So. I am writing up stuff for our alt.War project, and while currently I am neck-deep in fluff, I'm still thinking over the stats for the things I'm going to include into that sexy sexy Game Information chapter.
Now, since I've been writing about the Navy today, I'm thinking over the stats for ships, ship-based weaponry, systems, upgrades, and that.

Cut to the chase: CIWS is one of the most common ship weaponry systems, providing defense against aircraft, missiles, and most importantly, cruise missiles. These are 20 to 30 mm guns with rates of fire in thousands of rounds per minute, and effective ranges of a couple of kilometers or two. Minding how many of those a typical cruiser is carrying, statting them seems like a reasonable idea.

Let's lay down the principles I am using for statting things up:
A) The results should be usable in actual games
B) No entirely new mechanics should be involved
C) The results should be consistent with existing official stats for components, weapons and vehicles
D) The results should represent the abilities of a CIWS system with relative realism - while it's a good SAM system, it can not single-handedly protect a vessel from a modern cruise missile

Now, let's see. There are several possible approaches to the problem that I can think of.
1) Say that a full burst for such a weapon is some 600 shells, a long burst is 300, and a short is 150 (or something of that magnitude).
If we use the standard Shadowrun rules of [1 additional projectile = +1 DV or -1 die from dodge pool], then we instantly violate constraints A, C and D: such a weapon would shoot down cruise missiles from War! instantly, and having it fire on runners (suppose the runners are smuggling on a LAV or a naval vessel) means certain death. If we don't use the standard rules, we violate constraint B.
2) [suggested by HeckfyEx] Make CIWS akin to THOR weapons - an AoE attack with anything in its scattering center of effect destroyed, and everything around that having a chance to just barely survive a blast with reasonably high DV assigned.
Still, pretty much the same problems with constraints A, C and D: guaranteed destruction of every cruise missile already statted, and also guaranteed destruction of every runner vessel some random russkie frigate spots on its radar.
3) [suggested by HeckfyEx] Make CIWS firing on approaching cruise missiles an extended test: if the shooter acquires enough hits, the cruise missile counts as destroyed.
The way I see that, if we try to represent different types of CIWS and cruise missiles with stats affecting that extended test, we violate constraint B. If we just suggest using the same rules for all CIWS systems and cruise missiles, we violate constraint D, and in effect just suggest GMs to wind it (violating A).
4) Make CIWS a narrative tool - whether they hit cruise missiles or not, whether they destruct a runner vessel or not is determined by GM based on the rolls he asks for and his mood.
While this is the approach I so far like the most, it obviously violates constraints A and C, since it lacks, you know, actual mechanics.

I've looked into the way War! handles that, and it just lists "missile defense system" for large naval vessels, and leaves it at that. I hardly find that sufficient, minding that, at the very least, CIWS is a potent tool of destruction when used against any other targets, too.

So, any ideas how to handle all that mess in a consistent manner?

Sure: PHALANX ROTARY CANNON, MilSpecTech, Page 21.

Other than that, not a bloody clue.

I don't yet own MilSpecTech, how did they handle it? No need to post actual stats, of course, just the idea behind the thing.
Or did they just stat it up as a cannon, and left it at that?

Full-Auto Gatling Cannon only. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 . There's no rules in MilSpecTech, only vehicles (And drones), vehicle weapons, and stats for both. Of course, that's exactly what it was advertised as, so that makes it better than what I've heard from War!.

Which I can't complain about as I haven't seen it yet and thus...

Well yeah, that's some statting I'd say.
In what comes to War!, let's just say that cruise missiles with their convoluted evasion programs and ranges is dozens of thousands of kilometers are said to be standard light-armored high-handling drones with built-in Clearsight and Targeting 4.

Makes sense. With Drone-Based Anti-Missile Technology and Advanced Autotargeting systems... I bet they're expensive buggers, however.

But the same can be said of cruise missiles today. They're US$569,000 or so (According to http://www.Navy.mil/ ), and if they're being used in Afghanistan or Iraq, I highly doubt they're taking out something their money's worth. At least Shadowrun Cruise Drones would be taking out something coming close to what they're worth. (Then there's the cost of life issue going on, but I won't get into that.).

