Ummm, I think ammo capacity is the limiter there...

How long would each barrel have to be to hold 10,000 rounds?

Nope. SR4, pages 142-144, Burst-Fire and Full-Auto modes. The option you have that takes the most amount of bullets is suppressive fire, which uses twenty, while the second-largest is a Full Burst, using 10.

On page 143, it says that full-auto weapons keep firing as long as the trigger is held down, but the actual ruleset itself limits you to a max of twenty bullets per action phase.

Or, to channel Smokeskin, I could say, "@ronin: no."

RPM = rounds per minute, 40,000rpm = 10 rounds from each barrel in 1/4,000th of a second. Once you decide that's a good idea, I doubt you could release the trigger fast enough not to fire all 40 rounds...

Nope. It would have been a stupid idea in the 1600s. Once factory-made interchangible parts became involved, it stopped being a stupid idea. All they have to do is make all of the barrels using the same blueprints. The actual barrel length doesn't change, and if made right, the barrels have no choice but to face in the same direction once put in. We could almost make this gun now. In 70 years, making it may be using outdated technology.

Or lay improvised automated ambushes - from your spare ammunition.

Yeah - and I wasn't really considering that at pistol ranges a small lack of precision wouldn't really matter much anyway, guess I was thinking rifles.

Still leaves the different offset for each barrel though, but I guess you'd have each barrel "hit" a common point at half its effective range or longer, minimizing the problem.

Which amounts to unimportant in this case. In most cases, you're not going to be reloading the barrels in the middle of combat. In fact, you're not even going to carry bullets to do that in most cases. Neither will most shadowrunners. And for hand-loading, they can simply buy the bullets already setup for that and in the correct order and simply insert them into the barrel.

Really, if you're reloading the barrels while in combat, you're in deep.

No, they can't, because Yamaha won't sell them -- not to private customers, at least. And it's not like you can just drop the stacks in there anyway -- else they'd just drop out as easily. I'm sure you've tried fitting a bullet into a barrel through the muzzle some time. You'd need serious tools to be able to load the barrels at all, let alone doing so efficiently and accurately.

Yeah, crap accuracy is one of the myriad reasons why Metal Storm "rifles" were apparently never designed. Apart from barrels being misaligned, you've got a lot of projectile deformation from the previous shot, no rifling and the stability/projectile shape and size issues that brings, etc.

Uh-huh. This is the same world where you can legally buy machine pistols, submachine guns, fully automatic shotguns, full body armor, and even some assault rifles, plus ammunition for them and some types of grenades. You can even legally own cyberguns, hacking programs, police cruisers, and military-grade assault drones. A world where you can get a license to go to Walmart to buy these things.

I'm pretty sure they'll allow private customers to buy the bullets for thr gun if they have a license, plus it wouldn't take much to buy these bullets illegally. Hell, you can probably get them cheaper in the long run by just buying a fake license for them.

I'm pretty sure you can not only get these bullets in a store, but can get the guy who's selling them to you to load the barrels for you. So, please, try another one.

Oh, as for loading issues: That's simple. Insert the bullets. Even now, the Metalstorm system is one where bullet deformation isn't an issue and, with a few decades, will probably be a case of simply sticking the bullets in, inserting the barrel into the gun, and firing. If they combine it with the increasingly-smaller railgun tech, you don't even need propellant. Magnetic fields simply move the bullets forward and then sling them out.

It's not a problem about legality, it's about availability:
You would have to order those bullets and propellants from the factories, which usually doesn't even consider shipping unless you order a thousand.

The firearms presented in the main book use propellants.

Most of the time, in ammunition ready-for-use: Reloding is a hobby, after all.

Sure, you'll find some shops that offer such parts. But don't expect it to be ubiquitously available, nor worth the time if you have to use your gun regularily.

None of those private owners or security forces want the separate cartridge stacks, let alone the propellants and projectiles to manufacture the cartridge stacks. Loading the barrels requires a lot of tools, materials and knowhow, none of which end users has or particularly wishes to acquire -- this would be far more difficult to do than handloading your own ammo for a more conventional firearm. So Yamaha gladly sells them the loaded barrels at rather high prices, and buys the used barrels back.

Yes it is. It is simply used in applications where slightly deformed projectiles doesn't cause too much trouble -- like area denial or close defense at massive RoFs. But that's not why loading the barrels yourself is a problem.

Which is based on what level of technology? Oh, right, that which exists right now.

Now, to be honest, your whole comment about private owners really isn't that realistic. There are always going to be private owners who enjoy reloading the guns themselves, and usually they're in enough numbers that there are going to be stores which sell individual bullets. In addition to that, I see nothing about the barrel design to indicate that specialized tools are necessary for reloading. In fact, the barrel design looks like a box magazine, and in function, probably operates enough like one that you can simply load the bullets into it. Which, considering a good 63 years to perfect the technology at the most (gun is available in 2070 from the very beginning, meaning it came out at the latest in 2069), is perfectly acceptable. In addition, the technology itself has been perfected to the point that it allows the weapon to be handloaded without specialized tools required. If you want to argue further, you have to deal with the fact the ruleset itself supports this. Even if Yamaha does buy back the barrels from most and make a hefty profit, they're still going to have the customers who prefer to hand load the barrels and who will request empty barrels for such a reason.

