Detailed Ammo Options

[Chandon]

[ edit ] Current version:
http://ferrus.net/~nat/chandon-ammo2.html
[/ edit ]

http://ferrus.net/~nat/chandon-ammo.html

I've wanted to actually specify specific ammo types for weapons for a while, and I had a couple hours today. The link above is what I've started with.

In addition to providing flavor by naming the ammo types (i.e. "9mm Auto"), I've also sneakily gotten rid of Ex-Explosive ammo. I consider that a win.

So... here's what I'd like help on:
- Did I get anything blatantly wrong as far as ammo names? I just hit the "list of rifle cartridges" page on Wikipedia and picked some I'd heard of.
- What megas are those weapon companies owned by? I left my copy of corporate download across the state. I want to get my brand lock-ins correct. I'd really like the Predator IV to be firing "10mm Ares".
- Is there anything obviously wrong with my "Available Types" listing?

I'd obviously like to hear any other comments. I'm aware this is more record keeping for my players - that's fun for me.

[Austere Emancipa...]

You might find this handy.

Is the Colt Americana L36 supposed to be a very small handgun? If not, I'd make it 9x19mm Luger/Parabellum ("9mm Auto"). (This is one of the very few things I disagree on with Raygun.) The Steyr TMP should definitely be 9x19mm. If you want the Predator to fire the 10mm Ares, make it so -- there's no reason why Ares wouldn't make a new caliber with that name. The caliber itself is now just a type classification and not owned by any company.

10mm Auto is a very hefty SMG caliber and one in which HK currently doesn't make SMGs in. I'd rather make the 227 a .45 ACP, .40 S&W or 9x19mm.

The Walther MA-2100 could easily be chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum -- the weapon it's based on, the Walther WA 2000, was originally chambered for that round. The .308 Winchester and 7.62x51mm (ie. what you've got the Stoner-Ares M202 as firing) are very nearly the same caliber, and any security or military weapons in the 2060s-2070s would most likely be chambered for one or the other -- no point keeping those two as separate calibers.

I'm assuming you aren't going to bother with damages, so I won't say much about those. Just keep in mind that if any of your players know about firearms they might start wondering why a .30-06 sporting rifle does so much less damage than a .308 Winchester sniper rifle.

+1 DV/+1 AP seems a bit odd, unless you've done the math and come to the conclusion that that balances out with the given weapon damage codes and armor ratings. +1 DV/+2 AP would at least look better on paper, and not make Regular ammo completely obsolete.

You don't want to give high velocity rifle calibers "Gel" ammo type. It only really makes sense for the shotguns. .50 BMG should get Regular, R-AP, Explosive, and preferably should be the only caliber aside from 12 gauge to get Explosive ammo. Everything except the 8mm Sting and Ares Sliver should get HP. The 8.7mm should probably get P-AP.

[GrepZen]

If you would like a true to life, accurate, representation...check out http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun/ . He has done all work and knows more about firearms & things that go boom than I.
AE give pretty good advice 99.9% of the time too.

[yoippari]

It isn't blatently wrong, it isn't even wrong, but a 7.62x51mm should fire in a .308 but a .308 has a slightly different case and doesn't fit in a 7.62. This could be a way to mess with players or you could simplify it and only use one or the other.

[MYST1C]

[yoippari]

See how easy it is to mess your players up with that one. The minor case differences sometimes do make the rounds not chamber. It depends on the individual rifle and case. If you do use actual ammo sizes to keep track of interchangeability keep stuff like similar ammo in mind.

[Snow_Fox]

I think this could be adding unnecssary detail for most poeple.. THAT having been said it certainly could add to game detail if you have that sort of experience. Most people who pick up SR, I suspect have never fired a shot, ever. Let alone have a carry permitt.

I own a couple of handguns and certainly have differnet calibers and brands of ammo. There are .380 and .38 pistol rounds that are very different and fire out of my beretta and webley respectfully, but both would be medium pistols.

Pesonally I have had trouble with Winchester's heavy pistol rounds when the .357 magnum loads-they use a cheaper thinner brass and the force of the shot has misshapped the brass, making it hard to eject. American Eagle, as just another brand, no problems.
So imagine in that setting if Johnson says he's got the ammo and either provides the wrong stuff. .38 and .38 special do NOT fire out of the same gun, or gets the cheap stuff. Infamously in WW1 one of the US's early aces was killed because of defective ammo. He was in a habbit of checking eack and every bullet in a belt to look for defective rounds, when he died he did not have time and the guns jambed

[Austere Emancipa...]

I'm sure Raygun can clear this up for certain, but in the meanwhile re: .308 Winchester vs. 7.62x51mm NATO based on these three articles...
The chamber of a 7.62x51mm NATO weapon has greater headspace and is designed for lower maximum pressure than .308 Winchester rifles. The weapons are therefore slightly different.

The ammunition itself is often not: as a rule, 7.62x51mm NATO ammunition feeds nicely in .308 Winchester weapons and can be fired out of them without any trouble. Most .308 Winchester rounds should also feed well in a 7.62x51mm NATO weapon, but if the ammo is loaded to a high enough a pressure or the case is too weak and/or too loose in the 7.62x51mm chamber, firing it can be unsafe. As long as you pick and choose your ammo, you shouldn't run into problems.

The pressures, ammunition types and chamber designs the above is based on come from the US Sporting Arms & Ammunition Manufacturers Institute and hold for weapons and ammunition you might find in North America, which might explain M¥$T1C's contradictory experience.

