Do you prefer ballistics or lasers?

Moar Dakka.

But in all seriousness, ballistics are fun, you can do a lot with them, but where does plasma weaponry fall? It's not technically energy weaponry, but hardly ballistics.

Plasma weapons project matter, not lasers, so they are, strictly speaking, ballistic weapons.

Regardless of technicalities I'd classify them under lasers n stuff, just because they seem to fit with the "pew pew" mentality more than they do with a dakka mentality.

Now see what I was getting at? An argument can be made for either side.

Ballistics/plasma weapons need to be loaded with ammunition, whereas lasers just need a power source to generate the beam. Maybe this is a good place to draw the line.

But then some laser weaponry needs to be loaded with charge packs as ammunition, and some ballistic weaponry-Mass Effect comes to mind-almost never needs to reload as it works off of Mass Effect fields propelling slugs the size of a grain of sand at stupidly high mach speeds, as a result it can keep firing near-indefinitely without reloading.

Ballista cpu to quickscope my way to the top of the leaderboard

Stop complicating things! Charge packs aren't ammunition, slugs are.

@darthmummy: But then technically the charge packs carry the energy that is then turned into the lasers, ergo it is ammunition.

Ehhh, more like fuel.

@darthmummy: Depends on how the energy is converted, whether the energy directly from the charge pack is turned into what you're firing, or whether it just allows the gun to generate a different kind of energy.

The result is the same: the charge pack gives the weapon more energy to operate. I doubt lasers are loaded with charge packs that contain pure laser which is then channeled outward. Idk. Maybe they are, but I doubt it.

@darthmummy: Now we need to figure out the next question.

Do we classify Phasers as laser weaponry, or make a whole new category?

Phasers seem to be another kind of plasma weapon. Plasma weapons in general probably should have their own category. They're different enough. Too late though :(

@darthmummy: As a Star Trek fan, Phasers are particle weaponry. Ferengi Phasers on the other hand are indeed plasma weaponry. Phasers and Lasers are both a type of particle weaponry, but phasers are not lasers either.

Right here.

Nadions...*shrug*

Lasers for like elite guards and for swarm type enemies i say ballistic's. Lasers for super weapons ballistics for tanks.

I don't think phasers follow the rules of ballistic projectiles. They are more like lasers. What about blasters from Star Wars? Ballistic or laser?

I'd take a bolter gun over any energy weapon.

You say that now, but you won't when the recoil breaks your arm and you run out of the highly specialized ammunition. Lasers have no recoil and only need a power source.

Unrelated: the comment options are in the bottom left now O_O

They fire a particle laser beam so....I guess also laser as the term laser is thrown around a lot and used to describe a blaster or laser shot, what have you. The acronym for laser is also noted once or twice in describing laser weaponry, oh and commonly noted that a blaster just means high energy laser/particle beam weapon.

What if i prefer swords?
Pilasy:La Voix d'un homme

I meant if I could actually wield one, or if I were an Adeptus Astartes.

If I were to fire a bolter, it'd probably kill me.

However, bolters are much, much more powerful than most energy weapons.

Bump

If you're up against Replicators you better have ballistics.

Ballistics are cooler.

Ballistics.

I prefer ballistics.. like bullets and missiles blasters and laser crossfire seems look like too nerdy for me and too cartoony. Especially in star wars

Ballistic has some kind of raw fire power vibe.