What would you prefer to see visually onscreen?

GofyTomcat1 wrote:

roseandheather wrote:Your resident matchmaker has wanted to marry Tourville off to Michelle Hence for years and wonders if he and Kaplan will ever be in the same star system but finds the idea intriguing anyway.

I'd be more than okay with this!! As long as two certain tech-nerds end up on the same station for a long period of time (long enough to get to really 'know' each other, then I'm literally okay with anything else.

I'd just settle for someone, anyone, to break the ice, open the door, or whatever sentiment you'd want to use describing the first Havenite-Manticoran knot tied.

I wonder what a good nomenclature would be for such a knot.

A HavaMan knot? A PubEmp knot? A PeepMan knot? Hmmm... That's a hard knot to figure. Anyone?

Of course, if it doesn't last long, it'll be called a slip knot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_knots

A wall of battle firing a full energy-range broadside. Because Honorverse energy weapons are *hilariously* powerful.

bensellers wrote:A wall of battle firing a full energy-range broadside. Because Honorverse energy weapons are *hilariously* powerful.

I'd like to see that too.

My first impression of Honorverse energy weapons, and it continues to invoke the same imagery, is of the Borg's immensely powerful cutter beam from Star Trek.

cthia wrote:

bensellers wrote:A wall of battle firing a full energy-range broadside. Because Honorverse energy weapons are *hilariously* powerful.

I'd like to see that too.

My first impression of Honorverse energy weapons, and it continues to invoke the same imagery, is of the Borg's immensely powerful cutter beam from Star Trek.

It doesn't help that several book covers show visible weapon emissions from warships. Because they are actually invisible. Most warship weaponry sits in the X-ray or Gamma-ray spectrums, which the human eye cannot perceive.

They also fire for very short pulses - generally a few milliseconds, although there is textev of weapons on continuous fire for a few seconds. This immediately destroys the firing emitter through overheating, however.

The exception may be energy torpedoes - packets of plasma siphoned off a fusion reactor. Those should be quite visible. Otherwise, non-missile combat in the Honorverse probably isn't visually satisfying: Opposing ships will simply seem to blow up as soon as they get an unobstructed view of each other.

Don't worry, though. Any film/tv producer will definitely change that. Because no sci-fi movie is complete without excessive amounts of bright lasers and explosions.

It doesn't help that several book covers show visible weapon emissions from warships. Because they are actually invisible. Most warship weaponry sits in the X-ray or Gamma-ray spectrums, which the human eye cannot perceive.

They also fire for very short pulses - generally a few milliseconds, although there is textev of weapons on continuous fire for a few seconds. This immediately destroys the firing emitter through overheating, however.

The exception may be energy torpedoes - packets of plasma siphoned off a fusion reactor. Those should be quite visible. Otherwise, non-missile combat in the Honorverse probably isn't visually satisfying: Opposing ships will simply seem to blow up as soon as they get an unobstructed view of each other.

Don't worry, though. Any film/tv producer will definitely change that. Because no sci-fi movie is complete without excessive amounts of bright lasers and explosions.

Actually it might be impressive if they went with the invisible beam approach and gave the emitters a bright flash like huge camera going off, and the effect being like a massively speeded up version of wax in blowtorch or train crash applied to the target but with no visible impacter. Weapons grade lasers are described as being more like a ultra-high velocity impact since the energy transfer is so rapid it smashes through the target without even bothering to melt it first.

Alternately the ground combat versions can get the Plasma cannon, imagine a gun battle were the projectiles and impacts are too bright to even look at properly.

I'm not a fan of Star Wars but one thing I do like about the ones I've seen is the grand scale of them. If nothing else they always got the sense of scale right. That is easier said then done I think and I would hope that an Honorverse movie would first and foremost get that right. That was always a thing about the Star Trek movies that didn't work for me; I never believed the grand scale they were trying to sell me and as a consequence I thought the movies seemed smaller in comparison. When I see a city or an SD I want to feel the weight of the people inhabiting them. When I see a major space battle I want to be a witness to "the apocalypse". I want the scale of this universe to be the subtext of whatever movie gets made.

Warner Caslet's Charge to rescue Wayfarer.

In the same book Wayfarer's Final Battle.

