heat.
-
I don't like the idea of using tachyons, as physicists are pretty sure they don't exist. Besides, a tachyon grenade would explode before you pulled the pin! :D
If you really need an exotic "sci-fi" explosive, you might consider antimatter. Don't know how you'd store antimatter, tho...
How would you store tachyons in the first place, they can't be slowed to lower than lightspeed. Make them orbit a black hole inside the grenade? And how use them as an explosive? What's the idea? How is it supposed to work? What damage would it cause (if any)? And from where comes the explosive force to make the grenade explode. It would more likely just break open.
Particle Beam weapons sounds nicer, more realistic, highly advanced and powerful. Maybe the particle accelerating technology could also make for a nice fragmention grenade like device, yet quite risky (hide! Where to? the blast radius is like a 100 of those squares on the chessboard of the universe!)
:D Not being cruel :P
-
Just making an observation here, but I notice most people here seem to be trying to come up with technology they can justify from existing physics theories, or discarding technology because they can't. What I'm sort of missing is the "fiction" part of science-fiction. I find myself thinking, why can't we have a weapon that uses a principle we haven't even thought of? I realize the problem of that is that, well, we haven't thought of it, which makes the UFOpaedia entry a bit hard to write, but why must all alien technology be rooted in current human theories? What if there is a field of physics we haven't discovered yet, be it because we're not in the right part of the galaxy, because our current theories do not prompt us to do the right kind of experiment or even because we're just damn unlucky?
We may not be able to explain it ot reason it into our view of the universe right away. Any such technology would be TRULY alien to us, or as Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
So by this token, I guess I'm saying that all this trying to make it "make sense" is taking the magic out of it. Oh well.
-
I like sci-fi which has good scientific style. does not break known laws and invents new ones when required, but in a plausible-sounding way. Ian M Banks and Alastair Reynolds are very good at this.
Really pure sci-fi is about trying to guess how science and technology might affect the future. For example, if was in a purist frame of mind I would not classify Star Wars as sci-fi, rather fantasy.
I do thoroughly enjoy sci-fi, which simply tries to tell a story in the future and uses science/technology as a tool.
I think my main point is that it is easier to suspend disbelief if the science sounds plausible. new laws of nature may need to be invented for certain fantastic futures. This is all good fun. Its about getting the style of them right.
for plasma: it is possible to contain them using magnetic fields, it is not possible to contain them using any material.
-
Yeah magic alien stuff. Like in UFO1 and TFTD, almost.
for plasma: it is possible to contain them using magnetic fields, it is not possible to contain them using any material.
True really, but if the plasma is not locked away from the air it will quickly scatter and lose its temperature.
Thats why JET can contain plasma and keep its temperature high and stable for a long time. Its a combined magnetic field and vacuum container, and is so far the only way to keep plasma (as you said).
But if it has to be realistic, how can it be used as a weapon?
UFO: Enemy Unknown was good anyway, even though the plasma weapons there was realy weird. Elerium-115 and Zrbite is magic :wink: . The Aliens need that kind of stuff
-
But if it has to be realistic, how can it be used as a weapon?
Well, it probably can't. Else it would have been in use already.
-
Good sci-fi should be as believable as possible without getting in the way of the story or the fun, IMHO. So there's no harm in trying to find semi-realistic ways the aliens could have plasma weapons and hovering UFOs and such. besides, it'd make good filler for the UFOpedida.
As for antimatter grenades, chemists today routinely separate and manipulate materials on the nanogram-femtogram scale, so one can scale down the 2.2 megatons to whatever size explosion is needed.
-
6. I'm confused regarding the shotgun. The in-game UFOpedia suggests both slugs and flechettes cause "blast" type damage. The online wiki suggests they both cause "normal" type damage. Which is it? In any case it should be slugs cause normal and flechettes cause blast, no?
No, 'blast' governs only explosive damage. Both ammo types should cause 'normal' damage. Which really should have been renamed to 'impact' damage.
Okay, so the description of 'blast' damage is wrong, since it says buckshot qualifies as 'blast' damage. Though now we are faced with a different issue. Why would I want to use the shotgun saboted slugs when flechettes do more damage? If slugs are 'normal' and flechettes are 'blast' then you'd use slugs against armoured opponents because their armour is not as strong against that as against flechettes. But with both the same, I see no reason for using slugs at all.
I agree the slugs for riot shotgun are pretty useless, but they spread less than flechettes, so even if both are the same against armor there's still a difference, primarely at longer ranges where flechettes gets totally useless.
