Seriously, I'm sure its already been said on these forums but the Ares Alpha is a better "Machine Gun" than anything but the RPK HMG, but at a fraction of the cost, with a smart link and free grenade launcher, and no double recoil. Yes I'm aware that you are suppose to mount MGs on a vehicle or fire them from a platform but seriously? The Stoner is only marginally (1 extra armor pen) better than an AK-97 for 7 times the cost. The only discernible advantage is that you have more than double the range increments. I just don't see how this is justifiable.

I think it's possible heavy weapon damages weren't upscaled properly with other weapon damage. Possibly this is something that needs addressing in Errata.

I can understand a LMG having very similar damage to assault rifles since I picture a SAW when I think LMG (double recoil penalty kills me though). MMG should be comparable to the sniper rifles/EBR/sport rifles and HMG remove limbs on grazing shots. Ok I guess in the interest of game balance and not having every run turn into The Expendables we could scale down HMGs a little bit.

Your view of MGs is about in line with mine. I mean when you look at the calibers of the US MGs thats actually exactly what it is.

SAW/M-16(or variant)- 5.56 NATO
M-40/M-14/M-24- 7.62 NATO
M-2 Browning/ M-107- .50 BMG (or 12.7 NATO but BMG sounds way cooler)

btw, heavy machine guns and the M-107 aren't meant to be shot at people.

That's why you aim for the guns they're carrying. Seriously though we're not allowed to target people with .50 cals. Navy packs .50 cals on their ships but they're for firing at small craft.

I was on a sub. If we ever needed the .50 cal something horrible happened. Possibly the Zombie apocalypse.

I never really understood why subs packed small arms at all. I guess for just in case moments but I feel like it was more of a psychological thing. Everyone is a little calmer when they know they've got gun. I used to sail on special mission ships (civilian crew, no guns) and people would talk about how we were sitting ducks and one missile would take us out of the fight. I reassured everyone that they would never waste a missile on us, because a .50 cal could take us out of the fight for waaaay cheaper. Assault cannon damage is probably more appropriate for HMGs. Have they ever referenced a caliber for assault cannons?

I don't think so. I think you have to watch robo cop and guesstimate for assault cannons. (btw guesstimate was in spell check.)

Well subs have small arms for a few reasons.
1) a slight deterrent in port even though the seals have proven time and time again that we are still sitting ducks.
2) Mutiny. The Navy frowns on it.
3) To give the Torpedo Men something to do after they wax the decks.

Because having belt fed ammo is AWESOME.

"Who needs more Dakka?"
"Not me! I've got plenty!" DAKKADAKKADAKKA
"Ah geeze! MG! We just need to wait him out."
"Uh oh."
"Uh oh what?"
"They just dropped off three more belts."
"HAHAHAH-HAH!" DAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKA

That's actually a fair point. With a 100 round belt, you can suppress for days*.

As for the bit about how you're "supposed" to mount them on vehicles, the fact is you pretty much have to now - MMGs require 8+ strength to carry in SR5, and HMGs require 10+.

~Umi

* Replace "days" with "5 Combat Turns".

-- That's mistaken. It's a rather widespread belief though, which is why it is specifically addressed in military manuals.

-- I'll quote GURPS Tactical Shooting here (BTW buy this book, it's great!), since I helped write this particular paragraph:



-- Just so you know I'm not BSing. Here's a quote from The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations (July 2007 update, p. 9-1)

Superfluous injury is just legalese for overkill, isn't it?

Good to know. Not that they ever let me play with the cool guns. It's amazing how much bad information becomes "truth" because we never bother rtfm. The only time I remember specific guidance about the .50 cal not being used against enemy combatants was in reference to defending a ship against small craft/boarders and since the whole point of the guidance was de-escalation to prevent the boarding without bullets being exchanged I'll assume either the guy who wrote it didn't realize we're allowed to shoot people or assumed that if everything goes pear shaped nobody cares about the guidance anymore.

Reminds me of this.

Perhaps the story is told to keep down costs?

After all, if you tell your grunts they can't use .50 rounds on individual troops under penalty of law, they typically won't waste an entire magazine, belt, or drum on tagging that one guy running across an open field.

~Umi

-- Oh man, the stories I could tell regarding OIF/OEF ...

-- Let's just say that you would be SHOCKED at the ammo consumption of convoys during combat ops.

No I wouldn't. The US averages something like a quarter of a million bullets per corpse.

I've heard firsthand stories. Ten thousands rounds for five bodies, with only six bullets hitting flesh in four of them. The fifth was killed when the roof fell in.

~Umi

And yet the US is still THE dominant global military power. Can't argue with results.

In the debate about assault rifles v. machine guns, has range come into consideration?

I did look at ranges and the mgs have a much longer range. However in most situations that is negligable especially considering the price tags. Imo anyways.

Well that's just because we discovers that like all our problems if you throw enough money at it they go away. But ultimately it does save our soldiers lives being able to control the battlefield with massive amounts of support fire.

Another use for all those bullets...

