Zen Shooter01
Sep 1 2005, 03:26 AM
It would have been nice if they had talked to an actual gunslinger.
I love that assault rifles get the same AP as handguns, and only +1 DV. The 7.62 mm rifle round will go through a brick at fifteen feet. The .45 ACP pistol cartridge will not.
And SMGs get less AP than handguns, even though one of the definitions of an SMG is an automatic weapon that fires pistol ammunition, so they should do very nearly the same damage before autofire modifiers.
Oh, and what crackhead decided that shotguns handle so much like sniper rifles that they fall under the same skill? My Winchester 1300 12-guage shotgun (and my other 1300 with the pistol grips, and my Mossberg 500, and my fr!gging double barrelled Stoeger) handle exactly nothing like my AR-15 on its bipod.
Oh, well...Raygun! Raygun! Where are you? Save us!
Zen Shooter01
Sep 1 2005, 04:07 AM
I also love those insignificant increases to damage for automatic fire.
Fox1
Sep 1 2005, 04:34 AM
Look at it this way, it's a great excuse for house rules.
Arethusa
Sep 1 2005, 04:39 AM
As I stopped following SR4 a while ago, please, please tell me you're talking about SR3. The idea that so many people could be so stupid four times in a row is simply too depressing for words.
Kagetenshi
Sep 1 2005, 04:43 AM
I must spread my crushing despair. It's SR4.
Also, EX-EX kills armored folk better than APDS. Spread the word.
~J
Marc Hameleers
Sep 1 2005, 08:02 AM
You know what...
I do not know much about Guns
What i do know it that the SR4 rules seem to be a lot more streamlined then SR3 and that we actually might use them ( instead of using another set of rules for the setting )
As far as the weapons not being realistic: It's about FUN guys.
ever played an rpg calld D&D? You can get hit with a sword 10 times and still be standing.....is that realistic? DO loads have people have fun?
Now, i know that some guys are never goonna like SR4 because they like SR3. That's cool, to each his own. BUt perhaps you can do that on a SR3 board, instead of telling us who like SR4 for the umptieth time that you are better then us because you like your rules more complecated?
Thank you, and good bye!
Marc
Sabosect
Sep 1 2005, 08:15 AM
Marc, if you like unrealistic rules that allow a person to be shot point-blank with a ballista and live with only a scratch, then go play DnD. Shadowrun is supposed to be about the real world with the addition of magic and advanced technology. In the real world, even with those additions, if I hit you upside the head with a broadsword, likely you'll die. And don't even get me started on your chances of surviving a ballista hit.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 1 2005, 08:29 AM
QUOTE (Zen Shooter01) |
I love that assault rifles get the same AP as handguns, and only +1 DV. The 7.62 mm rifle round will go through a brick at fifteen feet. The .45 ACP pistol cartridge will not. |
You are assuming about the calibers.
Not only those calibers are on decline in the world today... in the sixth world, there is no telling what systems have been adopted... but certainly not those that are over 100 years old.
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 08:36 AM
The .45 ACP round is 100 years old right now, and doing better than ever.
As long as pistols and rifles are used in roles at all similar to how they're used right now IRL, the ballistics of the bullets fired from them will also remain similar -- specialty weapons like the (flopped, for a reason) FN Five-seveN aside. This means rifles will continue to fire bullets which are smaller in diameter, more pointed, far more energetic and moving a lot faster than bullets fired from pistols; in other words, rifles will still rule in penetration, especially of armor.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 1 2005, 08:47 AM
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
The .45 ACP round is 100 years old right now, and doing better than ever. |
Which would it make how old in the sixth world?
As for 'better than ever' ... well, thats mainly a head thing.
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
As long as pistols and rifles are used in roles at all similar to how they're used right now IRL, the ballistics of the bullets fired from them will also remain similar |
As long, indeed.
Predictions are somewhat a moot point, as even the IRL developments that go towards things like the MP7 do not necessarily match the needs of the sixth world.
Wireknight
Sep 1 2005, 09:32 AM
Yeah, but even making the assumption that Shadowrun's weapons use some form of advanced super-ammunition, wouldn't that super-ammunition probably do more damage, given the preponderence of things like cyborgs, trolls, and other bulky paranormals, rather than less? I don't think guns are designed from the standpoint of doing less harm in future iterations. It's all about the kill.
blakkie
Sep 1 2005, 09:49 AM
QUOTE (Marc Hameleers) |
As far as the weapons not being realistic: It's about FUN guys. |
Yer' not frum 'round these parts, er ya?
Welcome to DSF.
Crusher Bob
Sep 1 2005, 10:04 AM
Having realistic weapons is not incomaptible with fun. Even if the weapons don't do 'realistic' levels of damage, the damage they do should be scaled correcty.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 1 2005, 10:23 AM
QUOTE (Wireknight) |
Yeah, but even making the assumption that Shadowrun's weapons use some form of advanced super-ammunition, wouldn't that super-ammunition probably do more damage, given the preponderence of things like cyborgs, trolls, and other bulky paranormals, rather than less? |
Indeed, which is the reason why I am not surprised to find handguns beefed up so insane that they nearly rival rifles.
