Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Let's talk about machine guns
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
Zombayz
Before I begin, this post is largely a copy and paste job from a rant I had over on the Something Awful Forums.

The general primer on a machine gun is that it is a fully automatic firearm, usually firing from a belt, made to provide support and suppress. This is a simple concept. They fire small arms rounds, most commonly being intermediate calibers fired from assault rifles, while the larger end fire rounds that are designed to damage or destroy light vehicles. They are generally crew served weapons(this does not mean they need a crew to be used in combat, with the exception of transporting HMGs and autocannons). Most fire from belts but some, older models in particular, may fire from magazines.

An LMG is basically a belt-fed assault rifle(And in some cases literally is a belt fed modification of an assault rifle), and may also be known as a Squad Automatic Weapon, or SAW.. They're heavier(in reality this means less recoil for a given round), but still average out at something like 22 pounds loaded versus about 7 pounds for your average assault rifle. They fire the same rounds as an assault rifle. Think 5.56mm(like for a M249 and an M16), or 7.62x39mm (an AK-47 and a RPD). These are pretty light overall, and are used down to the squad level quite often, to the point where a single section or squad may even have two.

An MMG or General Purpose Machine Gun fire full size rifle rounds. They average out at around 30 pounds, loaded, where as a rifle firing the same round weighs about 10 loaded on average. Think an M240, M60, PKM, or the classic MG42 for an MMG/GPMG. M14s, SVDs, and FN FALs are all good examples of rifles firing the same kind of round round. These are generally present at the Platoon level, in moderate numbers, and weapons used as GPMGs may even be used down to the squad level. Most military vehicles mount, or are capable of mounting, an MMG/GPMG as a antipersonnel weapon.

The HMG class are big-fuckoff MGs. They're the biggest thing out there until you get into autocannons and the upper end of anti-material rifles(which are pretty much autocannons that are bolt action or semi-auto). Most of these are .50 caliber and up, the most famous of which is the Browning M2, firing the iconic .50 BMG(BMG stands for Browning Machine Gun, seriously). The M2 weighs in at 82 pounds, plus ammo. HMGs are most commonly vehicle mounted, and have a long history of being a light defense against air, whether that be helicopters or older war planes.

Autocannons are the grandaddy of all machine guns. There's nothing bigger. Firing 20mm or larger rounds, these incredibly powerful weapons are used as main guns on IFVs, and APCs, they're the primary form of AAA(anti-aircraft artillery), serve as secondary weapons on some tanks, and are present on virtually every fighter aircraft since the 1950s. The legendary GAU-8 of the A-10 'Warthog'(technically it's name is the Thunderbolt II) is an autocannon, as are many of the guns used on early WW2 tanks!

Now, let's take a look at some maths. An M240 is about 30 pounds, being fired by someone who's probably 180 pounds or more. One sixth of their bodyweight. This is still readily controllable, even if it's not something that's fun to pack around all day. A troll weighs an average of SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY ONE POUNDS. That's EIGHT TIMES as much as the M2. With a 105 round belt, in a can, the M2 would weigh in at 118 pounds...

Which is about 1/6th the trolls weight, same as the MMG to human ratio! So to a troll, a HMG is a MMG! So the HMG to human ratio is about 2/3rds, right? Well the Troll to a MOTHER FRAGGING AUTOCANNON(in this case, the Bushmaster 25mm from a Bradley IFV) ratio, with ammo, is less than 2 to 1. Yes, that's right, Trolls make autocannons look like oversized MMGs rather than HMGs. A troll-equivilent HMG would be more like 440 pounds with ammo.

Now, after a bit of digging, I found the troll version of an HMG. It's a fucking Bushmaster III, a 40mm autocannon. Like serious fucking big leagues, you don't get any bigger without going into full blow ARTILLERY or the guns on goddamned motherfucking TANKS.


Now, let's look at what it takes to carry machine guns in Shadowrun 5e! Exciting! First, anyone can use an LMG, no problem at all. But then you get to MMGs, and a world class, top 1% human weightlifter cannot manage to use one, despite an average weight of 30 pounds loaded! That's right everybody, Andre the Giant, with his obviously maxed out mundane strength of 7, couldn't manage to fire a 30 pound gun that uses rifle bullets. An ork in the top 10% could by hitting his natural unaugmented limit though! And the average troll could as well! Now, an HMG is pretty heavy. Normal humans can't really pack these big suckers around in combat, they're just too heavy and too unwieldy. But could an ork? Nope. Could a troll? YES! A 661 pound troll, with a strength score of 10, could manage to use an 102 pound HMG! But, they could NEVER manage to carry an autocannon, not even the lightest autocannons, because they're vehicle mounted.

Now that our basic discussion is over, I'd like to add one little note. While nothing but a vehicle can fire an autocannon in shadowrun, the weakest human, with a measly 1 strength, could fire an assault cannon, which is very likely firing an autocannon round. A CHILD can handle this enormously powerful gun(for a specific example, thing of the Anzio 20mm rifles, or the Lahti L-39), but only the toughest trolls can handle a heavy machine gun.

In closing: Get your shit together Catalyst. An LMG does the same damage as an assault rifle, a MMG does the same as the average sniper/sporting rifle, and a HMG does the same as the top end of snipers. An autocannon is a valid gun for a big troll. They do not suffer from drastic, virtually uncontrollable recoil. They do not require superhuman strength to use(with the exception of HMGs and autocannons). As it stands now, there are nearly no distinct advantages to having a machine gun, and with the introduction of drum magazines(which I assume will be in Run and Gun), they will have NO advantages.

