Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-21-2014, 08:46 PM   #1
Seneschal
 
Seneschal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pula, Istria, Croatia
Default [HT] Separating the recoil management thingy from the KRISS Vector

Having recently acquired Gunplay and Military Sci-Fi, I was really intrigued with the add-on- and software-heavy approach to infantry combat, so I thought I'd apply a grimy, realistic, "used future" switch to my sci-fi campaign setting. More precisely, I'm aiming for a "shooting an AK-47...with HUD link, targeting programs, gestalt ammo, at targets tagged by a drone flying overhead"-kind of style. That way, I can use High-Tech as a resource and just pimp the guns with TL 9-10 features.

The Super V system seems to be just that kind of late TL8 gadget that doesn't require any radical technological shifts, but still makes the Vector look, handle and perform in a novel and futuristic way. While browsing DeviantArt for inspiration, I came across a few gun concepts that glued a Vector-like box onto all sorts of rifles and pistols, so I thought it would make for subtly futuristic guns that still retained manageable TL8 damage figures. However, the system is mushed into the Vector's stats in Tactical Shooting. I'm not sure how to reverse-engineer it, but comparing it to other .45 guns and SMGs leads me to believe it works something like this:
  • -1 Rcl, -1 MinST - Pistols in .45 ACP have Rcl 3, MinST 10, but the H&K UMP has Rcl 2, MinST 8 - I'm guessing that's because of the stock. So, if those are the stats for a regular .45 ACP long arm, then the Super V lowers Rcl (shot spread/muzzle flip) and MinST (felt recoil/heft) by 1. The Vector has Rcl 1, MinST 7, and the above fits with what the system purports to do.
  • +1 Bulk - The Vector is only 40-60 cm long, for which the P90 gets Bulk-3, while the Vector has Bulk-4*. The boxiness probably doesn't help.
  • Shorter barrel - since the Super V system makes the bolt dip downwards, it has to be located behind the magazine. This means the chamber is way up in front, and you don't get the same barrel length as for other SMGs of comparable size. It probably also won't fit inside the stock of a bullpup weapon (assumptions, assumptions, but I'd go with this for balance purposes - bullpups already benefit a lot from their downsides not showing up in GURPS resolution).
  • Limited to certain cartridges? - Supposedly, TDI went with the .45 ACP just to prove their Super V system can tame even rounds that big. But it's not that much of a bruiser-cartridge. Maybe the .45's sluggish speed and low pressure worked in their favor. Anyone here who knows how this kind of recoil-manager would fare with high-speed rifle rounds?
  • Weight, $ - The whole modification would probably add a bit of weight (not a lot - the Vector is up there with most SMGs, even a bit lighter than average) and cost a few hundred $.

Alternatively, I thought of maybe making the whole system behave like a compensator - i.e., it doesn't lower Rcl, it adds a bonus to Guns (+1? +2?) when shot in bursts or at RoF 4+. This would make it so that there aren't two disparate systems for reducing bullet spread; the Super V would be in the same category as compensators, muzzle weights and ports.

So, how does that look? I kinda got all my info on the system from youtube, so who knows if the gun behaves like that in real life. I appreciate any corrections.
Seneschal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2014, 05:18 PM   #2
Kale
 
Kale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cowtown, Canada
Default Re: [HT] Separating the recoil management thingy from the KRISS Vector

I would be interested myself as this tech could be a bit of a game changer for ultratech guns.
__________________
FYI: Laser burns HURT!
Kale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2016, 09:46 AM   #3
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: [HT] Separating the recoil management thingy from the KRISS Vector

Yeah, I've wondered about recoil mitigation systems at TL9+. If it's possible to replicate the advantage of the Kriss Vector as given in Tactical Shooting without significant downsides or astronomical cost, I would expect that modification to become very popular.

In game terms, Rcl 1 is awesome, even if you never fire at more than controlled semi-automatic rate of fire. If the system can be minituarised in 1-2 Tech Levels, it would even improve pistol performance markedly. If it worked on service rifles, it would be a massive advantage.

I'll grant that the real-life benefits of reducing perceived recoil and muzzle climb might be less noticable than the Rcl 1 of the Kriss Vector, at least as regards semi-auto fire from a typical low-caliber, fairly heavy weight rifle is concerned. .223 recoil in a rifle weight package is already pretty anemic when firing at RoF 3.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2016, 11:16 AM   #4
clu2415
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Default Re: [HT] Separating the recoil management thingy from the KRISS Vector

There's also the balanced recoil system of the AK-107, which doesn't add significantly to bulk. High cyclic rate controlled bursts accomplish a similar goal; see the G11 and AN-94.
clu2415 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2016, 01:20 PM   #5
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: [HT] Separating the recoil management thingy from the KRISS Vector

Quote:
Originally Posted by clu2415 View Post
There's also the balanced recoil system of the AK-107, which doesn't add significantly to bulk. High cyclic rate controlled bursts accomplish a similar goal; see the G11 and AN-94.
Just so.

High-cyclic rate controlled bursts seem like a technology that might become widespread on whatever hypothetical weapon eventually replaces modern assault rifles and carbines sometime after 2040. Most soldiers fire on semi-automatic or disciplined bursts, anyway. This will be especially likely to continue due to concerns with overheating in caseless guns.

On the other hand, if support weapons and weapons made for CQB and special operations can be made Rcl 1 even on full-automatic, it will be very tempting. That is, unless this requires design compromises that make it impractical.

Realistically, what technical limitations are there on some form of advanced recoil managment system that achieves Rcl 1 in a slugthrower at TL9+?

I am very willing to believe that the Rcl 1 of the Kriss Vector overstates the benefits and/or that there are significant flaws in the design that would become apparent in a weapon designed for an effective military rifle caliber or a less bulky design for a pistol cartridge. On the other hand, I don't have the expertise to judge what these flaws might be or what kind of designs would be practical.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2016, 10:13 PM   #6
Kale
 
Kale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cowtown, Canada
Default Re: [HT] Separating the recoil management thingy from the KRISS Vector

I recently came to the conclusion that the reason electrothermal guns don't have extremely high Min ST and Rcl is because of ultra-tech recoil compensation mechanisms along these lines.
__________________
FYI: Laser burns HURT!
Kale is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
guns, high-tech, modern firepower, tactical shooting

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.