Forums of the Megaverse®

Well, are they?

And why do you think so?

Thanks!

Actually, I thought I would be answering a different question.
According to the rules you dont need a different clip for different types of energy weapons.

I thougt this was another thread asking if manufacturers used different clips. Northern Gun, Wilks, CS and so on. The usual answer to that is:
North America uses the same clips for everything. A long e-clip from the CS fits into a Wilks weapon. But moving to Germany would cause problems for a group of North American Adventurers.

I answered generic but, as with most polls, I would like to have answered differently. In my campaign, like Shorty Lickens, I rule that different e-clip styles are unique to certain weapons e.g. an NGR FSE-Clip won't fit into a C-18 pistol.

I don't personally believe different energy weapons need seperate clips - it's all energy after all. Otherwise I think my group would drown in the quagmire of book-keeping - I like to keep it quick and simple.

Shaka wrote:I don't personally believe different energy weapons need seperate clips - it's all energy after all. Otherwise I think my group would drown in the quagmire of book-keeping - I like to keep it quick and simple.

This is the reason I used to give my Rifts player when asked too.

C.R.A.F.T. wrote:I think the energy output needs for each type of weapon would be specific for that weapon.

They all ready are. If you'll look at any weapon in any of the books you'll see a part called "payload". The "payload" is the amount of times the weapon will generate its energy blast, be it a laser, plasma, ion, or whatever. The E-Clips just provide the power needed for the weapon to generate it. If you needed to have a plasma E-Clip for a plasma ejector then the price for those E-Clips would be different. There is only one price listed for them, so they must be able to be used in different kinds of weapons (not makers).

I voted for general but also think that there are differences amongst regions such as all North American are the same, all European are the same, all South American are the same, All Japaneese are the same, etc. and that a one region's E-clip wouldn't work in another regions weapon.

I do not think that manufacures would have propritory e-clips as that would reduce the overall usefulness of the weapon and thus make it less desireable by the public...the noted exception to this is Naruni. They (IMO) do want to do this because they know people will pay the premium for their weapons & ammo and will thus make more money by having propritory ammo.

Don't some weapons have payload listings? I agree that each type of weapon has different energy reqirements. I also agree that E-Clips are universal (unless otherwise stated). The weapon's payload is how many shots the weapon have on a standard E-Clip.

From the other thread, just something to keep in mind.

GMG, pg. 11:

E-Clip: Traditional automatic weapons have an ammo-clip. A cartridgethat holds bullets and is slapped into the weapon to supply its ammunition. An "E-Clip" is the equivalent for energy weapons like laser guns, ion blasters, particle beam rifles, and plasma ejectors, among others. Instead of feeding the weapon bullets, an E-Clip is effectively a powerful battery that feeds the weapon energy to fire X number of energy blasts. Typically, the more powerful the blast (i.e. the more damage it inflicts) the fewer shots are available from that weapon.

Also, GMG, pg. 111:

10. Northern Gun (NG) Self-Charging Power Packs. These items are relatively small battery packs that can be worn on the hip or back depending on the size. A cable runs from the pack to what looks like a standard E-Clip. The E-Clip end snaps into the weapon like a normal clip, but provides additional power from the pack. Designed to power heavy ion, plasma and particle beam weapons that require a lot of energy.

And now, from GMG, pg. 137:

Standard Japanese Pistol E-Clips. All ArmaTech pistol weapons use the same standard hand-loaded energy magazine. H-Brand weapons use the same standard for their pistol clips which are cheap knock-offs of ArmaTech E-Clips. The magazines of both brands are interchangeable, although ArmaTech is of higher quality. They can also be used to power most bionic and cybernetic weapons. It is interesting to note that ArmaTech energy clips and basic weapon designs are fundamentally the same as those used by the Coalition States in distant North America; evidence that the Coalition's technology is based heavily on pre-Rifts technology unearthed from ancient ruins and held secret by the respective governments. Consequently, the weapons and E-Clips of both ArmaTech and H-Brand can be used in many of the weapons produced by the CS, Northern Gun, Bandito Arms and most North American manufacturers.), as well as the New Navy.

Ranger wrote:E-Clips are universal according to the game.

Of course in my games I have stated that Pistol E-Clips and Rifle E-Clips are not interchangable.

how about just ruling that "Standard" E-clip only works for pistols and "Long" e-clip only works for rifles?

I think most are standardized, but certain manufacturers use propetary clips for whatever reason.

Examples of proprietary clips include:

Wilk's - their long clip slides into the rifle's grip

Triax - FSE-Clip

Naruni - what few weapons of theirs use conventional e-clips of course

Russian Arms Manufacturers - the G-clip

CS - Energy Cannisters fit only specific weapons

General by type and location.

