Imperial Blaster Rifle VS Federation Phaser Rifle

[Master of Ossus]

Then there are the quite ones that eventually get on your nerves.

(Hint, hint.)

Hey!

I think he meant NF_Utvol.

[Cal Wright]

E-11. Over using television remote controls will lead to my fucking death, not the death of my opponent.

[Nathan F]

hmmm, sorry

[Ender]

I choose the E-11, as I am more familiar with the basic design since it resembles current fire arms.

Besides, it's heavier, so in a pich I can just hit him with it.

[Master of Ossus]

I choose the E-11, as I am more familiar with the basic design since it resembles current fire arms.

Besides, it's heavier, so in a pich I can just hit him with it.

Actually, weight in modern firearms is a bad thing. We really don't know which one is heavier. It is highly likely that both are made of lightweight ceramics and metals.

[beyond hope]

I'd put any money on the E-11 being *sturdier*... would anyone expect to see a phaser rifle survive a fall into the garbage compactor and the subsequent immersion, and then fire afterwards?

[Cpt_Frank]

Phaser: looks like shit, impossible to aim, disrupted by radiating ore of the week, looks like shit, feels like shit, only effective against rock, makes no cool wounds, looks like shit.
E-11: looks cool, sophisticated scope system, blows chunks out of armored bulkheads, handles like a normal firearm.
Guess which one I'd take.

[Nobody]

if I HAD to take a phaser, I'd want a TNG style hand phaser. The reason?? It looks, and aims just like a TV remote... I'm GOOD with TV remotes... That crappy Voyager Gun looks too errrr... Awkward, and Bloody inconveinent to use...

Of course I would DEFINATLY go with the Trek blaster rifles first choice...

[Master of Ossus]

I'd put any money on the E-11 being *sturdier*... would anyone expect to see a phaser rifle survive a fall into the garbage compactor and the subsequent immersion, and then fire afterwards?

The E-11 is more reliable, as Kira said that Federation phasers are fragile, but the E-11 is reliable in all normal weather conditions, including submerged. It may or may not be heavier.

[Admiral Drason]

Blasters are way better than phazers these polls are always one sided.

[Darth Yoshi]

E-11. It can kill with shrapnel bursts from near misses.

[Typhonis 1]

E-11 its easier to aim and use and since this is a phaser rifle the thing cannot be set to shoulder and aimes it has two hand grips to aim it the Federation compression rifle can be aimed normally

[Knife]

1. If both opponents are equal, then it should be interesting.

2. The Federation swiss army knife(phaser rifle) is to complex for its own good. Yes it has sooooo many neat settings, but unfortunatly while you take the weapon out of the ready position and type on the freakin keyboard to set the weapon of what ever setting, your opponent can fire and manuver on you. There is no such problem with the blaster, yes it has single shot, rapid burst, and stun. But I don't see using stun and besides the selector switch reseambles a modern day switch and is easily used while still having the weapon at the ready.

3. Having watched various StarTrek shows, redshirts often hide behind flimsy cargoboxes for cover, while in Starwars the blaster rifle takes chunks out of metal walls and other more sturdy obstacales.


In short, give me a E 11 blaster man.

[Tsyroc]

I'd want the blaster because it always seems to me that the slow moving beam of the phaser can be dodged by almost anyone. Okay that's an exageration but the beam does seem sort of slow and I think it gives the person's location away more than the shots from a blaster would. Otherwise I think that all the tracking stuff the two weapons are supposed to have works out to around equal.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

If SF would give their troops armor instead of those silly pajamas, they might have replaced the phaser rifle with something that doesn't rely on exotic reactions.

[Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman]

Of course not, but I think my odds of victory would decrease significantly if I was using the phaser rifle. Consider that if the phaser is used to vaporize cover, it in effect creates cover for the person with the E-11. The phaser has no ability to detect a target through a cloud of vaporized material.

If I'm not mistaken, Mike Wong's site makes interesting points about how weird it is that phasers don't leave residue from "vaporized" objects.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... Beam1.html

Phasers can shatter large amounts of rock, knocking very large boulders loose and causing explosive reactions.

Rock shattering. We've seen phasers shatter rock quite easily in some episodes, easily blasting boulders free which may be as large as several tons. On the other hand, we've also seen phasers strike the ground in combat situations (eg. "Rocks and Shoals") without damaging the ground noticeably at all. This is extremely confusing, especially since phasers tend to produce a disintegration chain reaction or a localized heating effect in other situations. Why then, do they sometimes blast large, intact, unheated chunks out of rock walls? One possible explanation might be that natural rocks are not chemically or microstructurally homogeneous, so the phaser chain reaction may "shoot through" the rock along natural pre-existing grain boundaries, hence the shattering effect.