I'm sure there's someone among you who can manage to rub two brain cells together to figure this out. Y'know, I'm pretty sure as adults you can do basic research. If not, well, I suggest you help Shadowrun fans by finding competent replacements, and then help the gene pool by removing yourselves from it.



TL:DR on this mess: Catalyst need to unfrag themselves. Either go all out with the gun nerding and make an attempt to understand how drek actually works, or don't bother with guns at all besides having a single generic firearm of each class(and some very heavily simplified combat rules).
RHat
I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with the premise that realism is the most important aspect about firearms in the game. There are issues with Machine guns in the game, but these don't really seem like the big ones to me.
Zombayz
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 12:09 AM) *
I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with the premise that realism is the most important aspect about firearms in the game. There are issues with Machine guns in the game, but these don't really seem like the big ones to me.


Check the closing statement.

QUOTE (Zombayz)
Get your shit together Catalyst. An LMG does the same damage as an assault rifle, a MMG does the same as the average sniper/sporting rifle, and a HMG does the same as the top end of snipers. An autocannon is a valid gun for a big troll. They do not suffer from drastic, virtually uncontrollable recoil. They do not require superhuman strength to use(with the exception of HMGs and autocannons). As it stands now, there are nearly no distinct advantages to having a machine gun, and with the introduction of drum magazines(which I assume will be in Run and Gun), they will have NO advantages.


The only advantage to MGs is range. They're sub-par weapons for the costs needed to use them at this time. They're incredible expensive, have very high availability, have the insane strength requirements, suffer from double recoil, and that's all for nothing but a larger ammo capacity(which will soon be nullified) and longer range(which comes into play so rarely for Shadowrunners it's not even funny). You are by far and away better off with an assault rifle, rather than going for the buy-in costs to use a machine gun.
Smash
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 07:09 PM) *
I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with the premise that realism is the most important aspect about firearms in the game. There are issues with Machine guns in the game, but these don't really seem like the big ones to me.


I'm going to concur and add that realism hampers all parts of the game when applied anymore than casually.

I will add that there is maybe a point in upping the damage of them a bit. However complicated encumbrance rules a good game does not make. We are just starting to get away from the Troll editions. Let's not go back there.
Zombayz
QUOTE (Smash @ Mar 7 2014, 12:21 AM) *
I'm going to concur and add that realism hampers all parts of the game when applied anymore than casually.

I will add that there is maybe a point in upping the damage of them a bit. However complicated encumbrance rules a good game does not make. We are just starting to get away from the Troll editions. Let's not go back there.


By all means, I agree. Realism is nice, but game balance is most important. Either bother to make machine guns a valid choice, or don't bother at all.
RHat
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 7 2014, 01:14 AM) *
The only advantage to MGs is range. They're sub-par weapons for the costs needed to use them at this time. They're incredible expensive, have very high availability, have the insane strength requirements, suffer from double recoil, and that's all for nothing but a larger ammo capacity(which will soon be nullified) and longer range(which comes into play so rarely for Shadowrunners it's not even funny). You are by far and away better off with an assault rifle, rather than going for the buy-in costs to use a machine gun.


I don't disagree that there are balance problems. My point is that the reality-based argument isn't a good approach to solving balance problems. Certainly the damage needs to be a lot higher.
Zombayz
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 12:34 AM) *
I don't disagree that there are balance problems. My point is that the reality-based argument isn't a good approach to solving balance problems. Certainly the damage needs to be a lot higher.


This also runs into a core problem with Shadowrun: shadowrun is full of gun nerding. It WANTS to be realistic. It just screws up horribly and accomplishes neither realism or balance. I'm just using real world data to point out problems with in game balance.
Sendaz
Plus if you are going to raise the spectre of realism then you may as well adjust the ROF, which is seriously toned down in game to keep it manageable.

A combat turn is 3 seconds, so 20 CT per minute. Firing Full Auto is a complex action and uses 10 bullets. So you are looking at a ROF of 200 Rounds per minute.

This is ALOT slower than what RL weapons can achieve, when you have cyclic rates between 400 - 900 for many of these sorts and some even reaching a whomping 1200 RPM.

And spirits forbid we even think of miniguns with their 6000 rounds per minute ROF.

Thankfully those the are mounted sort though one could probably argue a troll could hold down a smaller one, like the one using light ammo but cuts through cinderblocks like a saw.

So realism does have to be tempered sometimes...

That said I do agree the damage for the more full auto weapons does need some tweaking, but again one has to find that balance point to make it worthwhile without overwhelming the balance.
RHat
And as long as we're talking weapon balance... There's a serious issue when Pistols+Longarms isn't notably stronger than Automatics alone.
Zombayz
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 12:50 AM) *
And as long as we're talking weapon balance... There's a serious issue when Pistols+Longarms isn't notably stronger than Automatics alone.


We're talking weapon balance, but machine guns in particular. I'll work up something tearing apart the whole Pistols+Longarms+Automatics thing in a few days most likely.
RHat
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 7 2014, 01:59 AM) *
We're talking weapon balance, but machine guns in particular. I'll work up something tearing apart the whole Pistols+Longarms+Automatics thing in a few days most likely.


Oh, they've been sufficiently torn apart.

As a starting point, though, let's look at the Valiant. Damage-wise, I'd want to set it at a DV of no less than the strongest AR in the book, so let's bring it up by, say, 3 points to 12; possibly increase the the AP as well. From there, maybe bring the Stoner to 14, and the RPK to 16... And get rid of the double recoil, of course.
Zombayz
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 01:20 AM) *
Oh, they've been sufficiently torn apart.