QUOTE ("Crusher Bob") |
Having realistic weapons is not incomaptible with fun. Even if the weapons don't do 'realistic' levels of damage, the damage they do should be scaled correcty. |
Quite true, the scale of SR4 looks ways better than the one of SR3.
Crusher Bob
Sep 1 2005, 10:25 AM
Also, as damage level and penetration are seperate, it should be easy to modify. From first blush, most rifles should have an additional -2 to -4 DV (and/or adding some DV to the pistols).
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 11:17 AM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
Which would it make how old in the sixth world? |
About the same age as the 7.62x53mmR when it'll finally be phased out -- first came out in 1891, still used in all GPMGs in Russia and neighboring countries with no plans of replacing it. It'll be about 30 years older than the .45-70 is now -- adopted in 1873 and still used for hunting and as patrol guns alongside shotguns.
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
As for 'better than ever' ... well, thats mainly a head thing. |
What's a "head thing"? Right now smaller caliber handguns are taking a lot of heat and the .45 ACP is, AFAIK, selling much more than it was, say, 10 years ago.
If you mean they're selling better because of their "image", you're undoubtedly right to an extent. However, the modern scientifically-minded study of terminal ballistics largely supports calibers like it over the likes of 5.7x28mm. It reliably makes big, deep holes, so it kills people better.
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
As long, indeed. |
Everything we know about the 2060s and 2070s, from the art, the fiction, and the "facts" (as represented in the rules) strongly support the idea that pistols, SMGs, ARs, MGs, etc. are still used in the exact same way as they are used right now IRL. Pistols still look the same, they're still carried the same, they are still used for civilian self defense and as police sidearms.
Handguns are still used at the same ranges as IRL, which means they don't need any flatter trajectory than IRL, thus they don't need more velocity on that account. The slightly increased amount of body armor used by civilians is covered by the development and use of more effective armor piercing bullet designs, not by increasing velocity. Orks and trolls require large and heavy bullets (like, say, .451" and 230gr...) to penetrate deep and to make big holes. The limits imposed by recoil are still there, so big, heavy
and fast is right out for civilian self defense. How often do you see .460 S&W Magnums being employed for defense, compared to .45 ACP semi-autos?
And the same goes for rifles, or more specifically assault rifles. They still look the same and they're used for the exact same thing -- something tells me they're going to be using rounds with rather similar external ballistics as the ones we have now.
IRL, assault rifles outpenetrate pistols by such a margin that discussions like these are not even funny. Even the trusty old AK-47 is going to handily outpenetrate the most insane of handguns when it comes to body armor -- a standard 7.62x39mm round is going to put 45% more kinetic energy per unit of area than even a
.460 S&W magnum, by far the king of handguns in this (quite limited) field. The 5.56x45mm deposits
4.6 times as much kinetic energy per unit of area as the .50 Action Express. When we get down to reasonable self-defense pistol calibers, the difference gets even bigger. This is why light, flexible body armor vests can defeat nearly all handgun threats one can face on city streets, but you need thick, heavy and rigid inserts to stand a chance against rifles.
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
Predictions are somewhat a moot point, as even the IRL developments that go towards things like the MP7 do not necessarily match the needs of the sixth world. |
Developments like the MP7 don't even match the needs of the real world. I've not heard of it being adopted by any military or police force nor have I seen it in action anywhere.
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
Indeed, which is the reason why I am not surprised to find handguns beefed up so insane that they nearly rival rifles. |
We could beef up handguns to insane levels even now -- witness the .460 and .500 S&W magnums. But there's no point in making them similar to assault rifles. Assault rifles fire small bullets at extreme velocities because they have to be accurate and effective at ranges beyond 200 meters, sometimes up to 500 or so meters. The effective range of any handgun in combat is reduced to less than 100 meters because of the inherent unsteadiness (one point of support compared to three for a rifle with a stock).
Because handguns are made for killing (meta)humans at short ranges and are inherently short-ranged and inaccurate, they benefit from using big, heavy, and (relatively) slow bullets. Big and heavy to kill people, slow to reduce the recoil and increase the accuracy of follow-up shots.
Critias
Sep 1 2005, 11:32 AM
Kudos on the long post that nailed your point home to those of us who already knew it -- it's safe to assume those few "ignorance-is-bliss-so-I-love-SR4" knuckleheads still reading this thread ain't gonna bother goin' over all that, though, Austere. And if they do, they ain't gonna understand it.
