Poll: Something that's been spinning my head around for a while now.
- Thread starter Vrex360
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Does it make any difference? We developed it to preotect us from our weapons. It's only natural to assume that aliens would develop defenses to protect them from their weapons. I'm fairly sure that OP didn't only limit the "resistance" to actual natural resistances...Biek said:
A little of both options. We've got kevlar to stop bullets so that'd follow the adaption choice but at the same time the newer/ more powerful weapons are designed to kill ourselves more effectively so option A is also arguably true as I don't know many who can treat a lump of anti-matter shoved down their throats.
I'd have to go with A. The aliens don't have any other aliens outside their own group of species to test it on, so naturally weapons technology is going to develop towards the most efficient way of slaying members of that particular group of aliens, as its all weapon designers have to go on. Even if the weapons were meant only for use on emerging species, the weapons designers can't predict that. That said, if the biology and technology of both the current group of aliens and the discovered species is similar, naturally this doesn't apply, but even if the aliens technology is superior to the emerging species, chances are the aliens own weapons are going to be more effective proportionate to their power than the emerging species weapons, and the same applies with the emerging species weapons.
A good example is the covenant. Plasma rifles are perfect for cutting through heavy shields, but you're going to take a beating if you deploy them against heavily armoured space marines who don't have shields and instead rely on heavy armour and bullet hoses. In this case it was only the fact that elites shields are also resistant to impact damage, and being physically much stronger than the marines, which allowed them to hold their edge. This changes if the two groups have been at war with each other for a while. For example, the brutes developed impact weapons, and had this been reality, this would probably have stemmed from the fact that the humans the weapons were designed to kill wear heavy armour instead of shields so impact weapons are simply more effective. Master chief doesn't count, as he's only one man and however dangerous, the brutes are not going to design their entire armoury around killing him (Though that might be wise...) Similarly, you're going to be able to shred human armour with concentrated fire much more quickly than you can burn through it. (Though this obviously doesn't apply to skin.) So human weapons tended to be weighted in this direction. Both sides were masters of their arts, problem being that there were two different development paths meeting. And of course, the humans simply didn't have the technology to build energy weapons (with the exception of the spartan laser, which considering its unwieldy nature was probably a prototype.) But even if they could, and had the war with the covenant not broken out, energy weapons wouldn't have come into their own until shields were commonplace, in my opinion anyway.
A good example is the covenant. Plasma rifles are perfect for cutting through heavy shields, but you're going to take a beating if you deploy them against heavily armoured space marines who don't have shields and instead rely on heavy armour and bullet hoses. In this case it was only the fact that elites shields are also resistant to impact damage, and being physically much stronger than the marines, which allowed them to hold their edge. This changes if the two groups have been at war with each other for a while. For example, the brutes developed impact weapons, and had this been reality, this would probably have stemmed from the fact that the humans the weapons were designed to kill wear heavy armour instead of shields so impact weapons are simply more effective. Master chief doesn't count, as he's only one man and however dangerous, the brutes are not going to design their entire armoury around killing him (Though that might be wise...) Similarly, you're going to be able to shred human armour with concentrated fire much more quickly than you can burn through it. (Though this obviously doesn't apply to skin.) So human weapons tended to be weighted in this direction. Both sides were masters of their arts, problem being that there were two different development paths meeting. And of course, the humans simply didn't have the technology to build energy weapons (with the exception of the spartan laser, which considering its unwieldy nature was probably a prototype.) But even if they could, and had the war with the covenant not broken out, energy weapons wouldn't have come into their own until shields were commonplace, in my opinion anyway.
A but if the aliens were planning to attack humans or whatever they would've designed it to be more affective against humans then fellow aliens.
I'd say it depends on the species. If your dealing with some kind of unity/hive mind that by it's nature doesn't fight each other, then "B" makes a lot of sense to avoid friendly fire incidents.
Otherwise it's "A" all the way because they are after all making weapons to fight, and presumably wind up using them on each other at least some of the time, and want them to be effective.
Otherwise it's "A" all the way because they are after all making weapons to fight, and presumably wind up using them on each other at least some of the time, and want them to be effective.
