|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Aesiron Kor-Azor
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
41
   |
Posted - 2013.04.08 20:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
'Plasma flame-throwers' aren't physically possible... Plasma and hot gas are exactly the same substance, just extremely differentiating in temperature. So you would need to magically invent a device which cools the plasma instantaneously by about 2000'c when it hits the target.. |
Aesiron Kor-Azor
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 20:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Aesiron Kor-Azor wrote:'Plasma flame-throwers' aren't physically possible... Plasma and hot gas are exactly the same substance, just extremely differentiating in temperature. So you would need to magically invent a device which cools the plasma instantaneously by about 2000'c when it hits the target.. Why would it need to cool? plasma is suppose to be hot, not cold. In Dust we have weapons that fire plasma; assault rifles for example fire bits of plasma encapsulated in electromagnetic fields. What I'm suggesting is kind of the same thing, but in much larger bursts, and without the electromagnetic encapsulation.
Because plasma wouldn't burn to produce this 'damage-over-time burning effect'... It would just melt straight through the ground... |
Aesiron Kor-Azor
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 21:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Aesiron Kor-Azor wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Aesiron Kor-Azor wrote:'Plasma flame-throwers' aren't physically possible... Plasma and hot gas are exactly the same substance, just extremely differentiating in temperature. So you would need to magically invent a device which cools the plasma instantaneously by about 2000'c when it hits the target.. Why would it need to cool? plasma is suppose to be hot, not cold. In Dust we have weapons that fire plasma; assault rifles for example fire bits of plasma encapsulated in electromagnetic fields. What I'm suggesting is kind of the same thing, but in much larger bursts, and without the electromagnetic encapsulation. Because plasma wouldn't burn to produce this 'damage-over-time burning effect'... It would just melt straight through the ground... Well obviously that isn't possible right now, or every time you shot your AR it would burn a hole through the ground; we don't have environmental destruction (yet).
That isn't my point, my point is - the plasma would be more of an instant-kill rather than a DoT. |
Aesiron Kor-Azor
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 21:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Firing a massive chunk of plasma rather than small tiny capsules of ionised gas would be instant-kill... It is not physically possible to hold back that high of a concentration of plasma, whereas a small capsule of gas is withstand-able. |
Aesiron Kor-Azor
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 08:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Aesiron Kor-Azor wrote:Firing a massive chunk of plasma rather than small tiny capsules of ionised gas would be instant-kill... It is not physically possible to hold back that high of a concentration of plasma, whereas a small capsule of gas is withstand-able. More volume =/= more concentration. Without the encapsulation it it far less concentrated; 10x more volume does not equal 10x more power. Also the damage is much higher than the AR anyway; I intend for it do do 420 damage per second. If you took all the shots an AR fires in 1 second (12.5) and combine them into a big chunk, the plasma flamethrower would still do more damage in a second than that chunk. EDIT: Made some errors in the post before, fixed now.
That statement is illogical, more mass fired (plasma mass requires a huge amount of energy to be heated) will definitely result in more energy (thermal damage), and subsequently more concentration... |
|
|
| |
|