*sigh*
So, right. Firearms. Yet another thing SR4 could have fixed, and didn't. Add it to my list. Four times in a row, baby.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 1 2005, 11:34 AM
QUOTE ("Austere Emancipator") |
This is why light, flexible body armor vests can defeat nearly all handgun threats one can face on city streets, but you need thick, heavy and rigid inserts to stand a chance against rifles. |
And there's the reason why in a world, where armor of both kinds (not even considering awakend stuff) is far more widespread, this assumption
QUOTE ("Austere Emancipator") |
Everything we know about the 2060s and 2070s, from the art, the fiction, and the "facts" (as represented in the rules) strongly support the idea that pistols, SMGs, ARs, MGs, etc. are still used in the exact same way as they are used right now IRL. |
is a bit far stretched.
QUOTE ("Critias") |
it's safe to assume those few "ignorance-is-bliss-so-I-love-SR4" knuckleheads still reading this thread ain't gonna bother goin' over all that, though, Austere. And if they do, they ain't gonna understand it. |
Nice try, for a /me too.
So its safe to assume those few "ignorance-is-bliss-so-I-love-my-homebrew-stuff" eggheads still reading this thread ain't gonna bother goin' over that? And if they do, they ain't gonna understand it?
Birdy
Sep 1 2005, 12:13 PM
QUOTE (Sabosect) |
Marc, if you like unrealistic rules that allow a person to be shot point-blank with a ballista and live with only a scratch, then go play DnD. Shadowrun is supposed to be about the real world with the addition of magic and advanced technology. In the real world, even with those additions, if I hit you upside the head with a broadsword, likely you'll die. And don't even get me started on your chances of surviving a ballista hit. |
Agreed but:
Why the heck are you playing Shadowrun? GURPS, Milleniums End, Cyberpunk I could understand but something as unrealistic as Shadowrun? Where you can (unless houseruled) miss trying to blow your brains out and armored underwear protects against headshots?
Birdy
Adarael
Sep 1 2005, 12:44 PM
It's all about the feel of the game, really.
Sure, Shadowrun - in any incarnation - could easily have guns that, when you are hit by them, will either kill you outright or mangle your organs so they never heal right. It would be easy to do so - and in fact, I know many of you have done so.
But for Shadowrun to *work*, as a game, in the idiom it created for itself, one of two things must happen. Either you must scale down the power of the nastier guns so that runners have a halfway decent chance against security guards that pack them, or you must scale up the effectiveness of their armor against those weapons. Or, I suppose, you could do both. I don't mean say I want to play that game, or that I want to play the other game. What I mean to say is that recognize that an RPG wherein a gunfight lasts 3 minutes, with maybe 5% of the bullets striking and incapacitating whatever they strike... Well, it isn't how Shadowrun stories are told by canon, is it?
On the other hand, Twilight 2000 stories....
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 01:02 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
And there's the reason why in a world, where armor of both kinds (not even considering awakend stuff) is far more widespread, this assumption ["[...] pistols, SMGs, ARs, MGs, etc. are still used in the exact same way as they are used right now IRL."] is a bit far stretched. |
I don't get it. I keep trying, and failing.
Body armor or not, pistols in SR still look like the pistols we have IRL, they are shot from the same stance, they weigh the same (after lbs-kg-deflation in SR3), they have the same range, they relate to other weapons the same, etc. etc. They are obviously used in the exact same way: for civilian self defense and as law enforcement sidearms, as well as occasionally as military sidearms (or criminally, in a role identical to RL).
Because they are still used for self-defense by human beings, and nobody has manage to break Newton's third law of motion yet (at least in such a way as to be feasible in firearms design), handguns in SR are still about as powerful as their RL equivalents. Since they still cannot be effectively employed at long ranges, there's still no overriding need to massively increase muzzle velocities or to reduce bullet diameters at the cost of terminal effectiveness against humans. On the other hand, larger metahumans might drive towards the larger caliber end, towards the 10mm Autos and .44 Magnums, to ensure deep penetration of tissue and large wound diameter at some cost to comfort and accuracy.
Tinkering with the specifications of the cartridge in order to improve penetration of armor, like going for extremely high velocities with light bullets or even necking down by a significant factor, would be counter-productive to making big, deep wounds. Instead, when body armor is a problem, bullets designs can be used to defeat it -- right now, Russian steel-core 9x19mm AP rounds fired from the
GSh-18 defeat NIJ level III rigid armor and will still produce permanent wound cavities larger and deeper than what a 5.7x28 AP/FMJ is capable of. Because of "little details" like these, weapons like the MP7, the FN Five-seveN, and even the FN P90 aren't exactly wide-spread even potential threats might well include the opposition wearing body armor.
And it wouldn't matter even if by some freaky reason (like the military and LE bureaucracies of several major nations going completely mad at the same time) necked-down cartridges like 5.7x28mm became the standard for handguns. Because of the inherent limitations of handguns, pistols in such calibers still are and will be much less powerful, much less lethal, and penetrate much less than assault rifles. 62gr @ 3025fps for 1260ft-lbs vs. 31gr @ 2133fps for 313ft-lbs is hardly a contest.