Of course, a friend of mine was in a tank that fired off a shell that was probably worth far more than the clay wall it blew up (And the POS that was hiding behind it with a Nine-Volt to set off the IED that detonated under his tank. Do not pass Go, do not collect any Virgins.).

Not really, minding that a missile worth 2 million nuyen can easily be shot down with a heavy machine gun worth 6 thousand. It doesn't even have Defense autosoft.

Indeed... Suppressive Fire (from the Phalanx), on a target that is moving and cannot really dodge... Usually means one dead target...

There's no real way to stat a gun that fires thousands of rounds a minute.
I would treat it as suppressive fire that Just Uses More Dakka Bullets.

Suppressive Fire over an insane area, eh?

I want to mount one on my MPUV now...

Think of CIWS as a RADAR/Sensor Guided Fire Hose. It also tracks the target and tracks the stream of bullets,,when the two match CIWS is happy.
During development they Mounted CIWS on a barge and fired 155mm and 8 inch shells over it...A school they had those shells...CIWS using DU rounds chewed off the from of each projectile and also the rear end.

Also CIWS during my days had no IFF, if it was armed, loaded, and active, if you flew too close..BOOM. Pilots were truly hesitant to get with in the engagement envelope or what they thought the engagement envelope was....

With SR4A rules I do not believe you can come close to simulating the effects of a CIWS taking down a missile or airframe. The Sensor and Gunnery rules are too FUBAR, made by devs that had no clue on RL weapons and firing of same.

Many people have no clue on RL weapons or firing of same, period. I'm better than most, and only fired off a rifle and shotgun a handful of times. (Which is strange even for a Canadian, at least one from Northern Ontario.).

I miss the days when writers/devs wrote things for Shadowrun that they had some what of a clue like Paul Hume and the Shaman/Magical Rules since he was/is a practitioner.

It's a mistake to 'simulate' the CIWS using the firearms rules. Instead, just say they make a roll in order to intercept, succeed or fail. (As others have suggested). Isn't this how the RAW Missile Defense mod works anyway?

Remember that this 'cheap gun' that's destroying ¥2mil missiles is *defending* ¥2bil vehicles.

"Cheap" in cost, but still in use because, well, sometimes you just need to fill the sky full of explosive lead to make something work.

Bolt-Action Rifles are still used by the military after all...

Yeah. Well, someone implied earlier that it's 'bad' for expensive missiles to be killed by this cheap gun, when that's basically the whole story of technological warfare.

make a VHV (very high velocity) weapon. high base damage and double or triple for suppressive fire. adjust the numbers so a missile won't survive

Mm, I wasn't quite right above. The Missile Defense System in Arsenal doesn't auto-kill anything, but it *does* avoid the firearms rules. Instead, it applies big Defense bonuses to the defending vehicle (which might work out to be the same as destroying the missile, I dunno). Presumably, the fluff is that a missile 'dodged' in this manner is actually destroyed? Does anyone know specifically? The text actually says (logically) that it 'knocks down' rockets and missiles, but the crunch doesn't mention that.

It is a bit fluffified, but essentially correct... the MDS eliminates the threat by allowing the target to effectively dodge it... Misses are as good as destroyed for all intents and purposes...

Technology can be trumped by Anti-Technology which can be trumped by Technology.

It's all in what you have, and how you use it. A tin can and a hand grenade can be a very lethal combination.

On the flipside, using an IED against a up-armoured Leopard-II will just make for a pissed off tank crew.

Seems so :\
Suppressive fire against a vehicle?

It's a ship-sized weapon, I doubt it'd fit.

Missile Defense mod adds dice to defense pool, yeah. How would a defense pool look for naval vessels, though? It's not like you could dodge with an aircraft carrier.
Besides, Missile Defense is said to fire off 10 bullets per turn. So it's good for small vessels, maybe patrol boat-sized, to defend against missile launcher rounds with their turret machine guns. Now, for an aircraft carrier defending against cruise missiles? Uhhh.
We could just say that CIWS adds +4 dice, like lasers, of course, and use that as a reasonable compromise...
In what comes to simulating CIWS with firearm rules being a mistake - what can I possibly do when it can be used as a direct-fire cannon realistically?

