I really think shaped charge grenades would be around in this world. To many things are really hard to damage especially spirits. Here's my take on the shaped charge grenade.
Shaped Charge Grenade
Damage: 12P AP: -2/-6 Blast: -4/m Avail: 7F Cost: 70¥
Full Version: Where are the shaped charge grenades?
Those numbers are really close to an AV missle/rocket. Which indeed would use shaped charges of some sort. You basically have a mini-rocket that is deployed in a Grenade Launcher. That makes the cost and Availability you gave way too low. Just offhand I would multiply the cost by 10 and add 10 to the Availibility.
Also it is not going to work too well if you throw it by hand. Unless you can throw it with the velocity and perfect spiral of a hall of fame quarterback like Warren Moon.
It'll work a bit better if you design them like this, though they'll still be a pain in the ass. That nobody has attempted to manufacture such weapons since WW2 is a good indication of just how useful they are.
If you're talking about grenade launcher rounds, then keep in mind that they will be far smaller (ie. should do far less damage) than anti-armor rockets or missiles. Real world 40mm HEDP grenades (shaped charge with anti-personnel fragmentation effect) can penetrate about 50mm of armor steel, while anti-tank rocket weaponry these day, like the M136 AT4, tend to manage 400mm or more.
I don't quite get how shaped charge warheads would be any better at damaging spirits, though. I sure hope spirit immunity/armor-like powers aren't actually modified by Armor Penetration modifiers in SR4, because that'd be pretty dumb.
If you're talking about grenade launcher rounds, then keep in mind that they will be far smaller (ie. should do far less damage) than anti-armor rockets or missiles. Real world 40mm HEDP grenades (shaped charge with anti-personnel fragmentation effect) can penetrate about 50mm of armor steel, while anti-tank rocket weaponry these day, like the M136 AT4, tend to manage 400mm or more.
I don't quite get how shaped charge warheads would be any better at damaging spirits, though. I sure hope spirit immunity/armor-like powers aren't actually modified by Armor Penetration modifiers in SR4, because that'd be pretty dumb.
| QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
| I sure hope spirit immunity/armor-like powers aren't actually modified by Armor Penetration modifiers in SR4, because that'd be pretty dumb. |
They are.
The houserules of the old FAQ carried over to SR4, resulting in Spirits that are immune to autofire but will die from snipers.
Sorry should have said they are grenade launcher rounds only. I used 12P becuase a AV rocket has the same 16( as a Frag rocket so I gave my AV grenade the same 12P a Frag grenade has. Same with the other stats. An AV rocket has the same availability as an HE rocket so I gave the grenade the same availability as an HE grenade.
The Frag grenade has 12P(f), which is very different from 12P. It also is including the inane +2 damage from flechette. 
How about something like this. Still quite effective against medium armoured vehicles, and more importantly against the people inside the vehicles. It is also a step up the grade of military armaments from normal "grenades". Much more akin to the rockets and missiles, and therefore because of it's obvious use for no good, have much tighter legal controls on them.
Any similarity to reality or conceivably realistic munitions is accidental only.
AntiVehicle Mini-Grenades
Damage: 10P
Armour Penetration: -1/-4
Blast: -4/m
Avail: 16F
Cost: 600¥
These high explosive, shaped charge mini grenades are really a miniature anti-vehicle rocket. They can only be fired effectively from a Grenade Launcher with a Smartlink, the Smartlink being required to arm them correctly. Without the Smartlink the fuse is not armed, and the only damage done is budgening from the force of being propelled.
How about something like this. Still quite effective against medium armoured vehicles, and more importantly against the people inside the vehicles. It is also a step up the grade of military armaments from normal "grenades". Much more akin to the rockets and missiles, and therefore because of it's obvious use for no good, have much tighter legal controls on them.Any similarity to reality or conceivably realistic munitions is accidental only.
AntiVehicle Mini-Grenades
Damage: 10P
Armour Penetration: -1/-4
Blast: -4/m
Avail: 16F
Cost: 600¥
These high explosive, shaped charge mini grenades are really a miniature anti-vehicle rocket. They can only be fired effectively from a Grenade Launcher with a Smartlink, the Smartlink being required to arm them correctly. Without the Smartlink the fuse is not armed, and the only damage done is budgening from the force of being propelled.