Besides, by this point railguns are viable weapons. If you're going to continue to use modern technology as a base for your arguments, you're not going to get anywhere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Storm

The only potential projectile deformation is in the projectile being fired in the latest prototypes. Considering they are talking about potentially using that ammunition design in rifles, I would say the issue of deformation isn't one.

What evidence do you have of SR4 firearms functioning with any level of technology other than what we have IRL? Oh, right, none.

I never said individual bullets will not be sold. Those will just be of no use to someone who wishes to reload his own YSF barrels, unless he also has a heck of a lot of other stuff. Like, I don't know, a Firearms B/R Shop, specialty propellants and a decent Firearms B/R skill.

So I take you have not attempted to stick a bullet down the muzzle of a gun. Try it some time. Then read up on what the cartridges of a Metal Storm weapon are like and how they're arranged inside the barrels, and then we can pick up on this discussion.

"There's dragons, so obviously nothing is in any way similar to anything we have IRL, even though they're obviously directly based on this particular RL piece and there being dragons has no direct implications whatsoever on said piece."

Where does it say that?

That's not what it says. It says the projectiles are no longer being deformed so much that they "plug" the barrel -- you're still talking about the full force of the propellant gases pressing directly against the nose of the projectile behind it. This leads to deformation, which means lesser accuracy.

You want to find me a quote of someone knowledgeable about the Metal Storm technology suggesting its use in rifles from, say, the past 4 years? Back in the early days of the tech some people mentioned the possibility of a "burst fire sniper rifle", but all mention of such has since disappeared -- one imagines because the Metal Storm system is simply inferior to more conventional firearms when it comes to precision.

Railguns in SR3. Portable laser weapons in SR3. A portable laser weapon in SR4. The internal smartgun system in both systems. The fact you can remote-fire any weapon with an internal smartgun in SR4. Oh, should I also mention the various types of ammunition from both systems? Oh, let's not forget the piece of fluff about how fast armor-piercing tech has advanced.

Railguns are modern tech, but the way they were treated in SR3 was as though some of the problems plaguing them today have been eliminated.

Now, want to try that one again?

Which is, once again, not based on SR and their tech level. You know, that game where they allow you to have entire limbs replaced without losing the sense of touch. Or all of those other pieces of technology that are unrealistic by today's standards.

I read up on it. I fail to see how that really has any power to convince when you consider it's a problem they're trying to work around. Given even 60 years, I'd say they have it. Besides, have you looked at those "barrels" they have for the YSF? They're just boxes. I'd say they solved the problem.

Oh, and I've actually managed that with a bullet. It depends on barrel design whether or not you can with ease. A barrel designed for muzzle-loading is easier than one not.

Nice strawman.

Okay, here's your problem: You're trying to discredit my point by bringing up magic, where as I've been bringing up technology advancements this entire time to point out why your entire argument is worthless. And, really, it is. So, quit trying to distract from the discussion at hand and try to stick on topic. I'd really, really hate to have to point out all of the logical fallacies you've used in your attempt to look like you actually know what you're talking about.

In the part where it classes the gun as a muzzle-loader, provides rules for muzzle-loading, and then fails to mention that you need any tools for it. In fact, the way it's worded, you can do it with your fingers.

Okay, using logical fallacies AND not reading my source material. Nice combo.

Do I need to provide a dictionary definition of the word "skirt" for this?

Or, maybe, because a burst-fire sniper rifle is a fucking stupid idea? Maybe also because people are more interested in the tech for larger weapons? Incidentally, I found this interesting article:

http://www.defensereview.com/article718.html

All mentions of a sniper rifle I found are from 2002, but this doesn't mean it was dropped. Presumeably, it was, but then we have such lovely things as the OICW that was intermittantly kept quiet about.

Oh, and for fun, it turns out they were working on a rifle after all. Just not in the way it seemed.

Now, Austere, I want you to provide me with a source that says that, in a 2070 SR game, you have to reload a weapon using metal storm tech using special tools.

Which ammunition advances in SR can be considered to have anything to do with new technology? Stuff like "Flechette" ammunition only shows that the game designers don't give a damn about how actual projectiles function. And what is there to show for this amazing advancement in armor-piercing technology? By all accounts armor piercing small arms ammunition still functions just like it does IRL -- normal projectiles, sometimes saboted, with dense, hard metal cores.

Cyberlimbs have what to do with firearms?

They are? Links?

Yes. The person who drew that picture specifically stated that he drew them to be whole barrels that are factory preloaded and which are replaced wholly, right here on Dumpshock Forums.

Muzzle-loading weapons use sub-caliber ammunition that is somehow padded to stay inside the barrel, or is rammed inside with significant force. Do you suggest this is how Metal Storm weapons in the future will work?

I'm bringing up the fact that the technology advances you've claimed have as much to do with the matter at hand as magic does. I get that sort of argument in these discussions all the damn time, and I'm really, really tired of them.

According to the rules as you understand them, then, you could drop whole cartridges, with percussion ignited primers, from any other handgun of the same class into the barrel of a YSF, and that would work wonderfully? And you see no logical problem with this?

Urgh... I read the "source material" (the Wiki article) you provided, and have done so a few times before. Like I explained above, it is only saying that the current models do not rely on the projectiles deforming such that they plug the barrel. They are still under the full pressure of the propellant before them -- because of the way the cartridge stack works, this could not possibly be otherwise -- and projectiles under such forces tend to deform heavily. This reduces accuracy.

Please do point out my logical fallacy here.

It would not be, if you really could achieve the same accuracy as with single shots with a bolt action rifle. But you certainly can't with Metal Storm weapons, and the people at Metal Storm realized this.

It has certainly been kept quiet about since the OICW project was terminated.

Gee, ever hear of the gel rounds that are solid enough to be fired from a gun but still splat when they hit something? Last I checked, we don't have those.

When you consider smartlinks, cyberguns, gyro mounts, cyberlimb arm slides, and cyberlimb holsters, quite a lot.

Not until you provide the link I asked for.

I'll look it up after this, but really, I don't think that matters much. If he drew it that way, then he has the problem of the rules text not agreeing with the artist's opinion of the gun's actual function. Won't be the first time. If the gun was really intended to operate that way, they should have noted it in the entry.

So, let me get this straight: You're telling me you're really going to ram a missile into a launcher with significant force? I don't think that's very smart.

Oh, and actually, I wouldn't be surprised if the ammunition was "rammed" into the weapon. Keep in mind the various problems with reality this game already has when it comes to firearms.

Technology advances all related to weapons advancement vs. magical intelligent saurians... Yes, I can see how those two can be said to be equivolent. Really.

Or, maybe, I was point out other areas in which technology advancements have happened to show how a similar technology advancement could have happened with metal storm tech. Nah, that can't be it. Let's stick with the strawman instead.

And if you're sick of getting into these arguments, then stop getting into them. You chose to enter this one. I didn't force you.

Actually, it's pretty logically-consistant. We know ammunition has been available in a caseless form for years in the SR timeline. Depending on the rest of the gun's internal workings, the only problem may be on your end. Given the last seventy years of gun advancement, the next seventy may produce a type of propellant for bullets that doesn't make this an issue. Hell, we've done stranger things before.

Actually, reading it, the part of the bullet that gets deformed is not the tip, but further back. This would reduce accuracy a bit, but not enough to be a serious problem. Especially considering some of the designs they're talking about.

Well, there's the strawman logical fallacy, the one where you've asked for evidence but not provided any as of yet, and the one where you assume today equals what will be in seventy years.

Nor will it ever be possible when you have such things as recoil. The accuracy drops as shots are fired. Besides, once you start with rapidfire, you lose the benefit provided by a silencer.

Yeah, and there was an announcement of termination. Something I haven't seen with the sniper rifle.

That's because, as even the game designers are willing to admit, that sort of thing doesn't make sense, no matter the level of technology. If you've got something heavy and fast enough fired out of a handgun (let alone rifle) barrel to have the range and accuracy of a dense metal bullets, it's going to fucking kill people when it hits them. If you take a 124gr, 0.35" diameter cylinderical projectile in the chest at 1200fps, you better hope your ribs are particularly tough or you've got several grams of gel in your lungs.

There wouldn't be any trouble firing something of a firearm that will splatter on impact, as such. It's a problem of density and preferred target effect.

All these would all function fine with current firearm technology.

What, the question you edited in about where it says you need special tools for Metal Storm in the rule books? I cannot answer such a question (nevermind giving you a "link" for that), when there is no mention of actual Metal Storm technology anywhere in SR. If there was, it would be a simple expedient of quoting the mention of Metal Storm technology, note the lack of mention of any sort of massive advances in that technology when it comes to reloading, and also note how such weapons are really reloaded.

Now, can you provide some proof for your throw-away statements, like "[quick end-user reloading is] a problem they're trying to work around"], or could you please stop making up stuff to support your argument?

They made no mention how the gun operates. If you want it to operate a particular way, you go ahead and make it operate so in your games. I'm only saying what sort of operation would make sense.

Why would I? You brought up muzzle loading firearms. They are sometimes loaded with very tight-fitting bullets by ramming the projectile down the barrel with force.

So your argument here, in other words, is that "The game doesn't make sense in lots of places, so how about we decide that this bit, which we are completely free to rule anyway we like, doesn't make sense either, for sake of internal consistency?"

Of course it "could have". It's a fictional world, after all. But there is no proof that it has happened -- instead we have lots and lots and lots of proof that it has not happened, in how all the basic functions of the conventional firearms are still exactly the same as they are IRL, except in parts where the designers themselves admit that changes to such make no sense.

Sure, I could drop all arguments as soon as the person I am talking to says something silly. That wouldn't allow me to communicate much over the internet, however.

Caseless ammunition has been available for years in real life. Since SR doesn't say the G11 project never happens, it's been around for more than 90 years by 2070.

We know how conventional cased and caseless weapons work -- with electronic or percussion primers -- we know how Metal Storm weapons work, and there is no reasonable indication that either of these has changed in SR. Not much depends, unless you decide that, in your games, there has been some massive change in how all firearms operate.

The skirts rest against the front of the projectile behind the one being fired. All of the pressure will then be directly applied to the nose of that projectile. This will tend to deform said nose.

Any kind of bullet deformation inside the barrel that is not strictly controlled is really bad for accuracy. And yes, like I said myself when you first mentioned deformation, Metal Storm is currently being used in applications where lack of accuracy is not much of a problem, like area denial and close defense.