As a starting point, though, let's look at the Valiant. Damage-wise, I'd want to set it at a DV of no less than the strongest AR in the book, so let's bring it up by, say, 3 points to 12; possibly increase the the AP as well. From there, maybe bring the Stoner to 14, and the RPK to 16... And get rid of the double recoil, of course.


There's a good man, now we're thinking! My advice is something along similar lines: Match the average LMG with the average assault rifle. That puts us at 10P, -2AP. Our MMGs should be sitting at the average for a sniper rifle: 13P, -4AP. Now HMGs are the trickiest one. Right now they're sitting at 12P, -4 AP. The strongest core sniper is 14P, -5AP. Does this reflect something serious, like .50 BMG or is it more like .300 Magnum? I think it's closer to the smaller answer. So, does 15P, -4AP sound suitable to everyone here? It does to me.

Okay, now we've cut away the the two biggest problems with MGs, and given them much more reasonable damage in return. So as they sit now, they're expensive, hard to get, and EXTREMELY noticeable, but they've got good damage, large ammo capacity, and slightly superior range, and their weapon skill is good for assault cannons, grenade launchers, and missile launchers as well. Is this balanced? Seems like it, but it might need playtesting.

Surukai
I find it hilarious that a MAC-10 has good recoil handling while a machine gun (That is big, heavy and have lower ROF to make recoil more manageable) have completely the opposite effect on recoil in SR5

But, guys (and gals). Why look at weak MGs that deal inferior damage and requires massive investment when Motion Sensor Frag grenades autohit everything for autokill damage?

18P, no defence roll is not really manageable. Even if they resist 10 or so boxes they still end up knocked down and easily picked off later and no useless MG would have done better damage to a target that rolls 10+ hits on damage resist anyway.

Thowing is the skill to use, You don't even need to get very much in it frown.gif
RHat
See, to my analysis, if the LMG simply matches an assault rifle, it's just a touch too weak for their disadvantages; from there, I'm working in the space of MG's relative to each other.
Zombayz
QUOTE (Surukai @ Mar 7 2014, 01:47 AM) *
I find it hilarious that a MAC-10 has good recoil handling while a machine gun (That is big, heavy and have lower ROF to make recoil more manageable) have completely the opposite effect on recoil in SR5

But, guys (and gals). Why look at weak MGs that deal inferior damage and requires massive investment when Motion Sensor Frag grenades autohit everything for autokill damage?

18P, no defence roll is not really manageable. Even if they resist 10 or so boxes they still end up knocked down and easily picked off later and no useless MG would have done better damage to a target that rolls 10+ hits on damage resist anyway.

Thowing is the skill to use, You don't even need to get very much in it frown.gif


Because we're tearing MGs apart first. Focus the hate, unfrag Catalyst's mistakes. If they're not competent enough to make things work in shadowrun, then damn it, we'll fix it bit by bit. MGs just happen to be a point of exceptional bile and hate for me, so why not do that first? As we go, I'll make threads for basically everything, compile it into a PDF, and then release it. Free Shadowrun fix for all! pretty much.


QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 01:50 AM) *
See, to my analysis, if the LMG simply matches an assault rifle, it's just a touch too weak for their disadvantages; from there, I'm working in the space of MG's relative to each other.


Well the disadvantages for an LMG with our fixes are: Cost, availability, and the fact that the Automatics skill is godlike. The advantages are the large ammo capacity, and slightly increased range. The Ingram compared to the AK-97 would have the same damage, same AP, around triple the magazine size, one less firing mode, and 3 points of recoil compensation for 8 more availability(3x as hard to get as an AK!), and right around six times the price.

Still not very fair, you're right. So, should we increase the damage, or drop the availability and price? Or is there a third option I'm not seeing?


Also, for anyone who's interested, I threw a post into the Gun Heaven 3 thread a few hours ago, showing just how incredibly lazy Catalyst were.
RHat
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 7 2014, 03:10 AM) *
Well the disadvantages for an LMG with our fixes are: Cost, availability, and the fact that the Automatics skill is godlike. The advantages are the large ammo capacity, and slightly increased range. The Ingram compared to the AK-97 would have the same damage, same AP, around triple the magazine size, one less firing mode, and 3 points of recoil compensation for 8 more availability(3x as hard to get as an AK!), and right around six times the price.

Still not very fair, you're right. So, should we increase the damage, or drop the availability and price? Or is there a third option I'm not seeing?


Also, for anyone who's interested, I threw a post into the Gun Heaven 3 thread a few hours ago, showing just how incredibly lazy Catalyst were.


Part of my issue is actually about future proofing - come Run and Gun, that ammo capacity benefit isn't gonna be much of a thing.
Zombayz
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 02:19 AM) *
Part of my issue is actually about future proofing - come Run and Gun, that ammo capacity benefit isn't gonna be much of a thing.


That depends on whether or not they add in ammo boxes for belts again. I'm willing to assume they will, so everyone can rock 250 round mixes of tracer and APDS.

So in the meantime, what would you say to Avail 8 and dropping the price down to 4000 nuyen for the Ingram?
FuelDrop
hmmm... possible troll detected.
...
...
Commencing analysis subroutine...
...
...
Analysis result: Uncertain.
Solution: kill team dispatched, incendiaries loaded. Search and destroy.