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| They can only be fired effectively from a Grenade Launcher with has a Smartlink, the Smartlink being required to arm them correctly. Without the Smartlink the fuse is not armed, and the only damage done is bundening from the force of being propelled. |
Why wouldn't contact or proximity fuzes work in the 2070s? Or did you mean this purely as a game balance issue?
I suppose a Hacker could use their Hardware skill to arm the grenade, and have it denote by timer, remote signal. If it is thrown randomly determine the direction it is pointing and have the AP go in that direction. In the other directions -1 AP and blast as per the -4/m.
If not thrown you likely don't need to randomly determine the direction.
If not thrown you likely don't need to randomly determine the direction.
| QUOTE (Austere Emancipator @ Jan 26 2006, 07:07 PM) | ||
Why wouldn't contact or proximity fuzes work in the 2070s? Or did you mean this purely as a game balance issue? |
Ya. Too much overthink?
EDIT Mostly though the idea that reduced scatter would be the norm, the larger scatter for not having the Smartlink makes a lot less sense.
i was thinking that it would be neat to have a stick-and-krak grenade. Like a stick-and-shock round, this grenade has an industrial adhesive to make it stick to the target, then acts as a shaped charge at point blank range.
10P, -4 AP, No radius at all.
It's as tough as a PAC, but the downside of this thing is that you have to be right on the money. In our last game i ended up with a really cool grenade launcher, but it took seven (!!!) HE grenades to take out an armored mob sedan. Bear in mind that the only skill of 6 my character has is in heavy weapons. Add Agility 8 and smartlink and he was rolling 16 dice. Most of my successes were offsetting the 1D6 scatter, though, so there wasn't much left to add to the DV.
Anyone else wonder if 3D6 -4 per hit might be better than 1D6 -1 per hit? i suppose the fact that the grenade explodes right away is the only reason to keep your airburst link.
10P, -4 AP, No radius at all.
It's as tough as a PAC, but the downside of this thing is that you have to be right on the money. In our last game i ended up with a really cool grenade launcher, but it took seven (!!!) HE grenades to take out an armored mob sedan. Bear in mind that the only skill of 6 my character has is in heavy weapons. Add Agility 8 and smartlink and he was rolling 16 dice. Most of my successes were offsetting the 1D6 scatter, though, so there wasn't much left to add to the DV.
Anyone else wonder if 3D6 -4 per hit might be better than 1D6 -1 per hit? i suppose the fact that the grenade explodes right away is the only reason to keep your airburst link.
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| The Frag grenade has 12P(f), which is very different from 12P. It also is including the inane +2 damage from flechette. How about something like this. Still quite effective against medium armoured vehicles, and more importantly against the people inside the vehicles. It is also a step up the grade of military armaments from normal "grenades". Much more akin to the rockets and missiles, and therefore because of it's obvious use for no good, have much tighter legal controls on them. Any similarity to reality or conceivably realistic munitions is accidental only. AntiVehicle Mini-Grenades Damage: 10P Armour Penetration: -1/-4 Blast: -4/m Avail: 16F Cost: 600¥ These high explosive, shaped charge mini grenades are really a miniature anti-vehicle rocket. They can only be fired effectively from a Grenade Launcher with a Smartlink, the Smartlink being required to arm them correctly. Without the Smartlink the fuse is not armed, and the only damage done is budgening from the force of being propelled. |
What is your reason for making the AV grenade worse in comparision to the frag grenade than the AV rocket is relation to the frag rocket?
| QUOTE (Space Ghost) |
| i was thinking that it would be neat to have a stick-and-krak grenade. Like a stick-and-shock round, this grenade has an industrial adhesive to make it stick to the target, then acts as a shaped charge at point blank range. |
Are you talking about a hand grenade or a grenade launcher round here? Either way, what would be the point? Impact detonation is simpler, cheaper, more reliable and more effective.
Anti-tank grenades that were stuck onto the target existed in WW2 as well, but they were supposed to be planted by hand on the target, and the point of the adhesive was to give you time to run away before it detonated. One such design was the Hafthohlladung, which was attached with magnets onto a vehicle. Can you guess why these aren't used anymore?