Solothurn wrote:
"its all energy afterall" is a misconception. Just as there are different types of ammo, there are different types of enegy(also ingredients/elements to create a catalyst). Shur energy is mutable, but then thats dwelving into complicated systems that have to use other componetry and energy to change it in which also would take energy to power it. In the end you would just have a energy mutable changing device that is not, or at least, not a very effiecient weapon.

Mutating energy isn't efficient? Interesting, because when I speak on my celephone with my girlfriend who is 200 km away, I can hear her quite easily. If we didn't transfer the sound energy into electrical energy and then the electrical energy into radio waves and then the radio wacves into electrical energy and finally the electrical energy back into sound I'm sure I couldn't hear her over those intervenign 200km.

How about this, I pop a battery into a flashlight, turn it on and whoa, light energy. I pull the same battery out of the flashlight and toss it into my stereo, awesome, sonic energy. Then I take it out and put it into a remote control car. Hey, kinetic energy. This same little battery can provide all of those differing energy needs.

The e-clips are like batteries. It is the converters, emmiters and capacitors in the weapons that determine the type of energy it unleashes.

From what I understand the difference in E-Clips is from one manufacturer to another. For instance the E-Clips used in the three galaxies are incompatible with the ones used in North America on Rifts Earth, which are in turn incompatible with the ones used by the NGR in Europe.

There is no difference between using one for lasers and one for ion as far as I know.

Solothurn wrote:Just getting the medium in the eclip alone to catalyse and then catapulted through a bore is complex enough and would be much more practical.

How is it more practical?

Instead of just producing say two types of ammo feeders (long and short e-clips), now you're producing 4 long and 4 short for 8 different e-clips! How in the world is it more efficient to make 8 different ones than 2?

Toc Rat wrote:From what I understand the difference in E-Clips is from one manufacturer to another. For instance the E-Clips used in the three galaxies are incompatible with the ones used in North America on Rifts Earth, which are in turn incompatible with the ones used by the NGR in Europe.

There is no difference between using one for lasers and one for ion as far as I know.

This I can see happening. What I don't see happening is having one type of E-Clip for lasers, one type for plasma, ect, and then only charging one price for all. The prices for one type would be different than the others. Case in point: plasma missiles and armor piercing missiles. The delivery system is mostly the same for all missiles, but the different warheads are what determines the prices.

Solothurn wrote:

Solothurn wrote:

vitae_drinker wrote:

Solothurn wrote:Just getting the medium in the eclip alone to catalyse and then catapulted through a bore is complex enough and would be much more practical.

How is it more practical?

Instead of just producing say two types of ammo feeders (long and short e-clips), now you're producing 4 long and 4 short for 8 different e-clips! How in the world is it more efficient to make 8 different ones than 2?

Try again. Medium as in contents not size. Reread the posts. The arguement was effeicency between too many mutable processes versus straight spark and shoot. Not size variety of eclips. Don't know where your math is coming from.

And another thing. Your not thinking at all where I'm coming from and going off on some other avenue of thought that only you know what your thinking. I'm tired of this pointless debate with you putting assumptions of your own devising and blaming me for them. I'm done here.

LOL.

You know, if you just admitted you were wrong, we wouldn't hold it against you. Everybody's wrong sometimes, so it's no big deal.

Being snippy and saying we 'just don't uinderstand you' isn't a valid argument.

So, hey, if you want it end on a sour note, go ahead and do so.

Or you could admit you were incorrect, and everyone could just move on in a much friendlier tone.

no you are arguing for 8 diferent Eclips for each manufacture(actualy more)

2X Laser
2X electric to power rail guns
2X Ion to power Ion Guns
2X Partical to power partical guns
2X Plasma to power plasma guns
2X Fusion to power fusion guns

Not counting sutch oddballs as

2x Phase
2X Tripower
2X Inertia clips(Megaversal legion
2X Gravity clips

and your point is that not only should their be that their should be AT LEAST one of each clip type for each manufacturer, but quite posibly their should be one of each clip type for EACH FREAKING MODLE OF GUN MADE! (after all that would be the logical extention of your argument, after all how the heck can 1 power suply meet the power needs of a diferent moddle from the same Freaking manufacturer!

To me its simpler to have a limmited number of STANDARD Eclips(Mutch like the fact that their are a limited number of standar battery sizes that all 100% interchangable!) to provide the energizing power, and if you realy want to get anal throw in a a Bottle of reagent for each class of weapons to provide the raw material for the Ion or plasma or a Gas recycling system for electro-chemical lasers and partical beams and Fusion rifles and so forth.

Solothurn wrote:

Solothurn wrote:

vitae_drinker wrote:

Solothurn wrote:Just getting the medium in the eclip alone to catalyse and then catapulted through a bore is complex enough and would be much more practical.

How is it more practical?

Instead of just producing say two types of ammo feeders (long and short e-clips), now you're producing 4 long and 4 short for 8 different e-clips! How in the world is it more efficient to make 8 different ones than 2?