Abigail & Mateo vs the Pirates on Refuge.

and the scene I want to see most... Honor on the bridge of Fearless as the range closed in Second Yeltsin. I really want someone to write something the could do credit to Hammerwell's 'Ode to Spring' for the Scene.

Valen123456 wrote:

It doesn't help that several book covers show visible weapon emissions from warships. Because they are actually invisible. Most warship weaponry sits in the X-ray or Gamma-ray spectrums, which the human eye cannot perceive.

They also fire for very short pulses - generally a few milliseconds, although there is textev of weapons on continuous fire for a few seconds. This immediately destroys the firing emitter through overheating, however.

The exception may be energy torpedoes - packets of plasma siphoned off a fusion reactor. Those should be quite visible. Otherwise, non-missile combat in the Honorverse probably isn't visually satisfying: Opposing ships will simply seem to blow up as soon as they get an unobstructed view of each other.

Don't worry, though. Any film/tv producer will definitely change that. Because no sci-fi movie is complete without excessive amounts of bright lasers and explosions.

Actually it might be impressive if they went with the invisible beam approach and gave the emitters a bright flash like huge camera going off, and the effect being like a massively speeded up version of wax in blowtorch or train crash applied to the target but with no visible impacter. Weapons grade lasers are described as being more like a ultra-high velocity impact since the energy transfer is so rapid it smashes through the target without even bothering to melt it first.

Alternately the ground combat versions can get the Plasma cannon, imagine a gun battle were the projectiles and impacts are too bright to even look at properly.

No! We cannot overlook the human element and Hollywood's immense responsibility to cater to said element and spend its enormous blank check of an artistic license at an alarming rate. The price of a movie ticket is supposed to have explosions, special effects, more explosions and more special effects. We as moviegoers demand it. We double-doggone demand it from our Sci-Fy.

I remember an interview regarding Star Trek that said that so many man hours went into vessels going into warp because of the nature of a very demanding audience. Just as much attention to detail accompanied the accompanying sounds of warp.

Can't you imagine how boring the Enterprise's attack on Reliant's bridge would have been had the beam been invisible? For one thing, moviegoers wouldn't have been able to see how inaccurate targeting is. *It took a moment for the laser to find its mark -- Reliant's bridge. Bullets are also invisible, but at least we are smart enough to include tracer rounds.

Aren't special effects written into the Bill of Alienable Rights?

Whereas music hath charm to soothe the savage beast. A lack of special effects will piss him off to no end.

*Cue ahead at 9:00 if you must...
https://youtu.be/LaVIIoRKBlk

Valen123456 wrote:Actually it might be impressive if they went with the invisible beam approach and gave the emitters a bright flash like huge camera going off, and the effect being like a massively speeded up version of wax in blowtorch or train crash applied to the target but with no visible impacter. Weapons grade lasers are described as being more like a ultra-high velocity impact since the energy transfer is so rapid it smashes through the target without even bothering to melt it first.

Alternately the ground combat versions can get the Plasma cannon, imagine a gun battle were the projectiles and impacts are too bright to even look at properly.

I quite like that idea. It's very reminscent of an age-of-sail cannon broadside; at a distance, you would never be able to see the cannonballs themselves, but you could certainly see the muzzle flashes as well as impacts on their targets(or splashes from missed shots). And smoke - perhaps vented coolant of some kind.

munroburton wrote:

Valen123456 wrote:Actually it might be impressive if they went with the invisible beam approach and gave the emitters a bright flash like huge camera going off, and the effect being like a massively speeded up version of wax in blowtorch or train crash applied to the target but with no visible impacter. Weapons grade lasers are described as being more like a ultra-high velocity impact since the energy transfer is so rapid it smashes through the target without even bothering to melt it first.

Alternately the ground combat versions can get the Plasma cannon, imagine a gun battle were the projectiles and impacts are too bright to even look at properly.

I quite like that idea. It's very reminscent of an age-of-sail cannon broadside; at a distance, you would never be able to see the cannonballs themselves, but you could certainly see the muzzle flashes as well as impacts on their targets(or splashes from missed shots). And smoke - perhaps vented coolant of some kind.

Maybe smoke from fires aboard ship (in compartments open to space) before they run out of oxygen to burn from?