It seems to me that the shotgun is underpowered compared to the other human weapons, maybe it should do little more damage to make up for its poor accuracy, and perhaps there should be flechette type damage, both for shotgun and GL (btw. why is shotguns range 60 and GLs ≈10 with flechettes? One would never use flechettes (or shotgun actually) at such ranges) to make a difference between AP ammo and flechettes.
-
Weapon rebalancing is something that needs to be done across the board. And we probably won't get it right on the first try either, especially considering that some weapons, notably the UGVs, aren't even in the game yet.
-
Perhaps the plastic shell has an extremely complex system of minaturized electromagnets that keeps the plasma together for a fraction of a second.
I like you idea but not its hilarious complexity. Just have the material have an inherent charge. You know, like a fridge magnet, but orders of magnitude stronger.
It doesn't have to be complex, what would plasma do in a shell of superconductive material? If the superconductive shell wouldn't do the trick by itself, pattern rings of superconductor around the plastic shell, charge them up and you've got a magnetic bottle. The superconductors wouldn't even have to be too high-temperature, just chill the plastic enough to keep them superconducting until they hit the target.
-
I guess you mean use supercondunctors to create the strong magnetic field (like in an MRI scanner).
problem is that you need to be at liquid nitrogen temperatures for superconductivity. you could postulate that the problem of room temp superconductivity has been solved by clever aliens.
it is still complex
-
It doesn't have to be complex, what would plasma do in a shell of superconductive material? If the superconductive shell wouldn't do the trick by itself, pattern rings of superconductor around the plastic shell, charge them up and you've got a magnetic bottle. The superconductors wouldn't even have to be too high-temperature, just chill the plastic enough to keep them superconducting until they hit the target.
Please offer some evidence in support of this theory, I think it's very interesting. I'm sure the aliens could come up with technology to 'flash-freeze' a ball of plastic to superconducting temperatures. The breaking of such a frozen ball against a target would help to keep the plasma on the target instead of dispersing, as well.
Mind you, keeping something so cold whilst containing a mass of superheated plasma seems . . . unlikely.
With regards to room-temperature superconductors, if we give them to the aliens then there are a lot of possible weapons and equipment technologies that they could/should have of which I've never even heard. We'd need more technical expertise to help us out.
Regards,
Winter
-
The aliens having room temperature superconductors would help explain their particle beam weaponry. The energy requirements for accelerating even sub-atomic particles to c-fractional velocities is non-trivial. A superconductor that doesn't need to be super-cooled would allow for high energy density storage which in turn would make it possible to power a pocket particle accelerator.
Regarding the plasma thing, the more minimalist the explanation the better. The weapon is implausible as is so we might as well just put in a short explanation to minimize hand-waving. Say "the plasma is encased in a bubble of a magnetically charged material" and leave it at that. The short range is explained by either the material (or plastic if you like) being stable for only a short about of time, or it rapidly losing its charge. Going about explaining just exactly what the material is, and how it is magnetically charged, or even saying the word "superconductor", is asking for the death of the audience's suspension of disbelief.
It's a good rule of thumb to minimize handwavium whenever possible.
-
According to www.superconductors.org, the current world record is 138K, with a potential 150K compound in the works. This is already significantly better than liquid nitrogen (77K), I would expect that even us feeble humans would be able to better than that given the next 77 years to work on it.
The whole point to using a superconductor would be to keep the hot plasma away from the container, so not a whole lot of heat transfer from the plasma would happen. There would be radiant heat transfer, but no conduction.
-
room temp superconductor, or some fanct cooling
superconductor makes strong electric current.
current creates magnetic field
field contains plasma
plasma does not need to touch physical container
a container is still required to stop air entering plasma containment field and scattering plasma, while the projectile is is flight.
i don't like the phrase "magnetic charge". it suggests magnetic monopoles, which are impossible.
-
Is there anyting preventing you having the plasma generated at the point of impact instead of within the weapon itself? Something similar to a conventional shaped charge/hollow round?
As far as design goes, it would solve the problem of plasma weapons being attenuated by smoke as well and would have armor-piercing capability. Small rifle-sized rounds with miniaturized components capable of forming a jet of subatomic gunk instead of molten metal on impact.
Punching a hole in heat resistant armor and delivering heat inside it where its actually contained by the armor would be pretty devastating.
I guess that changes the whole weapon mechanic, but its something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge