Duck and Cover

THere are a few, and at first I thought the Fatman nuke catapault thing was one. Until I remembered this thing they thought about using back in the 50's. It was called the Davy Crockett: http://www.brookings.edu/FP/projects/nucwcost/davyc.HTM

Sure the one in FO3 is smaller, or so we are led to believe, but it is only logical that as time passes and technology improves, that the size of the warhead could be greatly reduced with little or no effect on yield.

nah, they actually have stolen this idea from da Redeemer of UT 04



Has nothing to do with 50/60 or some other century, they have stolen the idea straight from those id niggas, not a big thang, chinese people do da same, but get dissed with complaints, know what m sayin.

DaC-Sniper wrote:they have stolen the idea straight from those id niggas

Maybe I've misread but UT has not one single thing to do with id Software?

fallout ranger wrote:it is only logical that as time passes and technology improves, that the size of the warhead could be greatly reduced with little or no effect on yield.

Critical mass?

Clarify...

fallout ranger wrote:THere are a few, and at first I thought the Fatman nuke catapault thing was one. Until I remembered this thing they thought about using back in the 50's. It was called the Davy Crockett: http://www.brookings.edu/FP/projects/nucwcost/davyc.HTM

Sure the one in FO3 is smaller, or so we are led to believe, but it is only logical that as time passes and technology improves, that the size of the warhead could be greatly reduced with little or no effect on yield.

what the christ are you talking about

its a small arms weapon, you can shoot it at an enemy who is fifteen feet away, how is a nuclear weapon in such a situation even the least bit practical, or even "wow, cool!"

whats the use of a tiny tiny miniature nuclear explosion? just use a fucking grenade

Radiation and way more yield. 40lb nuke=20,000 lbs TNT.

But Overkill? Fuck yes.

SuperH wrote:Maybe I've misread but UT has not one single thing to do with id Software?

you are absolutely correct, sir.

Didn't we already have about 50 conversations why the fatman is a horrible idea? Just because its from the 50's doesn't neccesarily mean it fits, I think. 50's retro sci-fi != Stick abunch of shit from the 50's into it to make it look like it fits into fallout.

unless it's completely ubiquitous to find the weapon and ammo, then I can just think to myself it's a Chinese invention/prototype meant to combat the USA's Powered Armor.

The super sledge design is terrible, why do they keep fucking with the classics? Is there anyone here that thought the super sledge looked shitty? Saint must be turning in his grave, that was one of his favorite weapons. LOOK WHAT THEY'VE DONE TO IT!

The Behemoth. I cannot forgive, not at any level. It needs to be removed ASAP.

As long as we are discussing dumb weapons, what the hell is up with the rock/ barbie head throwing gun. Why? why? Who asked for that? I can't throw rocks with my hand?

Every game must have a gravity gun. Didn't you get the memo?

Wolfman Walt wrote:Didn't we already have about 50 conversations why the fatman is a horrible idea? Just because its from the 50's doesn't neccesarily mean it fits, I think. 50's retro sci-fi != Stick abunch of shit from the 50's into it to make it look like it fits into fallout.

Worry not, after firing 10000 nukes it will simply erode away.

fallout ranger wrote:Clarify...

You can't just take a nuke and scale it down. The nuking part of a nuke depends on uncontrolled chain reaction of the fuel. Chain reaction results from the fuel achieving critical mass, that is enough fissile material clustered together so to speak. The keyword here is mass. In short, you need enough of the fuel to make a boom, you can't just take any amount you want - this is not TNT. Assuming you use the most efficient sphere-shaped ingnition system, amount of the material you need to achieve critical mass is 50kg of Uranium-235 or 10kg of Plutonium-239. There are many other fissile materials you can use, but even the most efficient, Californium-251, needs 5kg of it to work, and these values are for bare spheres too - not including casing etc. which will interfere with the chain reaction. You could use neutron reflector around the mass to increase the efficiency, but it's not effective enough.

So forget about shooting nukes from your pistol or whatever you were hoping for.

Koki wrote:

fallout ranger wrote:Clarify...

