And yet, all it takes is a small amount of money to provide full functionality for the Electronics of the weapon, because, you know, the gun is still fully functional. Unlike your car scenario, which takes excessive amounts of Money just to make it functional. The gun works out of the box, your car analogy does not.

Apples and Oranges there Hermit...

Actually, according to the Quote that you so generously provided.



You are pretty entertaining Max... The Smartlink/Guncam is a requirement to add IMAGE RECOGNITION to the system. The System Must have an Input for the Images and recognition software to interpret. You can't do that without the Smartlink or Guncam.

I Never said anything about writers not knowing the rules (You can check, you won't find it). In fact, the rules are pretty evident, and I DO have a clue about them, I just did not see the need to reference them, as you did. Thanks for the Reference. My statement was that the Safe Target System is not FULLY functional without a Smartgun System (or a Guncam, though I go with the Smartgun System personally). The parts that are not FULLY functional are the Image Recognition pieces.

You misinterpret the text to say that a Smartgun is required to add an After Market Safe Target System as a Modification, when in fact, all that is required is the Image Recognition Add-on in conjunction with an Installed Smartgun System or Guncam. Not the same thing that you are indicating above.

No worries though.

No i dont:


And that last comment quite obviously wasn't aimed at you, but to those that where doing the stuff i mentioned
Like maybe the guy i responded and quoted in the start of that post.
Not that you really know the rules either.

Why would you ever use an Internal Version unless it came standard? I know that I wouldn't use it very often. But I will give you that one. I don't generally look at a Safe target System as a Modification.

As for the obvious aiming of comments, sometimes it is hard to tell, especially when it is generic.

Whatever Max...

Because it's about 70% cheaper

I have too many other things to use my Modification Slots for, the Safe Target System is not generally an option.

Yeah, i don't really see the need for it,period.
There are better uses for the top and under barrel accessory slots too.

also to comment your earlier statement:
Safe target system is fully functional without smartlink, the image recognition is an optional extra feature that costs more money.

Indeed...
Of the about 90 characters that I have created over the years in SR4, only one or two actually used the Safe Target System.

And I can't find my old work for teh Shiawase holdout revolver.

Nuts.

Two items of note were that it was nicknamed the 'piece of Shiawase' by people who'd used one of the drekky, mass-produced things, an dthat they coul dbe found in vending machines. Slot 100 nuyen and a four-chambered special would kerchunk on down, fully loaded and ready to go. (The pistol was only 75Y normally, so, you aid a premium for those four bullets, but, if you're getting a gun from a vending machine, you probably really, REALLY need it.)

It was neat, just because people would go, "Oh yeah! Shiawase *does* make arms!"

Plus, you know ... vending machine pistol.

Vending Machine Food is always more expensive for less quality and quantity.

I found that out when I was reading War! in a hospital ER Waiting Room at 2 in the morning.

I was of course actually joking and referencing the "Magnets, how do they work?" meme, but anyway...

I think I have the answer... sort of. It also follows my train of thought in a way which is... maybe gas venting shouldn't work on the Alpha but it could run a sound suppressor without the loss of RC (making it the ideal infiltration AR). Any of you familiar with the H&K G11? While not truly a "special chamber design" it sounds like it might be close to what they were aiming for.

I made all weapons generic, with an added Weapon Feature each. Most weapons come in 1 or 2 variants, so weapons really are different. I generally let players get a certain weapon with a certain Feature if they want it though.

Weapon Features House Rule

Each weapon gets 1 Weapon Feature. Many weapons are available in different versions, letting players pick a Feature for their weapon. The GM may rule that certain weapons require a certain Feature, or that some Features are not available for certain weapons.