You could make the blast radius really short, as it would really be with a small, shaped charge warhead that isn't designed for anti-personnel effect, but it wouldn't go away. When you're talking about a metal projectile detonating and sending a hot metal wad at an extreme velocity against a metal plate, you know what's going to be flying all over the place.
Sorry, i guess i didn't finish. The true bonus comes from remote detonation. Fire these things onto vehicles, objects, doors etc then blow them later. For frag versions, shoot them down a hallway and wait for your enemies to pop on by. It's basically just a long-range demolitions delivery systems.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m433.htm
Closest thing to what you're describing I've seen, 5 inch armor penetration.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/smaw.htm
For comparisson to a rocket system that is effective against masonry and concrete
My opinion the shaped charge grenade isn't in use in 2070 because it isn't very efficient.
Closest thing to what you're describing I've seen, 5 inch armor penetration.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/smaw.htm
For comparisson to a rocket system that is effective against masonry and concrete
My opinion the shaped charge grenade isn't in use in 2070 because it isn't very efficient.
I think we're better off reintroducing the LAW rocket
i'm more interested in gadgeteering than military stuff. Let's say you needed penetrative power in a mini-grenade package. What would you use? And don't forget it's 2070.
Next comes stick-and-track homing beacons. Or grenades that become proximity mines after sticking to there targets. Gas and flash versions might be useful for swat actions.
Next comes stick-and-track homing beacons. Or grenades that become proximity mines after sticking to there targets. Gas and flash versions might be useful for swat actions.
A good rating explosive foam, a mold, and a remote blasting cap would probably do the job. Demolitions skill to get the right shape. A shaped charge has to be pointing the right way when delivered which would mean set, or launched in a manner where it has a stable flight.
Well, the simplest solution in 2070 to get rid of a tank with a small munition is to stuff the small munition with spirit conjuring materials, then use them to summon a spirit and send it on remote service to "kill everyone in that tank".
Today, a 40mm grenade will probably produce a disabling hit on the top or rear of an APC/IFV (but not a catastrophic kill) but probably will do nothing against the front or side armor. A 40mm grenade these days won't even penetrate the rear or top armor of a tank.
Today, a 40mm grenade will probably produce a disabling hit on the top or rear of an APC/IFV (but not a catastrophic kill) but probably will do nothing against the front or side armor. A 40mm grenade these days won't even penetrate the rear or top armor of a tank.
| QUOTE (stevebugge) |
| Closest thing to what you're describing I've seen, 5 inch armor penetration. |
2 inches, or 50mm like I said in the 4th message of this thread.
| QUOTE (stevebugge) |
| A good rating explosive foam, a mold, and a remote blasting cap would probably do the job. Demolitions skill to get the right shape. A shaped charge has to be pointing the right way when delivered which would mean set, or launched in a manner where it has a stable flight. |
You also need to have a copper (or some other metal) cone on the inside of that shaped charge, which might be a bit harder to come by. You can't just hammer a metal plate into that form -- unless you're a damn good smith.
| QUOTE (Findar @ Jan 26 2006, 09:09 PM) | ||
What is your reason for making the AV grenade worse in comparision to the frag grenade than the AV rocket is relation to the frag rocket? |
It isn't doesn't have as much extra bonus AP versus armour because the package can't put as much specialized stuff in as the rocket can and won't have the same balistic velocity.
The drop is only worse against soft targets. Ah, because, ah, because it is direction dependant damage and they won't stop squirming. Yah, that's the ticket.
This is already really out there munitions. SA fire, armour breeching rounds with the added bonus of an area effect requiring no extra rolls in a small concealable package. So that game balance thing again.
The velocity of the projectile has next to nothing to do with how well a shaped charge warhead penetrates armor. However, a projectile fired from a grenade launcher is very small in diameter compared to what you can fit in a rocket, and diameter of the warhead is central to the penetration potential.
Rockets and missiles meant for anti-tank use can have a lot more explosives crammed into them, allowing them to have a much better anti-personnel effect as well as to armor penetration. Still, light anti-tank weapons are crap in the anti-personnel role.
Rockets and missiles meant for anti-tank use can have a lot more explosives crammed into them, allowing them to have a much better anti-personnel effect as well as to armor penetration. Still, light anti-tank weapons are crap in the anti-personnel role.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.