Laspistol

Clearly you are incorrect. Handguns shoot hands.

>why not?
The question is "why", not "why not"

Why is it important that laspistols look like 21st century handguns?

As you can see, handguns clearly shoot fire.

But sir, you have chosen from your arsenal the finger gun.

>lases

There must be some mistake, I crafted it from my finest hand!

>why not have the ammo load up from the grip rather than in front of the trigger?
because laspistols are space mausers

why not just use an autopistol or a stub pistol?

logistical. You can't fit as many shots into a mag with bullets than with a chargepack.

And you can't fit as many shots into a quarter sized chargepack that has been slimmed down enough that it could fit inside a pistol grip, so what's your point?

so stick with your normal laspistol

or go with 2e laspistols that I don't think even had a charge pack

To all the people nay saying, you're all clearly a bunch of no-gunz having fagzors.

Mauser style guns are annoying and not as ergonomical as regular pistols where you slap the damn magazine in the handle and you're good to go. Same for magazines that you slap in the side of a rifle. Star Wars gets me every time. The Storm Troopers would be so dang cool if only their magazines loaded in from the bottom like, oh, I don't know, EVERY MILITARY RIFLE IN THE HISTORY OF EVER.

Literally ForWhatPurpose-tier.

Is this a serious thread? Like a for real thread?

Because this is stupid as holy fuck.

Why do you want to strain your hands attempting to get them in a stable firing position around a giant powerbox?
As someone who actually has several guns with both rifle and pistol grips, I know for a fact that you need to be able to actually get your hands around the grip in order to actually fucking use the gun.

Also, there are many old rifles that load from the side or top and every breech loader ever loads from the back of the chamber.

because "normal freaking handguns" were designed with their technology in mind. A laspistol does not work the same way as a handgun, and will not look the same way as a handgun.

This is like asking why a nuclear power plant doesn't look like a wind turbine.

>why should a laspistol look like a stubber?
>why should a stubber look a flintlock?
>why should anything look like anything?

nice bait

Because your pic is a Stub Pistol. A laspistol is a laspistol, and uses large battery packs that could not fit inside the grip without causing ergonomics issues. Plus, if we go by the now-defunct RPGs, laspistols have 30 shots per packs, whereas Stub Pistols had 9.

nothing says you cannot, but perhaps some AdMech design decided that the hand-grip was a fine place to put the computer and focusing arrays for the Las system, thus requiring a bulky separate, but additional, volume for the charge-pack?

it's a laser weapon, it likely requires a small sturdy computer to handle focusing lenses for distances...

Then just slim down the powerpack and carry a bunch of mini powerpacks with you. What is this? Halo? Are we no longer reloading now just because our guns shoot energy?

If you want a smaller weapon with a slimmer profile because you're sick of carrying around heavy-ass shit, then you get a smaller pistol with smaller ammunition and carry around smaller magazines.

And I KNOW there have been guns that you reloaded from the top/side/corner/back/up/down/left/right/B/A/start. I don't give a dick about them; they're annoying and bulky and they make for a bigger profile because the magazine juts out like a big, dumb idiot.

In fact, pretty much all the guns in the StarWars canon make me seethe in autistic rage. Those big, DMR looking guns look unwieldy and impractical to operate. The regular blasters fielded by the regular Storm Troopers have those ridiculous magazines that load in from the sides, and don't even get me started about how the E-11 blasters in the new Star Wars movie was clearly designed for right-handed users, but the magazine sticks out to the right like it's intended for left-handed users.

If anything, THAT'S "literally ForWhatPurpose-tier"

>Then just slim down the powerpack and carry a bunch of mini powerpacks with you. What is this? Halo? Are we no longer reloading now just because our guns shoot energy?
You do realize that as it stands, you rarely need to reload in a fight. Increasing the number of times you need to reload for the sake of easier reloading is silly.
I'd rather have a magazine forward of the grip that I'll never need to reload in a firefight than have to reload three times per fight because the magazine is small and in a slightly more convenient location.

never have to reload against 'nids or orks?

Yeah I know right. Guns that are feed ammo from their sides is a stupid idea. Those damn propdesigners really need a reality check

If you're fighting nids or orks, you're part of a firing line and either have the breathing room to reload every 30+ shots or are already dead.
Ceasing fire every 30 shots is better than ceasing fire every 10 shots for a marginally shorter increment of time.

I'd rather have half the ammo and not need to worry about my aim being thrown off because the magazine makes the front of the pistol too heavy.

And I'm sure they've needed to reload plenty of times. Each magazine in a lasrifle carries maybe around 150 shots. That's nothing. People dump 150 rounds at the range in a matter of minutes. Actual soldiers who happen to have engaged in real-life firefights run out of ammo in an hour or two, and they don't fire half as many rounds as the IG do.

