I've been following this thread a while, and everyones done a good job of keeping things coming back around after tangents and listing references. As I said, I just want to make sure it doesn't wander off like the thread I mentioned.

But you've basically brought the hammer down on what was otherwise a lively and informative debate on weapon damage, which did directly relate to an in-game facet of Shadowrun. That may not have been your intention, but an Admin post such as yours on this forum carries a lot of weight.

No hammer intended. I'd prefer to say something just as a reminder before things go off.

And no disrespect intended either. I would have taken this to a PM, but figured I'd keep it public, as I'd prefer that the discussion in question not be stifled.

NP, like I said, lets keep the thread rollin'

I like this thread. I like reading scary, scary gun stats.

Ultimately, any changes that would make guns more real a.k.a more lethal (without addressing the other inter-related systems) won't make the game more fun (for me and my players). Watching lovingly-crafted 400 BP characters die in their first firefight != fun (for me and my players).

Austere:

I'm not saying no science. I'm saying look at it game-end first.

Debate may exist about the exact ballistics, but we gunslingers (you, kzt, Granddad Raygun, Fortune, and myself) all agree that rifles should get better penetration than handguns. We all agree that SMGs should get damage very similar to pistols, because real SMGs, by definition, fire pistol ammunition. We all agree that .308 Winchester hits harder than 5.56 Remington.

It's these kind of broad strokes that are easily translated into game mechanic improvements. But going over pictures of shot-up ballistics gelatin like we're Fox Mulder looking for an ET is just an invitation to a battle of minutia without much game application.

I think it's interesting to note that in terms of damage value, the differences between classes of handguns, assault rifles, sniper rifles and shotguns is the minimum possible amount.

Assault rifle ammunition is already a compromise. Stopping power is not its only concern - it must also provide for controllable recoil (especially in bursts or fully automatic fire), accuracy, light weight, reliability (feeding, firing and extracting), availability and cost. NATO standard ammunition has to pass through many layers of bureaucracy, as well. Add to that the difficulty in accurately assessing terminal ballistics (if it were a real science, everyone would be using pretty much the same ammo by now).

Pistol ammo is just as much of a compromise (if not more).

.45 ACP lacks accuracy at longer ranges. It doesn't matter how hard the bullet wallops a bad guy if you can't connect with it at the ranges you expect. 5.56mm is not the most impressive man stopper in the world - but it provides far superior range than any .45 ACP option I've ever heard of. Fired from an assault rifle platform, the 5.56mm is also quite controllable and it is light enough for one soldier to carry several hundred rounds. A few percentage points difference in one shot stops doesn't much matter compared to the .45's basically zero percent effectiveness past 100 meters, especially given the ability to fire bursts. A man struck in the head or torso by either weapon is likely to stop posing any serious threat - although there can be exceptions. I do recall reading somewhere that one of the design criteria for .45 ACP was that it be able to stop a man or his horse with a single shot (most militaries still had horse cavalry in 1911, after all).

i don't see anything about indoors in your previous post. at any rate, the reason rifles firing rifle rounds are generally preferred is that they are more versatile, range-wise. in a pinch, you can use a full-sized rifle in close quarters fighting; you're at a severe disadvantage, however, trying to use a pistol or SMG chambered for pistol rounds in a long-range engagement. moreover, a rifle round is better able to punch through armor and barriers, because it's so much faster. none of that has anything at all to do with the ability of the round to cause damage to living beings--it just means that the rifle round can deliver its damage in a wider range of conditions than a pistol round can. or a shotgun round, if you like.

in answer to the specific question of why units don't use the M3A1 "Grease Gun": why in the world would anyone do that, when they have access to the UMP?

Actually, Austere, it takes a lot of specialized training to make a cavalry horse. I can drive your garden variety animal into a frenzy of fear by setting off a few firecrackers.

I suppose that's no more silly a definition of "stopping power" than any other.

(Having just read up on Agincourt and Waterloo, I am under no illusions about how horses act in battle.)

Hey, does anybody know if the HK UMP will be or is available in a civilian semiauto version?

Oops, never mind.

http://www.hecklerkoch-usa.com/index.jsp?l...&PartNumber=UMP

You're the second person to tell me it was dropped. Hmm...too bad. Looks nice. I was tempted by the Berretta Storm, but I couldn't get past that 8 rnd .45 magazine.

So what's the dv on something like this?

sinners go to hell when they die, RunnerPaul. hell.

I've known what the final destination on my itinerary has been for a while now. At this point, I'm just trying to get my seat upgraded from coach to first class.

Has anyone come up with decent rules for trying to use a "sniper rifle" in CQC, or for the difficulty involved in switching targets when using a high-power scope?

The rule I made had more to do with movement in general.

one of the applicable ideas i had was for firearms to apply a negative reach value while they're being used as firearms (ie, if you're not actively making melee attacks with 'em). something like -1 for SMGs, -2 for ARs, and -3 for sniper rifles and heavy weapons.

Well I guess I have to add my two cents.

