New answers tagged

0

Your basic problem is body mass. If your pixies only mass as much as a golf ball and are limited to muscle powered weaponry then they can't launch weapons like javelins, sling stones and arrows etc with much more force behind them than their own body weight. The first limiting factor is muscle power. For example the aprox maximum draw eight of a typical long ...


0

In one word: viruses. These little demons spread through the humans like covid today. So all the pixies would need to do is create a new virus, maybe a modified covid-19. Then, the pixies watch the virus spread until there's an epidemic and logging is temporarily halted because of the virus and all the cut down trees are replaced with new trees. The pixies ...


2

Poison immune; small; invisible? I'd go with poison darts, delivered from a blow gun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowgun Lightweight ammunition, means you can carry a reasonable number of 'reloads' - although your range on the blowgun might not be very much, that doesn't matter if they can't see you. And you've a range of options for the toxin, in terms ...


10

The Internet! Invisible, flying golf balls that can type. Who can out-hack that? But who needs to hack anything? That takes too much study. They find out somebody works one of the bulldozers, and start searching for child porn from his computer. Or they post a couple of one-line death threats to Twitter in his name. Bye-bye. NEXT!!! Best part is, the ...


6

Since you specifically asked for deadly ranged weapons, I will say terror attacks using human machines. Terrorism is a horrific but quite effective tactic if you are out-numbered and out-gunned. Even Lt Cmdr Data agrees. In the case of the pixies, their lack of weaponry isn't an issue of technology - they are smart enough and freaking invisible, so they ...


5

Framing challenge: Why ranged weapons? Or weapons at all? Just poison the humans. And not obvious, quick-killing poisons, but the slow ones. Or those that just get diagnosed as an obvious normal illness (heart attack etc)


0

But is it possible to still create things like... rockets (or fireworks), even if you cannot produce propellants? To a certain extent. You could conceivably make steam rockets, for example, but given their relative complexity, difficult material requirements and unexciting performance compared to the simplest of solid fuel rockets it seems unlikely that ...


14

Invisible to us, we only see them on photos. Very good. So they can fly right up to our eyes with a sharp blade and... well, that flash was the last thing you ever saw. An advantage is that one blinded man needs another one to take care of him and it is much scarier than seeing your comrades falling dead with a dart sticking out of their neck. However, that ...


19

As big as official ping pong ball. Invisible to us, we only see them on photos. They don't need to use ranged weapons at all, which is good because air behaves differently at small scales (viscous effects dominate over inertia effects) and the sort of projectile weapon sized for your pixies would have negligible range and probably not enough power to ...


49

Don't bother killing humans, kill their stuff! When you kill a human they go crazy. Humans with weapons and blue flashing lights appear with big scary dogs that can smell pixies and chomp them down, and when human forensics dudes figure out the killer is small and invisible they go around with cameras and slaughter pixies. It just doesn't work out when ...


5

Miniaturized slingshots Can use stray marbles and small stones to hit at humans and machinery causing more failures, and infighting amongst workforces, as it seemed the friendly Joe was intentionally throwing stones. If used at a short distance, the slings can cause non serious injuries, enough to frighten but not enough to kill. The escalation can be ...


5

Frame challenge: it is impossible to prevent the creation of propellants without radically altering chemistry itself. Even table sugar (sucrose) can be used as a propellant with an appropriate oxidizer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_candy Frame challenge #2: High explosives can be used as propellant either by modifying the combustion rate, e.g. by ...


3

Existing ground-based inertial confinement fusion pellets implode at ~300km/s, and are accelerated over a distance of a few mm (and this is far from the lab speed record). These are laser powered, and the shock waves due to the sudden acceleration heat the pellet substantially before it hits the center. Gentle acceleration up to 100km/s over 100m doesn't ...


1

I really do not understand the purpose of the 100m barrel, unless you are projecting a VERY big bullet. Some references here about the American navy, but it is so far behind. The leader is undoubtedly the Chinese army. Railgun technology, which uses electromagnetic force to send projectiles up to 125 miles at 7.5 times the speed of sound, is cheaper and ...


5

Based on current proposed weapons, we can estimate the rough acceleration we can achieve with a rail gun and scale that up. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_Rail_Gun.php With a 10 meter barrel, we get about 2500 meters per second. But the muzzle velocity is sqrt(2 * barrelLength * acceleration). So a 100 meter barrel would have a speed of about 7900 ...


13

For a rough idea, you can use Luke Campbell's approximation for coilgun performance, which basically imagines the gun as a tube of energy in the form of the magnetic field, which is swept out by a projectile that turns it into kinetic energy. You can assume that any figures this gives are over-optimistic, but it isn't a bad upper-bound for coilgun ...


11

Very high G are possible. But not efficient or easy. A coilgun projectile is just a hunk of matter, there is no part of it that is more or less breakable than another part. Correctly designed, the forces acting on the projectile act on the whole projectile, equally. In effect the projectile would not "feel" any acceleration, it would just be ...


