Change missiles into plasma torpedoes because...

[Vakna]

Not checical but ion or anti-matter propelled would be more likely. And with those it still wouldn't be plasma missiles.

Nope, definitely chemical, smoke trails don't happen with Ions.

 

[Ithirahad]

Plasma Torpedo just sounds kinda... lame.

Tell that to the Romulan Star Navy and see what happens to your ship.

 

[Zedrackis]

Wasn't the star trek version of torpedoes fired out of a rail gun like launcher and guided (when actually using a guided torp) by manoeuvring thrusters in the torp? Giving it a limited tracking ability but a lot of punch compared to their phasers.

 

[lazarus78]

Tell that to the Romulan Star Navy and see what happens to your ship.

Is that supposed to scare me? The Romulan Star Navy will never even see one of my ships.

Nope, definitely chemical, smoke trails don't happen with Ions.

Maybe not real ion engines, but sci-fi ion engines might.

 

[Ithirahad]

Wasn't the star trek version of torpedoes fired out of a rail gun like launcher and guided (when actually using a guided torp) by manoeuvring thrusters in the torp? Giving it a limited tracking ability but a lot of punch compared to their phasers.

Correct. I don't remember, though, if they were actually launched out or if they flew out under their own power.

 

[lio_oVo_oil]

My god... He's right! Plasma, however, could be transported inside of missile-like canisters to effectively melt the enemy's hull. (Yep, just took what Calbiri said, and put it into a logical manner that tells you exactly how AMCs are really just slower-than-light missile systems that fire extremely shiny, plasma-filled rockets.)(Would this even be considered conventional?)

 

[Lecic]

My god... He's right! Plasma, however, could be transported inside of missile-like canisters to effectively melt the enemy's hull. (Yep, just took what Calbiri said, and put it into a logical manner that tells you exactly how AMCs are really just slower-than-light missile systems that fire extremely shiny, plasma-filled rockets.)(Would this even be considered conventional?)

When did Calbiri say that AMCs were actually containers of plasma?

Anyway, the missiles cannot be plasma, because plasma doesn't explode. It just melts over time. Our missiles instantly destroy blocks.

 

[lio_oVo_oil]

No, not missiles, rockets, completely different from missiles. Also, Calbiri was defining AMCs as being "cannons", and giving the definition of "missile", though not necessarily connecting the two (I simply assumed that he was). Rockets don't necessarily explode. I understand that cannons do not necessarily fire self-propelled munitions (until the 17th century, cannons were like the first muskets, put powder in the barrel, then the projectile), but I used them as if they were synonymous to any sort of mechanism that fires self-propelled projectiles. (Though it could also be a canister launcher, launching canisters of plasma at your foes.)

 

[Lecic]

No, not missiles, rockets, completely different from missiles. Also, Calbiri was defining AMCs as being "cannons", and giving the definition of "missile", though not necessarily connecting the two (I simply assumed that he was). Rockets don't necessarily explode. I understand that cannons do not necessarily fire self-propelled munitions (until the 17th century, cannons were like the first muskets, put powder in the barrel, then the projectile), but I used them as if they were synonymous to any sort of mechanism that fires self-propelled projectiles. (Though it could also be a canister launcher, launching canisters of plasma at your foes.)

Rockets might not necessarily explode, but ours do, so they can't be plasma, because plasma doesn't explode.

 

[lio_oVo_oil]

Then rename it "plasma launcher".

 

[Lecic]

Then rename it "plasma launcher".

It cannot be plasma though. Missile is much more fitting, as when it is missile, on RP servers people can pretend the kind of missile is whatever they want it to be. Keeping the type of missile it actually is allows for people to make their own stories.

 

[lio_oVo_oil]

... then why argue about it? Can't servers change the names of blocks on the server? If not, that should then be implemented.

 

[rece ktore leczo]

Nope, definitely chemical, smoke trails don't happen with Ions.

Ion engines also leave a trail but not so much visible as chemical propelled engines, because they eject much less matter in the same time.
Anyway these straight trails, which we have in Starmade aren't possible IRL, because matter in gaseous state would just spread very fast in every direction, not staying in the same place for so long time, so we can't really say here which propellant is used in missiles as real-life physics doesn't apply here.


To the whole discussion - simple names for weapons is the best option. If we want to accurately name the weapons (which isn't possible btw) then what about other types? Why only "pulse", why not "electromagnetic pulsator" or "gamma pulse" and why only "beam" and not "photon beam", etc.
If someone want to rename their weapons then they are free to do this, but vanilla names, imo, should stay as they are right now.