(Okay, comical overkill maybe but seriously dude, 8 availability on an MG? Also, with the new LMG in gun heaven three I'm fairly confident that Catalyst and related writers have realized they made a mistake by lowballing MG damage. With luck Run and Gun and the next Errata will prove me right.)
RHat
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 7 2014, 03:29 AM) *
That depends on whether or not they add in ammo boxes for belts again. I'm willing to assume they will, so everyone can rock 250 round mixes of tracer and APDS.

So in the meantime, what would you say to Avail 8 and dropping the price down to 4000 nuyen for the Ingram?


Something about easily available machine guns seems very off to me.
Zombayz
QUOTE (FuelDrop @ Mar 7 2014, 02:45 AM) *
hmmm... possible troll detected.
...
...
Commencing analysis subroutine...
...
...
Analysis result: Uncertain.
Solution: kill team dispatched, incendiaries loaded. Search and destroy.

(Okay, comical overkill maybe but seriously dude, 8 availability on an MG? Also, with the new LMG in gun heaven three I'm fairly confident that Catalyst and related writers have realized they made a mistake by lowballing MG damage. With luck Run and Gun and the next Errata will prove me right.)


Why would I be trolling? Catalyst isn't willing to put any work into Shadowrun, so why don't we? And Krime Wave in Run and Gun is not a good example of anything. It's sitting at average assault rifle damage, but... It also costs more than THREE THOUSAND NUYEN less than the only other current LMG. Also it's art is straight up a photoshopped MG42/MG3/MG4/whatever. In terms of stats, it's the AK of LMGs, utterly bare bones. For more than double the price, and almost three times the availability, it gets... 62 more rounds and a bipod. It's a terrible example of balance.

QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 02:51 AM) *
Something about easily available machine guns seems very off to me.


Availability 8 is the same as the FN HAR, which seems to be the middle of the road assault rifle. Does the MG really have enough going for it to be worth the higher availability? I'm talking sheer game balance here, nothing for realism at all.
RHat
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 7 2014, 03:57 AM) *
Availability 8 is the same as the FN HAR, which seems to be the middle of the road assault rifle. Does the MG really have enough going for it to be worth the higher availability? I'm talking sheer game balance here, nothing for realism at all.


Frankly I'd rather use stuff like the Raiden and the Alpha as points of comparison in the design; in terms of player choices, that's the real competition.
Surukai
In my group I knocked 1 DMG off from AK and added 1 to MGs (All categories), part of the problem is AKs being very powerful.

The added armor values does not cover the much higher damage on guns in general. Maybe not compared to the narrow-burst automatics in SR4 (but those were grenade-level-broken so not a meaningful comparison). The only things that deal way too little damage is the MGs and big melee weapons.

How come a gun wound is far far far more dangerous than an axe chop from a moderately strong human? One provides a small hole that maybe hits vital organs but more often than not is survivable while the other digs a 1kg+ head to the hilt inside your body causing massive trauma?

Tuning down guns a little bit (and of course going bananas on grenades, ffs) might fix a bit of the problem with high defence being superior to armor (again, ignoring grenades).

Zombayz
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 03:09 AM) *
Frankly I'd rather use stuff like the Raiden and the Alpha as points of comparison in the design; in terms of player choices, that's the real competition.


Well, let's compare then!

Ares Alpha Advantages:
-Automatics skill is extremely flexible
-built in grenade launcher with 6 round capacity
-1P more than the fixed Ingram
-can fire semi-auto
-built in smartgun
-2 points of fancy recoil absorption
-costs 1350 nuyen less

The Ingram has:
-48 more ammo
-3 points less availability.
-longer range

If anything, that's still leaning in favour of the Alpha.

QUOTE (Surukai @ Mar 7 2014, 03:14 AM) *
How come a gun wound is far far far more dangerous than an axe chop from a moderately strong human? One provides a small hole that maybe hits vital organs but more often than not is survivable while the other digs a 1kg+ head to the hilt inside your body causing massive trauma?


Because while that axe is moving maybe 100 meters per second on the upper end, the bullet is moving a thousand meters a second, deforms, and rends flesh like you wouldn't believe. Ever seen an exit wound? They're all kinds of nasty, far worse in terms of actual damage done than the swing of your average axe. An axe. Go do some research on terminal ballistics, and you'll see.
RHat
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 7 2014, 04:16 AM) *
Well, let's compare then!

Ares Alpha Advantages:
-Automatics skill is extremely flexible
-built in grenade launcher with 6 round capacity
-1P more than the fixed Ingram
-can fire semi-auto
-built in smartgun
-2 points of fancy recoil absorption
-costs 1350 nuyen less

The Ingram has:
-48 more ammo
-3 points less availability.
-longer range

If anything, that's still leaning in favour of the Alpha.


And what I think should be done is for that imbalance to be corrected - hence why, rather than reducing availability, I'd increase damage and AP to above that of the higher-end assault rifles.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 03:51 AM) *
Something about easily available machine guns seems very off to me.


Yeah, Me too... Military hardware should be HARD to get your hands on, and it should not be cheap. eek.gif
psychophipps
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Mar 7 2014, 09:22 AM) *
Yeah, Me too... Military hardware should be HARD to get your hands on, and it should not be cheap. eek.gif


To be honest, I respectfully disagree. Mil-spec is hard and expensive to get now, but the US is also a country with a unilateral jurisdiction federal law enforcement system, a military budget that matches a largish part of the rest of the world combined, and the US has a GDP of right around twice that of the next largest world economy. In Shadowrun, none of this is true. You have several smallish NAN nations, the eastern part of the former US is split into UCAS and CAS, and Seattle is this little island of UCAS like a Shadowrun-era Berlin.