1

If you'd like scalpels for your super weapons, might I suggest the Ultra-Relativistic Electron Beam, or the Macron accelerator? The former even works rather well in atmospheres! For UREBs, you avoid the issues of electrons spreading out due to having like charges due to the intensity of the relativistic effect of their speed. At TeV energies there are so ...


5

Rock falls. Everybody dies. You don't need relativistic speed for an asteroid to be deadly. The gravity well of the planet will give a good-sized rock enough speed to be a devastating kinetic impactor. That idea combined with tech is sometimes called a "rod of god" - a massive, dense object like a tungsten rod dropped from space. Add a few ...


3

Bad Idea - but like many bad ideas, you can 3D print it at home! I'm not going to link to the final product or modify the OpenSCAD source to do this because I don't feel like getting SWAT'd. But it's trivial - if you really want to do this you'll need to learn the 5 commands yourself from the tutorials included. Download a ready-to-print nerf gun from ...


4

People are inventing ways to hide guns since guns were invented, look at this example A gun hidden within a bible, made for Francesco Morozini, Doge of Venice (1619-1694). The owner of the bible could pull the silk bookmark to shoot while the book was still closed. Now on display at the Museo Correr in Venice A nerf blaster is just a big plastic container, ...


4

It is obviously possible. It is also something people have thought of before: from snopes, Shotgun Disguised as Water Gun or Super Soaker. (probably fake). I'm sure similar rumours have popped up about paintball guns, and the reason why plenty of paintball centres don't have red pellets, etc. Honestly, given the tendency of police in some parts of the world ...


2

The most realistic of your two choices is the 10-gigatonne nuke. Accelerating a projectile to the speed of light is an exceptionally difficult task, and is best done over scales of millions or billions of kilometres, or even more. Obviously building a gun with a barrel this long is impractical, regardless of technology. It requires absolutely mindboggling ...


1

I am going to go on a limb here, and say that if there is a farmer that uses a laser rifle as varmint repellent, then the tech level of that world is off the charts (why then there still is varmints to be repelled is another question, maybe the technology has peaked and has become apocryphal, like in StarWars or Dune?). So let's get with it. As the other ...


4

Video Game Console. It is a toy weapon and you can get online with it and hire a hitman to kill your twin. Or, if you want a less bloody fight, use it like in the 1983 movie Wargames and hack into Norad. Threaten everyone with nuclear destruction if your twin doesn't put down the lawn dart.


6

Fibre optic whip: Those fibres are very strong, you may be able to use one as a garotte, but if not, ligature strangulation by pretty lighted rope should do the trick. Or, juggling knives I sell these in my own store, and while the edge is slightly dulled, it's still pretty sharp metal. You can draw blood accidentally by handling them wrong.


2

Lawn Darts (for obvious reasons) and Bocce Balls (they are really hard) seem the most lethal outside a chemistry set.


2

As the majority of the answers indicate, radiation weapons are a joke versus projectiles for damage. But maybe we can exploit their properties to use them smarter. You can easily realign your EM beam with mirrors (auto-aim). With (very) high tech, it is possible that a weapon with an enemy anatomy database could direct a high-power penetrating (xray/gamma) ...


13

that would do a similar amount of damage as a .22 LR round This criteria makes the question a non-starter. It is impossible for an pulsed energy beam weapon to do a similar amount of damage to a projectile weapon. The damage done by a projectile weapon is almost totally due to impact energy. It is a kinetic energy weapon. F=ma. The force applied is from the ...


3

As long as the pulse is short enough, the width of the pulse hardly matters to the racoon at all, so quoting wattage doesn't tell you anything about the killing power of the pulse rifle. Better to quote the rifle's pulse energy in Joules. A 300 Joule rifle puts out pulses with energy similar to bullets, but you have to worry about how well it's absorbed. ...


8

A .22LR bullet has 41 Joules of kinetic energy at leaving the muzzle. $J_{vaporize\ water} = 2260 kJ/kg$ A Watt is $Joules \over seconds$, so how dangerous your Laser Rifle is depends on the pulse width. 1 ms pulse width = 0.3 Joules 1 second pulse width = 300 Joules if and only if you can keep the rifle trained on the critter. And as was mentioned before ...


8

"It depends" I'm of the opinion that until someone can make a decent pulse laser, then lasers just aren't very useful weapons (and a quick glance at EDL and Ash's answers will confirm this). A pulse laser needs to deliver enough energy to vapourise a chunk of the target, and deliver enough of those pulses in a short enough time to carve a hole ...


13

It's not so much the wattage, it's how you focus it Square cube laws answer is ballpark correct; the figure I got was 2g impacting at 200m/s has 0.5 * 0.002 * 200^2 joules of kinetic energy. That's works out to about 400 joules. And Mike's comment is correct, a kw laser for 100ms it's only going to slightly warm the skin on impact. A bullets impact doesn't ...