In other words, Heavy Pistol is still just a heavy pistol, and will be using special armor piercing rounds ("APDS Ammunition") to defeat armor when necessary. With armor piercing ammunition, the "Heavy Pistol" might equal or exceed the armor penetration achieved by an "Assault Rifle" firing FMJ, but, until there's a massive technology shift in ranged weaponry, using similar bullet designs rifles will out-penetrate pistols by a huge margin.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 1 2005, 01:42 PM
QUOTE ("Austere Emancipator") |
I don't get it. I keep trying, and failing. |
Quite obvious.
First, you keep looking at the wrong part of the SR4 scale for what you class a normal civilian handguns - that would be rather light pistols.
Second, for this market, legality is an issue, too - which is the point where one can forget about amorpiercing rounds.
So if it is a world where big, ugly monsters in body armor roam the streets, trying to rape/eat your family, this is a world where a market for a few completely overpowered handgun designs with cartridges specifically created for penetrating armor while being legal, might very well exist.
wagnern
Sep 1 2005, 01:54 PM
Perhaps it is a intentional effort to maintain the game's flavor. An attempt to get the Rambos of the SR world to lay off the assault rifles and such in favor for lighter weapons?
Linear scaling may not be approprate. Perhaps lowering the weapon's damage and Armor penetration so that the heavier weapons are not an garrented end to a charictors career (if not life) would result is light weapons that are useless.
Zen Shooter01
Sep 1 2005, 02:17 PM
My original post was not a plea for much more complicated rules. In fact, I find the combat rules to be pretty okay.
The actual physics of shooting are so complicated that no RPG system will ever want to model them with even 70% accuracy. And that's cool.
The actual process of me, in real life, selecting and tweaking my gear, is a lot more complicated than any edition of SR has ever modeled, and it takes into account a lot more factors than ammo capacity and caliber. And that's cool too.
And the actual damage codes in SR4 are so retarded, it hurts me bad. And one of the reasons it hurts me so bad is that it could have been very easily done a whole lot better. Like this --
Heavy pistol 5P, -1 AP
SMG same as HP
Assault Rifle 7P, -2 AP
And while there will be changes to firearms technology in the future, the one thing those changes are certain not to do is make guns less effective.
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 02:21 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
First, you keep looking at the wrong part of the SR4 scale for what you class a normal civilian handguns - that would be rather light pistols. |
I guess you missed me pointing out that the 10mm Auto and .44 Magnum equivalents would become somewhat more common, or the comparison of the armor penetration potential of assault rifles vs. the most powerful handgun magnum rounds ever created. The looks, the weights, the ranges, or the relations to other weapons of the extremely powerful handguns have changed no more than those of the lighter ones, and anything I say in the above messages goes for both the lowest and highest extremes of the handgun power curve.
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
So if it is a world where big, ugly monsters in body armor roam the streets, trying to rape/eat your family, this is a world where a market for a few completely overpowered handgun designs with cartridges specifically created for penetrating armor while being legal, might very well exist. |
If you must be able to carry the weapon concealed in public and may face a variety of threats, only one (and rather rare) of which is huge motherfuckers in body armor, then going for an extremely powerful handgun capable of solving that problem "head-on" is a bad fucking idea.
A handgun which could defeat any flexible body armor with non-armor piercing, full-caliber ammunition and still cause a large enough wound cavity to be considered adequate for defense against trolls. You'd need something far more powerful than even the abovementioned .460 and .500 S&W magnums, and it'd have to be chambered in a handgun 1/3rd the size. The recoil would be horrible, more than enough to damage your hands and your wrists, and forget about any follow-up shots. The market for such weapons would be niche to say the least.
If concealability is not a problem and huge armored motherfuckers are a threat, then there's no reason not to simply go with a rifle. This is certainly the case for home and perhaps also car defense, and it's not as if carrying a full-size .500 S&W is much more comfortable anyhow.
If you went with a much less powerful, very small bore handgun which could only penetrate the armor but not be worth much against trolls nor cause very serious wounds through that armor, you'd be much better off using a larger caliber gun (thus increasing lethality against unarmored opponents manyfold) and shooting any armored opponent in the limbs and the head. And, again, a handgun of this type would be the 5.7x28mm-equivalent of the SR world and would still not even come close to penetrating armor (or anything else) as well as an assault rifle.
If, on the other hand, you went with the approach that someone has managed to make Newton's 3rd go away in the 6th World, then you can bet your ass assault rifles would be in on that goodness just as much as pistols would. The relation would still be the same, since rifles can be made to tolerate higher pressures, can use larger ammunition, are still required to be accurate and effective at far greater ranges, etc., etc., all of which support making them (or having them, as a side-effect) penetrate far better than handguns.
Hell Hound
Sep 1 2005, 02:26 PM
I'm a self confessed novice when it comes to firearms so bear with me.