When I mention a cheap gun shooting down missiles worth 2 million, I mean your usual garden-variety heavy machine gun. Not a Phalanx, just a Ultimax HMG-2. It will do so in one turn, too, with a single burst. BAM.

And yes, it is bad. I'm saying it outright: if you are statting up something that costs 2 million damn nuyen and is supposed to be a hyper-sound cruise missile, make sure it can not be shot down with a man-portable non-specialized firearm.
That's what my constraint C is all about.

Essentially, that is option (1) from my post, just toned down. And yeah, apparently that and using slightly tweaked Missile Defense System rules like I said up there in this post is the best that can be done, as far as I see so far.

Thank you everyone for your suggestions.

I need to want a Light Tank then, or something even heavier. Or a lower-caliber CIWS.

As for dodging Aircraft Carriers, well... Just don't play "Chicken" with one.

Just buy a yacht.

Actually, SR4A has a nice "Police Boat" that I could convert into a nice House Boat with one of these for "Home Protection".

"Sir, do you realize you have a Anti-Missile Weapon System on your property?" "I have a permit for that." "Oh, OK then, have a good day, Citizen."

I don't think there's room in the Seacop for a 'house', and the corvette boat is too expensive.

Morgan Cutlass, Body 16. Should be bigger than a lot of Apartments the rest of the group has. And you can drive away in it.

But you have to admit, the Striker would make an absolutely cherry House Boat... Especially if you got to keep the armaments...

No, it'd make a great boat boat. Luv the Seacop. Oh, you meant the corvette. Yus.

Yes, the Celebrian Striker... Mmmmmmmm...
But yes, the Seacop is nice too...

Minguns fire "thousands of rounds a minute". The fact that SR simply ignores that bears to be considered. There are already rules for 20mm and 30mm rotary autocannons (read: gatling guns) in Arsenal. Slap a missile defense mod onto that thing and you got your CIWS.

Indeed....

Miniguns have the potential to fire thousands of rounds per minute. But man, that'd chew through ammo reserves like no tomorrow.

Great for missile defense, not so good for other purposes. Luckily, a rheostat can adjust that cyclic rate.

But, as we're talking about CIWS, yes. Thousands of rounds per minute.

You can adjust for that (if it bothers you) by making a x100 cost 'Minigun Ammo', or something.

That's already been adjusted for: THOUSANDS OF ROUNDS PER MINUTE! Ammo does not get cheap at those cyclic rates!

Also, CIWS systems are 20-30mm, those are Cannon Rounds. 45 a round (Arsenal, Page 178, 450 /10 rounds.).

Let's be conservative, and have the CIWS set for 1,000 RPM. There are single barrel machine guns and SMGs that fire faster. It fires off for, oh, thirty seconds during a barrage of missiles. That's 500-Rounds of Cannon Rounds. 22,500 gone in a puff of smoke.

The CIWS is cheap. Keeping it fed, that's expensive.

CIWS when I served carried less than a 1000 rounds in the "magazine". It go thru that in a short time, typically fired short bursts only but was generally good to engage 2-4 targets depending engagement environmental.

Empty shell casings had be be unloaded from the "magazine", then fresh rounds loaded into the "magazine" by an experienced crew in a time measured in minutes.

Bear in mind CIWS fires 20mm Depleted Uranium rounds when I served, so that will add to the costs.

Do not forget the Rolling Airframe Missile launcher that is needed to complete the package.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w...irframe_Missile

No, CanRay, that's my whole point. In SR4, miniguns are literally *not* firing thousands (even hundreds, often, though it's possible) of rounds per minute. That means they're using less ammo/money than they 'ought', so I suggested adjusting the money side of the equation.

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooh. I gotcha now.

As I understand it, Gatling Guns (aside from CIWS) are usually kept at a lower cyclic rate to keep their recoil and ammo usage under control, while their multiple barrels allow for longer continued bursts of fire without replacing barrels like traditional machine guns. Am I wrong in this? (Wouldn't surprise me, remember, I'm a Civvie. And a Canadian one at that.).

