40K Source

well i was thinking that since by the looks of it we are probably going to be using the meltagun. as well as bolters etc.

i was thinking how wabout what the HUD amination of the gun is going to be when fired.

well i think it should when fired vent steam from the holes in the gun, this should appear on other people too so you know they are firing, since a meltagun is just pinpointed micro waves i dont think there should be a "bullet progectile" you know what i mean, but when it does hit the surface or nid it hits should steam as well.

also the meltagun is very short range so should drasticly reduce in damage at a certain distance away, too far away for a nid t00 charge but not far asway as so you probably only get one chance to kill the nid charging you, :wink:

oh well
just my thoughts i should let be known,

unless you thought of this before  :P

good idea, but isn't this the wrong forum part? :D

No it's not, according to the Wikipedia def. on 40k weapons:

I would say the effect would be very simmilar to a UT2003 flak cannon.

And yes, this topic should go in the "suggestions" forum.

I have in mind a beam effect, similar to lasguns in RS, with a heat shimmer and a much shorter range.  Although I do rather like the idea of steam escaping the heat shield in place of a muzzle flash  :D

the zapy gun in HL1, lol where it shot a stream of blue light, that sort of suits it i wreckon

no, the melta doesn't fire shrapnels...
Wolf is right, the visual effect should be similar to the HL zap gun.

I think me meant the way the flak cannon is very dangerous close too, but very quickly becomes useless at range.

I was thinking a sort of near-transparent (ever-so-slightly red) low-poly model with a refract shader applied, to give it that sort of 'heat atmosphere effect'

No. Let me specify -
"A meltagun works by forcing a pyrum petrol fuel mix into a sub-molecular state (a miniature fusion reaction), and then projecting it from the barrel as a blast of incredible heat."

So a meltagun does not shoot a continous, connected beam, but a single powerful blast.
I assume (couldn't find the definition) that pyrum petrol fuel will turn into it's gaseous state when superheated by the mini-fusion.
Therefore the gun will fire a blob of superheated gass that spreads out from the muzzle much like the ammo from a shotgun or a flakcannon.

And if someone have an old official GW explanation on how meltaguns works, feel free to update and correct the wikipedia info.

i see it as a blast of a blue beam that travels very quickly, some some of semi-auto fire but with a small cooldown as to stop it being a rapid fire microwave

Yeah, maybe a good old blaster effect would do it.
A blue variant of the slow-moving blaster shots from Star Wars.
But to be loyal to the physics, it should spread out/grow in size as it travels, and also deal less damage on longer ranges.

Certainly the meltagun would need to have a cooldown to advoid melting.

actually its the plasma gun that needs a cooldown before firing again.

I see the meltagun as the crude "shotgun" of the heat weapons, its not too precise beyond close range, it has a widening blast area as said but can be fired more without the danger of overheating.

Remember in RT% and 2nd ed rules, it was only plasma weapons that needed a cooldown period. As these were the most detiled rules that TT 40k has there probably a good indication of how things should work in the fluff.

In most Artwork I have seen (specifically Eldar Firedragons) Mellta's are depicted as a rough "beam" much like a laser, but more dense, like a short "stream" of fire.    

I'd agree with this Chrome's Version of a "heat beam", but a few other suggestions are viable too. I defininitely disagree with a weapon without a projectile ( not sensible from a game design perspective ) or a shrapnel weapon (meltas are focussed energy weapons)

Sorry, I don't really know the TT rules for meltaguns, especially not the old rules.

From what I can remember from battle reports, the meltas are so concentrated that they are considered single-target (as opposed to flamers and missiles with area damage), but the weapon description certainly sounds more like a shotgun than a focused weapon.

from this description, it's far away from a shotgun..
Basically here is described as a short range weapon that fires a short and "thick" beam.... I don't agree with the "shotgun" theory :D

OK, let me explain...

When you fire a bullet out of a gun, it will stray a bit from the straight line of the barrel. How much is depending on the length of the barrel, and whether it is rifled or not.
So when you fire a blob of liquid or gass, it is like firering 1000s of small drops. Each drop will stray a bit away from the straight line of fire, with the result that the blob spreads out over an area.
Remember, unlike a bullet or grenade there is no metal shell to keep the blob together.