If I'm an officer, and if I'm carrying a laspistol (poor-fag couldn't afford the boltpistol), then I'd rather be able to shoot 15 times at my best then 30 times impeded.

Also, like I said above, I KNOW there are guns which, historically speaking, you'd reload from the side. I still think they were absolute wretched abominations and there's a good reason we never went back to them.

I don't know maybe they have their magazines on their side because. Oh I don't know, its fucking easier to reload and you don't have to worry about the magazine getting in the way when you're lying down? Or maybe fight in trenches? Or over barricades? Or maybe the ammo has to be fed from the side for some reason.

You forget that there's no recoil.
If you can't compensate for the slightly forward point of balance on a weapon that is one of the two you've ever been trained on (The other being the standard lasgun pattern for your regiment) then you're just a shitty shot. Sorry.

Mate its a fucking future setting. The packs probably way. I don't know about as much as my terrabyte hard drive maybe less. Light doesn't tend way that much. And in case you don't know. The Imps don't exactly like deviation from standard patterns.

The reason they use lasguns is to simplify logistics. Laspistols use the same energy packs as the lasguns to simplify logistics. Everyone wears the same kind of armor and eats the same kind of food to simplify logistics.
If you make special laspistol packs for the sake of slightly improved balance, you're just causing logistical problems.

>because the magazine makes the front of the pistol too heavy
good thing the ex-hive-ganger space soldier men don't give a fuck about the weight of their guns because they have arms the size of your entire body

It's hardly "easier to reload". If there even WAS a difference, then I bet the difference would be negligible and could be easily offset with regular training. Bullpups are harder to reload and tons of countries still use them because they've decided the pros of a longer barrel outweighed the cons of being slightly inconvenienced with loading. But even the L85 has a thin, unobtrusive design that you would easily lay down with.

That's a ridiculous argument. Lying down with a rifle that you load in from the bottom is "difficult" now? You'd compromise your thin profile and ease of ergonomics for the ability to lie down more comfortably? I didn't realize the military was so intent on me sleeping on the job.

And if you're fighting in close, cramped quarters, a magazine jutting out to your left (or right, in The Force Awaken's case) would be total SHIT. And are Storm Troopers known for fighting in barricades? Do regular soldiers IRL always shoot in barricades? If you're being dispatched on a mission where barricades and lying down seem like a likely option, then THAT'S when they should deviate from a practical, multi-purpose styled gun (ie. any gun where you reload your magazine from the bottom) and issue specially-purposed blasters with stupid magazines jutting out from the stupid sides.

And WHY would the magazine HAVE to be fed from the side for some reason? There ARE examples of guns being fed on the bottom. The pistols on Star Wars are all fed from the bottom. There are many rifles (both canon and non-canon) that load from the bottom like any regular gun. So why, why, why, why, WHY would the great and mighty Empire or the First Order or whoever the hell's in charge give their standard issue rifle an ugly, dumb, retarded, baka desu side-loading magazine?

Literally the only logical explanation I've heard in this thread beside "it's just a movie"-tier explanations.

>It's hardly "easier to reload". If there even WAS a difference, then I bet the difference would be negligible and could be easily offset with regular training. Bullpups are harder to reload and tons of countries still use them because they've decided the pros of a longer barrel outweighed the cons of being slightly inconvenienced with loading. But even the L85 has a thin, unobtrusive design that you would easily lay down with.
I wonder if he realizes that almost every part of this also applies to having your pistol's magazine equivalent forward of the grip.
The imperium has decided the pros of a larger magazine outweighs the cons of a slightly worse center of mass and slightly less convenient loading.

...Okay, fair enough. You win that round.

Why is a side fed gun easier to reload when you're lying down? Because you don't have to raise the fucking gun to reload and can keep it pointed at the enemy while you do so. And why are you lying down? Maybe its because your harder to hit/easier to stabilize the fucking gun.

Maybe Stormtroopers should, considering normal ST tactics is to stand out in the open and miss everything so that their even easier to hit. IRL if you're not shooting from a barricade or some other defensive structure, like a wall you're lucky your not fucking dead.

And no ones saying they HAVE to. And certain reasons include the ones why Machine guns are fed from the side.

My same argument still stands. WHY would you sacrifice an all-purpose design JUST to make it easier to lie down? Normal Storm Troopers, in the books (before it became non-canon) used military tactics just like the ones we use IRL. They hid behind cover and flanked and knelt and lay down and all kinds of whatever; all things that regular soldiers do IRL; which you won't find them complaining about even though their guns (surprise, surprise) load in their magazines on the bottom.