As I said, your argument about advances of technology that are not related to the item being discussed was as relevant as bringing up dragons and magic in such a discussion. You were saying "it doesn't need to make sense from a RL perspective, because obviously in SR some things function differently". I am pointing out that, for the sake of any sort of suspension of disbelief, when there is no mention of something having changed, and indeed there is lots of implications that things have remained the same, then it is logical to assume that thing has not changed -- even though you can obviously choose to change that thing in your game.

What things that I have claimed, that are not shown on a quick Forum or Google search, would you like evidence for?

That is the whole reason why, before the whole basic lack of accuracy thing is taken into consideration, the Metal Storm "sniper rifle" almost makes sense. The cyclic RoF between the shots on the first burst would be so high that the weapon would not be able to shift at all between the first shot being fired and the last bullet leaving the muzzle.

There are loads of sniping applications where sound suppression would not be necessary.

That would be because the OICW project was a relatively large DoD project with tens (hundreds?) of millions invested in it, and having a relatively large amount of publicity, while the Metal Storm "sniper rifle" was idle speculation that was never publically declared as even being designed.

SR4, page 313: Gel rounds.
SR4, page 313: Stick-n-Shock rounds

The game designers can admit it all they want, they still added it into the game.

... Except for the part where they have to be implanted and made to operate under commands from the brain.

Which is where I point out my point: All of the weapons in the game are given a basic way they work, with any deviants given special notations of how they deviate in the entries. For example, the YSF only suffers SA recoil for burst-fire.

Now, why is that important? Because the YSF doesn't include a specific mention as to it deviating from the norm for muzzle loaders in how reloading is handled. Considering this is the same game where railguns are viable and they've decided to introduce the XM30, I'd say we're supposed to simply assume that the tech advanced to that point in spite of the lack of fluff saying so. Any time you want an example of this, look at the XM30.

Considering how you've been making up a sudden requirement for tools for the YSF to be reloaded, I don't think you have much room to talk on the subject of making shit up. But, just to be nice, I'll include this:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...02/893foort.asp

Considering that they are making a handgun with a rapid reload capacity, I'd say it's obvious that reloading is an issue they are working on.

Actually, in a way, they did. They provided enough clues to show that it operates as a Metal Storm handgun, all the while providing clues that reloading is similar to a standard handgun magazine. They said nothing directly.

It's based off the fact you specified "muzzle-loading weapons" in your comment, which happens to include portable missile launchers (SR4 has one). I know it's being a bit of an ass, but at this point, I was channeling the ass.

Nope. Not what I meant. I was being sarcastic with that portion. My fault on that one.

We're dealing with a weapon that is reliant on experimental technology (like railguns are). So, yeah, I'm going to stick my neck out and say that it had to have advanced by the time the YSF was made. Besides, I think I accidentally found a real-life experimental weapon that makes my interpretation of the YSF perfectly justified just while trying to make you look like an idiot. Why the hell can't I ever make these discoveries on purpose?

Actually, you don't have to enter them to begin with. If you get tired of these, then the next time this comes up, take a break. By then, I'll probably not be willing to discuss it either.

Yes, but caseless ammunition isn't commonly available, like is it in SR. Big difference.

It's a firearm that operates by using electrical charges to detonate ammunition and is reliant on a technology still in its infancy and which has seen no actual full-scale military use yet. It doesn't require a change in "hammer slams down, explosion happened, bullet goes flying out of gun" to change how the YSF works. The YSF doesn't work like how normal handguns do.

Meh. I'm going to let this one go. I don't have the search-fu to continue.

Actually, this is when you make a massive failure in judgement.

Now, let's take a look at the weapons advancements I've been specifically harping on. There's the railguns, cyberlimbs, etc. Specifically, lets look at the example that spawned this portion of the argument, which is the railgun. Now, there is a reason why the railgun is very, very relevant: Like metal storm tech, it's reliant upon an energy system in the muzzle to fire the projectiles. The only difference is in how the projectiles are fired. However, that doesn't mean there is a lack of cross-reference. The same advancements in energy systems that make a railgun feasible would also be easily applied to metal storm tech to improve the electrical system that ignites bullets, and potentially even provide a system whereas you no longer need to add more propellant to bullets further in the barrel.

Now, let's look at cybertechnology: Keep in mind that it, also, requires advancements in power systems, but not the same advancements as a railgun. It requires advancements in power transfer systems, advancements which are actually quite tiny. Tiny enough to possibly fit inside the barrels of a YSF.

Now, if you combine those two seemingly-unrelated techs together, you get two areas of advancement that directly affect the YSF and potentially advance metal storm technology on the whole much farther.

Sometimes, to build a new missile, you need to improve canned food. Or invent new chips for home computer systems. Just because it seems unrelated doesn't mean it is when how technology advancements interrelate.

Except that you need the barrel to move or time between shots anyway. It's really only useful if you're shooting the same target multiple times, and then you're probably just a bad sniper.

True.

The thing about those ammo types is that they don't necessitate or imply any advanced firearms technology. They simply could not function as they do according to the rules in our world, no matter the technology; and the technology that would make them more reasonable, although still not in the way that they are described in the rules, is not related to firearms as such. Thus it has nothing to do with the YSF.

That has nothing to do with firearms as such. That's just a problem of allowing for accurate, reliably, direct neural input, and in creating cyberlimbs that can mount weapons. An electronically fired caseless firearm can easily be manufactured with current weapons technology, and the weapon would not care whether the input to fire comes from a trigger-switch or directly from the brain.

I do not have a copy of SR4 at hand: SR4 has muzzleloading conventional firearms that are loaded one cartridge (or part thereof) at a time through the muzzle of a barrel, and the notation and descriptions of all ammunition-related parts are completely identical between that and the YSF?

I did not. I noted that Metal Storm weapon barrels require tools to be reloaded. The YSF itself could be reloaded quickly with no tools whatsoever by exchanging the barrels. This is not a "sudden requirement", this is, has always been, and, as far as Metal Storm is concerned, will be integral to the way Metal Storm weapons operate.

Rapid reload = the barrels can be quickly detached and replaced. The VLe handgun prototype was to be reloaded by changing the 4 barrels -- this is apparent from viewing images and videos of its operation. Have you got some other proof?

That is a contradictory statement. If it functions like a Metal Storm handgun, it is not reloaded similar to how you reload detachable magazine loaded handgun -- except in that the barrels (like a magazine) could be quickly removed and replaced in a few simple actions (Simple Actions?). They did apparently not give any implication that it's like a Metal Storm handgun only the cartridge stack, firing system and the cartridges themselves function in a completely different way.

Duely noted.

They have demonstrated that it works, and the DoD is in the process of acquiring platforms for it (if it has not already done so). There is no apparent drive to change the basic functioning of the system, and certainly not to how its reloaded -- research is going more towards the platforms themselves. The VLe handgun prototype showed that it could be done, it just didn't make much sense.

Would you mind telling the rest of us what this weapon you found is?

I hate ignorance, so I try and fight it whenver I've got a chance. I don't want to give up on these arguments until it is apparent that it is impossible to sway the person I am arguing with. Sometimes that has taken weeks or months of arguments with people over apparently obvious matters (e.g. severity of blunt trauma through flexible body armor with handguns), but as long as I think I'm making progress I won't stop. And the same goes as long as I feel there is something I could learn from the argument.

You can freely purchase 5.7mm caseless ammunition for the Voere VEC 91. It is available if you want it. That it is not more common has nothing to do with technology, only the basic issues of having vs. not having a case for the cartridge.

Right. It doesn't require any change to how firearms work to make the YSF function logically. To make it function like you suggest it would, so that you can just drop in cartridges and they will automatically align themselves, firmly stick themselves to the exact right places and limit/boost the propellant as necessary to even out velocity, would require some changes, however.

Metal Storm weapons need minimal amounts of electricity to function. Electric ignition of the propellant could be done for thousands of rounds with a normal 9 volt battery.

Is there any implication whatsoever that the YSF does not use chemical energy to propel projectiles? Which percent of SR4 players, do you think, based on the description and stats in the book, assume that the YSF is a railgun or a coilgun? If the YSF still uses the same sort of projecting force as the RL Metal Storm weapons do, as I'm willing to bet the massive majority of the SR4 public assumes it does, what then do railguns and cyberarms have to do with it?

Exactly that would be the point of such a weapon. Not managing to hit your target on the first shot at 900 meters doesn't make you a bad sniper, it makes you not a hugely fucking lucky sniper. Only because of the inherent inaccuracy of the platform, it is most likely the whole 8-round burst out of a Metal Storm "sniper rifle" would miss a man-sized target at 900 meters.

Actually, I was just thinking it would require a vastly-reduced velocity, but somehow would need something to keep it going the distance. Related in terms of potential advancements in technology (even if they're likely impossible to make actually work in real life).

So it has nothing to do with firearms, but actually does have something to do with firearms? Make up your mind.

The only other muzzle-loading weapon is actually a missile launcher. Rules-wise, they reload the same.

Actually, yes, you did make it up in this case. You've repeatedly stated that a person would need a specialized set of tools to reload a YSF with no indication that you are talking about metal storm tech today. In fact, I'm the one who brought up that it's current technology you're talking about. Want quotes to prove it?

Do you have proof of that? Looking at all of the pictures I've seen thus far does not indicate to me that is exactly what they mean. If anything, it looks like you would have to construct major portions of the gun to even attempt that. But, I will admit I am having trouble with a couple pages. So, please, post proof of your claim so I can verify it.

It's a rapidfiring multi-barrel weapon that lacks moving parts and uses electrical ignition of ammunition, with the barrels being detachable for rapid replacement. Only, you can reload the barrels. Tell me how much of that is like the metal storm tech and how much isn't. Because if it isn't metal storm tech, then all of your arguments about the YSF up to this point have been completely baseless, and even if it is, you have to admit it does have differences easily explained as simple technological advancement in the area.

You already answered your question in that post.

The drive to change how it's reloaded would be a military issue for carrying around portable weapons using the technology. It's much cheaper to reload on bullets than to simply replace the entire barrel.

Heh. Well, just remember, you do only have yourself to blame for joining in.

Actually, has quite a lot to do with technology. But, I'll leave it alone for a bit. I have my reasons.

Okay, cool. You've not been paying attention this entire time. I was wondering when I'd get conclusive evidence of that.

About a page or two back, I actually mentioned two solutions for this. One would be an internal magnetic system that automatically adjusts where the bullet is. The other would be a set of bullets, with the propellants already adjusted, in the correct order in packages. You'd have to completely load a barrel, which isn't something you'd do in combat, but you could still do it by hand. You'd have to do it one bullet at a time, and a total of ten times per barrel.

It was around that time that the claim that Yamaha wouldn't sell bullets to inviduals was made as part of your "YSF is exactly like metal storm today and must be treated as such" series of arguments. You know, that requirement you were making up that's not supported by the rules. And, no matter how many times you try to deny it, I have proof that you were.

Won't argue with this one. Still, though, that doesn't actually contradict what I said.

Well, how about the fact that question two in that series was another strawman? In fact, I'd say that entire reply was a strawman. I already explained how they are related. Go back and read it again. And, next time, don't try the strawman tactic and try to make your reply relevant to what was said.

At that range, having no recoil won't make you a better sniper. It just means that, instead of one shot missing, you have eight that missed. The multiple, recoilless shots are all going to go where the first shot did anyway. So, you still have to be hugely fucking lucky to kill someone.

Now I'm thinking you're just disagreeing on purpose. I said it has to do with creating a reliable DNI and creating cyberlims, and that firearms technology is already advanced enough to allow for these once those two previous areas catch up.

You realize how that's a bit of a stretch, considering how completely dissimilar those two weapons are, and how massively different the action of reloading them must be?

It appears you have so far agreed that YSF functions with Metal Storm technology. I was talking about the YSF as though we both agreed on that -- this way it can be directly extended that since reloading a Metal Storm weapon does, and will unless the whole operating principle is significantly altered, require special tools, so will reloading the YSF. What's the problem here?

Argh... There are several images in which the barrel section of the weapon is opened up so that the individual barrels can quickly be removed and new ones inserted. I'll have to fish them out for you tomorrow morning. Or, you know, you could ask someone else on this board who knows anything about Metal Storm -- Raygun, Arethusa or Crusher Bob should do.

I'm not following the first part of that at all. You yourself have apparently agreed that it's a Metal Storm (-like) weapon. I simply disagree that the barrels can be easily and quickly reloaded by the end-user.

As I said, the VLe pistol is reloaded through swapping barrels, so it hardly works towards your vision of the YSF.

No such drive currently exists, even though a portable weapon based on the Metal Storm technology is currently undergoing testing to possibly enter service as part of the basic grenadier's weapon in Australia in 2010-2012. See: AICW. That's the sort of thing Metal Storm might be good for. It is more or less useless for infantry small caliber rapid fire weapons, like rifles, LMGs and GPMGs, which are the sorts of weapons where reloading through barrel swapping might be a problem.

The cost would be a non-issue for the military anyway. They would have a deal with the maker of the weapon to give back the used barrels and get them reloaded at reduced cost.

Let me guess: you have lots of stuff to back up your point about this, but you will hold it back because I could not possible comprehend it?

Nice. Very complicated, increased cost of the projectiles, requires a constant supply of power whenever there are cartridges in the barrel, reduces the muzzle velocity or increases barrel wear throughout, and does not solve the problem of having the projectiles loose when they are fired, reducing accuracy even further.

Like above, the projectiles would still be loose inside the barrel, leading to crappy accuracy.

I think perhaps your Dumpshock experience will be more pleasant if you read all general discussion of "how things are" as being about how things are either in canon, or how things make sense. These do not restrict your ability to do things differently in your games. If you do not care about canon or sense, that's none of our concern.

I haven't the slightest what you're talking about. You were saying that this technology advancing thing could lead to a weapon which uses no chemical propellant but only electrical energy to propel the projectiles. I was saying that, unless it is canon, makes sense, or is agreed upon by the majority of SR players that the YSF functions in such a way, the advances in technology you were talking about have nothing to do with the YSF. Where is the straw man?

No, they won't. No weapon in the world is that consistent. At 900 meters, you would see several inches of spread between shots aimed at the exact same point with the most accurate weapons in the world. Having the 8 shots spread over, say, 4 square feet would be ideal.

Only with a small caliber Metal Storm weapon, each shot will stray several yards off target, if you're lucky.

Hey, I was going by the way you worded it. To me, it sounded like you were disagreeing and contradicting yourself.

Depending on the setup, they can be totally dissimilar or amazingly similar. Take a look at Hellgate: London for an example of a micro-rocket launcher that uses detachable box magazines. Admittedly, it's not SR or realistic by any stretch of the imagination, but I am willing to bet that shoving something intended to fly through the air and kill people/destroy things into a barrel can be very similar except in the size.

Look at another similarity they have: In both cases, the item the ammo comes out of is disposable.

Oops. Sorry about that. (Not sarcasm either.)

Basically, my issue is that, with the way the rules are written, it seems designed to where you can basically load the barrel by hand. This is, of course, likely a fault of streamlining the rules and then turning around and creating something where we have to figure out in what way it's different from the tech they based it on for explaining to players and other GMs. Now, while this doesn't create a problem on paper, the realistic problem is some players will want to reload those barrels themselves, and other players won't think it's possible. The entry itself does nothing to say which direction.

Now, here's another interpretation of the rules, and one that fits exactly with what you're saying: The barrels themselves are not what the "muzzle loader" designation means. It's using the barrels as the ammunition you insert. Rules-wise, that's supportable.

Unfortunately, the way I read the rules, it means the barrels can be reloaded, since the reloading rules specify ammunition.

May be on my end. I've been having problems with viruses a lot lately, so my virus scanner and firewall are ultra-aggressive. Knowing my luck, I'm probably wrong... So, let's assume I am and move on from this point. I'll find a way to get the pictures later.