1) What an operator utilizes in the field is mission specific. It is not determined by some sort of hierarchy of ballistics and one shot stopping power.
2) US Special Forces utilize weapons in 5.56mm and 7.62mm almost entirely because of something called NATO. It is simply the standardized rounds utilized by most of Europe, all US forces, and a multitude of other countries. If for instance you are in theater doing long range patrols, assisting friendly insurgent groups, or other missions where you will be relying on airdrops the last thing you want to do is confuse the issue by adding uncommon rounds.
3) The .45 is the standard sidearm for most special ops outfits I know of. Keyword being sidearm. A pistol in the military is 99% of the time your last option.
4) .308 is the standard for sniper rifles utilized by HRT teams due to its extremely flat trajectory. Where you aim is where you will hit. This is not necessarily true with many rounds at different ranges. The .338 lapua is mostly popular as a military sniper weapon where most missions involve essentially just killing an individual vis killing them without harming the hostage he has. Additionally an immediate kill is not necessary. In other words if he is dead 15 seconds later because he bled out that is fine, but in a HRT situation you need an immediate kill or he might still spray hostages. So the .308 offers the best chance of that occuring due to its pinpoint accuracy in the right hands.
5) The weapon type is mission specific, and often team member specific. I want to keep things quiet, cqb environment, avoid unwanted collateral damage chances are its time to bust out an MP5SD3 and go to town. Expecting to be engaging enemies at medium to long ranges I definitely want to upgrade to carbines or assault rifles. Need pinpoint accuracy at long ranges jum over to bolt action rifles. It all depends on what you will be doing, pick the tool that will be best for your mission in the most possible situations.
6) Snipers are very dependent on good Intel. If the target is not where or when he is supposed to be somewhere, the opportunity will be missed. So when talking about Snipers in Shadowrun we are mostly talking about a sharpshooter that a team is either using to cover its exit, assist with entry by taking out guards, and generally providing a sort of overwatch of extremely accurate fire. Additionally this sharpshooter is probably not making any shots of over 500yds due to LOS issues. Lastly it is doubtful they are using a real dedicated sniping tool. Chances are they are using an accurized, closed bolt, gas operated, magazine fed, rifle with a scope. (If I got any of that wrong please tell me.)
7) Utilizing this sort of weapon in CQB is certainly not a desirable option, however there are several techniques together that can assist you and increase your survival rate (this is a prime situation as to why a sidearm is useful, sometimes). a) depending on the model and construction of the gun you can often underarm the buttstock, b) lower your head to the side to line up with the barrel, c) extend your non trigger hand to the side of the barrel, and us it to point. This method effectively shortens most rifles about 12 inches making them much more wieldy in confined quarters. Also point and shoot or instinctive firing techniques from an underarm position can be accurate on average out to 25yds. Another method when dealing with a scoped rifle in a situation where you have a little mor room is to aim over the scope using your non trigger hand on the barrel. Us your buunda finger to point at the target. With a little practice you can regularly hit targets at 100 yds., though this technique is very effective under 50 yds. If you are lugging around a bolt action sniper rifle and need to use it for CQB my recommendation is kill someone right quick and take their weapon. Also do not try an underarm technique with really highpowered rifles you will jack yourself up.

Anyway I am done with my two cents.

Even with lasers, you've got gravity and magnetic fields... but I'm just nitpicking.

I think it's worth pointing out that, in Shadowrun at least, "close quarters" fighting (with even the most unwieldy sniper rifle) can bypass a lot of real-life rifle problems thanks to smartlinks. When you feel like the weapon's an extension of your body, the balance and length might not be quite so clumsy in a tight hallway any more. When you see (due to a cybereye image link) where it's pointed at all times, trying to line up the sights or use a scope indoors isn't such a problem, etc, etc.

EDIT TO ADD -- almost forgot. One neat way (though wholly against canon) to make a "sharpshooter" in Shadowrun is to (with your GM's permission) just change a weapon's type (and, in so doing, it's range modifiers). Ask if you can "accurize" an existing assault rifle by removing burst fire capability (or at the very least full auto), and swapping it to use the "rifle" range chart instead. Shell out two or three times the price of the rifle to do so, and call it good. Voila.

Lining it up and aiming aren't the only issues to be concerned with, though. You also have the problem of weapon length. SL isn't going to do much for you if you catch the barrel on a door frame as you're bringing it to bear.

Oh why is typing so much harder than talking at least for me

Anyway point taken on the zero's I was reading the charts wrong, that will show me for not being up to speed anymore on my rifle rounds. Of course nowadays all I really get to fire is handguns. With rifles I was a big stickler on being good with straight iron sights using a battlesight zero which varies but most units set it at 300m. The only times I cared about ranges was during competition, qualification, or anytime I was using a scope.

M240G is a sweet piece. I would regularly pump through 40,000 rounds a week on a line of 12 guns. In a year I could practically count the number of jams on both hands. Reliable as heck.

My preferred sniper team would be a spy satellite and a Tomahawk missile.

i mean, no threat to personnel(sp?), better range, and much more lethal.

The real sniper deal these days is a Predator UAV armed with Hellfires. I love those things.

Boom.

That's just not cost effective. Sling some kind of laser-guided AP munition on the Predator and do the same job for half the cost, if that.

But, yeah. Gotcha.

The Hellfire-Cs fired by MQ-1 and MQ-9 Predators cost about $100,000 bucks a pop, while a 500lb GBU sets (bomb, computer control, fin assembly) are procured by the USAF at about $15,000/unit. Arming, fueling and piloting an F16C to the target and back might be a lot more expensive than that, but if there's a plane patrolling the area already it might actually be more cost effective to LGB their asses than to pick them off with an AGM-114.

Really? Shows what I know. How about an MG?