Rotbart van Dainig is saying that with the new and larger threats the sixth world imposes there exists a market for larger and more powerfull handguns to counter that threat. Handguns whose power would be a close match for that of an assault rifle round, and given there is over sixty years in which to research that new power handgun its not unfeasable to say it will exist in the 2070's.
Austere Emancipator is saying that even accepting there is a market for more power in 'self defense' handguns in the sixth world the laws of physics are interfering.
The modern day handgun monsters like the Smith and Wesson .460 Magnum (and the Desert Eagle would fall into this category as well?) are already pushing the limits of tolerable recoil. In other words a handgun with more power in it than any of the current models would not be feasable, the recoil would be too great for accurate use. In addition to this assault rifles still outperform even the modern day monster handguns in terms of penetration, and there is no reason that power difference should diminish. So any leap in technology that lets handguns become more powerfull should also make assault rifles equally more powerfull (just as the regular citizen now has to worry about troll muggers, the military has to worry about dragons and other oversized beasties).
Have I got the two sides of the argument right there?
Lord Ben
Sep 1 2005, 02:29 PM
I can give up some game balance for realism.
Overwatch
Sep 1 2005, 02:30 PM
Ahem...Zen Shooter
10mm to .40 anyone?
Crusher Bob
Sep 1 2005, 02:33 PM
Well, there is also the component of game design involved here. From a game design perspective, we may not want shoulder arms to go through armor like butter, but they should at least penetrate armor better than pistols do.
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 02:48 PM
QUOTE (Hell Hound) |
Handguns whose power would be a close match for that of an assault rifle round, and given there is over sixty years in which to research that new power handgun its not unfeasable to say it will exist in the 2070's. |
As I have been trying to explain, there's nothing stopping people from simply making more powerful handguns even now. In fact, people are making such insanely powerful handguns.
In terms of kinetic energy, the .460 S&W Magnum revolver beats the M16A2 by almost 100%, yet the 5.56x45mm likelyoutpenetrates it because the bullet is so much smaller in diameter, different in shape, and deposits that energy so much faster. The .500 S&W (8-3/8" barrel) is about 1.6x as energetic as the 7.62x39mm out of an AK-47, yet the 7.62x39mm penetrates better because of the same reasons as above. To make handguns that penetrate better than assault rifles, you have to take the "Bigger and More Powerful" approach to ridiculous extents.
And that difference in penetration was never intentional. It springs from the fact that rifles have to be accurate at very long ranges, while handguns just have to kill people at short range. Changes in the type of target have so far made no overall difference in the calibers used in these weapons, only in the types of bullets used. Additionally, the continuing spread of body armor in the military as well as the society in general has so far had significant impact on the types of bullets used in pistols and SMGs by militaries and LEOs, excluding Russia (who can't really afford to make such designs widespread) and some small European units.
QUOTE (Hell Hound) |
The modern day handgun monsters like the Smith and Wesson .460 Magnum (and the Desert Eagle would fall into this category as well?) are already pushing the limits of tolerable recoil. |
In their RL incarnations, more like the limits of tolerable size. As huge and heavy as they are, they do not necessarily have punishing recoil. If they were small and light enough to pass as feasible combat handguns (which would be necessary for people to opt for them over shotguns, rifles and carbines), then the recoil would be on the limits of human tolerance. I've read that the small, light-weight .44 Magnums are some of the most punishing guns to shoot. A "combat .460" would be like that x2.5.
QUOTE (Hell Hound) |
Have I got the two sides of the argument right there? |
You well may.
Hell Hound
Sep 1 2005, 02:55 PM
So it's not that Assault Rifles should do more damage than Heavy Pistols it's that Assault Rifles should have better armour penetration than Heavy Pistols. Thats your concern with the SR4 rules on firearms, yes?
And for the record I was not stating my own opinions in my previous post, I was trying to see if I correctly understood yours and van Dainig's arguments.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 1 2005, 02:56 PM
QUOTE ("Austere Emancipator") |
I guess you missed me pointing out that the 10mm Auto and .44 Magnum equivalents would become somewhat more common, |
Not at all, those would simply be the normal Heavy Pistols in SR4, which are still less common than Light Pistols.
Funny thing, none of those really rivals rifles.
QUOTE ("Austere Emancipator") |
If you must be able to carry the weapon concealed in public and may face a variety of threats, only one (and rather rare) of which is huge motherfuckers in body armor, then going for an extremely powerful handgun capable of solving that problem "head-on" is a bad fucking idea. |
Indeed, which is exactly why I never said it would be a good idea.
It's just an emotional choice.
QUOTE ("Austere Emancipator") |
A handgun which could defeat any flexible body armor with non-armor piercing, full-caliber ammunition and still cause a large enough wound cavity to be considered adequate for defense against trolls. You'd need something far more powerful than even the abovementioned .460 and .500 S&W magnums, and it'd have to be chambered in a handgun 1/3rd the size. The recoil would be horrible, more than enough to damage your hands and your wrists, and forget about any follow-up shots. The market for such weapons would be niche to say the least. |
As there is only one handgun of this kind presented in SR4, I don't see a big difference in opinion.
