Realism vs. sci-fi - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

View Poll Results: Do you prefer realist W40k figures like IG, or more sci-fi like Tau?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • Realism

    19 48.72%
  • Sci-Fi

    20 51.28%
Closed Thread
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 51
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    245
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    1 (x1)

    Realism vs. sci-fi

    a little poll


  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Ft. Irwin CA USA
    Posts
    278
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    1 (x1)

    I perfer a some realism with Sci-Fi.

  4. #3
    Senior Member Sister_mel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    506
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    32 (x2)

    Well actually I think it's good to have a bit of both. I think 40k is on the verge of sci-fi army's yet they aren't just green blobs from mars! GW team have done great jobs in making the army's seem realistic, well I'm not sure if thats the word but pherhaps profeshional is the right word. Other than IG we don't really have any realistic army's. But it's the 41st milienium so what do you expect to have? :-)

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    245
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    1 (x1)

    agree with you, but my idea of sci-fi was troops like those from Starship Troopers, not gerrilla or jungel warriors like those of IG

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    245
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    1 (x1)

    and by the way, why is man still using projectile weapons in the 41st millenium? thats like 37 997 years from now, and how technology has developped the last decenny it looks pretty weird to still use those kinds of weapons... there must have been a return-to-the-primitive-stage somewhere between now and then

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Ft. Irwin CA USA
    Posts
    278
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    1 (x1)

    Someone else want to tell him this? I don't fully understand it.

  8. #7
    Senior Member rtsposer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA, MD
    Posts
    290
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    1 (x1)

    and by the way, why is man still using projectile weapons in the 41st millenium?
    A: lasguns, lascannons, plasma weapons and Melta weapons are all what i think can be safly called non-kinetic energy weapons.

    B: Fluff wise there was some dark ages stuff going on i think

    C: its pretty easy to make kinetic energy weapons, as they are rather simple and effective, take a depleted uranium shell for instance, Pure kinetic energy consisting of a solid slug, rather than an HE chemical weapon or a shaped charge of some sort

    D: Its pretty hard to make non projectile weapons work well. There is a chemical laser thats like REALLY POWERFUL the only problem is its expensive as all hell to use and so big it has to be mounted in a 747 in order to make it mobile.


    I am HARDCORE SCI-FI ok, but sci-fi and realisim go hand in hand, good scifi is VERY realistic. Notice that modern scifi books don't talk about taking 'magical' space ships to other planets at "warp" speeds, rather they are getting into nanotech and A.I. as well as other by products of the informaton and materials science age we live in.


    In fact my biggest beef with the realism of 40k is that its old and out dated, sure ten years ago it might have been good quality sci-fi but its not by modern science anymore. Furthermore i thnk good scifi shouldn't use the 'easy out' of psykers to solve all their problems, I have Serious beef with the concept of the Emporor eating people's souls in order to make Warp flight possible, i mean its just silly don't you think?

  9. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    1 (x0)

    im very new to the 40k universe and as an outsider i thought that i could give a fresh perspective on this topic. first off, the I.G. look like a little on the old side of things. their equipment for the most part seems outdated. i mean they use tanks with treads and stuff and the tau are all hovering in the air. second, the I.G. looks like pretty much any army that you can see today. its cool that the armies all look different but the armies that have been around for a while actually look about that old. i have seen the new cadian figures that are going to be coming out and they look pretty good but even so they look like any troops that you can see today. but i have to say that i could be biased because i prefer the look of a streamlined force like the tau over the rougher image of the I.G. or even the space marines.

  10. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    1 (x1)

    I voted Sci-Fi..but im in agreement that sci-fi and realism go hand in hand.

    Im also a little surprised by the lack of technology that the IG shows. But then you never know what kind of technology they are really using. Whos to say that projectile weapons arent still used because they were found to be more effecient and effective than energy weapons? I mean.. if ammo isnt an issue..and projectile weapons are accurate..and can peirce armor..then why change?

    It seems to me..from what level history ive read.. that there was a huge fallout of some kind..or a mass exodus or something..

    look at this:

    "The Land Raider is based upon the near-mythical Standard Template Construct (STC) technology, and as such its design pre-dates the Imperium by many thousands of years. Its rediscovery is commonly attributed to the great Technomagus Arkhan Land at the very birth of the Imperium. When the Imperial Land Raider first saw combat is now a matter of much debate amongst Imperial archaeologists. Some claim it was during the Siege of Delebrion that a Land Raider first fired its lascannons in anger, others point towards the massed tank battles of Calysto Platinum and say that the Land Raider drew first blood during the mighty conflict that raged over that world at the start of the Emperor’s Great Crusade."

    that leads me to beleive that the land raider is some kind of ancient technology that was dug up and reinstituted into the new imperial army. So.. i dunno if there is a historical timeline for warhammer out there..but i think its safe to say that "something" happened that explains why everyone isnt flying around shooting lasers and such.

    BTW..one thing i dont see in the IG that seems like it would fit.. Androids. Heck.. they could make a whole other faction out of Androids if they wanted to expand on the game/universe.

  11. #10
    Senior Member LRSeriesIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    UMCP, College Park, Maryland
    Age
    32
    Posts
    581
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Reputation
    24 (x2)

    and by the way, why is man still using projectile weapons in the 41st millenium?
    B: Fluff wise there was some dark ages stuff going on i think
    Exactly. Imperial technology isn't really in a state of development or invention (they've been using the same stuff for the last 10000 years) and is all based on the records of designs which survived the Age of Strife and so forth. Besides, if the weapons were too high tech the entire idea of a basic infantryman would go out the window.

    rtsposer's other explanations were all quite good too.

    Also a solid projectile is not going to be subject to nasty things like atmospheric variations and so forth. Besides, light doesn't explode as it enters a target, and that's no fun...

    My biggest problem with 40k is just when it is set and the imbalance of technology. If it were set a few thousand years from now it would make a little more sense, but it would still be a bit odd. For example, a modern M1A1 tank can pick out and engage enemy targets in pitch black darkness at ranges of something around 1-2+ km if I recall correctly using thermal imaging (infrared), but a Land Raider is limited by night to ranges of a few hundred meters at most? And then consider that even without the autosenses in power armor a Space Marine is capable of seeing infrared light, which should give him extremely good night vision without any technological aids. For the record this particular issue is new to 3rd edition (troops like SM and Eldar could see throught things like smoke and so forth in 2nd ed.), but 2nd ed. had its own problems (like a volley of crossbow fire being theoretically capable of taking down a terminator... Also, a basic infantryman gets a low quality flak jacket and a helmet and a rifle (not even a good rifle) and that's it, yet they have the technology to travel faster than the speed of light? Not even some night vision? That seems a little harsh.

    Then of course there is the case of weapons ranges in general. A modern sniper can make a shot with a high probability of a kill at a range of up to and beyond 1km. If you use a laser weapon which is not affected by wind and gravity and better optics the range could be even longer. Yet even a sniper rifle in 40k is limited to what? A few hundred meters at most, and probably not even that.

    There is also the issue of the Battle Cannon. This is a weapon good at penetrating armor that also has a fairly large blast. The laws of physic and energy conservation would dictate that if you want one you are going to avoid the other.

    The whole reason for all of these imbalances is that the whole game is based around game play and being interesting and cool, not being 100% believable and realistic. Once you accept that, everything makes sense.
    "Don't Delay-The best is the enemy of the good. By this I mean that a good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan next week. War is a very simple thing, and the determining characteristics are self-confidence, speed, and audacity. None of these things can ever be perfect, but they can be good."
    -General George S. Patton, Jr.

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts