On 2017-11-21 at 10:04 PM, Sturn said:

I could swear I've seen it unfolded on screen, but my Google-fu (or memory) fails me.

I'd love to see it if you find it. I'm pretty sure it doesn't exist, but I'm not going to go through four movies and an entire tv show frame by frame, not to mention the comics. If had even an inkling of that kind of patience I'd go over the battle of Scarif looking for footage of the E-22 actually firing. I'd *love* to see whether the barrels actually reciprocate and whether it alternates fire or just fires both....NO! NO! WE NOT GET SIDETRACKED! BAD PENPENPEN! WE HAVE FLAUNTED OUR GEEKDOM ENOUGH!

On 2017-11-21 at 10:04 PM, Sturn said:

Hasbro released a new E11 toy in 2014 that has a folding stock. The Star Wars visual dictionary identifies it as a stock.

I know, a lot of books do. And it seemed fairly reasonable until Rogue One showed up. Gareth Edwards might have stealth retconned our stocks. And that kind of makes sense too. It would explain why no one bothers to use the stocks. I mean, it's not like most people in the franchise use the sights either but at least the stormtroopers supposedly have targeting displays in their helmets..... aaaaaanyways.

We never see the E-11's predecessor, the DC-15 (-A? -S? They keep changing their mind) carbine with an unfolded stock either. Turns out, if you build yourself one and unfold the stock it looks like this:

Since the pivot point is in front of the trigger guard it ends up being much too short to be of use as a stock, and it kind of blocks the trigger a bit. The Visual Dictionaries calls it out as a stock of course, but it sure doesn't look like one. I posit that the DC-15's stock like object might also not be a stock.

On 2017-11-21 at 10:04 PM, Sturn said:

my work rifle.

Wow. As a citizen of European Liberalistan I don't see that term bandied about very often.

1 hour ago, penpenpen said:

It looks too awkward for a tripod (not that awkwardness has ever stopped Star Wars weapon designers ) but it could possibly be a bipod. Or maybe it's supposed to be some kind of catch for a bayonet or something? Makes more sense as shared feature with the E-11.

I dunno, I think the design on the gun looks just fine for a tripod, or at least a flipdown stand. Sure the design is the same as the folding stock, but that little bit right at the end could easily just be a hinged bit of metal that you flip down and then balance the gun. I mean there are guns that do have that design. Maybe not that far down the barrel, at least from the very quick google image search I did.

1 hour ago, penpenpen said:

I suspect that the Lulz fairy wing harvesting business has made several fortunes off me over the years. I did spend a decade or so charging blindly at anyone who was wrong on the internet . Nowadays, it's all in good fun. A challenge to figure a plausible explanation for the inconsistencies.

Oh I understand, at least some people do it for fun, but there is a large number (a few on this forum) who have the mentality to break out the shivs and try and ice a mutha over this stuff, and it just makes me facepalm sometimes.

Personal retconning can make that gadget on the E11 whatever you want to be, but for me it's going to remain a folding stock. Official & unofficial sources call it a stock and we don't have any other sources calling it anything else that I'm aware of. Plus, the original props were actually made from Sterling submachinegun's. So, the gadget we are speaking of is in reality, a stock.

8 hours ago, Sturn said:

my work rifle.

5 hours ago, penpenpen said:

Wow. As a citizen of European Liberalistan I don't see that term bandied about very often.

My work rifle

A blaster would make the worst sniper rifle ever unless it had a projectile speed many times the ones in the movie. The mythbusters guy calculated it at 130-135 mph. A .308 round hits about 1600 mph. A moving target would be pretty much out of the question without a computer sight that tells the future. Even then the thing is super visible and makes a rather characteristic noise (and I know there is a suppressor in one of the books). To my mind any sniper weapon has to be a slugthrower.

2 hours ago, Archlyte said:

A blaster would make the worst sniper rifle ever unless it had a projectile speed many times the ones in the movie. The mythbusters guy calculated it at 130-135 mph. A .308 round hits about 1600 mph. A moving target would be pretty much out of the question without a computer sight that tells the future. Even then the thing is super visible and makes a rather characteristic noise (and I know there is a suppressor in one of the books). To my mind any sniper weapon has to be a slugthrower.

The blaster sniper rifles in star wars have a higher projectile speed. Meanwhile the best ones are railguns anyway.

53 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

The blaster sniper rifles in star wars have a higher projectile speed. Meanwhile the best ones are railguns anyway.

lol it better be a lot higher! But I like this idea and explanation.

6 hours ago, Archlyte said:

A blaster would make the worst sniper rifle ever unless it had a projectile speed many times the ones in the movie. The mythbusters guy calculated it at 130-135 mph. A .308 round hits about 1600 mph. A moving target would be pretty much out of the question without a computer sight that tells the future. Even then the thing is super visible and makes a rather characteristic noise (and I know there is a suppressor in one of the books). To my mind any sniper weapon has to be a slugthrower.

Actually, due to a poorly understood quirk of blaster physics, blaster bolts actually move faster the further away from their target they are. This makes them ideal for long range sniping and has led to the tried and true engineering axiom "A blaster bolt is never late, nor is it early, it arrives precisely when it means to."

10 hours ago, Sturn said:

Personal retconning can make that gadget on the E11 whatever you want to be, but for me it's going to remain a folding stock. Official & unofficial sources call it a stock and we don't have any other sources calling it anything else that I'm aware of. Plus, the original props were actually made from Sterling submachinegun's. So, the gadget we are speaking of is in reality, a stock.

Of course it's a stock in boring old reality , but since there are discrepancies either way I might as well indulge myself and argue my "case". Not to tell anyone that they're wrong about how they enjoy their favorite space opera franchise role playing game, but to share my thoughts on how I enjoy it, in case it would heighten someone elses enjoyment. I mean I could just point out things as mistakes made by the disparate parts of the franchise creators but that would only serve to weaken the suspension of disbelief that this genre runs on. On the other hand, doing a little mental gymnastics to explain away the inconsistencies actually reinforces my suspension of disbelief, and let's me enjoy it more.

Also, it's fun to use your brain box.

So maybe I posit something like this: The E-11 has a folding stock, but since it also has some issues with the barrel getting too hot to touch comfortably even with gloves, it's commonly used as a front grip in the folded forward position. When hooked up to the in helmet optics of the stormtrooper's helmet the weapon is accurate without using a stock anyway. So when the E-11D was designed for the death troopers, the stock was retained in a permanently fixed forward position, by user demand, and a fixed stock was fitted. This works pretty well with the different barrel the E-11D has as well, as that thing doesn't look they even tried to make it safe to hold.

And ofcourse when the first order rolls around the field expedient mods that made the E-11D have become streamlined into general production on the F-11D.

Form follows function.

10 hours ago, Sturn said:

My work rifle

I'll raise you my leisure shotgun .

8 hours ago, penpenpen said:

Actually, due to a poorly understood quirk of blaster physics, blaster bolts actually move faster the further away from their target they are. This makes them ideal for long range sniping and has led to the tried and true engineering axiom "A blaster bolt is never late, nor is it early, it arrives precisely when it means to."

Just out of curiosity, where did you come by this information? I think it's fascinating, but I also think that an accelerating projectile like that still isn't going to be as good as a regular bullet, a rail gun, or a laser. They tried gyrojet ammunition and I believe the acceleration profile was one of its issues.

5 hours ago, Archlyte said:

Just out of curiosity, where did you come by this information? I think it's fascinating, but I also think that an accelerating projectile like that still isn't going to be as good as a regular bullet, a rail gun, or a laser. They tried gyrojet ammunition and I believe the acceleration profile was one of its issues.

There's an article from Wired that picks the issue apart into more details than I could, but it's a fairly easily observable fact.

It comes down to a quirk of the animation process of the blaster bolts in the movies. When the action is close to the camera, the bolts need move past slow for them to be able to be visible for enough frames for our brains to have time register them. When the camera pulls backs to larger combats and space battles, we see a bigger part of the battle field, and the blaster bolts can cover more distance while still being visible to us.

So, according to visual evidence, blaster bolts do indeed move faster at longer range. They don't even accelerate, they just start out faster. Funny how physics works sometimes.

10 minutes ago, penpenpen said:

There's an article from Wired that picks the issue apart into more details than I could, but it's a fairly easily observable fact.

It comes down to a quirk of the animation process of the blaster bolts in the movies. When the action is close to the camera, the bolts need move past slow for them to be able to be visible for enough frames for our brains to have time register them. When the camera pulls backs to larger combats and space battles, we see a bigger part of the battle field, and the blaster bolts can cover more distance while still being visible to us.

So, according to visual evidence, blaster bolts do indeed move faster at longer range. They don't even accelerate, they just start out faster. Funny how physics works sometimes.

lol I see.

The best sniper rifle that is affordable at starting is the Model 77 air rifle.

1. Its silent

2. It fires armor piercing darts that can be tipped with poison. (Usually its smarttranq, but you can go for better stuff with gm help)

3. its strain damage only which means you don't have to worry about actually killing people as a Force User.

4. Its legal everywhere even on worlds with stupid laws banning most good firearms.

5. It can absolutely cripple other force users especially when you start using cortosis darts....