|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:46 am
Well theres the Trekkie Phaser, but that POS was only an a** kicker in the Kirk era.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 11:59 am
Or Schlock's roto-hand cannon that now lobs mini grenades... Then again, does it count if you bombard them into oblivion?
I always wondered about the trekkie phasers though. They have battle rifle equivalents, but they never seemed any more 'powerful' likd oyu'd expect them to..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:13 pm
trekkie Phasers are pretty crappy weapons over all. I mean look at the ergonomics of the weapon: You point it like a remote control. And then there's the slow fire rate. You shoot it, the beem extends from the gun to the target and then they're ash just as another guy shows up. You cant sweep the beam to cut down the next target.
Frankly, I think someone with an AK, a few grenades and spare clips, and a decent knowledge of how to use cover could probably take over the Enterprise.
Probably of most any era.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:51 pm
While I agree that phasers are rather bad, they still have highlights to them. They're more powerful than lasers, and have many different settings. And I don't just mean stun or kill, there's also sweep which makes the phaser beam a curtain of energy, and one or two others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Cale Darksun No. A Westar is not a M-1911. Just look at the damn thing and who uses it. Its not a military pistol. Its a gunslinger pistol. I'm relating to power. I'm aware that it looks nothing like an M1911.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:30 pm
Valkore Fraust Cale Darksun No. A Westar is not a M-1911. Just look at the damn thing and who uses it. Its not a military pistol. Its a gunslinger pistol. I'm relating to power. I'm aware that it looks nothing like an M1911. Even power wise they're not like an M1911. Jango had to modify them to have that kind of knock down power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:14 pm
While Jango did modify his pistols, they were initially designed to be that powerful at close range. They probably had some kind of specially-designed power flare just as the bolt came out of the barrel, making them more powerful up close than they were at a distance. I'm not sure how to compare that to real weapons...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:32 pm
It's a close ranged blaster. Kind of why I thought it to be like the M1911. The .45 caliber is, IMO, perfect. Great stopping power, decent kick back.
But it definitely reminds me of an older type revolver. The holsters, the way they were shown in AoTC, their shape. I can see your relation to the 1851 Colt, Cale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:44 pm
Yeah, Nelo's right about there being no point in comparing real world guns to star wars.
But if you ask me, the DL-44's more in line with the M1911 than the WESTAR.
Personally, though, I wouldnt touch those pisant WESTARs with a three meter pole.
I saw how well Jango did in AoTC. He got his a** kicked. Clonehost or not The WESTARs imply, to me, failure. They were poorly used and wielded by someone who should have known better. And that silvery, elegant design does not appeal to me. They look like guns for someone with an eye towards looks instead of towards buisness.
If given the choice, I'd rather take unscoped versions of Cad Bane's LL-30's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:52 pm
Would you say it's more powerful than the WESTAR?
And, while you're both right, I guess I forgot to add (Sarcasm). I usually explain the D. Eagle as "it'd blow an Elephant sky high." I like to, though. It's fun learning their origins.
I should admit, I like appearance as much as I do performance. I would chose a DL-44, or a modified WESTAR for its beauty. Definitely one of my favorites.
Cad Bane is bad a**, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:11 pm
I don't go much for using the blasters as much as I like playing with the little intricacies and modding other people's stuff. Something like a Westar, therefor, is very unappealing to me, since it doesn't leave much room to play around with it. A DL-44 or my personal favorite, the 434 "DeathHammer", is much easier to upgrade out the wazoo. I like something that looks like it was built, not drawn. And I'm still thinking the DL-44 is a better overall weapon. While Westars were immune to overheating, the DL-44 had longer range, a scope, and was easier to tinker with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:26 pm
I like your thinking with blasters. Sounds like a gunsmith to me, heh.
It penetrates Stormtrooper armor. Accuracy and Damage is a great thing in blasters. I haven't looked through its optics. Would you have to pull it closer to your eye, or, does it stay at a zoom when it's further away from your eye? neutral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:20 pm
Again, a Deagle isn't that powerful. It's strong, but that's mroe from you firing either a .357 or .50 caliber bullet, than because of it's own internal power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:17 pm
It's the most I've ever fired. And I'd rather be on the shooters side of that gun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:50 pm
I'd rather be on the shooter's side of any gun, but I guess I'm just crazy like that. razz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
