 Firearms and after market add ons., how much is too much? |
  |
 Apr 3 2004, 08:40 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 264 Joined: 26-March 04 From: Houston Member No.: 6,197  |
Like a staple gun, obviously.
But in all seriousness, I think there's already a picture of a Predator in Cannon Companion. It looks like a Desert Eagle. |
 |
 
|
|
Apr 3 2004, 11:18 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
All pictures I've ever seen of the Ares Predator look like the pistol used in Robocop, which was an over-lengthened (and thus really silly-looking) Beretta M93R.
The Robocop gun does not have an underbarrel weight, because it's made largely out of resin. If it were made out of metal, it'd be far too heavy to be useful. On the other hand SR guns are all far too heavy... The Beretta M93R does not have an underbarrel weight of any kind. [Edit]Correction: There is a picture in the Cannon Companion of the Ares Predator, and it looks like no RL weapon I can think of.[/Edit] I've never seen or heard of canon SR pistol illustrations that look like the Desert Eagle. Has someone else? This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Apr 4 2004, 12:35 PM |
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 01:07 AM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
The SR2 BBB has an illustration that is an exact copy of the RoboCop gun, with the caption "Ares Predator". Can't find my old SR2 book to quote a page, unfortunately. I'm sure someone here has it. Never seen one that looks like a Desert Eagle. The SSC illustration of the Predator II doesn't compare to anything real that I've seen.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 02:09 AM
Post
#29
|
|||
|
Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill. Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,545 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Gloomy Boise Idaho Member No.: 2,006 |
I can't get you chapter and verse but there is. Look again it is ontop of or near the entry for Pred III's. It is someone what debatable becasue some people feel unless there is a caption or a big shiny arrow pointing at it then it may not be the gun. But yes, it is the pred II. And in the AR section there is a picture of an Ares Alpha. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 4 2004, 02:17 AM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,066 Joined: 5-February 03 Member No.: 4,017 |
Page 18 of the Street Samurai Catalog (the one with the alleged mullet on the cover) shows the predator 2.
[edit]line removed due to irrelevance[/edit] |
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 02:32 AM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,616 Joined: 15-March 04 Member No.: 6,158 |
According to canon (SR3 p. 276, "Pistols"), pistols cannot accept any Underbarrel accessories since they only accept Barrel- and Top-mounted accessories.
Just pointing that out. It's not my rule. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 02:41 AM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,751 Joined: 8-August 03 From: Neighbor of the Beast Member No.: 5,375 |
I hear ya on the Canon Rules bit, but I throw the "no underbarrel mount" rule right out the window.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 02:53 AM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 413 Joined: 20-November 03 Member No.: 5,835 |
On the predator ... the Weapons Specialist glossy page has a pretty good non-cartoony image of a Predator. :-) If you look at her gear list, she has a Fichetti LP (which is in her right shoulder holster), a super warhawk (sitting on her table), and a Predator. Viola.
Regarding underbarrel mounts on pistols ... I would say that (most) pistols should definitely be able to mount underbarrel accessories -- such as smartguns, laser sights, tac-flashlights, etc. This is, after all, where such things are almost always mounted on current guns. =D |
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 03:35 AM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,401 Joined: 23-February 04 From: Honolulu, HI Member No.: 6,099 |
In the SR3 basic rulebook, (may be an older version, I've had mine forever), the Ranger Sniper rifle has version that has a silencer and a gas vent combo.
Never really saw the appeal of the Predator. I always preferred the Colt Manhunter for my runners. 1 more bullet, better conceal rating, same damage. Cheaper too, I believe. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 03:41 AM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,066 Joined: 5-February 03 Member No.: 4,017 |
Base manhunter: 425 with a laser sight; SI 1
Base predator: 450 with no targeting aids; SI .5 predator 2: 550, smartlink; SI .5 predator 3: 650, smartlink 2; SI 1 the predator 2 is cheap to replace and has a smartlink it's all personal preference, but each has its selling points. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 06:10 AM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 476 Joined: 30-December 03 From: Fresno, CFS: taking out one durned furriner at a time. Member No.: 5,940 |
I feel the appeal of the Ares Predator comes from it's seeming ubiquity within the SR universe.