PS: do you think I'd need a gyromount for my troll to carry a GAU-8 Avenger?

short awnser: Why not?
Semi Short Awnser: Do you plan on firing FA in multiple passes on the same turn? yes.

Ok, next question: what's the price and availability on a GAU-8 Avenger?

Also, I think that LS/KE might take issue with me purchasing one. Any suggestions on how I get the truck-sized minigun back home without attracting unwanted attention?

I think there is an element why range should be important. In case of a vehicular pursuit range can be much more long (especially airborne)... And high speed should also count in this extra range.

I think this game should benefit of having vehicular and personna DV on each weapon rather than a single one.

Maybe something like Personal scale/Vehicle scale/Naval scale/Building scale damage codes?

Yep, and some cyber and armor getting vehicular rating rather than enormous personna one. Of course rating magic will be harder...

yeah.... thats already begining to sound convoluted and muddled.

Well, you would still want one for the same reason they were historically effective. If you need to engage a large number of targets trying to close to melee range. Like for example, while slaughtering a native population or dealing with a bunch of people charging you with rifles to try to stab you with bayonets. Or if you need to spray bullets at a fast moving target (or slow moving target while you're going fast) and you don't plan on actually connecting with most of your shots. Like in a dog fight or while strafing a target. But beyond that, yeah, machine guns are not so useful.

Didn't the west end starwars RPG do something similar?

Maybe we just need to change how stuff interacts with armour.

Hardened armour is vehicle scale. It's getting 50% of its rating against personal scale weapons.

Let's dial it the other way: Person gets hit with a vehicle scale weapon (a weapon that counts vehicle hardened armour as normal armour). 50% of the damage cannot be reduced by a soak check, because there is no way that your armour jacket + riot shield + ffba + being a troll is going to completely negate that anti-tank missile.

Thats great and all, but the Ares Alpha is still a better MG than all but the RPK by the SR5 rules. Thats what has me frustrated. And I don't buy the belt feed thing either because you can have it mounted on a vehicle and it has access to 250/500 rounds.

[quote name='Umidori' post='1252488' date='Aug 9 2013, 01:38 AM']As for the bit about how you're "supposed" to mount them on vehicles, the fact is you pretty much have to now - MMGs require 8+ strength to carry in SR5, and HMGs require 10+.

~Umi

Which is utter tripe. Carried an MMG in combat operations in the jungle, with 400 rounds of ammo. I can guarantee I do not have the equivalent of a Body of 8+.

It's just one of the details lost in the game. You can't usually just mount an assault rifle on a vehicle and belt feed it, because it overheats or otherwise fails. Assualt rifles are just not designed for sustained fire. But do you really want rules that try to copy that? I mean, it could be fun to throw in for a glitch or something.

Yeah, the double recoil thing is crap. The heavier weight of machine guns means they usually have less recoil, not more than an assault rifle firing the same caliber.

Yeah... I'm guessing that the wording on that is all funkified. I think what they mean is fire while standing up with no assistance. But then again I've never fired a SAW, M40, or M-2 Browning.

Historicly speaking, depending on make and model some armys prefferd assault rifles (or their ancesters) over LMGs, specificly the American use of the BAR in WWII as they didn't have access to the Hittler Buzsaw of the Germans. MGs of any size are designed to operate as a team or from a mount. Granted a troll aproches a one man "team" but it's a factor of design over usage.

And you were shooting it from the hip while carrying the ammo belt on your armblade or did you lie down or brace and use a bipod in a semi fixed position to efficiently shoot with it ?

Well, I have fired a SAW and M-60 free standing, and braced standing (as well as sitting Kneeling, Prone, etc). It really is not all that hard to do. Now an M2. Not going to happen. Too Damned Heavy.

Obviously they mean firing from the hip or shoulder. Any grunt can fire reasonably accurately from a bipod, tripod, or improvised bracing position like a wall.

But shooting an MMG like a handgun or even like a longarm? You might as well be dancing with the damn thing.

~Umi

P.S. - Is it weird that I think of Waltz With Bashir as a an almost cyberpunk film, when it's based on the events and remembrances of a thiry year old war that is largely forgotten?

I have fired "Rambo Style", and while it is not as accurate, you can do well on target (as long as you are not just rocking 100 rounds non-stop). Of course, Braced and Prone are the preferred shooting methods, but you can shoot effectively standing. And truth be told, "Rambo Style" is a LOT of fun.

Thats why god invinted lazer sights and tracer rounds. Oh and I think I said m40 a couple of times when I ment M60. or maybe i'm confused. I'm at work and haven't slept in 30 hours so anything is possible. They net nanny any gun search I do.

Edit: I came to the suden realization that I ment the M240 the whole time. Even today soldiers in the sand box vote it as one of the most reliable weapon systems they have access to.

Preach it, bro.

I carried a pig with a 100-round belt around for a little over a year until my unit started get SAWs. Yes, the M60 is not really a fire-team level weapon. No, Top didn't care.

And despite SR developer logic to the contrary, something like an M60 is far more pleasent to shoot, recoil-wise, than an HK91 (same caliber).