And the picture of the machine gun you showed me in your last pic was not "loaded in from the side". It's still a bottom-fed magazine, but due to the nature of a machine gun (shooting a lot of bullets at really high rates of fire), the magazine is obviously larger, and thus, the magazine juts out in a bulky manner to accommodate for said increase in bullet capacity.

You don't see regular troops running around with belt-fed magazines like that because they're bulky and get in the way; same as a side-fed magazine is bulky and gets in the way.

Pretty much, side-fed magazines or any magazine in general that's not pretty much a straight stick running down from the bottom of your gun is impractical.

Also, just as a heads up, I once shot a Sten at my local gunshow, and at first I tried to kneel down and shoot it because I thought the trigger was a little sticky, but then I remembered the reloading felt cramped from that kneeling position, so I ended up standing for the whole duration of it.

All-in-all, side-fed magazines suck total donkey ass.

As someone who's trained on the L85 / SA80, this is horse shit. The thing is a pain in the arse to load while prone, as you've got to tilt the rifle one way to remove and replace the mag, then the other way to cock it, all while the magazine is catching on whatever uneven ground you're lying on and you're trying to keep your head as low as possible. I love the thing, but damn.

And yes, the military is quite keen on you lying down while shooting for a variety of exciting reasons which largely boil down to 1. Making it easier to shoot the enemy and 2. Making it harder for the enemy to shoot you.

Yeah, cool, but would you say it's difficult to lay down with it at all?

Loading a rifle would be difficult for anyone while prone (even with an m16), but you'd never see anyone adopting a side-fed rifle as his standard issue armament. Personally, would you rather have an L85 or an L85 that loads in from the side?

I'm willing to bet you'd say the L85 that DOESN'T load in from the side.

>Being THIS autistic

You're from /k/, right?

Well, at least it's not another elfthread and your REEEEEEEEEEEing is somewhat amusing.

7/10 i chuckled.

>Lasers make the front of the gun too heavy

>way
user, please. Make use of google spell check.
I love that threads like this exist while Space Marines continue to eat brains to steal memories. Everything in 40k is space magic and makes absolutely no sense by today's standards and until you accept this fact, you will never find enjoyment in this setting.

>Lasguns aren't realistic because they don't act exactly like contemporary guns with bullets!

In other news, water is wet and cats might be somewhat different from dogs.

I'll REEEE all I Goddamn want, you mongs

Please do. It's hilarious.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Rule of 40k: if it doesn't trigger /k/,you're doing something wrong

You have me there I'm afraid; having never used a side-loading weapon I couldn't say. I think it would probably be easier for prone shooting to the exclusion of all else, so I can see the potential advantages if your doctrine focuses more on static firing lines, but most modern militaries don't. Some IG forces do though.

>raging about side mounted magazines when shit like this exists

Funniest thing is that this one of the less gimmicky examples of its kind.

Not the user you're arguing with, but comparing a pistol or a rifle to an MG is disingenuous, you faggot. Line infantry aren't lugging around an MG per person.

That's the most badass thing I've ever seen of all time.

I wish I had US citizenship and made a billion dollars a year. The things I would buy would make that Dan Bilzerian guy insanely freaking jealous.

>Lying down with a rifle that you load in from the bottom is "difficult" now
You dumbass, going prone is a Thing that happens fairly regularly, and magazine length literally limits how low you can go. This is why, for example, you don't see 45-round stick mags being fielded regularly, because an extra 15 bullets isn't worth the hassle of getting shot in the face because you couldn't hump the dirt better.

IIRC, that pic was from an article about SF operators operating so operationally that they needed backpacks full of dakka to operate better. But also I saved that pic years ago, so fuck me if I have the source.

>Push button to kill
>Badass

>push button to explode a motherfucker from a mile away

>push button to BRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTT

>Designed in presumably early 20th century
>TOP fed pancake magazine, idealized for lying prone and also to reduce gun profile
>Presumably designed to act as some sort of machine gun, as evidenced by the added bipod

I literally see nothing wrong with this. If it were designed in modern times, it'd probably have a long chain of ammo running out of it attached to a big box of ammo sitting over on the side or something.

It's SIDE-fed magazines that trigger me, user. Not well-oiled machines of death.

Did I say it was the length of the magazine that triggered me? No, I said it was the fact that the magazine comes in from the side. And as far as a 30-round STANAG mag goes, or a tiny battery pack on an E-11 Blaster, those AREN'T large enough to be considered "unwieldy" or "overly bulky" by any means at all.