Now add that Mega-corporations have their own jurisdictions, with laws that very likely start with something along the lines of, "Make dat chedda', bitches!" So guess what they do? They make quality military hardware at a reasonable price that your average NAN/fragmented bloc that is ghost of it's glorious past/local warlord can afford. With all that wishy-washy legaleez going around, it's very easy to see how a little bit of "state of the art bang-bang!" makes it's way into the hands of folks that are committing dirty deeds, done dirt cheap for the aforementioned parties.
kzt
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 7 2014, 04:16 AM) *
Because while that axe is moving maybe 100 meters per second on the upper end, the bullet is moving a thousand meters a second, deforms, and rends flesh like you wouldn't believe. Ever seen an exit wound? They're all kinds of nasty, far worse in terms of actual damage done than the swing of your average axe. An axe. Go do some research on terminal ballistics, and you'll see.

No, impact weapons should be far more lethal, particularly swords, axes and similar large weapons. Pistols should be much less effective on average then shooting people with rifles or hitting people with an axe. However it should also be pretty much impossible to charge up to an alert guy with gun ready and attack him with an axe etc without getting perforated. So mechanics matter.

Machine gun bullets should do the exact same thing that the same size rifle does. A SAW and an M16 don't really differ in terminal effects. The RL advantage that a belt fed light machine gun is that it can keep shooting a lot longer without having to stop to reload or overheating nearly as fast. For the first few seconds of a fight it's just a heavy and oversize assault rifle, it's only when everyone else is reloading that the differences appear. There are also things you can do with tripods that make them hell on wheels at long range against targets you are expecting, but that takes quite some time to set up.

Machineguns larger than LMGs are usually classed as crew served weapons because you need multiple people to carry all the parts to the fight, then keep it fed and shooting accurately, plus real-world ammo actually weights quite a bit and MGs purpose is to fire a lot of ammo in a fight.

If you look at the actual price people sell belt-fed light or medium machine guns to armies they are a lot more expensive than assault or battle rifles, however prices in SR have always been absurd. I'd also argue that the fact that a MMG costs 10 times what a battle rifle doesn't mean that it's 10 times or any more effective then a battle rifle in the way shadow run characters would typically use it.
Samoth
Really all they have to do to make machineguns usable for anything other than drones is the change the double uncompensated recoil to 1/2 uncompensated. That is a legacy rule from many editions ago that never made sense and nobody bothered to change. Increasing the DV and AP would make sense but isn't necessary.
Sengir
QUOTE (psychophipps @ Mar 7 2014, 05:42 PM) *
To be honest, I respectfully disagree. Mil-spec is hard and expensive to get now, but the US is also a country with a unilateral jurisdiction federal law enforcement system, a military budget that matches a largish part of the rest of the world combined, and the US has a GDP of right around twice that of the next largest world economy. In Shadowrun, none of this is true. You have several smallish NAN nations, the eastern part of the former US is split into UCAS and CAS, and Seattle is this little island of UCAS like a Shadowrun-era Berlin.

Not to forget that before that breakup happened, the USA fought a major war. I doubt all the soldiers bothered to turn in their equipment...
binarywraith
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 7 2014, 02:38 AM) *
This also runs into a core problem with Shadowrun: shadowrun is full of gun nerding. It WANTS to be realistic. It just screws up horribly and accomplishes neither realism or balance. I'm just using real world data to point out problems with in game balance.


Despite RHat being an idiot in any thread that touches on reality, this is the point where it matters. Shadowrun -tries- to be at least quasi-realistic about its guns. It just fails miserably because apparently the writers don't know enough about guns to make it work, and/or weren't given enough time to do the research. An abstraction based off of bad assumptions is a bad abstraction.

A pure game theory approach doesn't even work, because the game stats they're giving for these weapons don't make sense with the in-game tactical situations they describe them as being built for. The stats don't make them the most desirable weapon for the niche they were 'meant' to fill. It's the same reason we get stuff printed like the Rain Forest Carbine, which is outright superior to most of the main book guns.
KarmaInferno
I'm wondering if the recoil on non-heavy weapons should be adjusted to scale more severely as you fire more rounds.

Like firing off a normal burst should be no problem, long burst gets pretty hard, and full auto sprays wildly.





-k
binarywraith
QUOTE (KarmaInferno @ Mar 7 2014, 12:45 PM) *
I'm wondering if the recoil on non-heavy weapons should be adjusted to scale more severely as you fire more rounds.

Like firing off a normal burst should be no problem, long burst gets pretty hard, and full auto sprays wildly.





-k


If anything that'd make more sense. Uncompensated recoil -should- be more of a problem on a lighter gun because you have less weapon mass relative to the amount of recoil each round produces. Keeping the nose down on an MP5 in FA is, from experience, a hell of a lot harder than an M16, despite the heavier round in the rifle.
Warlordtheft
QUOTE (Sengir @ Mar 7 2014, 12:48 PM) *
Not to forget that before that breakup happened, the USA fought a major war. I doubt all the soldiers bothered to turn in their equipment...


Granted up to the present SR timeline that was 50+ years ago. The CAS and Eurowars are 30+ years ago, and there have been two crashes that probably wiped out all the gun registries and inventory logs. So some things did go missing, that is for certain. There is the balkanization of authority, cheaper manufacturing and barrens (where you could set up a firearms factory and no one would bug you about it).
Daier Mune
QUOTE (RHat @ Mar 7 2014, 04:34 AM) *
I don't disagree that there are balance problems. My point is that the reality-based argument isn't a good approach to solving balance problems. Certainly the damage needs to be a lot higher.