In the games I play, the damn thing is everywhere, it's just so common, that it's hard to find a specific Ares Predator. Buy them by the case because they're so cheap and use one per run and then throw them away. Sooner or later, if someone uses only one gun, they'll be tracked by it. Add in smartlinks (which just about every non-magic character seems to have), and it just gets cheaper. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 4 2004, 11:10 PM
Post
#37
|
|||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Right. Which, again, is not very realistic. You can't have a gas venting system and a suppressor working in tandem. They work on opposing principles. A little more info for those who would like to hear it... Gas vents use the energy of expanding propellant gases to either push the muzzle of the barrel down, compensating for the upward thrust of recoil, or to push the firearm forward, opposing the rearward motion of the firearm into the shooter's shoulder or hands, thus reducing the potential for experiencing pain. The downside is that the energy source you're using to compensate for recoil in this manner is the main energy source that is responsible for making the noise we tend to associate with firearms. Silencers/suppressors initially contain that same energy source in order to dampen its noise by reducing its pressure, volume, and velocity. By the time those gases get to the muzzle of the silencer/suppressor they are moving subsonically and tend to make the kind of noise associated more with a pneumatic nail gun than a firearm. Unfortunately, because the energy is contained and released this way, you're seriously lowering the amount of energy that could otherwise be used to compensate for recoil. Therefore, you can't benefit from the effects of both at the same time. Period. Fortunately, because you're reducing gas pressure, volume, and velocity as well as adding mass to the firearm, you'll get very significant effects in reducing recoil as well when using a silencer/suppressor. On the same order as most muzzle brakes even, with the benefit of less noise as well. In short, realistically speaking, there's really no reason not to use a silencer/suppressor as long as funtionality isn't significantly affected. Unfortunately, SR's canon rules don't model that. In the case of the SM-3, I handle that rule by either saying that A) you can't benefit from the effects of the gas vent while the silencer is attached, B) the silencer provides the -2 recoil modifier itself and there is no gas vent (thus there are no recoil compensation benefits when the silencer is detached), or C) the silencer mounts over the gas vent. When the silencer is attached, you get the benefits of both, when the silencer is detached, you get the -2 recoil compensation. Options B and C are the most popular with C being the player's choice 100% of the time, and B being my choice probably about half the time, which puts a little variety into the process of getting an SM-3. And after all of that explaining, the last time someone used an SM-3 in a game I was in was a long, long time ago. Go fig. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 5 2004, 02:20 AM
Post
#38
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,401 Joined: 23-February 04 From: Honolulu, HI Member No.: 6,099 |
I'm curious, it doesn't indicate so in the SR rulebook, but I guess we've got to realize its not all that great at being accurate to real life stuff :)
But, does a silencer reduce the power of a bullet in real life? Or does it just affect the gasses and the bullet remains the same speed/force/etc? |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2004, 03:01 AM
Post
#39
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
Sigh, I was hoping to direct you to Raygun's site, but I can't find the part where he talks about supressors.
In short, some of the time. Some supressors (like on the HK MP5SD) bleed propellant gasses so that the bullet will not become supersonic. Others don't. In general, a supressor won't change the veolcity of the bullet an appreciable amount, unless is also bleeds propellant gases. All propellant bleed type supressors that I am aware of are 'added' during a weapons design stage (since this involves drilling holes in the barrel somewhere). The 'screw-on' type supressor just gets rid of the crack of the expanding propellant gasses. You can use bullets that are loaded to be subsonic to take care of the sonic boom of the bullet. Even with the bullet going supersonic, the weapon will be much quieter that normal. Audible distance for that sort of gunfire is a few hundred meters, rather that a fwe kilometers. [edit] Note that obsolete 'wipe' type supressors will change the bullet velocity some. Such field expident methods as holding a pillow over the muzzle will effect bullet velocity a lot (not to mention, still make plenty of noise). [/edit] |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2004, 03:09 AM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
I meant to to link to that page, darn it... Suppression.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2004, 07:27 AM
Post
#41
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,401 Joined: 23-February 04 From: Honolulu, HI Member No.: 6,099 |
Yknow what I find kinda wierd (in my old age...heh) is that in the rpg's that I play, I'm becoming more and more in the mood to focus on details, and 'realism'. So my D&D characters don't carry a bazillion things, even though by rules and strength they can. In Shadowrun, I like to try and understand the mechanics of all the gear my runner has. :)
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2004, 08:06 AM
Post
#42
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
Voran, that's bound to give you a headache in SR. :grinbig:
SR isn't realistic. They even say that in the beginning of the 2nd edition. (if I remember it right) But it is more...uhm...fantistically believable? |
|
|
|
|
Apr 5 2004, 10:45 AM
Post
#43
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,401 Joined: 23-February 04 From: Honolulu, HI Member No.: 6,099 |
Yeah. Darned right its annoying :) Its gotta be the old age. Darnit! Back in my day, games made sense! Get off my lawn!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd December 2024 - 06:56 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.