Page 2 of 2

Posted: 2004-02-04 06:08am
by Stofsk
Um, it says on that card there it's an "artillery" weapon. Does anyone else think "sus?"

Posted: 2004-02-04 06:17am
by Vympel
It also says "repeating blaster". Whatever it's classification in the card game, bah.

Posted: 2004-02-04 07:18am
by Jim Raynor
Stofsk wrote:Um, it says on that card there it's an "artillery" weapon. Does anyone else think "sus?"
It's been a long time since I've played the SW CCG, but I remember that "Artillery Weapon" was only a game mechanic. It has no meaning in the actual reality of SW.

Posted: 2004-02-04 02:26pm
by Meest
I have the laserdisc rip of ESB on DVD and there is a scene where it fires one big blast, unless there's another fire mode that's a pretty big repeating blast. Can capture a short bit of it if someone has webspace to upload to.

Posted: 2004-02-04 07:31pm
by Illuminatus Primus
Not so far-fetched. Original Maxim guns (and before them, .50 cal. mechanical Gatlings) were deployed as field artillery, before they were understood how to be used. There is a historical precedent for heavy and medium machine guns as "artillery" emplacements.

Posted: 2004-02-05 04:42am
by Meest
After reviewing it again, it is shown to fire several repeating big blasts, 3-4 pulses/sec. Maybe the rebels expected, or we didn't see any troops approaching and just turned the guns on the vehicles, to me it looks like that thing can mow down lines of troops.

Posted: 2004-02-05 05:11am
by Icehawk
Meest wrote:After reviewing it again, it is shown to fire several repeating big blasts, 3-4 pulses/sec. Maybe the rebels expected, or we didn't see any troops approaching and just turned the guns on the vehicles, to me it looks like that thing can mow down lines of troops.
I could see those weapons being usefull against AT-ST's and other light vehicles easily especially since star wars weapons have variable power settings. Although its primary purpose is no doubt to take on enemy troops.