I still don't think that.
In your explanation, a laser beam would be scattered, since it would be like firing millions of particles.
I still think that it doesn't work in a shotgun-like way, because the mass is fired all at once and it can be considered like a single "bullet".
However these are personal impressions, based also on official art (I remember seeing somewhere, in an old manual perhaps, the meltagun in action, and it fired a "stream")

Melta guns are supposed to be short-range, highly concentrated heat beams. K? any problems with that. you stand a certian distance away from a target and you fire, the heat comes out of the melta with such massive intensity that it causes all the material in it's path the vapourise and detonate. That is how it works. it is for all intents and very powerful blowtorch, okay? a massive, epic, huge, titanic, montrous, insane, quite obese-ly powerful FOCUSED blowtorch, ther for it should look like a flame that comes to point.

For reference it is a fusion gun and fusion reactions are what takes place in the sun therefore this thing gets really really really hot, like as hot as the sun

Well, I guess that it could be a short stream rather than a single blast. I just imagined that the fusion reaction would happen in an instant, causing an explosion. But if the fusion happens over time you would have a powerful flamethrower instead.

And on the lasers...
A non-modified laser shoots light in all directions. Those are not of any use though, so what the laser engineers does is placing mirrors, so that the lightbeam bounches back and forth many times before leaving the laser.
In effect this is the same as having a 3 m barrel on a rifle.
And the laser does spread out. For a cheap red laser the dot would about double its size if you let it travel 5 m.

What i see is some kind of a prolonged welding torch beam. Not a blast.
Some kind of white-hot searing beam that quickly fizzles off into steam at longer ranges is what i see as a melta weapon. And for the animaiton, the hand holding the melta pistol should definetly shake a bit while shooting, just to show how much killing power it is holding at the moment. A sufficient sound should be added. Recording of a welding torch in combination of a steam jet anyone?

How does a fusion reaction sound?  :wink:

The "shaky hand" is probably a good idea. Like holding a powerful water hose.
Sound? I am thinking of a bunsen burner (gass torch) cranced up at maximum power.

Meltaguns are said to make a hissing noise, from the sound of it's superheated beam vapourising any molecules it comes into contact with.

Okay,

do you guys know where this discussion should end?

At the beginning.

The weapon behaviour, damage & visual feedback are all crucial parts of the game design.

Now, I understand that it is fun and esciting to argue the "fluff facts" over how it might work or should look, but in the end the decision should be made based on game design and not on fluff. Obviously you try to match the fluff up with the design, but you shouldn't do it the other way around.

I'm saying this, because Rival Species 2 should NOT be a Warhammer 40K simulation. As enticing as that sounds, Rival Species 1 proved that an "accurate" reconstruction of Warhammer 40K does not produce a fun game.

Keep in mind that despite all your discussion, and I encourage them, you should not be too disappointed if the internal development team makes a decision against your "fluff judgement". It is simply a requirement of making a good game...

Ever wondered why the Half Life 2 shotgun animation doesnt quite do what it should in the real world?

Here's Valve's comment regarding the subject in the code:

I had a real lengthy discution about this subject at the Bloodthirst forums.
It's http://www.bloodthirst.org topic: background versus gameplay, if anyone is interrested.

Yes, there might and will be a point where the simulation ends.
But Half-Life 1 and 2 were never trying to be realistic.
Games like Rainbow Six: Rouge Spear and American Army tries to give maximum realism, and is great fun too.

If you don't think realism should decide game features you wouldn't like the Badge of Blood mod (http://www.badgeofblood.com) either.
They are making a near-sci-fi mod where every game feature is based on scientific facts, from the weapon damage and tanks design to the maps, which are based on a detailed map of Mars's surface.
And the mod looks very promising, I would say.

on behalf of Eltharyon,

*SLAP!*

Thanks Al...

Simulations and Games are two very different things. Both have the ability to generate fun, but both generate their fun in different ways. Once you understand the difference, you might be able to understand what I am talking about.

All "simulations" compromise at some point, simply by necessity. Do you die when you get shot ingame? No? Well, thats the first compromise.

Many simulation games compromise for different reasons. America's Army for example. If the engagements were realistic  then the "Bad Guys" would constantly be outnumbered, underequipped and mostly inferiorly trained. A friend of mine (who works on accurate military training simulations) has described America's Army as "CS dressed up as an army game". America's Army would be much less popular if you simulated all the other aspects of war, like transportation etc... imagine having to walk around for Ages before you even found an enemy. Or you just got bombed without a chance to defend youself... say what you want, AA remains a game. Design choices were made, and my argument is to make equally sensible (or more so) design choices.


