I'm hoping the views of other players and GMs on the following issue. I raise it because one of my players likes the idea, I don't and I wanted to check that my arbitrary ruling made some sense. Before you post the question, yes Robert I'm talking about you.

The character has twin cyberarm gyromounts, ie two cyberarms, each with a cyberarm gyromount. His opinion is that if you use both arms on one weapon (eg an AK) you get six points of recoil comp (three from each arm) because you are using (for a right hander) the right hand to handle recoil through the grip and the left hand to handle recoil through the foregrip or where you're supporting the weapon under the barrel.

I ruled you get one lot of three but not both, because (a) to get both would be unbalancing and (b) recoil goes (in my incredibly limited experience) through the stock primarily and only secondarily through the grip.

I do see the counter argument, which is (a) of course it's unbalancing, that's why he's paid over 300K and a rediculous amount of essence to get the things and (b) they're still gyromounts, in contact with the weapon, which could both assist in whatever shaking, rattling, rolling and riding upwards the weapon does when recoiling, especially on full auto.

Can anyone who actually has some automatic weapon experience assist? What about general game balance viewpoints?

He did pay 300k and a bucket load of karma for the arms, let him have them. For recoil I'd give the full recoil modifier, as I don't have the specific rules that counter his argument (if they exist), there has to be same good use for cyber-arms and several guns have foregrip&stock options that provide recoil modifiers. Yes the majority of force goes into the stock, but the problem with rapid firing is that the remaining force is vectored so the rear hand acts pivot and the barrel moves up and away from the target.

The hassles with MADs, etc, that he will pick-up because of two combat orientated cyberarms should counter his ability with FA/BF.

Double the RC. The Canon rules are on his side.

I've fired an AK-clone on full auto, but I've never had cyberarm gyromounts, so my experience doesn't really count...

I don't really see how a gyromount would help in either arm, but if it does in one it probably should in the other. Both arms are important in keeping the weapon level and pointing in the right direction. Plus cyberlimbs pretty much suck for everything else, so you might as well give the PC the RC from both arms.

However, being a , I would only give half the bonus (rounded up, ie 2) for using only one cyberarm gyromount with a 2-handed weapon, which is everything but most pistols. A gyromount in just one hand shouldn't help you as much with a rifle as it does with a pistol. Since I've house ruled cyberlimbs to be more useful otherwise, this works for me.

Well, no personal experience with automatic weapons, but in terms of game balance:

A Gyromount which offers 6 points of Recoil comp is 6,000. The Cyberarm recoil comp is 40,000 for 3 points of Recoil comp. Plus it costs essence. There are rather significant concealibility advantages on the cyberarm version. However, there just aren't that many highly conceable weapons where 6 points of Recoil Comp is relevant. So, IMO, concealibility is a wash.

If I had a player willing to blow that much essence and that much cash on his recoil comp, I'd probably let him. Yes, it's not by the letter of the books, but ... I don't see how it's game breaking when you can already get that much recoil comp anyways.

Dual SMGs or dual machine pistols (or both, for when he's in different moods) seem to be better uses of the RC, but I'd let them stack.

~J

The RC from both arms wouldn't stack, simply because the forces are in the wrong vectors.

The recoil on a properly made weapon is directed as directly backwards as possible. This means your body is applying vectors which can cancel out the recoil and you get a reasonably smooth ride and some accuracy. Cyberarm gyromounts help here by having gyros and counterweights which come out of the wrist/forearm area and helps bolster the natural forces being applied by the arm and maintain the proper balance. This is designed to come from a specific vector - straight down the reciever and into the stock.

The reason the AK-47 was so innaccurate was because of the crude machining process the Soviets used to make it, there was too much lateral force and movement involved which meant you had to compensate for the upwards and sideways inclinations of the weapon - hence you sprayed.

On a reasonably well machined weapon, particularly a battle rifle which is firing from a closed bolt, you shouldn't have to worry about lateral forces. None of the NATO weapons in use today, or the AK-74, have to worry about it. I could put a burst witnin a 1.5 inch grouping at 200m without anything beyond my natural comp and the weapon itself.

The second gyromount is applying it's counter force in the wrong vectors, so it'd probably make it worse and not easier (if you push the foregrip the weapon no longer points in the right direction). Besides, you get RC for strength anyway, which is all I'd allow the player in this case. I may allow the player to have the strength based RC twice, but since the rules are designed under the assumption that a long arm is used with two hands (hence the +2 penalty for not doing so) then I'd probably not at the end of the day, allow the double STR recoil comp. If this player is STR6 or higher, he'll get 4 RC from the single arm anyway. Perhaps a radical modification (which makes it useless for a normal useage) to the off hand gryromount would work.... but that'd be a GM thing.

The differences between the harness and the cyberarm ones are many, beyond simple concealability. The harness centres the gun compared to the whole body, since the weapon is mounted on a stabilised arm which extends from the body (think Drake and Vasquez in Aliens) and also counteracts lateral movement to an extent as well as providing vertical stability. The cyberarm version does the same but from behind the weapon, not in the same place and so must be much more specialised in order to do the job from an optimum position.

I've generated NPC's with twin cyberarm gyromounts, and they usually use them for SMG's or for taking the +2 on long arms.