[MYST1C]

[Chandon]

[kzt]

[Chandon]

In the default SR4 setting there is commonly available non-lethal ammo for any weapon type. That fact has a significant impact on the setting. Eliminating ExEx or saying that SMGs don't get Flechette rounds isn't anywhere near as big a game world change as saying that only Shotguns get gel rounds would be.

Now, gel rounds in light pistols or sniper rifles is obviously absurd. Heavy pistols and SMGs are slightly less obvious. I may just re-introduce Stick & Shock for the non-shotgun non-lethal ammo niche. On the other hand, Stick & Shock (as well as Tazers) are sort of retarded rules-wise in a way that wasn't true back in SR3. Gel rounds have 10+ years of history supporting their in-game existence.

[Raygun]

[Snow_Fox]

My usual carry is a .380 and I've had trouble thinking of it as a "light round" so I like the upgrade you gave it. I know it's not a 9mm or .357 but it didn't seems 'light'

for yholdouts look at the Beretta hold out. There is the Bobcat and the Tomcat. The bobcat is a .25 but the bobcat is (I believe) a .32. both hold outs made by the same company and they look the same but the loads are not interchangable.

[Chandon]

Apparently I lose.

I got a chance to look at my copy of Corporate Download today and apparently only one of the weapon companies selling a gun in SR4 is listed as a megacorporate subsidiary - Cavalier Arms was owned by Novatech.

Does that mean that there's actually a reasonably free market in legal small arms sales? Does Lofwyr really not own either H&K or FN?

If anyone can think of any cannon references that would link any of these arms companies together, that would be awesome. I really want to know what the baseline is before I start making stuff up.

[Raygun]

The only one I can recall was Lone Star's deal with Ruger to manufacture the Thunderbolt (LS.116). They were obviously two separate corporate entities, and if Ruger were owned by another (at least one that had any substantial hand in the security business) you'd think that would cause problems. Currently, Ruger is the largest firearms manufacturer on the planet (so I've read), and is actually part of a larger corporation based around investment casting production, so it would stand to reason that at least Ruger is still independent. BTW, their main manufacturing facility is in Prescott, AZ (which, IIRC, is in the PCC in SR), so there's a decent-sized "what-if" when it comes to how the NAN would have handled that. They do have another manufacturing plant in Newport, New Hampshire, though.

Other than that, the only thing I can think of is Colt being owned by Ares, but I don't think that was canon.

[kzt]

If you look at who owns US companies that make weapons, explosives and ordinance they are pretty much all either free-standing entities, part of private corporations or part of corporations that are strictly military/explosives. I haven't found one that is part of a large commercial conglomerate.

The history of Smith & Wesson shows why. Tomkins PLC, as owners of S&W from 89 to 2001 tried really hard to put the company out of business in 2000, selling it in 2001 for about 12% (40% with debt) of what they paid for it 14 years earlier. You can also see this in how Colt Mfg had a series of near death experience in the 90s. (Not that the US gun industry has ever been particularly well managed when the companies were stand alone however - it's just that being owned by a public conglomerate was much worse.)

But I think the unwillingness of major publicly traded companies to be involved in weapons is a fairly recent phenomena. For example, DuPont was the worlds largest explosives manufacturer, but they sold off all their explosives manufacturing by the mid 70s IIRC. GE was deeply involved in the nuclear weapons program. I've been told this was due to the stock market not liking the cyclical nature of the business and due to shareholder pressure to get out of making things that killed people.

[Penta]

nuclear weapons were a cyclical business? :shock:

[kzt]

[Chandon]

The "weapons companies are bad PR" theory doesn't work either. All the megas have a weapons division - it's just that none of them sell products that are in the BBB.

Gah! I guess one solution would be for me to design a bunch of Shiawase Arms (etc) small arms that are slightly better / cheaper than the book weapons to do my vendor lockin plotlines with.

[SL James]

[crash2029]

Hi, I looked at the guns & ammo list that Chandon posted and noticed that he didn't know who manufactured the Uzi. That company is IMI, or Israeli Military Industries.
Just FYI.

[wind_in_the_ston...]

In our game, we buy ammo for a specific gun. We mark the quantity and type down on our character sheets next the gun that it's for. When we find a gun, we take the ammo that comes with it. When we loan a weapon to a teammate, we give the ammo with it.

In other words, we don't share ammo between weapons of similar classes, it's not a big PITA recordkeepingwise, and we don't need a chart.

The only downside is that we can't take advantage of being able to share ammo between weapons that really do use the same size round. But I think it's rare that this would come into play, since we seldom carry more than one gun of the same class.

I'm not trying to say that I think your idea is bad, I'm just offering a suggestion for a slightly simpler way.

[WhiskeyMac]

The designer's notes in the beginning of the Cannon Companion state that the guns outlined in the book were just the most "popular" ones. You can have a gun company from Evo make Ares Predators that are exactly the same stats wise but simply a different name. Each megacorp has a weapons manufacturing division and so all you have to do is change the name to represent each mega's version of the gun. Maybe add in some independents here to spice things up.

[Chandon]

So... I got some more time and tried again.

http://www.ferrus.net/~nat/chandon-ammo2.html

I've introduced a couple of plot points for my game world:
- The Advanced Japanese Ammunition Standard (AJAS). The old ammo standards were too lame for a consortium Japanacorps (apparently including Shiawase and Yamaha), so they introduced a couple of caseless cartridges.
- Precision Arms - This small company introduced a couple of new, patented, cartridges with very minor performance advantages. For some reason, there are a lot of countries and security that are now requiring PA cartridge compatibility in their new weapon purchases. A number of weapon manufacturers - including HK and FN - have licensed the technology and are offering PA compatible guns by default.

Any thoughts?