Which, unfortunately, isn't clear in the rules as written. The rules as written support the idea of an individual easily reloading the having extreme difficulty reloading the barrels, but managing to do so anyway. Unfortunately, the rules simply state one muzzle tube being reloaded... which means they likely intended for multi-barrel muzzle-loading weapons to be in the game (why specify it otherwise?).

Now, how can this be explained tech-wise? An improvement in the barrels themselves that directly controls ammunition feed. I won't bother to guess how. If I was a weapons engineer with the knowledge to do that, I'd be working for Metal Storm instead of posting on Dumpshock.

I'll admit I'm wrong. I'm going from that angle anyway, so no harm in admitting it multiple times.

I know. That's what I refered to when I said they were working on a rifle.

About the only use I can see for such a weapon is a case of spray-and-pray. The frontline, army-againt-army kinda combat that we don't see anymore where laying down a large number of bullets in a very short amount of time is more important than accuracy, and even then it wouldn't be the weapon you hand out to every soldier. Any use for reloading the barrels would simply be a case of trying to save materials for prolonged combat. The current era of guerilla warfare makes this mostly useless, but in a full-scale war, it's always nice to have the one guy capable of firing a lot of ammunition in a short amount of time.

Meh. Can't argue with that much. They probably already have that deal for every Metal Storm weapon developped.

No. I don't feel like going on a massive source hunt for that entire portion of the argument just to prove a point that isn't necessary to prove. And, to be honest, it would take multiple sources, each covering a different area of advancement and how it affected weaponry, to prove that.

Not really. Use the magnetic system to load them tightly, then move the entire stack forward. Muzzle wear wouldn't be an issue because they'd have already had to solve this (this is where railguns are related, as they have the same problem on a much more massive scale). And, for battery power, use the same power technology that makes portable lasers viable combined with the most advanced power transfer systems in technology (where the cyberlimbs come in, as it's a requirement of the fluff behind how they work that they have it).

Of course, you do end up with an expensive weapon, one that would be far more expensive than others of it's class. Which is exactly what the YSF is.

Nope. Make the barrel the right length and you have to pack the projectiles in tight to even get them all in the barrel.

With how things are in canon, part of this argument isn't even happening. With how things make since, it's how they make sense now. I've read several arguments on here where either of those apply perfectly. This isn't one of them in my estimate.

Or, you simply didn't understand what I meant.

I said it could lead to a weapon where no propellant is necessary. The counter to this is it's cheaper to produce a weapon that uses propellant, as then you can buy the ammo wholesale. Besides, the way the weapon is worded, it does use propellant. A portable system that small doesn't necessarily have the electrical capacity to produce enough of a magnetic effect to operate as a true railgun anyway. I was kinda hoping someone would point that out.

No weapon in the world is recoilless. Thus, the crux of the problem with the whole scenario to begin with.

That aside, the explanation of how it could operate from your end makes it sound like a weapon where you could fire multiple bullets without the recoil affecting their trajectories. That would result in all of the bullets fired failing to vary in flight paths and striking as close together as they were when they left the barrel. Assuming a lack of bullet warping, of course.

Yup, that's exactly how I see it. If you agree that the rules can be read like that, there's little left to discuss here -- I (along with most who've discussed the YSF before) think the interpreration I use is more sensible, you think yours is. And as long as the source of the disagreement is how you read the rules, I guess it's not for me to attempt to sway you any further.

In modern conventional warfare (that might be an oxymoron...), there are surprisingly few uses for a weapon like that. This is most evident when you consider the fact that we already have weapons capable of very high cyclic RoFs but are likewise limited in size, mass, accuracy, etc.: miniguns. There were some attempts, like the XM214, at creating infantry support versions of these, but they were ditched. Metal Storm would be only going further in that direction, so I doubt they're giving such applications much consideration.

The places where high RoF is very good and less accuracy not so bad are things like close defense, e.g. shipboard anti-missile systems, and area denial, like the automated minefield replacement system they're demonstrating on their site. In the Talon UGV, AFAICT, the advantage of Metal Storm is that it allows for less weight and bulk and more reliability when you want a repeating grenade launcher, but not hundreds of rounds -- really the same thing as with the AICW GL component.

This would allow for aligning them properly, but as long as you can easily drop the whole cartridges through the muzzle of a barrel and the magnet can move them around quickly, you are talking about projectiles which have a significantly smaller diameter than the inner diameter of the barrel itself. When such a projectile is launched, it will bounce off and grind against different parts of the barrel at random, which will hugely affect accuracy.

The same goes for loading the projectiles in a particular order by hand, only the probability of misaligned rounds is much greater.

Possible in SR times, certainly, but extremely costly -- both for the weapon itself and the individual barrels -- compared to an actual Metal Storm setup.

Just because I use a different argument than what you wanted me to use doesn't make what I said a straw man, you know.

Nobody was under any illusion about that at any time. Well, okay, some idiots who really have no idea how firearms work were, but that's beside the point. If you fire the shots in a fast enough progression -- like 8 rounds in 0.0015 seconds -- the weapon will simply not have time enough to move as a reaction to the recoil before all the projectiles have left the muzzle. Then, I expect, massive muzzle brakes and a hydraulic or mechanic recoil compensation system would kick in, and then the shooter's shoulder would undergo a vivid pain sensation while the weapon kicks up (and kicks up a whole lot of dust, too).