I agree with the idea that as a game, Shadowrun won't be better by trying to simulate reality; levels of abstraction are necisary. My problem is that Shadowrun is abstracting it's gun rules off of action movies & video games (which were already abstractions of reality themselves). If they scrapped what they had and rebuilt the gun & ammo rules based off a little bit of research & hands on testing, I know they could come up with a simplified & abstracted system that at least makes some amount of sense, and reflects how physics work in reality.

However, the fact that the selection of guns and ammunition types basically hasn't changed in five editions makes me think they have no intention of changing this any time soon. (another reason I didn't pick up 5th ed)
thorya
QUOTE (KarmaInferno @ Mar 7 2014, 01:45 PM) *
I'm wondering if the recoil on non-heavy weapons should be adjusted to scale more severely as you fire more rounds.

Like firing off a normal burst should be no problem, long burst gets pretty hard, and full auto sprays wildly.





-k


It might be easier to reverse what we have now. Heavy weapons have 1/2 the recoil penalty rather than double. Then they're useful especially for going full auto which is what they're designed for, but still have other draw backs (large size, hard to conceal, etc.).
Sengir
QUOTE (Warlordtheft @ Mar 7 2014, 08:52 PM) *
Granted up to the present SR timeline that was 50+ years ago. The CAS and Eurowars are 30+ years ago, and there have been two crashes that probably wiped out all the gun registries and inventory logs. So some things did go missing, that is for certain. There is the balkanization of authority, cheaper manufacturing and barrens (where you could set up a firearms factory and no one would bug you about it).

You certainly won't find an n-th generation SAM with the very latest counter-countermeasure firmware unless looking very hard and bribing half a division worth of people. But ordinary infantry weapons like assault rifles or grenades are common enough (both by fluff and RAW), and the available "Eurowar Antiques" should also include stuff like aircraft autocannons and shoulder-launched fun.

As for better recoil rules, IMO good rules are not just balanced and accurate, but also should work without a logarithm table wink.gif
FuelDrop
QUOTE (Sengir @ Mar 8 2014, 08:17 AM) *
As for better recoil rules, IMO good rules are not just balanced and accurate, but also should work without a logarithm table wink.gif

See I disagree. All Shadowrun's mathematics should be base pi squared, use D%/4 as the basic dice for everything, have logarithmic attributes but linear skills and exponential bonuses.
Oh, and guns should only work if you throw your dice 1 at a time, because otherwise it jams so things are more realisti-
HERESY! *Blam!*
*Pushes body off keyboard*
And that, folks, is why you never leave your laptop unlocked.
Umidori
I dunno, FuelDrop, for a minute there that started to sound like playing with the Earthdawn system.

*twitch*

~Umi
FuelDrop
QUOTE (Umidori @ Mar 8 2014, 09:20 AM) *
I dunno, FuelDrop, for a minute there that started to sound like playing with the Earthdawn system.

*twitch*

~Umi

I'd ask the guy what he was referencing, but the large caliber round through his brain has rendered him a little on the quiet side.
Umidori
Did you fire that large caliber round from a pistol, or a machine gun? Because I imagine your wrist must be hurting if it was the latter, what with that doubled recoil... biggrin.gif

~Umi
FuelDrop
QUOTE (Umidori @ Mar 8 2014, 09:30 AM) *
Did you fire that large caliber round from a pistol, or a machine gun? Because I imagine your wrist must be hurting if it was the latter, what with that doubled recoil... biggrin.gif

~Umi

Man-portable artillery, in point of fact. ARMP specifically.
Thanks for your concern, it's really touching.
psychophipps
The correct machinegun protocol is to shoot controlled, five or six round bursts to conserve ammunition and to keep the barrel from taking a shit in the first 60 seconds or so of the battle.

Also, don't forget that SAWs are being replaced within the USMC with the M27, a heavy-barreled version of the HK416 assault rifle. Pop a 60 or 100-round Surefire magazine into them (yes, they exist now and work wonderfully) and you have yourself an excellent sustained-fire platform that reloads much faster than a belt-fed and is more reliable. 7.8 lbs unloaded with bipod and optic.

One thing that constantly irks me about Shadowrun is how they all this gee-whiz firearms wankery in their books that I just love, despite their often being completely fucking retarded about how it actually, like...y'know...works...and stuff..., but they're constantly looking in the past for the actual weapons design cues. I'm all for some old skool fun, but you need to look in the future and what's happening now as well, for crying out loud.
kzt
Burst size depends on what you are doing. There are times when you fire on cyclic, though not many.

My understanding is the main problem with the SAWs is that they are all worn out. They are mostly about 30 some years old and have been through two major wars and endless training. USMC needed new guns, I hope they chose well.

QUOTE
One thing that constantly irks me about Shadowrun is how they all this gee-whiz firearms wankery in their books that I just love, despite their often being completely fucking retarded about how it actually, like...y'know...works...and stuff..., but they're constantly looking in the past for the actual weapons design cues. I'm all for some old skool fun, but you need to look in the future and what's happening now as well, for crying out loud.

It just annoys me that they manage to waste endless pages on describing great detail their varied gun models, during which they manage to clearly demonstrate again and again both their total lack of clue and fascination with comic books, and at the end you have one or two that make any sense for anyone to actually use due to their always creating a model that has all the best things and no limitations.
Faelan
QUOTE (kzt @ Mar 7 2014, 11:19 PM) *
Burst size depends on what you are doing. There are times when you fire on cyclic, though not many.

My understanding is the main problem with the SAWs is that they are all worn out. They are mostly about 30 some years old and have been through two major wars and endless training. USMC needed new guns, I hope they chose well.


