the meltagun(suggestion)

[migb]

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.

[The Vastator]

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")

[Tortured_Soul]

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

[migb]

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.

[zenarion]

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?

[migb]

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.

[ChromeAngel]

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

[Eltharyon]

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:

// If shotgun totally emptied then a pump animation is needed
   
   //NOTENOTE: This is kinda lame because the player doesn't get strong feedback on when the reload has finished,
   //         without the pump.  Technically, it's incorrect, but it's good for feedback...

[migb]

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.

[Alhaus]

on behalf of Eltharyon,

*SLAP!*

[Eltharyon]

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

[migb]

I would argue that RS1 failed because it said

I've got a melta with the following properties and I will in

and failed to ask the question

I've got a melta with the following properties, how do I fit it in?

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

do you guys know where this discussion should end?

At the beginning.

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?"

[zenarion]

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?

[migb]

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.

[Darknar]

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,