So Heavy Weapons Guy is essentially toting a (debatably) man-portable CIWS.

How are 20mm and 30mm rounds "cannon rounds"? Both the "Vigilant" (20mm) and "Vanquisher" (30mm) gatling guns use "regular ammo", not cannon rounds. A "cannon" in shadowrun terms is either an "Assault Cannon" for man-portable weapons, or a smooth bore tank gun (reasonably starting at 75mm for the "Light Cannon" and homing in at around 120mm for the "Heavy Cannon").

In the SR Universe, weapons that usually fire "thousands of rounds a minute" are reduced down to a max of 960 rounds a minute, at a "regular" RoF of around 120 rounds per minute for unenhanced combatants.

Reasons for this are probably game balance with the existing firearms rules (especially burst and full auto rules) as well as playability (read: ammo capacity).

Anyone with even an ounce of sense in their head knows that "Miniguns" are a piss poor Infantry weapon. You'd have to carry around obscene amounts of ammunition and you'd waste it all in a short burst or two. Even at a RoF of "only" 2.000 rounds per minute, carrying 1.000 rounds of ammunition would only last for 30 seconds of actual use. That's not just "ineffective", that's borderline retarded.
Yet, ever since "Predator" (and probably even before that), Miniguns have a"cool" factor that is comepletely undeserved based on their realistic performance. So, to allow such weapons in the game and to "accomodate" the fan obsession to "Infantry Miniguns", the rules had to allow the use of such a weapon with "only" 250 rounds over a somewhat extended duration.

With the rules set as such, the CIWS would have to tie into the same "logic" and have it's ROF reduced to the very same HV range. Especially since the "Vanquisher" is pretty much a SR-stated "GAU-8 Avenger", which is the same as the "Goalkeeper CIWS", as well as the "Vigilant" being the stated version of the "M61 Vulcan" or the "Phalanx CIWS".

The GAU-8 Avenger that's fielded on the A-10 had a 4,200 round per minute firing speed on the 'high' setting (and spits enough recoil to cancel out one of its engines). They hardwired it to a fixed rate of 3,900 RPM and train the pilots to burst in one to two second squeezes due to overheating danger. A pilot could expend his entire ammo capacity in one burst if he so desired, which is about 20 seconds of sustained fire. They don't really jockey with cyclic rates and instead train the gunners to burstfire to keep recoil and ammo use under control.

DOCTOR Heavy Weapons Guy, thank you very much!


So, what are they then? Assault Rifle rounds?

If so, I'm glad I never served after all! I like my collarbones unbroken, thank you very much.

A Panther Assault Cannon (The price listed for the ammo I used above) can't be more than 30mm and still be "Troll Portable" and usable. I don't care what Handwavium is used for recoil compensation, physics is still physics when it comes to firearms. A 75mm Cannon Man Portable Cannon? Hardly!

*Sighs* One weakness to Shadowrun, no calibers listed for any weapons, or options of various types of calibers... OK, yes, it makes for a simpler system, but it provides fights just like this very one.

"Cannon round" is a misnomer.

A 20mm or 30mm gun is traditionally known as an "Autocannon". Such weapons are not man portable - they're simply too big. So their regular ammunition is then a 'cannon round'.

As far as the SR rules are concerned, they have the same stats, cost and availability, yes. Then again that Category encompasses everything from .22 to 30mm Autocannons.



As it is a heavy weapon, it cannot be fired without a Gyromount anyway, compensating somewhat for the recoil. As far as lore is concerned:



That sounds like a 40mm+ round to me, as silly as that may be (comparable to the Bofors 40mm autocannon, the 35mm Rheinmetall Oerlikon or the 35mm Rheinmetall 35/1000 or "Millenium Gun"). The lack of sustained fire capability could be explained as a design compromise to make it man-portable in the first place.

That said, I found "Assault Cannons" in SR Ludicrous, ever since first edition.