The cyberarm is articulated, therefore the arm can be articulated such that the compensating force vectors can be directed along the line where the force is needed. Therefore both cyberarms can be used for RC. If one arm can be used then two or three or four can also be used.

Your example that the recoil compensation for a gyromount is directed along a straight line is flawed since you could be easily be shooting from the hip or prone or any other position other than with the arm straight out.

Right. The "rotational inertia" adds "virtual weight" to the weapon. So a 1 pound weight spinning fast enough adds a 10 pound underbarrel weight when you hold the gun. (very simplified example)
It is very much like "virtual weight" except that once it does start to move, it generates force in strange directions.
But I would think that adding a gyro for more "virtual weight" under the barrel (where your left hand is) would be similar to adding an underbarrel weight and thus reduce recoil.

I would consider anything from 4 to 6 points of RC from both arms reasonable, depending on the GM. But it should definitely help, even if it doesn't double.

None of those options save the shock pad are particularly concealable, nor is the weapon itself. If someone's loaded like that there's going to be body count anyway.

~J

True, I was just pointing out that with no recoil, the body count's going to go up faster, is all.

You could also give him the other arm at half effectiveness (probably rounding down, so 1RC).

IMHO he should not get the full rating of both. The arm is designed to work with the gun held in a particular way, the second hand is not holding it in that way so the device is not as effective. However giving nothing is kind of harsh

If it's trying to rotate the arm at all, it'll be resisted. I guess the question is, do we think the user can set the direction of spin?

~J

Combat pool. If the incoming heavy pistol shot only has one to two successes on it, it may take a second shot to down Joe.

~J

Hmm...

Shouldn't it be possible to develop a gun-mounted version of the cyberarm gyro-mount?

Just the gyro by itself, perhaps in the underbarrel slot?


-karma

You'd think so, yes. It'd probably shake a decent amount while spinning up, though, due to not being anchored to ~50+ kilos of flesh.

Regarding spin-up/spin-down times, nothing listed. Perhaps there are multiple gyros set to pass kinetic energy to each other, a sort of flywheel system. That'd be complex and still laggy, but more efficient than braking and then spinning up the same one in sequence.

~J

I would give him the FULL RC but as a side affect I think he would only be able to shoot at one target at a time. The old Gyro harness gave you modifiers for trying to turn your direction. My thinking would be that if he is using his off hand to 'aim' the weapon then it would be hard to turn the rifle once the gyro was engaged.

I would like to point out that actual miniguns do not have a spin-up time and will fire immediately when you depress the trigger, the idea that they have to spin up to speed before firing is pure fiction. (It can never be mentioned often enough, definitely not when someone actually mentions miniguns.)

I would give both. Having read the arguments hear I can firmly state I don’t know what the physics would do but then I have the same problem with the mage casting fireball. Based on cost rules and balance considerations I say it would be allowed.

Without resorting to giros I can usually eliminate recoil on a assault rifle anyway.

Ares alfa (so good you wouldn’t use anything else). 2 points integral, shock pads, customised grip gas vent 4. Ok 2 points left. We can load tracers every 5 rounds and solve that little problem.

Edward

Just stack 'em. 300,000 and 3 essence is totally balancing.

For the miniguns, theres a spinup time until you hit the full rate of fire, but the start shooting as soo as you pull the trigger. IIRC the M61 (20mm cannon used on US aircraft) has fully spun in in around .4 seconds during which time it will have fired around 20 or 30 rounds.

20-30? If it really fires that many times while spinning up, then you really can pretty much ignore it, because during the first ½ second of fire you're already getting 30-40 rounds. I ran some numbers back in this thread and ended up with 10 in the first 0.4 seconds, but I just used a progression which looked nice.

The main thing, though, is that you'd get more rounds out of the M61 Vulcan in 1 second after depressing the trigger/fire key than you'll get out of any minigun that's already spinned up to speed in SR in a full CT.

Hi omae!
My question is slightly off topic -
Excerption from "Lone Star"

Basically means they stole the design and used it as their own.

Okay, after reading some of the comments, I guess I've been convinced :o) But I'd still only allow 1 point to count from strength since that's factored in already (two arms for a two handed weapon, so using it one handed generates a +2). So I guess two gyromounts in arms with STR 6 would be 5RC. Perhaps.

Gryomounts, as in the cyberarm ones, require a simple action to extend from the arm and activate, so I guess it does have a small spin up time.

As miniguns don't have a spin up time, does anyone think removing that rule would be especially harmful?

Maybe do something funky like declaring that miniguns fire seven rounds on a cold fire.

~J

...better not comment, since the question is explicitly not about realism but about game balance. I wouldn't know, I haven't run a canon game of SR ever.

I like limiting such weapons in other ways, ways in which they are limited IRL. IRL, miniguns will absolutely tear apart any human beings in the area where they're fired at -- firing 6000rpm at a 10' x 10' area, that's 1 bullet per square foot per second. Yet I'm willing to bet you've never heard of criminals, terrorists or policemen, indeed anyone but the armed forces of certain nations, using miniguns. They're rare, very expensive, bulky, useless in most tactical situations, high-maintenance, etc.

Keeping those things in mind, I've no problems with allowing miniguns to kill people dead when (or if) someone actually gets his hands on one and can use it.

Especially since comping it is an absolute nightmare also.