Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

Subject: Re: Phasers vs. Blasters Author: capn hayes [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 14:38:43 08/30/02 Fri Author Host/IP: NoHost/207.14.48.2 In reply to: TrekGOD 's message, "Re: Phasers vs. Blasters" on 16:56:27 08/29/02 Thu >>>3.Due to problems 1 and 2 it's range is drastically >>>reduced because it lacks any kind of sighting device >>>and it's crappy handgrip make it very difficult to >aim >>>at far away targets. >> >>Of course, we've seen there are absolutely no problems >>aiming at targets some distance away in such exampels >>as DS9 the circle/the siege, FC, and DS9 Rocks and >>shoals >> >> >>>4. The only reason phasers make people disappear is >>>due to their NDF effect allowing them to be very >>>effective against organic materials not because they >>>have enough power to actually vaporise someone. It >>>should also be noted that against dense materials >such >>>as armour their effectiveness drops drastically. >> >>However, Phasers do have a basic "raw power" of just >>over 1MW (as per TM and TNG The Mind's Eye). Anything >>else is just an added bonus >> >> >>>Now let's take a look at blasters. >>> >>>3.A blaster has a longer range because it has sights >>>and acutal hand grips that don't force it's user to >>>hold it in an awkward position. >> >>Actually, no. Blasters do not have longer range. We've >>seen them used, and they miss people who are only a >>short distance away. Their stated max range is >>120m(pistols) and 300m(rifles) - clearly, comparable >>with phaser pistols and rifles in actual useage (I've >>ignored tripod-mounted weapons until we have a >>comparable weapon from Trek, though the range of the >>E-web is only 500m) >> >> >>>4.All one has to do to see the blasters are more >>>powerful than phasers is to is look at the scene in >>>ANH where Han uses his blaster agaisnt the >>>stormtroopers in the Mos Eisley spaceport where it >>>blast torso-sized chunks out of the docking bay walls >>>showing it's knock down power is more like a grenade >>>laucher than a handgun. >> >>Han Solo's blaster is rated at about 50kJ. Compare >>with phasers rated at 1MW or more. >>Even E-11 blaster rifles are less powerful than phaser >>rifles. >>(ref www.trek-wars.info/swwpower.html) >> >>Phasers are more powerful than blasters. >>Phasers, in actual useage of like-for-like weapons, >>have comparable range to blasters. >> >>The upside is, Phasers have the added bonus of NDF, on >>top of their raw power. > >my pick is a phaser rifle over a blaster anyday That's cause you like the wide angle area effect, at setting 12 Gene. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]