Low recoil: 1 point of recoil compensation
Accurate: Reduce modifiers for long and extreme range by 1
Variable gas vent: This weapon has internal gas vents on this weapon allows for the mounting of a silencer or suppressor. The weapon is only silenced if the gas vents are closed, which negates the recoil compensation. Opening or closing the gas vents takes a Simple Action (Free Action for smartlinked weapons).
Penetrator: -1 AP. Ammo only interchangable with other weapons of same class and Feature.
Massive: This weapon fires larger bullets at lower velocity. +1 DV, +1 AP, -33% clip size (suppression fire with a full clip is still possible even if it holds <20 rounds). Ammo only interchangable with other weapons of same class and Feature.
High Velocity: Per existing rules, apply qualities of Low Recoil, Extended Magazines, Gas Vent, no underbarrel accessories. Only available for High Velocity weapons.
Extended magazines: +66% magazine capacity.
Reliable: The weapon needs one more die roll of 1 than normal to glitch or critically glitch. It receives +/-3 dice when testing for maintenance or reliability.
Cheap: -50% cost.
Compact: Reduce Cumbersome Weapon Rating by 1. Only available for bullpup weapons.
Concealable: -1 die to Perception tests to notice the weapon. –25% magazine capacity.
Silent: When a silencer or suppressor is mounted, apply an additional –2 to Perception Tests to hear the weapon
Heavy Weapon: Heavy Weapons require the Heavy Weapon feature and fo not get additional features.
Sniper Rifle: Sniper Rifles require the Sniper Rifle feature and do no get additional features.
Special effect: Weapons with special effects (ceramic components, underwater firing, inconspicuous dissassembly, Burst Fire for Pistols of Shotguns, etc.) require the Special Effect and do not get additional features.

This already exists for free on a gas-vented weapon.

Well, guns differ much more in RL even in the same class than they do in SR. If you go with simulationism, you have to account for that. For the most famous example, see AK-47vsM-16. Both are assault rifles, but firing the two is an unmistakably different experience; and I can think of quite a number of situations where users of each would shout "Do want" seeing the other.
For a gaming system somewhere between gamist and storytelling approach like Shadowrun, however, making equipment interesting and different is essential. There's just no point in statting up dozens of closely similar guns.

Well I'm not big on creating entirely new mechanics; so I just try to homebrew weapons that'd be interesting to use, have a certain zest you can't just replicate with mods and add-ons.

No, at the level of abstraction used in the SR4:s weapon rules, there really is zero difference between AK-47 and M-16.

I disagree, from what I know about those two weapons I would say that in SR terms the AK-47 would do more damage and have better armor penetration.

The difference between an assault rifle and a battle rifle in SR is exactly 1 point of damage, so no there really isn't room for one AR to do more damage then an other AR.

While the AK-47 uses a 7.62mm round it is much shorter than a 7.62mm NATO. It's sauce is equally weak compared to a 5.56mm NATO. The AK-47 is the weapon of choice to arm a conscription force with, however if you have the time to train them how to shoot, I would take any of the full size M-16 incarnations over the AK-47. Volume of fire, reliability and simplicity were the driving forces behind the AK-47, along with simple manufacturing (stamped versus machined), and large tolerances in all of its operating parts. It is highly inaccurate, but fun to use, and fairly effective at shorter ranges. It fit in perfectly with Soviet doctrine at the time. It's descendants are much more effective weapon systems, however with the increase in accuracy and tighter tolerances they have lost some of the fabled reliability. The M-16 is very accurate, and very reliable when you perform regular field maintenance (clean it). From personal experience I would choose the M-16 every time, since I know it will hit what I shoot at. At 500 yds. I can reliably fire a 10" group using the iron sights of the weapon. The AK-47 iron sights for lack of a better word suck. You are very lucky to hit anything at 300 yds. In close in fighting (CQB) or while fighting in dense undergrowth neither really has an advantage, but open things up and well I know what I would be using. So in terms of SR stats they are the same neither has a clear advantage.

It would, if there was more granularity to the core mechanics of the system; but there isn't. +1 damage is a big deal, when the basic combat mechanics tend to work best with numbers in a very specific range.

+1... What more really need be said. If the SR system was more detailed from a firearms mechanical perspective, it might make a (Small) difference, but in the end, they really are more similar in use than they are dissimilar. At least as far as SR is Concerned.

It doesn't help that some of the "Training Lacking Persons" tend to think of the AK-47's sights as a "Power Gauge".

"When I put it all the way to 300, that is how many Infidels I will kill!"

Mine only goes to 11...

You claimed that in RL new weapons do not produce the wow effect. If you'd read my previous post, you'd notice that I point out the obvious case of such; and moreover, state that if you expect realism from SR (if you do not, why would you use reactions to RL weapons as a basis for your opinions on SR weapons to begin with), the assault rifles should get different stats, for reasons obvious. Was pointing out the fact that they do not now supposed to rebut that? If you do not expect realism, your argument on RL weapons not having wow effect is meaningless, too.