Just to address a couple of things. If you are firing cyclic you have lost your mind, are scared shitless, and will soon be dead because your barrel will melt, and you will run out of ammo stupid quick. You never fire on cyclic except if you are screwing around on a nice safe range, and want to think about how cool it is. If you know a damn thing about how to properly deploy a MG you would know that you never, ever, fire cyclic. Yes those war movies get it completely wrong.

The SAW is and always has been a piece of shit, primarily becaus eof the caliber of round it fires. The only part on the damn thing that wears out easily, very regularly, and rarely gets replaced because it never seems to be in the budget is the extractor. Slight wear+sand=failed extraction=bolt action weapon that weighs more than it should.

Sorry about that, SAW=pet peeve.
Faelan
Directed at the OP.

Take a thirty pound weight and run around with it for an hour at the ready. Then tell me how easy it is to deploy or fire. Ever fire an M240 or M60 in the assault position? Good luck hitting anything that is not within 50 ft, also good luck not getting yourself shot by the enemy while you do this. Suggesting a Troll can fire a 40mm autocannon is completely ludicrous, because you know aircraft firing them in a strafing run don't get slowed down at all by them, right? So while I agree that game designers regularly screw up their firearms facts, this really is not one of those times.
Zombayz
I'm seeing an unfortunate number of people who are too busy showing their incredible lack of firearms knowledge here. I would kindly request you do some research, and then return to the problem at hand of balancing machine guns. If you think that a low availability matters because it's military hardware: so is every assault rifle, SMG, and machine pistol in the book. If you think that an axe is more lethal than a bullet: please go research terminal ballistics. An axe, while very dangerous, cannot kill anywhere near as reliably as a gun. There is a reason that no army in the world equips their troops with axes as a close quarters weapon; that's what SMGs, PDWs, and smaller assault rifles are for.

For the man who brought up the M27: It's an assault rifle that's being used with machine gun doctrine. It's literally a piston M16 instead of a direct impingement M16.

And now, this man:

QUOTE (Faelan @ Mar 8 2014, 08:11 AM) *
Directed at the OP.

Take a thirty pound weight and run around with it for an hour at the ready. Then tell me how easy it is to deploy or fire. Ever fire an M240 or M60 in the assault position? Good luck hitting anything that is not within 50 ft, also good luck not getting yourself shot by the enemy while you do this. Suggesting a Troll can fire a 40mm autocannon is completely ludicrous, because you know aircraft firing them in a strafing run don't get slowed down at all by them, right? So while I agree that game designers regularly screw up their firearms facts, this really is not one of those times.


You must be seriously out of shape or work in an office if you can't run around with something in your arms all day. I used to work in a warehouse All I did, all day, was move 20-50 pound boxes, all day. Peak days involved three forty foot shipping containers and close to eighty thousand pounds of boxes moved. Keep in mind, that's not just HOLDING the boxes. That's picking them up and moving them. And people have been using GPMGs at the squad level for close to a hundred years. These aren't cybernetically or magically enhanced superhumans. They're regular people. Normal human beings, Joe Chummer.

On top of that, if you cannot hit a target at 50 feet, with an MG(or anything aside from a pistol really), after only an hour of physical activity you probably shouldn't be in combat. At all. You should actually be exercising until you are no longer overweight and have some decent cardio going. And while a troll firing a 40mm autocannon might be absurd, you seem to be forgetting about the rates of fire on aircraft autocannons versus the ones we use down on the ground. Not to mention the sheer weight of a rotary autocannon. Firing rates in the thousands of rounds a minute are very, very, VERY different from weapons that only reach hundreds of rounds a minute.

Go do some research before you complain please. And perhaps exercise some.



Now, does anyone have any actual input on balancing machine guns, or are we effectively finished here?
Faelan
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 8 2014, 04:05 PM) *
You must be seriously out of shape or work in an office if you can't run around with something in your arms all day. I used to work in a warehouse All I did, all day, was move 20-50 pound boxes, all day. Peak days involved three forty foot shipping containers and close to eighty thousand pounds of boxes moved. Keep in mind, that's not just HOLDING the boxes. That's picking them up and moving them. And people have been using GPMGs at the squad level for close to a hundred years. These aren't cybernetically or magically enhanced superhumans. They're regular people. Normal human beings, Joe Chummer.


Sorry but you are showing your ass here. Marine Corps Infantry 92-98. If you don't know what you are talking about shut your pie hole. Read my original post and if you don't know simple terminology like "at the ready" or "firing in the assault position" you might want to ask rather than talking and showing those who know what a fool you are.

QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 8 2014, 04:05 PM) *
On top of that, if you cannot hit a target at 50 feet, with an MG(or anything aside from a pistol really), after only an hour of physical activity you probably shouldn't be in combat. At all. You should actually be exercising until you are no longer overweight and have some decent cardio going. And while a troll firing a 40mm autocannon might be absurd, you seem to be forgetting about the rates of fire on aircraft autocannons versus the ones we use down on the ground. Not to mention the sheer weight of a rotary autocannon. Firing rates in the thousands of rounds a minute are very, very, VERY different from weapons that only reach hundreds of rounds a minute.


Go learn how to deploy the weapon correctly and read what I actually wrote instead of running your suck like a complete tool, and showing your complete lack of knowledge on the subject being discussed. As to ground based autocannons please look up the hardware you are talking about and check their actual rates of fire, or better yet specify the hardware you want to talk about so the rest of us are not guessing what particular piece of equipment you had in mind, because guess what there are non gatling/rotary autocannons that achieve a rate of fire in the the thousands, and they too are not restricted to aerial use. (i.e. rotary feed single barrel, multi barrel rotary feed, multi barrel belt fed, combination multi barrel rotary feed, or gatling)

QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 8 2014, 04:05 PM) *
Go do some research before you complain please. And perhaps exercise some.


