TR-116 vs Phasers
TR-116 vs Phasers
NOTE: THIS THREAD IS NOT INTENDED TO RESURECT THE FAMED TR-116 THREAD.
IT IS TO DISCUSS THE MERITS OF BOTH WEAPONS, AND TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST THEM.
I was recently reviewing the DITL entry on the TR-116 and was hit with a great idea. Would it be completely unrealistic to design a TR-116 with a phaser built in? That would provide the bearer with several options during a combat operation.
Thought?
IT IS TO DISCUSS THE MERITS OF BOTH WEAPONS, AND TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST THEM.
I was recently reviewing the DITL entry on the TR-116 and was hit with a great idea. Would it be completely unrealistic to design a TR-116 with a phaser built in? That would provide the bearer with several options during a combat operation.
Thought?
They say that in the Army,
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
the women are mighty fine.
They look like Phyllis Diller,
and walk like Frankenstein.
- Teaos
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15368
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: Behind you!
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
As a general rule its better to make speiatlity guns rather than swiss knife guns.
What does defeat mean to you?
Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 10988
- Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:01 pm
- Location: Timepire Mobile Command Centre
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
Well seeing as the TR-116 was shelved in favour of phasers that worked in all enviroments, I'm not seeing much of a benefit to scrapping all the existing weapons and replacing them. Yes, you could put a phaser on it ala the C-7/M-203 combo or vice versa with a phaser but in general I'd say it would just be better to put a grenade launcher on the existing phaser rifles.Mark wrote:NOTE: THIS THREAD IS NOT INTENDED TO RESURECT THE FAMED TR-116 THREAD.
IT IS TO DISCUSS THE MERITS OF BOTH WEAPONS, AND TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST THEM.
I was recently reviewing the DITL entry on the TR-116 and was hit with a great idea. Would it be completely unrealistic to design a TR-116 with a phaser built in? That would provide the bearer with several options during a combat operation.
Thought?
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
Yeah, the only barrel-mounted additions I could see being useful are grenade launchers (or the 'Trek equivalent) or targetting aids. Phaser rifles and the TR-116 fill the same role, and as Kendall mentioned there appear to have been developments in phasers which overcame the reason the TR-116 was made.
For particular roles, like sniping, the TR-116 with the microtransporter mod would be useful - but in that case, there wouldn't be a need for the phaser addition.
For particular roles, like sniping, the TR-116 with the microtransporter mod would be useful - but in that case, there wouldn't be a need for the phaser addition.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
- Captain Seafort
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15548
- Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Blighty
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
The TR-116 never really made sense as a combat weapon - normal transporters are blocked by everything from thunderstorms to funny rocks, so it stands to reason that the microtransporter would be even more severely affected. Without the transporter, it would be considerably less effective, as it's got a very low velocity round. The only thing it would really be useful for is assasinations - in which case it's size is a considerable drawback.
As for attachments to phaser rifles, they're in desparate need of a bayonet.
As for attachments to phaser rifles, they're in desparate need of a bayonet.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
-
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 21747
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
- Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
Seconded.Captain Seafort wrote:...As for attachments to phaser rifles, they're in desparate need of a bayonet.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 10988
- Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:01 pm
- Location: Timepire Mobile Command Centre
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
That was just something cooked up by the insane Vulcan and O'Brien anyways. I doubt that it was ever seriously considered as a modification for combat.Captain Seafort wrote:The TR-116 never really made sense as a combat weapon - normal transporters are blocked by everything from thunderstorms to funny rocks, so it stands to reason that the microtransporter would be even more severely affected. Without the transporter, it would be considerably less effective, as it's got a very low velocity round. The only thing it would really be useful for is assasinations - in which case it's size is a considerable drawback.
As for attachments to phaser rifles, they're in desparate need of a bayonet.
-
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 26014
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:58 pm
- Location: Poblacht na hÉireann, Baile Átha Cliath
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
Aye, wasn't the transporter bit an add-on? Maybe it was meant as a conventional sniper rifle.
As for shoving a phaser on it, don't bother. Give the trooper carrying it an MP-5 instead. Much bettter.
As for shoving a phaser on it, don't bother. Give the trooper carrying it an MP-5 instead. Much bettter.
"You've all been selected for this mission because you each have a special skill. Professor Hawking, John Leslie, Phil Neville, the Wu-Tang Clan, Usher, the Sugar Puffs Monster and Daniel Day-Lewis! Welcome to Operation MindFuck!"
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
As the standard-issue longarm?! If each soldier was equipped with an M2, they'd be able to carry an average of eight rounds apiece.Deepcrush wrote:Frak mp5, go MA DEUCE!
Yes, it was added by the Vulcan sociopath in the DS9 ep. However, that add-on would make it an effective sniping tool; without it, it's just a rather unimpressive hunting rifle.Rochey wrote:Aye, wasn't the transporter bit an add-on? Maybe it was meant as a conventional sniper rifle.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
-
- 3 Star Admiral
- Posts: 10988
- Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:01 pm
- Location: Timepire Mobile Command Centre
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
Not even that. It's man portable, yes but only if it's broken down into three pieces. Have fun using that barrel as a club.Mikey wrote:
As the standard-issue longarm?! If each soldier was equipped with an M2, they'd be able to carry an average of eight rounds apiece.
-
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 21747
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
- Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
Yeah, just give 'em this.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
Assault shotgun + no real body armor to speak of = bad for the guy on the wrong end.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
-
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 21747
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
- Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
- Contact:
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
During the part where he's auto-blasting the crap out of the water-filled buckets, just picture the Jem'hadar charge from AR-558.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Re: TR-116 vs Phasers
You wouldn't want to be on Deck 9 when Guinan pulls that out from under the bar and starts shooting the ceiling.
I'm reminded of an episode of Stargate when O'Neill and the team are demonstrating the advantages their assault rifle has over those staff blaster thingies (I never watched the show regularly).
The staffs may have been technologically superior, but the assault rifle was much more effective.
I'm reminded of an episode of Stargate when O'Neill and the team are demonstrating the advantages their assault rifle has over those staff blaster thingies (I never watched the show regularly).
The staffs may have been technologically superior, but the assault rifle was much more effective.
"You ain't gonna get off down the trail a mile or two, and go missing your wife or something, like our last cook done, are you?"
"My wife is in hell, where I sent her. She could make good biscuits, but her behavior was terrible."
"My wife is in hell, where I sent her. She could make good biscuits, but her behavior was terrible."