The standard qualifying standard in the Russian army is hitting a meter-high ("dug-in combatant") target at 200 m. So it's not like you can't hit anything.
Just saying, let's not have the ten-thousands round of AKvsM-16 argument here.

Okey, go back and read my original post again, because i definedly said the exact opposite of what your claiming.
RL weapons most definedly have "wow effect", even thought there really isn't much difference's in them(incide any given "weapon class"), just like the guns in SR.

Why not? It's in every other firearm thread in every other forum on the Internet?

OK, folks, honestly, apples and oranges. The Assault Rifle is a compromise between a Machine Gun (Which were crew served at the time) and a Combat Rifle (Which were Bolt Action at the time.). Typically, they favor one or the other.

The AK favors the MG for rate and weight of fire, the M-16 favors the rifle for accuracy and ease of carrying and use. The other issues are found in various other arms that also have the issues argued for and against.

As my Mr. Johsnon should have said often enough to my PCs: "The right tool for the job, you Tools!"

Wouldn't that rather be a compromise between Submachine Gun and Rifle? After all, the East German army classified the AK-47 as an SMG (MPi-K).

Hey I like both weapons for different purposes but when I am talking about accuracy, well let me explain. When I was in the USMC we had converted from a point system to what was essentially a hit or miss scoring system for rifle qualifications. The target we used were the Able target a simple bullseye target and black is 12'' in diameter, additionally it had a center x ring which was 6" across if I remember correctly. We fired on these at the 200 yard line 5 sitting, 5 kneeling, 5 standing, slow fire, if I remember correctly the x ring was worth 2 points at this stage of fire only, and 1 point for a hit outside the x ring. Then you fired 10 round rapid fire at the 200 yard line on a Dog Target which is a low profile target black is 19" tall and 26" wide (looks like a man in the prone position) 1 point for a hit. At this point you moved back to the 300 yd line for a 5 shot slow fire kneeling on an Able target, and then another rapid fire of 10 rounds at the Dog target. A hit is 1 point for both. Finally you moved back to the 500 yd line and shot 10 rounds slow fire at the B Mod target with black being 40" tall and 20" wide. 1 point for a hit. Slow fire is essentially 1 minute per round, marking windage, and elevation adjustment for each shot. Rapid Fire is 2 magazines of 5 rounds, starting in a standing position and dropping to the kneeling with 70 seconds for all 10 rounds which includes a magazine change. In this course of fire I regularly shot in the high fifties. I have walked off the 200 yard line with 40 points. In the full scoring system where you scored points off of different rings around the same targets, which we used for competition firing I have shot a 246 (roughly a 61 in the hit or miss system which was my personal high).

So where am I going with this? I did this with an M16A2. I cannot imagine doing the same with an AK-47, in fact I have little doubt that it would be a real bitch to hit the Able target at 300 yds with the rifle, owing more to luck than skill. The MOA on most AK-47s are in the 4 MOA range. Additionally the sights are very unforgiving because they are very close set. For firing with real skill they do not hold up. They are perfectly sufficient for point and shoot techniques at 100 yds or less, however I like some real reach. The AK-47 descendants like the AK-74 have rectified these problems and are much more accurate though the iron sights are still unforgiving, with 1-2 MOA.

As it uses a rifle cartridge, not really. But there's lots of folks that argue about it.

The first Assault Rifle is the German "Machine Pistol Model of 1944" (MP44) later called the Sturmgewehr (Can I get a confirmation from our German posters that this does, indeed translate to "Assault Rifle"?). It was called a "Machine Pistol" (The European name for a SMG at the time, BTW) due to politics going on. After many reports going about "These wonderful rifles, when can we get more?", they were officially accepted as the StG44.

It's the bastard child of machine guns, rifles, and SMGs. That's one messed up poly-family, let me tell you.

As the idea of stormtroopers comes from the German late-WW1 assault forces, i think it is the closest practical translation.

The British just called them Canucks, Aussies, and Kiwis.

