Would different "types" of phasers make sense?

[evilchumlee]

To clarify what i'm asking here, modern day, real-life come in a plethora of different types... pistols, sub-machine guns, machine guns, carbines, rifles, shotguns etc. They all do a similar thing, shoot bullets to kill things, but they do them in slightly different ways for different applications.

In Star Trek, we know we have three general types... a small, compact Type 1, the venerable handheld Type 2, and a more powerful Type 3 "rifle".

If one were trying to extrapolate out a purpose built, Starfleet combat force, would it actually make any sense to have different types? Like, would there be any point of of a "Phaser SMG"? How it would even work?

I've been able to reconcile a few different potential things that make sense...

A "marksman / sniper" rifle variant that fires a bolt rather than a beam, configured to hold its energy over especially long distances with advanced optics built in. These could be like, crazy long range with the technology, like potentially being able to hit something miles away if there was direct line of sight. The sniper probably wouldn't even need to be particularly skilled... the optics and computers would take care of calculating the shot.

A "machine gun" type that isn't actually a machine gun. I think of it as a "Sustained Fire" Phaser, that is basically just a phaser rifle with a massive power pack that is capable of firing a sustained, constant beam over a longer period of time, or a powerful wide beam for a shorter amount of time but longer than you would get out of a normal phaser.

Maybe something like a "close quarters"/shotgun type that is configured to fire in a wider beam, conical arc. The thing is... you should be able to do that with just a regular phaser, so i'm not sure it REALLY makes any sense? Perhaps it could work for just being like purpose built for it rather than needing to be configured... you can pick up a the CQB Phaser and not have to fiddle with settings, it's just ready to go.

Those are really the only three things I can think of that seem to make any sense. I'm curious about ideas here.

 

[1001001]

Moving to Trek Tech

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

To clarify what i'm asking here, modern day, real-life come in a plethora of different types... pistols, sub-machine guns, machine guns, carbines, rifles, shotguns etc. They all do a similar thing, shoot bullets to kill things, but they do them in slightly different ways for different applications.

First, you need to explore each category of FireArm and figure out why each section exists IRL.

• Hand Guns come in various Generalized Classes:
  • CCW (Concealed Carry Weapon) sized
  • Regular Duty Weapon size
  • Competition size
  • PDW (Personal Defense Weapon)
  • SMG (Sub-Machine Gun) type Pistols AKA Machine Pistols
• Carbines:
  • PDW's
  • SMG's
• "Regular Rifles" AKA Long Gun
  • There's an entire deep history/evolution tree on this itself
• Machine Guns
  • There's also a long history on the evolution of the Machine Gun and it's various roles
• Shot Guns
  • It's usage is fascinating and it's modern relevance is more important than ever given the rise of Anti-Personnel Mini Drones becoming prevalent in the BattleField now thanks to the War in Ukraine.
• Sniper Rifles
  • Anti-Personnel
  • Anti-Material

Each weapon category has a reason to exist and why new iterations of each weapon is constantly being developed & refined.

In Star Trek, we know we have three general types... a small, compact Type 1, the venerable handheld Type 2, and a more powerful Type 3 "rifle".

If one were trying to extrapolate out a purpose built, Starfleet combat force, would it actually make any sense to have different types? Like, would there be any point of of a "Phaser SMG"? How it would even work?

From here you can extrapolate what types of Beam Weaponry you would need for a Standardized Ground Combat Force.

You figure out what roles each weapon plays, than you design it.

 

[evilchumlee]

Each weapon category has a reason to exist and why new iterations of each weapon is constantly being developed & refined.


From here you can extrapolate what types of Beam Weaponry you would need for a Standardized Ground Combat Force.

You figure out what roles each weapon plays, than you design it.

Gonna kind of reply backwards here....

First, you need to explore each category of FireArm and figure out why each section exists IRL.

Hand Guns come in various Generalized Classes:

• CCW (Concealed Carry Weapon) sized
• Regular Duty Weapon size
• Competition size
• PDW (Personal Defense Weapon)
• SMG (Sub-Machine Gun) type Pistols AKA Machine Pistols

In this case, it does very seem like the standard Type 1 and Type 2 would fit all of these roles. The only difference I could potentially see is maybe a "Competition" phaser would be styled a bit a more ergonomically than a TNG Type 2, but otherwise they should fill the functions of all of these.

Carbines:

• PDW's
• SMG's

This is where i'm sure there's any thing these do that a Type 2 or Type 3 wouldn't.

"Regular Rifles" AKA Long Gun

• There's an entire deep history/evolution tree on this itself

Generally covered by the Type 3.

• Machine Guns
  • There's also a long history on the evolution of the Machine Gun and it's various roles

This is why I was thinking some sort of "sustained fire" version that could be used for suppression and what not.

• Shot Guns
  • It's usage is fascinating and it's modern relevance is more important than ever given the rise of Anti-Personnel Mini Drones becoming prevalent in the BattleField now thanks to the War in Ukraine.

Kinda went over that.

• Sniper Rifles
  • Anti-Personnel
  • Anti-Material

I think when you get to phaser technology, I don't know that there would need to be a functional difference between those two. I see the value in having a phaser equipped for long range, but between anti-personnel and anti-material, that largely seems like it would be just a quick setting change.

Now I *DO* think that some other types of weapons would be useful, like man-portable photon launchers.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Sorry, not to be pedantic, but shotguns do not shoot bullets, they shoot pellets collectively called shot, or in some cases a slug, which are different. All guns shoot projectiles, though, which is what you're getting at.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Gonna kind of reply backwards here....

First, you need to explore each category of FireArm and figure out why each section exists IRL.

In this case, it does very seem like the standard Type 1 and Type 2 would fit all of these roles. The only difference I could potentially see is maybe a "Competition" phaser would be styled a bit a more ergonomically than a TNG Type 2, but otherwise they should fill the functions of all of these.



This is where i'm sure there's any thing these do that a Type 2 or Type 3 wouldn't.



Generally covered by the Type 3.




This is why I was thinking some sort of "sustained fire" version that could be used for suppression and what not.




Kinda went over that.




I think when you get to phaser technology, I don't know that there would need to be a functional difference between those two. I see the value in having a phaser equipped for long range, but between anti-personnel and anti-material, that largely seems like it would be just a quick setting change.

Now I *DO* think that some other types of weapons would be useful, like man-portable photon launchers.

You kind of went in analyzing backwards.

You look at it from a Phaser PoV and tried to fit their roles into existing FireArms category.

I'm asking you to understand why the FireArms categories exist FIRST.

Then you go back and assess what kind of threats that the different types of Phasers will exist to deal with, along with the various roles they play in terms of each Phasers speciality and how it applies to each individual & group level dynamics.

After that, you'll truly understand what kind of categories you really need to create.