Try again. Medium as in contents not size. Reread the posts. The arguement was effeicency between too many mutable processes versus straight spark and shoot. Not size variety of eclips. Don't know where your math is coming from.

And another thing. Your not thinking at all where I'm coming from and going off on some other avenue of thought that only you know what your thinking. I'm tired of this pointless debate with you putting assumptions of your own devising and blaming me for them. I'm done here.

I certainly don't understand how the book can tell you its a battery and you cannot seem to go one step further and admit the fact that a battery is a universal (standardized) electricial energy source.

There is no semantic debate here, there is no debate here at all. The book tells us they are batteries not plasma tanks or ion holding chambers or mini particle accelerators...they are freaking batteries! Any other "interpretation" is purly a figment of your fancyfull imagination.
[/i]

Sureshot wrote:

Shaka wrote:I don't personally believe different energy weapons need seperate clips - it's all energy after all. Otherwise I think my group would drown in the quagmire of book-keeping - I like to keep it quick and simple.

This is the reason I used to give my Rifts player when asked too.

Agreed, I like a bit of realism, but there are things I'll gloss over. This is one of them.

Thinyser wrote:

Solothurn wrote:

Solothurn wrote:

vitae_drinker wrote:

Solothurn wrote:Just getting the medium in the eclip alone to catalyse and then catapulted through a bore is complex enough and would be much more practical.

How is it more practical?

Instead of just producing say two types of ammo feeders (long and short e-clips), now you're producing 4 long and 4 short for 8 different e-clips! How in the world is it more efficient to make 8 different ones than 2?

Try again. Medium as in contents not size. Reread the posts. The arguement was effeicency between too many mutable processes versus straight spark and shoot. Not size variety of eclips. Don't know where your math is coming from.

And another thing. Your not thinking at all where I'm coming from and going off on some other avenue of thought that only you know what your thinking. I'm tired of this pointless debate with you putting assumptions of your own devising and blaming me for them. I'm done here.

I certainly don't understand how the book can tell you its a battery and you cannot seem to go one step further and admit the fact that a battery is a universal (standardized) electricial energy source.

There is no semantic debate here, there is no debate here at all. The book tells us they are batteries not plasma tanks or ion holding chambers or mini particle accelerators...they are freaking batteries! Any other "interpretation" is purly a figment of your fancyfull imagination.
[/i]

You almost have to wonder if he is one of thoes people who insist on his players knowing if their Gasoline powered motorcycles takes regular, premium, Deisle or Bio Deisle, and god help them if they get Jet fuel in their!

Thinyser wrote:There is no semantic debate here, there is no debate here at all. The book tells us they are batteries not plasma tanks or ion holding chambers or mini particle accelerators...they are freaking batteries! Any other "interpretation" is purly a figment of your fancyfull imagination.
[/i]

well said.

Just curious if anyone else wants to get in on this.

Thinyser wrote:There is no semantic debate here, there is no debate here at all. The book tells us they are batteries not plasma tanks or ion holding chambers or mini particle accelerators...they are freaking batteries! Any other "interpretation" is purly a figment of your fancyfull imagination.

Pretty much sums things up.

Solothurn wrote:

Drakenred wrote:

Thinyser wrote:

Solothurn wrote:

Solothurn wrote:

vitae_drinker wrote:

Solothurn wrote:

And whats really sad is that you actually think that would be wrong.

Realisticaly? I have yet to see a player who will not convert to Nuke powered transport as soon as they can than deal with a GM who will put them through the "your truck runs on deisle but all they have is Regular gas" But then my group used to play in my Invid invasion campain and they did not want to go through that again. That and I suspect that most vehicles in RIFTS earth that still use petrochemcials are probably multi fuel systems.

Guys, play nice.

[MODERATED QUOTES]

But I do see people's points about not wanting to continue beating the proverbial dead e-clip. Anyone else got a good topic they want to throw out there?

vitae_drinker wrote:But I do see people's points about not wanting to continue beating the proverbial dead e-clip. Anyone else got a good topic they want to throw out there?

that would usualy take a new thread would it not?

um

I dnot think it was you.

Solothurn wrote:ahem anyway....concerning those eclips......

um I think they have all been beaten to death

you think they are weapon specific, I think they tend to be manufacture specific but can be modified (cheeply) to work with other makers of guns,(to the point that the group just considers it a minor cost) and others feel that an E clip is an Eclip is an Eclip

Anyway...

If you want an extreme level of realism in your game, then by all means have separate E-clips for all the different types of energy weapons.

Personally I'd rather keep things a bit more abstract, but whatever floats your boat.

Solothurn wrote:

Kalinda wrote:Anyway...

If you want an extreme level of realism in your game, then by all means have separate E-clips for all the different types of energy weapons.

Personally I'd rather keep things a bit more abstract, but whatever floats your boat.

Its not extreme. Its just realistic.

...or perhaps it's being a wee anal? Surely the story and player satisfaction should take centre stage?