Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Gotta love...

Posted by: Shadowmeet Jun 23 2006, 12:06 AM

I think I'd like to see this stuff in action.

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2006/06/19/goo_tec.html?category=technology&guid=20060619160030&dcitc=w19-502-ak-0000

Posted by: Shrike30 Jun 23 2006, 12:10 AM

75 pounds? That's not light Carrying a 75 pound pack isn't hard, but it starts to add up when you throw body armor, guns, ammo, and combat gear on top of that.

Posted by: Shadowmeet Jun 23 2006, 12:12 AM

Personally, I think they should vehicle mount it like a water cannon, and give it some more pressure for a longer range.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Jun 23 2006, 01:38 AM

QUOTE (Davison)

And it could spell trouble for a vehicle in motion. "If they are traveling at high speeds it may not be non-lethal.

Is anyone else seeing Shadowrunner applications for this now?

Posted by: Toptomcat Jun 23 2006, 02:03 AM

I really don't know about non-lethal, even with slow-moving pedestrian crowds. How many people are injured each year just by falling on ice? Slip the wrong way and you have a broken bone, a concussion or worse.

Posted by: Da9iel Jun 23 2006, 02:38 AM

Broken bones and concussions are usually non-lethal.

Posted by: Kanada Ten Jun 23 2006, 03:02 AM

QUOTE (Da9iel @ Jun 22 2006, 09:38 PM)

Broken bones and concussions are usually non-lethal.

Until you start talking about an entire crowd falling on top of each other, often times with flammables and fire starters among the group. Then broken bones mean burning to death with little way for any one to be pulled from the danger zone.

[e] There was stuff like this in SR3, along with freeze foam.

Posted by: Da9iel Jun 23 2006, 03:49 AM

Yet the broken bones remain non-lethal. Almost any form of incapacitance would be lethal in the scenario you mentioned. Maybe the freeze foam would be non-flammable and insulate from the fire, but not in my dark future.

Posted by: bigdrewp Jun 23 2006, 06:03 PM

75 pounds really isn't that bad. The average rucksack in the Army is 60 pounds, so you are only talking about 15 extra pounds, and when you take into account you wouldn't be carrying a rifle or extra ammo for that rifle, and the fact that as you use the weapon it gets lighter, it isn't all that bad at all.

Also non-lethal only refers to the weapon you are using, not secondary damage, or other scenarios.

Posted by: Squinky Jun 23 2006, 06:07 PM

Yes, even with a tazer, you can shoot someone with a knife and they can fall on it or they surroundings.

Posted by: nezumi Jun 23 2006, 06:13 PM

Wow, this was posted Wednesday and got 1 response. Posted today on this forum it gets 10?!? You guys need to get out more.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Jun 23 2006, 06:31 PM

Only if I can have this 'nonlethal' soloution to asswads on the road hooked up to a 50-gallon tank in the back of my truck.

Posted by: Squinky Jun 23 2006, 06:40 PM

I just want one to wear to the club, so I can offer the ladys some "Slippery lovin'".

Posted by: Shrike30 Jun 23 2006, 06:46 PM

QUOTE (bigdrewp @ Jun 23 2006, 11:03 AM)

I was figuring that the soldier using the non-lethal weapon would probably be carrying his standard rifle and ammunition as well. If the spraygun had a range longer than 25', it might be a different story, but as is, if they start getting shot at he's probably not going to be able to return fire with the spraygun.

Once he starts using the weapon, it will become lighter... but he's also at the point where he's not likely to be trying to move any significant distance on foot with it (he'll be at the scene where they're going to control a crowd, so he'll be done jogging to the scene or patrolling with his unit). If you're sacrificing the soldier's ruck and supplies for a 75 pound nonlethal weapon, it becomes a serious issue if the situation degenerates to a firefight and he finds himself without any supplies or effective weapons.

Posted by: bigdrewp Jun 24 2006, 07:57 PM

Generally the Army and Marines are there to kill people. I am not trying to start an argument, nor am I passing judgement, but realistically that is their job. They wouldn't use a non-lethal like this. This is more for the police for riot control. Also if a soldier were to use it, they would hump it to the scene of conflict then they hae to take it out again, which is where the lighter thing come into play. Also, look at the soldiers issued flame throwers back in WWII, they didn't carry any additional gear, nor an additional weapon, their range sucked, but the served a purpose and were fairly effective at it. It is a moot point however as the military would never issue a weapon as heavy as this.

Posted by: Demon_Bob Jun 24 2006, 08:18 PM

So What happens if someone shoots the tank?

Posted by: Tarantula Jun 24 2006, 10:46 PM

Depending on which tank they hit, either powder or water would start leaking out, or the compressed air tank would rupture. Either way, a hole in any of them would severely ruin its ability to function.

Posted by: Zen Shooter01 Jun 25 2006, 12:39 AM

SR 3rd ed. had an equivalent called slip-spray.

This stuff strikes me as a dumb idea. It doesn't work as a barrier, because the crowd probably won't realize it's there until they're falling down. And crowd control weapons are really crowd dispersal weapons, and this doesn't disperse anyone - it just knocks them down. So now you've got a crowd of people going ass-over-tea kettle on the asphalt street, breaking bones on the way down, and then flailing about helplessly once they're down there. Then friends of theirs run in to help them and get trapped as well.

Add in a big dose of confusion, liberal amounts of panic, two or three motor vehicles going out of control at twenty-five miles an hour, a molotov cocktail or two, and you've solved no problem at all, just created a bigger one.

Posted by: Tarantula Jun 25 2006, 01:27 AM

But it works great for shadowrunners to use to create a rather sizable distraction for the local police force.

Posted by: Zen Shooter01 Jun 25 2006, 03:01 PM

3rd ed. slip-spray turned up in my game fairly often, because while a lousy crowd control device, it does have a lot of shadow applications. It could be delivered via grenade, or through a sprayer that in SR was about the size of a two-liter bottle. It was useful for covering retreats or for paralyzing the enemy in an area without the noise of an explosion. Once everybody was falling down, you could finish them with silenced weapons.

And I agreed with tarantula that spraying it all over the lobby of a building would draw all attention there while your team slips in the back door.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 25 2006, 08:05 PM

QUOTE (Zen Shooter01)

Add in a big dose of confusion, liberal amounts of panic, two or three motor vehicles going out of control at twenty-five miles an hour, a molotov cocktail or two, and you've solved no problem at all, just created a bigger one.

And that's bad, why? Police are rarely issued anti-personel grenades so they have to be creative when they want to cause mas-deaths.

Posted by: Shrike30 Jun 26 2006, 06:01 PM

Flamethrowers were/are a lethal combat weapon, and the specialists who used them used them as such. A crowd-control spraygun really does nothing if the crowd you're attempting to control opens fire on you.

Posted by: Dragonscript Jun 26 2006, 07:38 PM

OR mount it on the back of your car and when the police are chasing yea....

Also, when it comes to this kind of technology the proper term isn't "non-lethal" but "less than lethal". The technology isn't designed to kill but if used incorrectly can.

Posted by: ShadowDragon8685 Jun 26 2006, 08:03 PM

Mount a couple of sprayers in the back of your Riggermobile and a 50-gallon tank in the trunk...

Ooooh yeah, that'll get the cops off your ass.