Nope. As I said, no weapon is that accurate. Attach a rifle rigidly into a frame that doesn't allow it to move at all, fire it a few dozen times, then check the spread of impacts at a few hundred meters. Tiny changes in barrel harmonics, errors in projectile shapes that are invisible to the human eye, effects of the muzzle blast on the projectile as it's leaving the muzzle, etc. etc. all create some amount of spread between each and every shot. The problem is that, with a Metal Storm weapon, these would stack up to an inaccuracy too great for the weapon to be of any real use at long ranges even with a burst of several rounds.

Quite right.

I think your's is more sensible in technology, and I think mine is more sensible in how the rules work.

Now, I know what we need to solve this: An answer as to what they mean with "muzzle loader."

Thus, why I used the words "we don't see anymore" in my post.

Say, this leads me to my next question: Is it possible to adapt that grenade launcher setup to SR? It could be an adaption based on the YSF, only with a clarification as to how it loads.

Hmm... These are problems I am honestly not informed enough to continue discussing. Let's come back to this in about three years.

Not really. Considering how cheap many cybernetic implants are, one that doesn't use as many components would be cheaper. The power system would be primarily a gun item, not a barrel item, and thus would probably not even affect barrel cost. Add to that the fact that many smartgun systems manage to read the box magazines and you probably have a good case for the entire system comming standard in the detachable barrels, and thus already figured into the price.

This does mean, though, that it'll still be more expensive than buying ten bullets. That's unavoidable.

Not what I meant. Just that it seemed you were purposefully misrepresenting my comments from my end.

Can't argue there.

Hmm... Those are items I forgot to include in my thinking. That's probably why they're not making metal storm rifles but are making pistols. A pistol isn't normally used for the amount of range where that makes a difference, all the while the increased bullet output would make a huge difference. And, with each barrel holding a different ammunition, you have an unlimited adaptibility for a hand-held weapon.

Now, though, that does bring us right back to the issue of how the YSF works. Because, the way it's setup, you can load each barrel with a different type of ammunition. Then, in burst-fire, you need to know where the bullets are comming from. If three barrels are firing, you're using three different types of ammunition, potentially with the effects of each combining. If only one barrel is firing, then you're only using one type. What would make this interesting is to load a barrel with gel rounds holding a contact hallucinogen, another barrel with stick-n-shock, and a third with EX-EX. In one pull of the trigger, you leave behind a guy with burn wounds who is being shocked into submission while hallucinating. Or, instead of EX-EX, another gel round with a contact poison in it. Maybe even three barrels of gel rounds, each holding a different drug.

They did not drop the XM214 because conventional warfare became uncommon. They dropped it because infantry doesn't need huge RoFs, since you're always trading bulk in both the weapon itself and the ammunition for it. Metal Storm would have the added problem of requiring different ammunition altogether, and further aggravating the problem of ammo weight. So, even in conventional warface, Metal Storm weapons would only be used for special applications, such as those mentioned above.

Why not? There can never be too many rapid fire GLs.

The barrels would still need the magnet system capable of ferrying the cartridges around accurately and at very high velocities, which would increase their cost quite a lot compared to actual Metal Storm barrels. It's not a matter of thousands of nuyen, certainly, but if you combine +50% cost for the weapon and +100% for the barrels with the hugely reduced accuracy, it seems like a very dear price for being able to hand load the barrels outside of combat.

Yeah. As I said earlier, Metal Storm kinda makes sense for certain applications, while for others it's crap. That said, it remains to be seen which category handguns fall into (in real life, that is) -- Metal Storm isn't making them, yet.

The weapon can fire them in any order the shooter wishes to fire them. Presumably, with mixed ammo, you'd program it beforehand to fire in certain patterns, or else with Smartlink you could choose just before firing. Does SR4 still include the rule that one burst cannot contain ammunition of more than one type (excluding tracers)?

while its worded as a suggestion to ease book-keeping rather then a solid "no", its still there.

Ah. Makes sense.

Sounds like something to talk to Hullbreach about.

As it stands, the only thing I find in the book that's even close to a barrel is a spare clip, and that only costs 5 . Doesn't seem like too high of a price.

We'll see on this one.

It's not actually mentioned in the section that covers firing firearms. I'll try to find where it's mentioned in the book.

With a Smartlink, that should be how it works. And I agree about the RFID or other identification method -- I was just pointing out that if you want the gun to fire in a certain sequence, such as EX-APDS-Capsule, and you don't have a Smartlink you'd have to tell the gun to do so, because it most likely has not been pre-programmed to suggest that.

Four Simples and four Complexes to completely reload, actually (or 1-4 Frees and 4 Complexes, if you have a smartlink) - so 8 (or 4) complete passes before you're completely refilled. However, nothing in the rules say the gun has to be complely refilled before you can use it again (most guns only have the one clip, so usually it's a moot point). Each reload action gives you 10 rounds to play with, so you could conceivably have it useable again in one to two passes, depending on if you have to burn a Free or a Simple to get the empties out.

That said, however, if you've burned 40 rounds in a single combat, and the YSF is your only weapon... it's probably the least of your problems at that point.

Yeah, that's pretty reasonable actually. If it was separated into 2 actions, it should probably be a simple for removing and another for inserting (assuming no Smartlink), just like with a removable magazine.