Topic: Assault vs. Hunting Rifles

[Lord Damian]

Take a look at the picture at the top of this page:

http://www.thegunzone.com/people/lahti.html

Lahti 20mm rifle. . . .imagine the maneuver penalty. . . .

Yup, that'd be the monster i shot.  you do NOT shoot it standing, i'll tell ya that.  it's got 2 bipods, one of which has skis because you're supposed to CRAWL with the bloody thing.....

Lord Damian

[Lord Damian]

I shoot high cal long range silhouette/target shooting, so most of my experiance is with the big boys anyway (my rifles a .50 cal, and i used to regularly shoot a 20mm), and yes, the 50 cal dosn't really notice little things like walls and engine blocks much, and the 20 mike just turns things inside out, BUT, that wasn't what we were talking about.    still fun to discuss though.  Over in the base HARP discussion i had the rough workings of a design-your-own system for powder guns, though it would work with a few additions for most modern firearms.

Lord Damian

LD,
 A side note I use Traveller 3's Fire Fusion and Steel for designing weapons and it is very accurate but cumbersom. Also thier is no direct way to translate it to HARP unless you use Arms Law and RMSS: Firearms Law. AL:FA has a table in the front for weapon energy to table #. FF&S also has rules for craetion of guass weapons and all sorts of stuff.

MDC

I'll have to pick it up, then.  I've got pretty good resources for getting old books.  most of my friends are old gamers who don't play much anymore.

I'm giving serious considerations to using Stuff! from BTRC, or working out 3g3 conversions.

Lord Damian

[Mungo]

As far as I understand Nick's previous comments, very little.

Technically a 5.56 round is a 5.56 round per the rules as is.

...

Hi,

But what do you think about Critical sizes? Does a hunting rifle have a higher Critical size than an Assault weapon? This based on the assumption that they have on average a bigger caliber? Or do you think damage in rule terms is the same?

BR
Juergen

[Marc R]

I think Hunting and Military weapons are the same calibers. . .assault rifles are usually light end rifles, but not always. Though this is usually a 5.56mm to 7.62mm comparrison, you can also have a heavy assault rifle firing 7.62mm rounds, and a .223 (5.56mm) hunting rifle, reversing the "Which is heavier" question. . . .they both cover essentially the same range of round sizes.

The major difference is the soft lead hunting round vs the full metal jacket round.

A lot depends on what nick selects to be the standard round, and in later books compares to it. (I guess you could just declare up front that all military weapons like assault rifles use FMJ and are rifled to use them, and make the mods now, while all civilian hunting weapons use soft lead rounds, and include the mods for that now. . .and leave the issues of hollow point and magnum for later.)

(If nick says FMJ is the standard, than SL hunting weapons should get a range and damage boost, and an armor penalty. If he says SL is the standard, then the FMJ rounds should get a range penalty, damage reduction and an armor bonus. The answer to your question is dependant on which is the standard.)

Since nick said he didn't want to get into specialized ammo variations, my call would be "No difference".

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

But what do you think about Critical sizes? Does a hunting rifle have a higher Critical size than an Assault weapon? This based on the assumption that they have on average a bigger caliber? Or do you think damage in rule terms is the same?

My initial reaction would be to say "No". This is HARP SF, emphasis on the HARP part. That means it is focused more on High Adventure, than it is on micro-managing every little detail or factor involved. Yes, there WILL be some minor hand-waving and rounding things off, but again, this is HARP, not Rolemaster. The idea is to have something workable across the spectrum that is still relatively uncomplicated.

From what I am seeing of this discussion, it is only attempting to add in extra levels of detail, which means extra levels of complication, which is not something that is wanted for the game.

[Mungo]

From what I am seeing of this discussion, it is only attempting to add in extra levels of detail, which means extra levels of complication, which is not something that is wanted for the game.

Hi,

Actually that's not what I am attempting. I am attempting to find out whether for a Hunting Rifle/Laser/Blaster a Critical Size one higher than for an Assault Rifle/Laser/Blaster can be justified.

To me this looks both more realistic and nicer in rule terms, as it would mean that there is a weapon for each Critical Size available, and that the Burt capability of a 2-H burst capable weapon (i.e. Assault ...) is balanced by a higher range and Critical of the corresponding 2-H single fire weapon (i.e. Hunting ...).

BR
Juergen

[chk]

Harder bullet will penetrate armor better, but mushrooms less, resulting in more "clean" through-and-through hits and less of a little-hole-in-big-hole-out result. (This is probably the major reason for the differences in inflicted wounds discussed above.)

This is a requirement of the Geneva Conventions, isn't it? Specifically, rounds designed to mushroom were "outlawed"? (My memory is a little hazy; apologies if I've got this wrong

[Marc R]

Along with shotguns and other "maiming" weapons. . .for whatever that's worth.

I suspect the fact that FMJ rounds take longer to foul the barrel ends up being the actual reason, especially for guns intended to fire full auto. (FMJ guns foul mostly with propellant residue, while SL guns tend to foul with lead also.). considering the realities of war, a gun that needs less cleaning, and is less likely to malfuntion if not cleaned, probably provided more motivation than the GC. (Especially considering that all those GC nations have combat model shotguns in inventory.)