You can't just take a nuke and scale it down. The nuking part of a nuke depends on uncontrolled chain reaction of the fuel. Chain reaction results from the fuel achieving critical mass, that is enough fissile material clustered together so to speak. The keyword here is mass. In short, you need enough of the fuel to make a boom, you can't just take any amount you want - this is not TNT. Assuming you use the most efficient sphere-shaped ingnition system, amount of the material you need to achieve critical mass is 50kg of Uranium-235 or 10kg of Plutonium-239. There are many other fissile materials you can use, but even the most efficient, Californium-251, needs 5kg of it to work, and these values are for bare spheres too - not including casing etc. which will interfere with the chain reaction. You could use neutron reflector around the mass to increase the efficiency, but it's not effective enough.

So forget about shooting nukes from your pistol or whatever you were hoping for.

For a second I thought that because you ditched your terrible fucking ytmnd avatar that you were someone intelligent.

But hey, your physics are like, tasty, and it's too bad bethesda doesn't know at least as much about them as a ytmnd fan.

Koki wrote:You can't just take a nuke and scale it down. The nuking part of a nuke depends on uncontrolled chain reaction of the fuel. Chain reaction results from the fuel achieving critical mass, that is enough fissile material clustered together so to speak. The keyword here is mass. In short, you need enough of the fuel to make a boom, you can't just take any amount you want - this is not TNT. Assuming you use the most efficient sphere-shaped ingnition system, amount of the material you need to achieve critical mass is 50kg of Uranium-235 or 10kg of Plutonium-239. There are many other fissile materials you can use, but even the most efficient, Californium-251, needs 5kg of it to work, and these values are for bare spheres too - not including casing etc. which will interfere with the chain reaction. You could use neutron reflector around the mass to increase the efficiency, but it's not effective enough.

So forget about shooting nukes from your pistol or whatever you were hoping for.

So laser/plasma weapons are OK, but nuclear weapons, regardless of how small they are, are out of the question?

Realism != fun

{
if(IQ<80)

VasikkA wrote:Realism != fun

();
else
Realism = fun();
}

VasikkA wrote: So laser/plasma weapons are OK, but nuclear weapons, regardless of how small they are, are out of the question?

Realism != fun

Let me put it this way. Humans are exposed to various forms of laser and plasma on a daily basis. Goddamn flourecent lighting generates lil bits o plasma.

Nobody, not anybody, in the entire world, is exposed to more than one atomic explosion, no matter the size (a controlled reaction is not an atomic explosion) on a daily basis. No reactor powered car is going to create an atomic explosion from putting a few bullets into it 200 years later, let fucking alone if it was running and reacting at full fucking bore when you shoot the unholy christ out of it, and no explosion, atomic or no, the size of the ones in the FailOrc3 demo causes a mushroom cloud. Mushroom clouds are not produced by virtue of the atomic nature of the explosion, Todd. Pete. Get your fucking physics together, god damn you.

It's really, really fucking obvious that Bethesda just slapped "radiation" and "nuclear explosions" every fucking where in the game to prove that they actually know what Fallout was about, which of course, is incorrect, and yet again bethesda focuses on cramming shit that was barely, barely in the original fallout games (atomic explosions, 50's music) into FailOrc3 until it's bleeding from the fucking eyes, and still wonders why people shake their head sadly at the ruined jack the ripper victim they show at game conventions.

Koki wrote:{
if(IQ<80)

VasikkA wrote:Realism != fun

();
else
Realism = fun();
}

Fuck you. Next.

popscythe wrote:blabber

Look, I don't know what treatment Bethesda is giving to Fallout 3 in regard to nuclear weapons, nor do I really care anymore. I'm discussing the concept of nuclear weapons in a Fallout game, which, in my opinion are acceptable on a limited level(without messing around with weaponry and combat balance, that is). I don't see a problem with a one-shot miniature nuke launcher as a quest/plot item.

Killzig wrote:The Behemoth. I cannot forgive, not at any level. It needs to be removed ASAP.

Hear hear!

Double and then some on top of Horrigan is just too absurd.