In the 6 live-action movies of the Transformers each of these robots has different types of weapons some have swords, blades, grapples or shields to defend themselves while others have canons, pistols or submachine guns, I have noticed many times how the Cons are murdered by a shot in the Bayverse something that is repeated in the Knightverse in Bumblebee where Optimus only shot killed the Seeker he faced but they had to shoot more than once to at least hurt a Bot as the case Brawn but if Brawn would be a Con and would already be dead, it is a big question how the weapons work in these movies but I conclude that the seekers' weapons are less effective than Prime's or only this is done by magic of the script I know something illogical but in all the movies like about 20 Bots defeats to like 100 Cons and it does it easily except for the main enemy but not that the Cons you were expert soldiers and the Bots were more than ranchy
Who cares? The effectiveness of weapons in Transformers fiction has always been variable and has always been dependent upon the plot. Galvatron destroyed a planet in FFoD with his cannon and turned Starscream into ash in the 1986 film, but there are instances in which his cannon never permanently harmed his opponents. Nobody dies during the first two seasons. Just the same cast shooting at each other over and over, but suddenly during the 1986 movie, the Decepticons are able to kill Autobots with one or two shots using the same damn weapons they previously used that didn't seriously hurt anyone! It's something that's happened in the brand from its early days.
Charged shots could be a thing like in video games. Like, suppose the ammo is physical and typically superheated to orange-hot, a round heated past that to glow white-hot could have more armor penetration and hit vital organs more easily.
TBF we never saw Optimus shoot anyone dead. In fact a few of the Seekers were clearly just knocked out from punches (or the one guy who got hit in the head by the one dude's severed head... pretty sure the headless guy didn't survive though) so there's no saying for sure his shots were any more or less lethal than standard firearms.
Its literally just for the sake of entertainment. "Badasses' like Optimus are 1000x more durable and weapons so 1000x more damage because the story says so. If weapons were as lethal in movies as in reality, practically everyone would be dead in a single firefight, considering most of the Transformers don't use proper firefight tactics.
It's plot armour, upped stakes, and context. Does killing a character show how strong another character is or how dangerous the situation is? No? Chances are they won't be killed off arbitrarily, especially if they still have something left to do in the story. They'll just survive through all kinds of damage instead, as is movie tradition. Even a gun will not do the same thing to same person in a different context within a movie. In the first film (let's set aside bumblebee for the most part because it's already a different take and we don't know how it's going to develop), Decepticons are very hard to kill, because there aren't many of them and they're meant to be seen as a big threat. In later films, autobots and humans are able to kill them off much more easily, both because they better know how (and maybe because they've run through the a - team by that point), but also because the movie is trying to show a grander battle, but doesn't have the time to make each individual combat as in-depth as the first film. Unless it was a material that was already very hard, a superheated metal round would be less effective a penetrator, as most metals get softer as they get heated to incandescence.
i guess while where on the topic of tf gun logic, did it bother anyone else that in the bumblebee movie prime's gun shot in bursts but when he tried to shoot ravage it didn't for some reason
Because some guns are selective fire and don't have just one mode of operation. Many military rifles will have three different modes of fire. Safe, Single(Or Semi-auto, whatever lingo you want to use), and Full-auto or Burst. It'd make a lot of sense that Optimus' rifle works like a typical military rifle...Safe-Semi-Burst. I know someone already touched on this but I can't stress how horrid this actually is. The ONLY thing molten metal does when impacting against a surface is that...it splatters all over the place. In fact, the best penetrators are strong and dense, like depleted uranium or tungsten. When penetrating armor what matters is velocity and energy concentration. It's why the Armor-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot(APFSDS) round looks like a giant dart with small pointy ends, fired at very high velocities, and is typically made of DU or tungsten. It's dense, heavy, tough material, fired at super high speeds, with lots of kinetic energy, and all that energy focused onto a needle point that drives the projectile through armor like a hot knife through butter. While I'm at it here's two videos...First one explains the APFSDS concept, and the second video shows waht it looks like on real armor in a testing situation. APFSDS kills because it super heats fragments of the armor on the interior and that stuff splatters around the insides, an affect called "Spalling." Spalling injures or kills the crew, and with DU, can be hot enough to set off unprotected ammunition. Imagine being a transformer and having all of that going off in your insides.
Ik they can but why would optimus do it in that situation, he used burst regardless of distance or how fast the target was moving so why would he change the firing mode to something that would make it harder to hit ravage, I know the reason is just because the movie writers wanted to add tension, they just forgot how silly of an in universe decision it was for op to make
It's absolutely a movie thing. But thinking of guns semi-auto in close combat isn't a horrid idea. I shoot frequently and there's a lot of value to being able to pull off single shots even against close targets.
It's not so much armor that gets superheated and spalls (unless you're talking depleted uranium plating, but more on that later), because steel armor can generally dissipate the heat at the point of contact (or a small portion becomes molten), and usually a puncture is after deformation, because that's a good way to absorb impact energy (there's a lot of other factors, sloping armor, ablative armor, reflexive armor, etc. Which I won't go into for sake of simplicity in this post). Depleted uranium, such as that used in armor piercing rounds, is incredibly dense (meaning it will strike with a lot of kinetic energy), very hard (meaning it will transfer a lot of that energy to the target before deforming), and is also pyrophoric (meaning it will spontaneously catch fire in air if hot enough and with a big enough surface area / mass ratio). The surface also oxidizes and bits break off after impact, and the round, heated by the force and friction of penetrating the enemy tank, and so those bits of white hot, super hard shrapnel are what are bouncing around the inside of the target. Unpleasant stuff. There's also the older high explosive anti tank (HEAT) rounds used a shaped charge to compress a metal liner into a superplastic penetrator on impact, which I guess is closer to the superheated 'molten' round the previous poster was talking about, but it's sort of working off a different physical principle (it doesn't work because its in a liquid state, it works because it's transferring a ridiculous amount of kinetic energy, and at those forces and temperatures those materials will appear more like a superheated, molten material than a solid. Still not really what they were describing though maybe worth mentioning. The rest of what you said is on point.
The gun thing that bothered me was how their weapons turned humans into water. I preferred the DotM versions that turned humans to ash.
It's a problem Hollywood has always had of a weapon is only as effective at the writer wants it to be in that moment. The bad guys have assault weapons, machine guns and just armed to the teeth but Rambo is all "it is but a scratch". But give Rambo a paper clip and he could kill 20 bad guys with it. Obi-Wan talks about such precious shots then the Storm Troopers spend the rest of the series not being able to hit anything. The good guys in Westerns could shoot the wings off a fly from a mile away but the bad guys always miss the hero in the big showdown gun fight at the end of the movie. Until you can break studios from the idea that people will only watch a movie if the good win then you just have to roll with the idea that the writers are always playing with loaded dice that the good will always roll a critical hit and the bad guys will always roll a miss.
