01-21-2014, 08:46 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Jul 2009
|
[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:
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. |
01-22-2014, 05:18 PM | #2 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cowtown, Canada
|
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! |
07-30-2016, 09:46 AM | #3 |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
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! |
07-30-2016, 11:16 AM | #4 |
Join Date: Jun 2016
|
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.
|
07-30-2016, 01:20 PM | #5 | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: [HT] Separating the recoil management thingy from the KRISS Vector
Quote:
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! |
|
07-30-2016, 10:13 PM | #6 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cowtown, Canada
|
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! |
Tags |
guns, high-tech, modern firepower, tactical shooting |
|
|