Slugsthrowers VS Lightsabers

[Darth Carnifex]

[member="Darth Vornskr"]
Minor concussion coming to a battle near you!

Republic better watch itself.

 

[sabrina]

[member="Darth Sinna"] show me the proof.

 

[Darth Avida]

[member="sabrina"]
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Slugthrower

"However, they remained popular for the unique advantages they offered. For example, during the days of the Galactic Republic, mercenaries fearing an intervention by Jedi Knights used rapid-fire slugthrowers that were impossible to completely deflect, unlike blaster bolts. "

 

[Darth Avida]

[member="Valiens Nantaris"]
The reason they are used less in canon is due to supposed rarity of materials (which is far rarer than blaster gas.)

Also, it is actually more effective than blasters on most modern armors, as most bulky armors were replaced eons ago with nimbler ones as most armors could not take a direct hit from a blaster - regardless of how thick (within reason).

The reason, from what the wiki seems to point to us, is that regardless of weapon type, everyone adapts to it and thus makes the opposing weapon more useful. Blaster resistant garbs, such as glistaweb, is like a pin cushion to a bullet when referring to slugs. Now, I won't say they're the perfect anti-force weapon, as you can quite easily counter them when given full awareness of the situation and not caught off guard. And yes, you can re-direct the projectiles to a degree depending on distance and precision and accuracy, (see my above post in relation to an ideal scenario with a slugthrower).

Now, I am not going to ever go out and say "slugthrowers are better" - because they aren't. They're just better at the single application mentioned in this thread than a blaster. This isn't a thread about why/if slugthrowers are great and such, its purpose is to answer the question about why a lightsaber is unable to completely reflect the ammunition or just simply block (and thus melt) the projectile as one would with a blaster.

Clearly there is newer tech (such as anything with automatic projectiles at a high rate of fire with a large amount of kinetic force) that is better suited for this application, but again, the subject of the thread was "how does x happen? and why?"

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="Darth Sinna"]
Rarity of materials?! All a slugger needs is gunpowder and bits of metal. We managed to make them on Earth...but I don't see us using plasma weapons, do you?

You're also misreading about the armour. Whilst it says that a slugger can penetrate the joints or gaps, it can't penetrate regular stormtrooper armour, whilst blasters can.

On the other hand, it's relatively simple to produce anti-ballistic armour if you have a mind to. Regular bullets can be defended against here on Earth, so with the advent of full armoured suits and shields, defending against sluggers is easy if you needed to. That's why blasters rose to prominence in the first place.

In many ways I see blasters and sluggers as comparable to blackpowder and crossbows in the Renaissance. The former in both cases has significant drawbacks, especially concerning accuracy, rate of fire and visibility...but it renders armour useless. It's also the new tool, easy to use, and over time the more accurate, faster firing weapon falls out of favour in place of the more powerful, more imposing weapon.

 

[Darth Avida]

[member="Valiens Nantaris"]
I was going by the wiki in terms of rarity of slugthrower ammo materials. (It literally states outright that blaster gas is more common than ballistics ammunition.)

Edit:

"
Ammunition for slugthrowers was often rarer than blaster gas, however, and thus more expensive. Varying calibers sometimes compounded this problem."

 

[sabrina]

[member="Darth Sinna"]

In many ways I see blasters and sluggers as comparable to blackpowder and crossbows in the Renaissance. The former in both cases has significant drawbacks, especially concerning accuracy, rate of fire and visibility...but it renders armour useless. It's also the new tool, easy to use, and over time the more accurate, faster firing weapon falls out of favour in place of the more powerful, more imposing weapon.

does that make railguns and mass drivers, are like longbows. As they where still much better, than gunpowder weapons during this time?

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="Darth Sinna"]
Rarer because it's not made as much!

 

[Darth Avida]

[member="Valiens Nantaris"]
Regardless, the entire point of this thread was to answer a question, not to debate the worth of literally ancient tech.

 

[Nyxie]

Ammunition for slugthrowers was often rarer than blaster gas, however, and thus more expensive. Varying calibers sometimes compounded this problem."

I believe that is meant in the context of slugthrowers being less commonly used, and thus harder to supply, as ammunition is much less frequently made.

 

[Nyxie]

A lightsabre can contact with it on the side and cause it to ricochet away. Why? Lightsabre blades are solid plasma, they have the ability to knock things out of their course.

Also, I know it's not really important but I just wanted to point out that this is a contradiction! Solid is solid. Plasma is plasma. xD

Edit: Yeah, whatever form of containment field that is encasing the plasma, that is what the solid objects in question are actually touching. The heat simply passes through and into the solid medium. This is canonically true, and if it wasn't true, it would just be spewing molten plasma every which way.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

does that make railguns and mass drivers, are like longbows. As they where still much better, than gunpowder weapons during this time?

I consider the longbow the lightsabre; an older weapon which requires great skill, powerful in the right hands, but useless over time.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

And yet, when lightsabres clash they impart force.

But OK, slugthrowers vs lightsabres. They have key advantages against Force users, but weaknesses in key other fields.

 

[sabrina]

[member="Valiens Nantaris"] so essentially they could beat my lightsaber, though they are weak because I have heavy armour?

 

[Garith Darkhold]

That would depend on a variety of things. The type of armor, the type of ballistics, and the caliber of the slug thrower you’re using to penetrate the armor. Distance can be a factor. Depth perception is another.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="Valiens Nantaris"] so essentially they could beat my lightsaber, though they are weak because I have heavy armour?

Precisely. If you have quality 7+ armour you would just laugh at them emptying a slugger into you as it pings off your armour.

 

[sabrina]

Oh well, then what`s the point of a slug thrower then. Apart from against Jedi who like light armour [member="Valiens Nantaris"]

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

[member="sabrina"]
It's good against traditional Jedi and Sith, good for snipers and silent stalkers.

It's why I created my boltgun range - slug throwers which the punch to penetrate modern armour.

 

[Moira Skaldi]

Bolters are very efficient at purging force-users.

 

[Nyxie]

SLUGTHROWER VERSUS BLASTER: WHY CHOOSE YOUR SOLID COUNTERPART?

Slugthrower - Can't see the bullet.
Blaster - Brighter than the brightest tracer.

Slugthrower - Faster velocity and fire rate.
Blaster - Self-explanatory

Slugthrower Sniper - Your target will never see or hear it coming.
Blaster Sniper - Giant, dorky glowing composite-beam leading right back to you.

Slugthrower - Not stopped by ray shields!!!
Blaster - ...Which were designed to stop blasters.



In conclusion, slugthrowers are a niche weapon. They're old, not obsolete. In real life, we still issue firearms that were invented a full century ago (cough, Colt handguns, cough, Browning machine-guns). There are also about a half dozen weapons better than a slugthrower for fighting Force Users, such as Particle Blasters, Rail Guns, Sonic Rifles and Bolters, and I personally think that's not a slugthrower's only niche.