4

The ammo type you mention delivers in the range of 178 to 259 joules per shot. Just divide this value by the pulse duration to find the wattage. I.e.: if the pulse lasts 100 ms, then the wattage would be in the range of 1,780 to 2,590 W. If one shot is composed of multiple pulses, use the total pulse duration. This is for short to medium range. For really ...


4

Hotties in planes! You need some characters with the perspective to tell your story. The people in charge of firing the big guns don't have that perspective and they also never work out and their skin is terrible. You need fighter pilots to fly out and look at the kaiju with their own gleaming eyes. They can help aim the big guns and satellite weapons ...


8

Things to keep in mind: At least 50% of your soldiers are off-duty or sleeping at any particular time. Another 10% are likely away on leave. Some small percentage are on sick-call, a few may be incarcerated. 3,000 at a base means perhaps 1200 awake and on-duty. 12-hour shifts wear people down after a few weeks. It lowers morale and readiness. People can do ...


11

You Don't Want Walls, You Want Bait Sure you want to have a 20ft high steel wall with a 100ft wide 40ft deep trench facing the exclusion zone to keep out the low-grade Kaiju. Or at least a fence to ward off humans who accidentally stray to far west. You might even want some strategically placed strongpoints for specialist troops/machines to sally from in ...


16

The Maginot Line worked as designed. It wasn't enough. In the modern age, the purpose of fortifications is not to win or to hold out, it is to allow a small force of defenders to delay the enemy and to buy time for offensive action elsewhere. Tactically, defensive positions allow a force to inflict greater casualties than it suffers, which means that the ...


0

Your Super-Soldiers would have a powerful advantage in cheap and plentiful and effective, if very unsexy, thrown weapons in the form of rocks. A typical adult male human can throw a .45 kg rock at 36 m/s. Your super-soldiers can either throw the same rock much faster or heavier rocks just as fast or some combination in between. Throw in the mechanical ...


-2

I'll try. I say have the plasma in a pre compressed, inert state, most likely housed in a magazine type thing. The gun actually fires a small bullet like projectile with a strong magnetic field to hold the plasma. Range stops when the magnetic bullet melts due to the plasma, and the rapidly expanding and cooling plasma disapates. To not interfere with the ...


2

That really depends on how much realism you want. Some random thoughts: The primary laser technologies that are candidates for generating high power either use lots of electricity (semiconductor solid-state lasers) or chemicals (chemical lasers), so there would likely be a cable coming off the laser itself to a backpack or other power/fuel source. Lasers ...


1

Consider a common laser pointer. The only difference between that and a laser weapon is its power. Your weapon would have to: have a large enough power supply. be large enough for the electronics to handle the power. be able to dispose of the heat produced by the far less than 100% efficient conversion of stored energy into laser light. be small and light ...


2

I point out that elephants are a lot stronger than 6 times human strength, and in Asia war elephants have been fitted with blades attached to their tusks. War elephants have also been trained to use w swords with their trunks. And some war elephants have been trained to pick up large iron chains and swing them at enemy soldiers. So if versions of hand ...


6

For ranged weapons The quality of steel in the 800-1000AD range was generally not good enough to make an arbalest, and designing a longbow able to take much more than a 100lb draw is not easy (see comments for more details). Multi-arm or slat laminated arm crossbows have also been suggested, but are grossly unreliable and not invented until after 1000AD. ...


8

With the weapons of the period I think the most immediate benefit would be removing one the biggest shortcomings of crossbows, putting them on the same level with bows when it comes to cadence of fire: Later crossbows (sometimes referred to as arbalests), utilizing all-steel prods, were able to achieve power close (and sometime superior) to longbows, but ...


-1

Tungsten or Tungsten Alloy While the answer focusing on filling the blade with a heavy metal such as lead or platinum to give it more momentum is great for the weapon's effectiveness, it doesn't really show of the "Dragon-forged" aspect. Instead, you could make a sword out of an alloy from a metal with an exceptionally high melting point - ...


5

Self fixing blade If you ever spar with metal blades, you will notice that your blade requires maintenance. Depending on what you're handling and your style you'll get scratched, bent or chipped blades. The handle might also become loose or disconnect from the blade altogether depending on the abuse. And then there is rust if you don't oil ot every now and ...


2

The primary weapon I would choose would be a bunch of 500 gram double-sided metal darts. These can be propelled at others for ranged combat, can circle you at your maximum range for stopping others from entering it, and can also be used for closer combat. You should also have a large shield that normally protects your back but can be moved to wield off ...


1

It turns out the dragon is helpful after all The good news is that the OP's dragon is of aid to the hero, thanks to the extraordinarily high temperatures that they can achieve. In particular, 2000°C is well above what's needed to turn pack-carburized type "blister" steels into a uniform, homogenous mass, through what's called the Huntsman crucible ...


2

Frame Challenge: Biological Weaponry Why would blademancers focus on using blades? As per the OP: "Blademancers are mages (going by the definition "Anyone who uses magic", and not "old man who wears a pointy hat and carries a staff") who can control blades from a distance. Note: Henceforth I will be using 'sword' and 'hilt' and other ...


Top 50 recent answers are included