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 03:01 PM
QUOTE (Hell Hound) |
And for the record I was not stating my own opinions in my previous post, I was trying to see if I correctly understood yours and van Dainig's arguments. |
Yeah, I just got carried away with something else and finished the message a bit short. The point of the first half of the message is to say that if that is indeed what Rotbart van Dainig is saying, then he's just plain wrong.
QUOTE (Hell Hound) |
So it's not that Assault Rifles should do more damage than Heavy Pistols it's that Assault Rifles should have better armour penetration than Heavy Pistols. |
Depends of course on how, exactly, "Heavy Pistols" are defined: if they're at or above .44 Magnum-level (which I personally do not believe they are) while ARs remain closer to 5.56x45mm-level, then you could definitely argue HPs should do more damage than ARs. If, on the other hand, it's more like comparing 10mm Auto to 6.8x43mm Remington, then ARs should probably do as much or more damage with standard ammunition, and potentially a lot more with the right ammo.
To be fair, my concerns with SR rules on firearms are numerous and varied.
Hell Hound
Sep 1 2005, 03:01 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
QUOTE ("Austere Emancipator") | A handgun which could defeat any flexible body armor with non-armor piercing, full-caliber ammunition and still cause a large enough wound cavity to be considered adequate for defense against trolls. You'd need something far more powerful than even the abovementioned .460 and .500 S&W magnums, and it'd have to be chambered in a handgun 1/3rd the size. The recoil would be horrible, more than enough to damage your hands and your wrists, and forget about any follow-up shots. The market for such weapons would be niche to say the least. |
As there is only one handgun of this kind presented in SR4, I don't see a big difference in opinion.
|
Perhaps the key sentence in there is
"The recoil would be horrible, more than enough to damage your hands and your wrists, and forget about any follow-up shots."
So, does the one gun in the SR4 BBB mention anything about dislocating your wrist when you fire? Is it a Semi Auto or are you only allowed one shot per round? If neither of these drawbacks are listed for the gun then that's probably where the opinions differ.
Clyde
Sep 1 2005, 03:11 PM
[/I]You know, the SR3 assault rifle requires three more points of ballistic armor to fully resist than a heavy pistol (both firing standard ammo). I'd call that better penetration.
And if I wanted realistic firearms rules, I'd start a real long ways from assault rifle penetration. I'd start with that silly problem that you hit almost everything you aim at in any incarnation of Shadowrun. Fact is, most shots fired in a gunfight miss their targets. Even championship winning target shooters miss like crazy. SAS commandos miss. Everybody misses, no matter how high their skill level. It's unavoidable. In an average shootout, only one shot in three connects. And that is at a range of 21 feet or less. Screw armor penetration. If you gunheads [I]fix the assault rifles, but keep your target range mentality for the rest of the rules you've just screwed the game sideways.
I'm only hoping SR4's resisted combat rolls will give this game a chance of coming closer to a realistic hit/miss ratio than any other version of Shadowrun ever has.
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 03:12 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
Funny thing, none of those really rivals rifles. |
.44 Magnum loadings can generate ~1000ft-lbs of kinetic energy from a 6" barreled revolver, compared to ~1260ft-lbs for an M16A2. In those terms of "power", it certainly comes close. And if I had to choose either a .44 Magnum or a 5.56x45mm to shoot someone (unarmored) trying to kill me, it'd be a tough choice. I'd say it "rivals" some rifles.
Like I've said before, the .460 S&W and .500 S&W you left out from the quote are both far more powerful than any modern assault rifle, in terms of just about any formula currently used to estimate the lethality, "stopping power", or whatever else. Yet with full-caliber, non-armor piercing ammunition, they still don't penetrate armor as well as assault rifles.
QUOTE (Clyde) |
Screw armor penetration. If you gunheads fix the assault rifles, but keep your target range mentality for the rest of the rules you've just screwed the game sideways. |
As it happens, I made plenty of changes to the way ranged (and melee) combat played out in SR3, which lead (among other things) to a lot more misses than canon games would have enjoyed, I guess -- I've never actually played a canon game of SR3. I've not had the chance to tinker with SR4, it has not reached Finland yet.
This is just one thing I'd like to tinker with, and since it happens to be the topic of this thread, I thought I might as well discuss it.
Crusher Bob
Sep 1 2005, 03:13 PM
Once again, from a game design prespective:
Almost all targets of interest to shadowrunners will be wearing armor.
In SR4 a point of DV is roughtly worth 3 points of armor penetration.
If heavy pistols did, say, 5 (0) and assault rifles did, say, 5 (-6) (comparable to DV 7 (0)), while this would not be completely realistic, it might be 'as much realism as your game design contraints allow'.
