Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert
The Mauser MG 151/20 has a range of 1200/6900, and it's a rather low-powered 20mm cannon, and the M252 has 2400/3300 and is a low-powered 25mm cannon. That a fairly powerful 25mm grenade launcher has Max 2200 is quite reasonable.
|
Those are machine guns, and they lighter of the two weighs over 90 lbs. I'd hesitate to call either "low-powered cannon" or to use them as a useful basline for the range of a projectile launched from a 1.5 lb weapons system.
As an interesting point of comparison, when I look at the 40mm grenade launcher, range and accuracy drop dramatically, and choosing between a Payload riffle and a 40mm GL is an interesting decision.
Looking at the ATK-H&K M29 from High Tech (page 145) and subtracting out the weight of the underbarrel carbine, it looks like the 25mm launcher should weigh 6 lbs or so. I could see reducing the weight a little with the reasoning that the tech is better, but not to 1.5 lbs. Such a 6 lb weapon is still superior to the riffle in most cases.
Quote:
|
If you want something to be suspicious of, go for the penetration of small calibre shaped charge rounds (and HE, for that matter, but it's not as big an issue with them) in UT - penetration is linear with calibre, which is the general case. However, small warhead use up a disproportionate amount of their available mass and volume in fusing, and thus have less penetration than extrapolation from larger calibres would suggest. The HEMP rounds of 10-18.5mm have this allowed for (but making them imp seems off), but the 25mm shaped charge should arguably also have a penetration modifier of only (5), or reduced base damage.
|
I'd favor the penetration of (5). That weakens both options, but the GL more.
I still want a heavy grenade launcher that launches 64mm or 100mm warheads 400 yards. Or that gets 2000 yard ranges on 40mm warheads. Of course, those are arguably mortars.