I recommend you do something other than make shit up, and maybe go play with the equipment before you decide to act the pro when there are plenty of us here who have done it for a living, BOOT.

QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 8 2014, 04:05 PM) *
Now, does anyone have any actual input on balancing machine guns, or are we effectively finished here?


Now do you have anything constructive and real to add to this discussion or are you going to continue talking out your ass?
Koekepan
QUOTE (Zombayz @ Mar 9 2014, 12:05 AM) *
If you think that an axe is more lethal than a bullet: please go research terminal ballistics. An axe, while very dangerous, cannot kill anywhere near as reliably as a gun. There is a reason that no army in the world equips their troops with axes as a close quarters weapon; that's what SMGs, PDWs, and smaller assault rifles are for.


I was curious about the whole axe thing, so I went to my favourite surgeon, who has spent quality time in inner city emergency rooms patching people back up after little bullets, big bullets, and trauma ranging from industrial accidents to two drunk morons trying to kill each other with chainsaws.

Real dope, straight from the streets follows:
  • Yes, rifle bullets which actually hit the head, body, or upper limbs including arteries, are killers. Very capable killers. This is why hunters use them.
  • Handgun bullets just don't compare. The physics of expanding gases and short barrels mean that handgun wounds, including head wounds in the numbers, have lethality rates of under 20%. Seriously, the survival rate is somewhere over 80% with today's medical care on tap.
  • A knife wound is close to a pistol wound in lethality, but since stabbings usually entail multiple knife wounds, and the torso hit rate tends to be better, the knife is on balance more lethal than the pistol.
  • Two handed, swung, weighted weapons are killers on a level very close to rifles. The accumulated energy is plenty to crush joints, split skulls, sever limbs and penetrate all the way through a body.


It comes down to the volume of tissue disrupted. Arrows are actually pretty comparable, given a powerful bow and well designed head, with rifles, because they carve long, deep wounds all the way through bodies, and this is despite the fact that a typical arrow has kinetic energy levels way below that of a rifle. Why? Because penetration capacity is best measured in terms of the momentum of the projectile, and not the energy. (If you want a truly detailed explanation, I can provide one, but that will be a very long post.) Knives tend not to penetrate very deeply, but can penetrate enough to reach vital organs, depending on the size (and fat layer) of the victim and the length of the blade. Slashing tends not to be a fight stopper, but chopping (a la machete) can be with sufficient momentum to drive the edge through the tissues quite deep. This is because swinging a heavy mass accumulates momentum, which is why swinging a hammer from the handle works better to drive nails than gripping the head in your hand and bashing.

The myth of the amount of tissue disrupted by rifles comes from studies in clay and ballistic gelatin, both of which betray the maximum upset of soft tissues but do not reflect the elasticity of those same tissues. The bullet may bruise nearby things, but unless it hits a full vessel there is no significant transmission of the fabled hydraulic shock because there is no efficient medium of transfer to act as a wave guide for the pulse. If you hit a full heart, the aorta will carry a pulse up to the brain and knock out the victim, but this is a low percentage shot - even if you hit the heart you might easily hit it when it is flaccid, and then the victim will just bleed out into the chest cavity. Your typical rifle bullet wound only actually damages tissues which the bullet strikes (and I have done autopsies on animals with my surgeon friend's guidance and can personally attest to these facts).

So. Yeah. Axes will spoil your whole day, better even than pistols.

Oh, and yes, some soldiers do carry tomahawks. They might not be issue weapons, but they are very useful. Check into that. Armes blanches didn't stop working when the Garand was invented.
Neraph
QUOTE (kzt @ Mar 7 2014, 10:19 PM) *
USMC needed new guns...

Budget would help...

QUOTE (Faelan @ Mar 8 2014, 10:05 AM) *
Just to address a couple of things. If you are firing cyclic you have lost your mind, are scared shitless, and will soon be dead because your barrel will melt, and you will run out of ammo stupid quick. You never fire on cyclic except if you are screwing around on a nice safe range, and want to think about how cool it is. If you know a damn thing about how to properly deploy a MG you would know that you never, ever, fire cyclic.

Talking Guns.

QUOTE (Faelan @ Mar 8 2014, 10:11 AM) *
Directed at the OP.

Take a thirty pound weight and run around with it for an hour at the ready. Then tell me how easy it is to deploy or fire. Ever fire an M240 or M60 in the assault position? Good luck hitting anything that is not within 50 ft, also good luck not getting yourself shot by the enemy while you do this. Suggesting a Troll can fire a 40mm autocannon is completely ludicrous, because you know aircraft firing them in a strafing run don't get slowed down at all by them, right? So while I agree that game designers regularly screw up their firearms facts, this really is not one of those times.

Yup. Call of Duty annoys the crap out of me with all the running around they do at the Ready.

As to axes: things like that already exist. In my MOS school we had a blackbelt SSgt talking about how he had one and wanted to go on another deployment just to get a confirmed kill with an axe in a combat zone.
Sendaz
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 8 2014, 07:26 PM) *
As to axes: things like that already exist. In my MOS school we had a blackbelt SSgt talking about how he had one and wanted to go on another deployment just to get a confirmed kill with an axe in a combat zone.
Yeah I can dig that. wink.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012