Seriously. The only reason they put the E-11 Blaster magazine on the side is because "rule of cool", but if you were any gun nut wandering around back in the 80's, it certainly was not "cool" by any means imaginable.

>push button to win hearts & minds

>The only reason they put the E-11 Blaster magazine on the side is because
it was built up on a Sterling L2A3 SMG, you fucking ignoramus. Just like how Solo's DL-44 is is actually a Mauser with some fiddly shit slapped on, and became the template for all laser pistols in existence, including 40kek's laspistol.

Moron.

if you mix hearts and minds together you get

Still its a gun that loads its ammo from its side. I wasn't talking about specific guns but guns in general. But it doesn't change the fact that I don't care. Also pic = thread.

Side mounted mags were pretty common among submachine guns made back then.

This is a Congolese macaroni art board, post only relevant content pls

okay

I DIDN'T WATCH MY FRIENDS DIE IN 'NAM SO SOME FAG IN A CAMBODIAN CORPSE MAKE UP BOARD COULD TELL ME WHAT TO REEE OR NOT!

>its a gun that loads its ammo from its side
That's not even remotely true though, and you'd know that if you know a damn thing about guns. Most modern MGs load from the top, the belt just dangles out. (The M249 SAW is an example of a weird exception, but only when you're loading STANAG mags, but fucking no one does that, to the point that at least two variants - the SPW and the Mk46 Mod 0 - ditched the side-loading mag feature entirely).

Yup. Sten, the Sterling L2A3 (British knockoff/replacement Sten), the CETME C2 (Spanish knockoff L2A3), and the Lanchester (British knockoff of the German MP28, which itself is just a variant of the MP18, a WWI-era sideloading SMG) all come to mind.

A weapon to surpass Metal Gear!

>Implying I didn't know that

What I had MEANT to say, if you wanted me to be absolutely literal was "Gee, I sure wish the Empire's standard issue rifle was modeled after a weapon, THAT DIDN'T FUCKING SUCK".

Is THAT how I should have worded it, YOU PEDANTIC FUCKING MONG?

Would you had preferred to be modeled after something like this then?

Cheap design that was readily distributed (Britain copied Russia, which was copied by Britain again, which the Germans took inspiration from, which the Russians and British copied yet AGAIN when they were low on resources), also, they were very commonly used as resistance weapons and weapons of last resort, famous among French resistance fighters and downed airmen.

Even the M3A1 (derided for its "ugly", stamped look) performed massively better then the British Sten and British soldiers favored the American Thompson humongously at the time due to its well-made design.

Side-fed magazines were literally memes. If Veeky Forums had been invented in the 1940's, people would create threads on /int/ showing a picture of a Sten or a Sterling and then smugly typing "There are still countries that exist who fight the Nazis using this" before creating a massive shitstorm involving Sten-shills trying very hard not to get BTFO.

Again. There's a reason we didn't go back to them, barring odd, exceptional circumstances.

>Completely ignores me when I specifically told him it's a gun that DOESN'T load from the side
>Gets BTFO anyway

By the way, this IS the user you were replying too.

Nowadays we are too busy with trying to get a new standard issue pistol only to discard it at the last moment, wait a year or two and start looking for a new pistol again.

>M3A1 performed massively better then the British Sten
>British soldiers favored the American Thompson humongously

[citation needed]

I remember reading plenty about how the Sten, despite its flaws, was well liked, and due to its cheap and easy manufacturing, it was made in various occupied countries as well. Hell, even the Germans tried to make their copy of it, but the brass wasn't interested in it until the very end of the war.

Also, I don't remember much about people liking the Thompson. It was a very heavy gun for what it did. Something like the M3 did the same job in a much smaller and lighter package.

>Side-fed magazines were literally memes.

No, they served a specific purpose.

>There's a reason we didn't go back to them

Which isn't because people designing the weapons were complete morons that didn't know how to make guns and intentionally ignored modern sensibilities of what a gun should be, like you're trying to make it out to be.

>why doesn't 40k look like real life
Does your fridge look like a toilet, or do you have to go out of your way to eat shit?

That's pretty sexy, yes. Or perhaps just give them Not!Kahrs that shoot lasers or something.

Personally, I've always fantasized about being able to remake StarWars in my own image, and if ever given the chance, I always fantasized about arming the Storm Troopers with Not!M2Hydes. Pretty obscure among normie Call of Duty players, but decently popular with the gun nut crowd, though I'd cut down the length of the magazine and tack on some space-stuff and color it black.

I've also planned on giving the occasional rebel or two the side-fed E-11 blaster, as a homage to the French resistance; but the majority of them would be armed with simple long rifles and pistols, like the M1Garand, or the Enfield (though spaced up, for sci-fi reasons).