SR2 and 3 had this completely bolloxed up, in that a light automatic rifle chambered in 10mm auto (or whatever heavy pistols were chambered in) was a superior killing tool compared to a rifle chambered in 7.62 x39 (or whatever). In that it both produced greater wound cavities and penetrated armor better. This is both bad game deisgn and bad 'realism'.
[edit]
The high miss rate in gunfights probably has several large psycological factors as well. The data I've seen os far suggests that 'psycological training' (for combat) can greatly reduce miss chance. The real problem is that no game has attempted to represent the psycological difficulties of combat so the combat miss chances they tend to produce will tend to be disporportionalty small. As writing a good set of rules to cover this (and explaining why we bothered to put these rules in the game) would be quite difficult.
[/edit]
Hell Hound
Sep 1 2005, 03:13 PM
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) |
QUOTE (Hell Hound) | So it's not that Assault Rifles should do more damage than Heavy Pistols it's that Assault Rifles should have better armour penetration than Heavy Pistols. |
Depends of course on how, exactly, "Heavy Pistols" are defined: if they're at or above .44 Magnum-level (which I personally do not believe they are) while ARs remain closer to 5.56x45mm-level, then you could definitely argue HPs should do more damage than ARs. If, on the other hand, it's more like comparing 10mm Auto to 6.8x43mm Remington, then ARs should probably do as much or more damage with standard ammunition, and potentially a lot more with the right ammo. To be fair, my concerns with SR rules on firearms are numerous and varied. |
It sounds like it would be difficult to provide a single realistic damage code for a gun when it seems to be the ammunition that makes all the difference.
Is there even a 'regular' ammunition load for assault rifles? I would assume the military would keep a single size round just to keep the logistics of supplying an entire army as simple as possible. But what about outside the military? And here I demonstrate my extensive lack of knowledge in firearms because I must also ask the question, how widespread are Assault Rifles outside the military? Do they see use by Special Forces units, police, SWAT, crazy surivalist types hiding up in the hills?, paranoid home defense focused civilians?
Lindt
Sep 1 2005, 03:21 PM
So basicly we should sack what (crap) guns are in the book and make our own? I could do that.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 1 2005, 03:22 PM
QUOTE ("Austere Emancipator") |
And if I had to choose either a .44 Magnum or a 5.56x45mm to shoot someone (unarmored) trying to kill me, it'd be a tough choice. I'd say it "rivals" some rifles. |
Which would make a Heavy Pistol, not a Light.
..nonetheless I was talking about SR4 scale - did you had already the possibility to compare?
Crusher Bob
Sep 1 2005, 03:23 PM
QUOTE (Hell Hound @ Sep 1 2005, 11:13 PM) |
...
I must also ask the question, how widespread are Assault Rifles outside the military? Do they see use by Special Forces units, police, SWAT, crazy surivalist types hiding up in the hills?, paranoid home defense focused civilians? |
The short version is yes to almost all of the above. Special forces units tend to use full sized assault rifles or 'shortened' assault rifles (these days called carbines); both regular police and SWAT units occasionally use them, those both of these forces are typically better off with sub-machine guns, as the ranges they will be shooting at will be under 100 meters in almost all circumstances; Just about everybody in some parts of the world has an AK or an AK knock-off; and there are plenty of 'de-mobilized' military men who keep their service weapons; or when buying a weapon in civilian life, get the weapon they trained with.
The standard round for assault rifles in military use is a full metal jacket (FMJ) round, which may or may not have a harder than lead core (steel, etc) for better armor penetration.
In civilian usage, the rounds will almost creatainly be lead cored and may have an exposed lead tip rather than a fully enclosing jacket.
mmu1
Sep 1 2005, 03:27 PM
QUOTE (Clyde) |
I'm only hoping SR4's resisted combat rolls will give this game a chance of coming closer to a realistic hit/miss ratio than any other version of Shadowrun ever has. |
Prepare to be disappointed, then, except at very low skill levels.
The SR4 rules make it easier than ever for highly skilled characters to almost never miss, and dodging has gotten a lot harder unless you give up actions to do nothing but dodge.
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 03:27 PM
QUOTE (Hell Hound) |
Is there even a 'regular' ammunition load for assault rifles? |
There is indeed. Right now for the US Armed Forces that's the M855 5.56x45mm FMJ cartridge, and that (or something very similar, like the M193) is used in most specops units, LEOs, crazy survivalists and paranoid home defense people.
Unfortunately, that's one of the weirdest cartridges around. To fully appreciate the weirdness of the 5.56x45mm, read
this. The same effects are at play for most non-military rifle ammunition, except for the solids meant for big and dangerous game hunting.
Caliber (which doesn't exist in SR...) aside, the bullet type of "Regular ammunition" is rather simple to define for assault rifles, since FMJs are not likely to go away any time soon. How it should relate to the "Regular ammunition" of handguns is much more difficult -- FMJs are hardly ever used for combat handguns out of the military, and few to none of the freaky fragmention-related properties rifle rounds may or may not exhibit are shared by pistol rounds.