*snickering faceplam*

OK, not that I'm complaining, but why are a number of items still carrying the "Canadian" name in their makers mark? I mean, it's the UCAS now... But we have the Ford Canada Bison RV and the Ares Canadian Sportster Rifle...

Marketing.

Oh so very much this!

There's enough people that consider themselves Canadian for this to be worth it? Weird.

Remember, if you claim a Scotsman is English he will be likely to take you apart on the spot. I suspect there are similar feelings around in UCAS...

Oh, right, sorry; apparently, posting past midnight doesn't really help to read carefully.

Oh come on, what's a Canadian going to do? Use harsh language?

Although, now that I think of it, considering the "Harsh Wilderness" that Canada is infamous for, it might be a brand used to show how "Rugged" an item is subconsciously, eh?

I'm thinking rather from it's tactical role. The assault rifle combines the rifle's capability for reasonably precise single shots within the typical range for infantry engagements with the SMG's capability of full-auto bursts for close-in combat. AFAIK assault rifles aren't really suited for the machine gun's role of sustained automatic fire.



Yes, it does. Although the first weapon which shows the typical traits of an assault rifle (selective fire, mid-power cartridge) is to my knowledge the Russian Avtomat Fedorova from 1915. IIRC it didn't go anywhere first because of resistance from the czarist military leadership and then because of the revolution.

FWIW, the Bundeswehr doesn't use the term. All rifles (assault or not) are simply classified as "Gewehr" (rifle), hence the "G" designations like G3, G36.

What about LMGs like the BAR and Bren (And it's originator, the ZB vz. 26)?

"Machine Gun" had a lot of connotations to it.

IIRC the Bren, although magazine-fed, had a quick-change barrel. Wasn't it also originally intended to be operated by a crew of two soldiers?

You're right that weapons designations aren't discrete categories. AFAIK US law designates any full-auto capable weapon a "machine gun". Terms also change over time and differ between different languages. I'd still contend that the average assault rifle isn't well suited for providing sustained full-auto fire.

Yes, the Bren (And the vz. 26) both had quick change barrels. I have a mid-war training manual (Somewhere, stupid moving provinces) that described how it was to be changed in the middle of combat, and emergency situations when you needed to swap them out quickly. Basically, it summed up to dropping the barrel in a basin of as "Pure water you can find". The BAR, on the other hand... Well, it could and did burst into flames when used too long.

The idea process behind the design of the Assault Rifle is probably not to be found in books, but in the minds of the people who developed them in the first place. So, who wants to have a drinking contest with Mikhail Kalashnikov?

He has his own line of Vodka, BTW.

Both the AUG and the G36 are designed to be usable in a LMG role, no? That is, the same basic frame but a different barrel and perhaps chamber (not sure on the AUG given its bullpup design) to allow for belted ammo.

Still, beta-c and similar allows a normal assault rifle to put a unusually large number of round down range if need be.

Neither G36 nor AUG have a belt-fed configuration. There are heavier barrels for both for use in an LMG role plus larger magazines (42 rounds box magazine for the AUG, 100 rounds drum magazine for the G36).

heh, what i get for going by memory.

Sturmgewehr means Storm Rifle, you could loosely translate it as Assault Rifle, I imagine. I haven't used my German in over eight years though... so... meine Deutsche ist schlecht.

Sons of Guns tried out the new Beta C-Mags with rapid reloads. The barrel they showed was cherry red. I've also seen another show that took off the foreguard of the M-16 which had a few 30-round magazines put through it and it lit a matchhead with barely a touch.

Droopy hot barrels BAD!I was wondering about that, "Sturm und Drang" being "Storm and Stress", apparently. 'Course, after French classes, I know how bad translating can be.

Cyclic rate and realistic cyclic rate usually vary quite a bit. Sure you can put x(n) rounds downrange per minute, but what happens to the materials of the weapon?

It also depends on the condition of the weapon in question. That's why cyclic rate is listed as a range.

The Sons of Guns episode, BTW, watercooled the M-16 with the Beta C-Mags, as it was intended for use on a Brown Water Navy Boat. They did it in an interesting way as well. I highly recommend the show. Why said Brownwater Navy didn't just get a Belt-Fed, I don't know, but there you go.

Heh, i recall seeing something similar done to a AK-47. I think the wood was burning towards the end.