If the surrounding covers are mostly chemically or microstructurally heterogenous (ie rocks), it is possible that the target will shatter and explode, thus generating dusts that might make aiming difficult.

[CmdrWilkens]

The situation is thus:

We have a 4000 square foot open warehouse, sealed on all sides with magically impenetrable material, including the ceiling and floor.

I think this little bit here is important. At only 4000 sq ft we are talking two sides only about 65 ft long. That means the greatest distance of firing will be about 20m. Given the close range I actually want to go with the Blaster Rifle because it has a much more rapuid ROF (it has some sort of burst setting). With the power kicked up and burst setting enabled I can sweep like a scythe and cut my opponent down before he can alter his pwoer settings and ramp up to wide beam, aim in, and fire.

[Stormtrooper THX-1138]

The E-11, no question.

1) Its robust and reliable; you can drop it, bang it around, drag it through sewage/garbage compactor goop, you name it; and still she picks up and fires on the first trigger pull.Not sure you could say the same thing for a phaser rifle; if their warp core designs are any indicator of how robust Fed systems are, I'd be terrified of carrying any piece of Fed equipmen into a real fight !

2) While it does sport a stun setting for those times when they simply *must* be taken alive, this is a weapon designed primarily to do one thing: deliver lethal damage to man-size targets accurately and consistently , punching through light armor where necessary.There's a lot to be said for focus in a weapon's design.Whereas a phaser rifle has to be able to do everything from providing technobabble to heating rocks to actually once and a while shooting someone.

3) It has a folding stock and an actual scope for those times when long-range precision fire is called for.Coupled with the vision enhancements in our helmets, an E-11 is every bit as dangerous at extreme ranges as it is up close.As opposed to a phaser rifle, which sports what amounts to a holographic iron sight which you'd have to hold the weapon at a bizarre angle to look through anyway.

4)It does come with autofire options, enabling me the trooper to respond to a wide variety of tactical requirements, and do it quickly.While it can be argued that a phaser could be set on some sort of wide beam setting to allow for supressive fire , a Fed soldier has to do about three seconds worth of keying to adjust his settings.I move my thumb up to flick a selector switch, in less than a second. Advantage : E-11

and of course 5) Which is simply the question: Which would you rather carry into a firefight: an actual weapon designed for combat or an elongated Dustbuster?

Give me my E-11 any day of the week.

[Howedar]

I'd go for the E-11 simply for ergonomic reasons. Firepower-wise, the difference seems negligable. Reliability would probably not be a big issue in quick, single combat.

[tharkûn]

I'm at a toss up. The blaster gives me potential kills for near misses, ebeit the phaser might be able to make those rock filled boxes explode (we have seen phasers cause rock walls to explode before). At long range the phaser sucks ass, but we aren't at long range. Phasers have fairly high rates of fire and have demonstrated wide range stun ability at a few metres. Blasters are better for long range shots, but there will be few of those.

Frankly I doubt it will matter all that much 1:1 firefights are a matter of luck. Even if only the blaster can create lethal shrapnel (dubious assumption) I'm still going to get cover where such shrapnel isn't going to hit me (assuming the floor is made out of this "impentrable" material). So its going to become a question of who gets the first good/lucky shot first.

I'd likely take the blaster just because its closer to what I'm ergonomically used to. One on one combat *really* emphasizes luck over weapons, there is no chance for suppressive fire so he who gets the first clean shot normally wins.

Actually, weight in modern firearms is a bad thing.
Yes and no. Weight is bad because some poor grunt has to lug the thing around in combat and on march (unless you get mech). Weight is good because its lower recoil. In most combat situations I'd rather have a heavy rifle/machine gun than an uberlight one. If I have to spend less time reacquiring my target it's a *very* good thing. What are stupid are heavy guns with high calibre rounds for the sake of heavy high cal rounds. Those have all the disadvantages of high weight (lower mobility, less weight for other equipment, etc.), few of the advantages (faster refire rates, more precision), and new disadvantages (less ammo, less compatability with other grunt's ammo). But a heavy rifle on a bipod vs a light assualt rifle ... give me the heavy rifle ... better shots all around (of course it becomes a bitch to carry but hey). Likewise I'd normally prefer to have a HMG than a LMG.

This is not to say that lightweighth weapons do not have their uses and are not better for war in general ... but rather that on the actual battlefeild heavier guns have some advantages ... especially if you don't plan on moving all that much. The real killer on weight is that no grunt in his right mind wants to carry an uberheavy gun on a long march. Once you get into a prone position for firing, especially if you have bi(tri)pods, the heavy guns are better.