In short, terminal ballistics is a really complex field, but there still are plenty of easy generalizations which will come in very handy when simulating reality, such as in an RPG. One such generalization, and as good as generalizations get, is that rifles penetrate better than pistols.
Kagetenshi
Sep 1 2005, 03:29 PM
QUOTE (mmu1) |
The SR4 rules make it easier than ever for highly skilled characters to almost never miss, and dodging has gotten a lot harder unless you give up actions to do nothing but dodge. |
And to paraphrase Seiler, if you keep trading simple actions for your opponent's entire turn you can't lose.
~J
Arethusa
Sep 1 2005, 03:33 PM
QUOTE (Lord Ben) |
I can give up some game balance for realism. |
You don't really need to. The concept of balance is an absolute contrivance of artifice. No one bitches about balance in real life. You have access to what you have. In a fight. you cowboy up and you deal with it.
QUOTE (Hell Hound) |
So it's not that Assault Rifles should do more damage than Heavy Pistols it's that Assault Rifles should have better armour penetration than Heavy Pistols. Thats your concern with the SR4 rules on firearms, yes? |
True to a point. But when you're look at, say, that mainstay assault rifle caliber in the America, 5.56x45mm, you'll notice that the bullets are, by handgun standards, tiny and very light. A 9mm handgun round is quite a bit bigger around, and easily twice as heavy. The change in velocity, among other things, between a rifle round and a pistol round has a tremendous impact on terminal behavior. They're comparable within a certain scope and within a reasonably necessary degree of abstraction, but there are a lot of significant differences.
Austere Emancipator
Sep 1 2005, 03:41 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
Ligh Pistols? or Medium Pistols? |
Uhh, what? You already agreed that a .44 Magnum could represent a "normal Heavy Pistol". What is this comment related to?
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
..nonetheless I was talking about SR4 scale - did you had already the possibility to compare? |
Again, I do not understand what you're getting at. I don't have the book, but I'm going with the assumption that Zen Shooter01 is not lying above and that Heavy Pistols do 5P (-1 AP) while Assault Rifles do 6P (-1 AP).
Crusher Bob
Sep 1 2005, 03:43 PM
QUOTE (Arethusa) |
...
You don't really need to. The concept of balance is an absolute contrivance of artifice. No one bitches about balance in real life. You have access to what you have. In a fight. you cowboy up and you deal with it.
... |
Actually, 'game balance' is a very important consideration when creating the rules for a game as you may not intend to model the real world.
Allowing Mr. Alien Farmer to bounce bullets off his skin is obviously unrealistic, however if you are designing a particular sort of super hero game, then this is a requrement.
So we must design the game with as much of a nod to realism as we can, while still keeping to our game desgn contraints. SR is generally baised toward having survivable gunfights. Having fully realistic weapons damage would not do, but the game can still be biased toward survivability while still not insluting anyone who knows much about real guns.
Lord Ben
Sep 1 2005, 03:43 PM
Nato uses typically the .223 rem or 5.57? cartridge, warsaw pact and other "commies" would be the 7.62x39mm. That's what the AK-47's and Chinese SKS both shoot. Those are typically machine gun rounds.
Bigger scoped rifles or older rifles (some marines in Iraq are using the M14), as well as the M60 used the .30-06 round. Russian bigger rifles use the 7.62x54R round.
Mostly it's standardized with enough variety to make it interesting.
2070 body armor might well be equally protective of pistol and rifle rounds. Perhaps layered stuff that equally protects against fast and light or heavy and wide rounds? I'm not going to quibble.
If I had the choice of being shot with no armor with a .45 or shot with no armor with a .223 I'd take the smaller rifle round any time.
One thing to keep in mind is that the .223 moves fast and is small so it passes through armor easier. But it also passes through flesh easier without slowing down as much. This means lots of the energy is wasted out the back of the target. A round that stops in side means the body needs to absorb all that shock. And unless you bleed to death it's the shock that kills you.
One if the biggest reasons we use the .223 instead of the .30-06 is that we can carry something like 2x as much ammo for the same weight.
Game balance wise I think the SR4 system works fine though. When you 3 rnd burst with an automatic weapons the damage IS a lot higher than pistols.
mmu1
Sep 1 2005, 03:48 PM
QUOTE (Lord Ben) |
Nato uses typically the .223 rem or 5.57? cartridge, warsaw pact and other "commies" would be the 7.62x39mm. That's what the AK-47's and Chinese SKS both shoot. Those are typically machine gun rounds. |
I'm going to enjoy watching you get savaged by the local "gun nuts".
Crusher Bob
Sep 1 2005, 03:52 PM
Mmm, blood in the water...
QUOTE (Ed Simons) |
... No, there was no period at the end of that sentence, but that's not the real problems of that description. If I were to describe Catholicism with the same level of accuracy, I'd have to say -
"Catholic priests - called nuns - revere the saints. Nuns are traditionally, but not always, female" ...
|