An extra 15 lbs of mass makes a HUGE difference on felt recoil.

Yeah...this guy obviously has an 8+ STR...

That's note accurate fire. That's suppressing fire.

~Umi

Ummmm, nope.

And nope again.


You guys and the SR devs are drinking the same kool-aid.

Seriously, just... just no. These are all static, braced shooting positions. And they're all horrible accuracy. Suppression at best.

Meanwhile, Shadowrunners never stand still. You sure as drek can't run and gun with accuracy using an MMG. So I'd let a character with medium level strength fire like this, but only Suppressing Fire, and they can't move.

~Umi

Truth be told, with something like an M249 and an M60/M240G, it's the same thing.

In reality, you spend 3 - 5 seconds on the trigger and walk your rounds to your target.

I was able to drop groups of man-sized silhouettes out to 1000m with iron sights on the M60 qual range without too much practice.

Machine guns are just used differently than assault rifles, and I've yet to find a PnP RPG that models it well.

Bravo, you hit static targets from a static, braced position.

You did not, however, hit moving targets in a back alley gunfight with bullets and magic flying back at you.

If you want to use an MMG for anything other than 20 round Complex Action Suppressive Fire in Shadowrun, especially while moving, you need to be an Ork, Troll, or Augmented. Simple as that.

~Umi

I probably won't be able to find any videos of it because they don't normally allow those types of tactical movements on public shooting ranges, but yes, moving, stopping, firing 3 seconds at a time, then moving again was our MO. I used an M60 at a fire team level. It was a 4 man element that maneuvered constantly. The fire I put on targets was no less accurate than the other guys using burst-fire ARs. I just did a LOT more sweating.

Yes, these types of weapons are far more effective when you are stationary and have the weapon braced. But guess what...that applies to ALL firearms. Assault Rifles, Shotguns, SMGs, and Pistols too.

That's not how SR works though.

Moving, stopping, firing for three seconds, then moving again? That sounds like what I suggested - Suppressive Fire only, and no moving while firing.

I would treat the strength requirements for MMGs and HMGs as simply a restriction against being able to run and gun at the same time, and against taking any kind of accurate aim. If you've got enough Strength, sure, then you can handle a machine gun like an assault rifle for precision firing in SA/BF/FA modes for non-suppressive fire. But if not, you have to brace and you have to spend 20 rounds walking your shots to the target as you yourself said.

~Umi

Truth be told, you are right, that's not a very impressive feat in real life.

Though you have to be CONSIDERABLY more competent to pull it off consistently in Shadowrun.

1000m with a MMG is still a -6 DP penalty for range alone. Add in full auto fire (-9) and with a bipod (2 RC) and Tracer Rounds (+1 DP), you need to have a DP of 13 just to get to roll at all, and 15 to get above a 50% hit rate, on stationary targets from a non-moving and braced position.



Again, you are 100% correct. Though I would imagine that your line of thinking would apply equally to MMGs, LMGs, Assault Rifles, Shotguns, SMGs, and Pistols.

Life gets MUCH more complicated when the targets are shooting back.

But everyone from US Army/Marine light infantry legs to SF and SEALs carry LMGs and MMGs when on patrol.

If they were useless in that capacity, they would be used in that capacity.




Right again. You are 3 for 3.

Too bad that is nothing at all close to real life.


Edit: Forgot to include autofire penalties in my example.

Perhaps the trouble is that you simply cant have a unified combat system because a MMG is not an overgrown assault rifle, and you can treat vehicules like overgrown living beings.

Shooting a belt fed gun is more like painting a target with a garden hose or a flamethrower than spreading random bullet around an area (could be, but that is covering fire not shooting). At one point your stream WILL reach the target and then the matter wont be the dodge factor at all, but did they have cover to dodge behind or armor strong enough to resist being vaporised by the bullet stream. That is not how automatique fire work here.

Vehicules CANT be treated as living beings, they took damage far differently.
1- you can alter vehicular mobility without really affecting vehicular integrity nor combat potential and usually easily than destroying/damaging it (shooting the tires, ramming the tracks, wrecking rotor or guidance with concussion blast). You cant damage a living being mobility by shooting at him without damaging him.
2- vehicules are usually made of an armored shell surrounding empty space and some vital are as usually contained in a second armored area. You can spray assault rifle on an armored personnal transport all day. Even if you manage to pierce the armor, if you dont hit engine, transmission, fuel or pilot, you wont destroy him. A living beam consist of squisshy/bloody pulp into a bag, with or without an armored shell. As soon as you pierce the bag, and regardless of where you impact he start leaking and take damage that will result in death or incapacity.
3- Vehicules are modular. You can shoot each weapon system, com system, propulsion system, refuelling system, transport area independently and without affecting the way the others systems works. In a living being damaging any system to the point of disabling usually disable the whole being (common nervous system and blood supply)

That is why, even if you can scale personnal and vehicular combat to the same ratings, you CANT simply use the same rules for both. And why since 1st edition, SR always fail to provide satisfying vehicules rules.