True, but most calibers can be derived from the categories. A "Hold Out" would be around the .22 mark, a "Light Pistol" would be around the 9mm mark, a "Heavy Pistol around the 45 ACP or .5 mark (with the Ruger Superwarhawk as probably a .454 casul), a Machine Pistol at the 8mm mark, a "SMG" at the 9mm mark, an "Assault Rifle" as well as a "Light machine Gun" at the 5.56mm mark, a Sport Rifle at the .306 mark, a Sniper Rifle at the .306 to .5 BMG mark, a MMG" at the 7.62mm mark, a "HMG" at the .5 Browning mark, a "Shotgun" at the 12 gauge mark.

At least that would be my classification, which is obviously biased.

And the price I listed for the Assault Cannon Rounds for the CIWS at 20mm-30mm is on page 324 of SR4A.

Regular Ammo ≠ Assault Cannon Rounds.

And, um... 8mm Ammo? Are we talking about 7.92mm Mauser here, often referred to as 8mm? That's a big machine pistol!

And .306 Caliber Rifle? Maybe .303 British Service or .308 Winchester?

Since they say the Panther XXL is indicative of a light tank round, I'd go with an 85mm single-shot superplast. After all, 85mm is a hell of a lot more expensive per round than 20mm CIWS shot.

.308 sounds better, and I'd stick with 9mm for a machine pistol since that's what the Berettas use, IIRC.

He meant miniguns, not assault cannons.

Arsenal includes the vehicle weapons that correspond to 'light tank' and 'heavy tank' cannons, as well as 'autocannons' (and a 'minigun' machine gun). Autocannons aren't assault/tank cannons.

Obviously, this is unrealistic, but also creates some balance questions. *shrug*

Your typical troll will weigh over 300 kg. Not to mention The one that go over 3 meters, and walk around with body and strength scores of 15 and are weighed down by lots and lots of cyberware. Man portable takes on a whole new definition there.

"Assault Cannon" ≠ "Autocannon"

Also see:



and



It seems plausible to therefore consider the caliber "Heavy Machine Gun", especially since it mentions to use the rules for "miniguns", not the rules for "assault cannons".

If you check out the Arsenal Entry for "Light Cannon" and "Heavy Cannon" you will find they derivate from the assault cannon ranges.
While it is not specifically mentioned, I would consider this plausible ground to use assaut cannon rounds as the appropriate ammunition type for Light and Heavy Cannons; same as I would use the Gauss Rifle rounds for its larger cousins.





The 7.65 Browning. Didn't know the caliber name out of my head, just knew it was in the 8mm ballpark. My apologies.
And yeah, .308 Winchester would probably be better.

That's a hell of a good recoil compensation system for a Cannon. I mean, it takes a whole light tank and recoil mount to keep that from tipping over, but, OK, I won't argue any more.

9x19mm Parabellum (With various types of Beretta pistols and SMGs use) is the most common pistol/SMG round in the Western World, as it is the NATO standard pistol cartridge. A lot of people still swear by the .45 ACP, however, and there are a good number of oddball unique rounds that have been tried over the years, including .40 S&W and 10mm Automatic. And, of course, .357, .41, and .44 Magnum Revolver Rounds. Oh, and the "I just have to compensate for something" .500 S&W.

That would be different then. Miniguns are, typically, "Machine Gun" calibers. That is, indeed, regular ammo.

I'm sorry, the lack of calibers grates on me even more than the term "Clips" used all the time incorrectly.

But that's the Gun Nut in me, never mind my ranting and railings as I dance around in copper armor on mountain tops during a storm screaming "ALL GODS ARE WANKERS!" at the top of my lungs.

Point made. A mortar just became "One-Troll Portable" instead of requiring a team. The amount of shells he can carry would still be limited, but a big surprise for anyone not expecting a single person artillery strike.

7.65mm Browning (AKA .32 ACP) is a good caliber for a light pistol or machine pistol. Possibly better than 9mm Parabellum or the caseless equivalent. 9mm Short (AKA .380 Automatic) is also an option. Hey, maybe it is 8mm caseless, we don't know. Again, calibers aren't listed at all.

Now, if you excuse me, "ALL GODS CAN JUST SOD OFF!" *Makes obscene gestures at the storm*