Han Solo would have his mauser D-Something blaster (D-12, I think?), I think that was a really good design that fit him well, but I'd give the Storm Troopers massive sidearms; kind of like how in Halo: Combat Evolved, the pistol is a deathly weapon. This would be based off of the blocky 1911, whereas the sidearm for most rebels would be dinky, stream-lined pistols, reminiscent of a 1912 Weber or something.

Also, fuck Tie-Fighters. What a dumb design. I'm not even a huge StarWars fan. I just like the setting, and I'm disappointed at all that wasted potential.

Also, I apologize for my deviantart-tier drawing. I'm no graphic designer.

Why are you so butt flustered over the laaer gun design of a space fantasy movie that has people charging into combat with laser swords and knocking away lasers like fucking baseballs

>"It's PHANTUSEE! It's not SPPOSD to be realistic!"

I hate this meme so fucking much.

Well deal with it and go pretend somewhere else.

Tie Fighters are designed the way they are because they're distinct and memorable. You can reduce a Tie Fighter to three basic 3D primitives (a sphere suspended between two hexagons, pic related) and it will still be instantly recognisable as a Tie Fighter. You will never, ever mistake a Tie Fighter for a space fighter from any other franchise.

More to the point, it emphasizes the coldness and inhumanity of the Empire, by the fact that their ships are all weird flying geometries (Star Destroyers are arrowheads with blocks stacked on them, the Death Star is a sphere with a crater in its upper hemisphere and trench around its equator, etc.), compared to the Rebel Alliance's ships that look closer to traditional fighter-planes, and thus feel more human and relateable.

This is good visual design, blah blah blah, I feel like I've made this fucking argument a million times already.

I'd enjoy your space gunwank, user.

>everything I don't like is a meme
Listen here faggot.
You're complaining about laser guns not matching the real world ergonomics of the guns you learned about from call of duty and halo, in a universe were the laws of physics are casually broken every in other scene.

Go be autistic somewhere else.

You DO realize this is Veeky Forums, right? Otherwise known as "the board that takes gaming seriously"? Verisimilitude is the key to setting and lore, not ass-faggotry and preschool-levels of make believe.

If you want pretend fun, go to /v/, you Slow-Roasted Ham&Bitch.

Yeah, well I kept the little plates in my new design because I figured I'd give it a similar identity without just having it be a ball stuck between two stop signs.

Even fantasy has to follow some sort of rules. I'm not the frogposter, but I understand his frustration with this argument. It can't just blanket everything you don't feel like needs to be explained.

Except that your design looks too similar to the shit that the Rebel Alliance has. The Empire needs its own identity, and the Tie Fighter is exactly that.

0/10, pretend harder.

Those rules do not have to be tied to real world physics or design.

Not anyone you're talking to, but it's safe to assume in fantasy settings that everything lines up with real-world physics unless otherwise stated or implied. If something is dumb because the author was just ignorant/didn't care/was too lazy to handwave it it's fair to complain.

>make the guns bigger and blockier
>that's a unique take on sci-fi weapons
>make the "wings" move
>because that matters in space
>ooh and make them see through
You should apologize for your deviantart tier ideas.

m8, fantasy things can't look realistic for the good reason that yes, it's fantasy. What the fuck do you expect something like a graviton gun to look like?

Internal consistency is the key to setting and lore, not looking realistic. You're using the wrong definition of verisimilitude.

Every single aspect of 40k implies that it does not follow real world physics (or chemistry or biology or anything else).

>Make the guns bigger and blockier
Too show that they're much more expensively manufactured and powerful. Duh.

>Make the wings "move"
They "pivot", user. Not "move". And yes, they do this because rockets propel things through space, and rockets at the ends of pivoting wings allow it to "move" better than rockets stuck on the butt of a fighter. It actually, scientifically does matter. I'm not sure why it wouldn't. Like, I'm honestly trying to figure out why it wouldn't, and I can't think of a good reason why.

>Ooh, and make them see through
Yeah, well fuck you too.

You do realize you're arguing for someone who demands high energy weapons from the 41st millennium to look like 20th century automatic pistols, right? I'd really like you to explain to me what real world physics are involved that would make a laspistol look like a 1911, rather than something completely different.

No, it's handwaved that their technology is advanced enough that it does weird things to physics that we can't, which is different. The only thing in 40k that is utterly unacceptable to conventional reality is warp/psyker fuckery and ftl travel

>No, it's handwaved that their technology is advanced enough that it does weird things to physics that we can't, which is different.
You're right. So it explicitly states that it doesn't follow real world physics.