I'm not asking for the melta to be turned into a sniper rifle. I'm not even excluding your suggestions from the list of possibilites. All I'm saying is that the appropriate approach in a game designing should be:

Establish what you want the player to be able to do (Astethics). If your goal is to allow the player to kill things at short range, you might consider choosing giving him a melta, because a melta is a short ranged weapon so it would fit in with the mechanics you're going to associate with the weapon.

Under no circumstances should the game be approached the other way around (I've got a melta with the following properties, how do I fit it in?).
This is what Rival Species 1 did and what is arguably the reason for its perceived failure.

Thats it, no more discussion form my side :)

I would argue that RS1 failed because it said

and failed to ask the question


You might not want to discuss this further, I don't really want to either (because of said long argument @ bloodthirst forums) but -

Either you were really arrogant or you had a very bad time expressing your thoughts properly.
*Slap*
I would however agree that we have spend quite a lot of time discussing a single small design feature. Too much time.
But on the other hand, there were no serious discussions going on meanwhile that this discussion took away from.

And there is absolutely never, ever anything wrong in asking
"What would this feature look like in 'real life'? And can we put the 'real thing' into our game or will it distrupt the balance?"

I know that this is not a meltagun or an inferno pistol here, but still, this is pretty much what I see as them. Check out the weapon in the inquisitors left hand, firing the tight stream of fire:

http://www.hillcity-comics.com/role_play/gw/52-01-60.gif

Now am I all wrong when i think these guns (inferno, melta, hand flamers) are based on similar technology?

No, not if you say the fusion takes place over a few sec as opposed to in an instant.

There is a small difference in that a hand flamer shoots a gass that is ignited, where a meltagun fires a superheated gass.
But when the gass hits anything it will heat it up so much that it self-ignites.

actually hand flamers and flamers shoot out a highly igniting gel over an area, but lets not argue that point.

my only problem is that this discussion is now heated into how the meltagun works, what we just want is something cool looking but easy to implement into the game,

migB...

you're obviously trying not to get my point, which is not at all specifically about the melta gun, but as I said I won't discuss this point any longer.

I've said before I don't discourage fluff discussions, but when it comes to defining how something should look or work ingame it is a question of game design (never to be confused with "visual" design or story writing!). I therefore discourage everyone without a good idea what gameplay effect their suggestion has (and why thats a desired effect) to make suggestions about how things should work.

That said, I too think this thread has been build up way too much. In the end I must accept that I can't convince you and you must accept that the decision about the melta gun or anything else on this mod is out of your hands (and out of mine mostly).

Hola !

I just stumbled across this mod almost by accident. It's caught my attention because many years ago I used to love the gamesworkshop stuff and I still think that the background and settings are fabulous (well the older 1st and 2nd edition games, not the more recent stuff).
Anyway, couldn't help but add my 2 cents to the melta gun discussion (sorry).

First off some slightly different fluff from what you've already got........

Melta guns fire a blast of concentrated thermal energy created by sub-atomic agitation of the air, literally melting their target. Although short ranged, these weapons are very deadly and often considered the safe alternative to plasma weapons as it’s effects are similar but it is far less dangerous to the user. The weapon is basically silent when fired, apart from a very distinctive hiss which becomes a roaring blast as the moisture content of the air and the target is vaporised explosively.

And secondly - gameplay first, fluff second. Game-wise I'd use a concept where a cylinder is projected a short distance from the barrel in a straight line. The cylinder would stop the moment it hit something solid and inflict (max damage minus distance modifier). If the cylinder happened to pass close by something, but didn't actually hit it, then I'd have some kind of 'splash damage' caused by the intense heat. I'd probably have the shot as hitscan rather than projectile because of the short ranges involved. I'd also use creative license on the visual effects - have the cylinder produce a 'heat shimmer' and glow faintly red from the centre.

hmm i think thats the best way to make a meltagun effect ingame, would als mae do with the brillent effects of the source engine(hazy)

I agree!

I think Source already has what we're looking for ppls. Go watch the 'air distortion' effects when a Strider charges up it's big laser to fire. A meltagun does infact fire a continuous beam, I think that wording's been rephrased somewhere. So, steam from the muzzle, heat-distorted air, and a suitably evil sizzling noise, maybe amplified the closer the target is...  :twisted:

And deadmeat's coding idea is perfect.

so its sorted out by the fans, what does the entire dev team think about it

yeh funny thing, we already have a plan for it, chrome has most of the weapons figured out, best ask him.