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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-13-2018, 05:41 PM   #201
sir_pudding
Wielder of Smart Pants
 
sir_pudding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
It's a rather silly hypothesis to begin with. If I want someone over there dead, I'm not going to fire a single bullet no matter how good of a shot I think I am.
I would fire a single shot, or a failure drill, because ammo conservation is important (and training works, I guess).
sir_pudding is offline  
Old 01-13-2018, 05:43 PM   #202
Žorkell
Icelandic - Approach With Caution
 
Žorkell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Reykjavķk, Iceland
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
It's a rather silly hypothesis to begin with. If I want someone over there dead, I'm not going to fire a single bullet no matter how good of a shot I think I am.
My accuracy will likely go down more, because I'm at least as caring about not getting shot myself.
And I am mostly pacifist with zero military skill or education.
Not every one is like you, and you shouldn't generalize from a single source.
__________________
Žorkell Sigvaldason

Viking kittens | My photos | More of my photos
Žorkell is offline  
Old 01-13-2018, 06:03 PM   #203
acrosome
 
acrosome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

I guess it depends upon how far "over there" is. Five meters? I'll keep pulling the trigger until they fall down. A hundred meters? I'm far more likely to hit with one aimed shot than just by spraying a dozen in the general direction. That's for amateurs. If they're at two hundred meters and dodging? Yes, you'll never get a perfect shot so fire as fast as you can reacquire a decent sight picture.

So it depends. I think both of you are just making different assumptions than the other.
acrosome is offline  
Old 01-13-2018, 06:41 PM   #204
Flyndaran
Untagged
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Žorkell View Post
Not every one is like you, and you shouldn't generalize from a single source.
It is useful, because if even I would produce such results while 100% trying to kill in warfare, such data doesn't make sense to apply to people actually trained to kill.
I'm using myself as an outlier to disprove the claim that the vast majority of trained soldiers are less able to shoot at people to hit.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check.
Flyndaran is offline  
Old 01-13-2018, 06:44 PM   #205
Flyndaran
Untagged
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_pudding View Post
I would fire a single shot, or a failure drill, because ammo conservation is important (and training works, I guess).
Sure. I'm just suggesting that firing more than one bullet does not at all require an inability to try to hit a foe.
I certainly didn't mean to imply that everyone always sprays bullets like a video game character with unlimited ammo.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check.
Flyndaran is offline  
Old 01-13-2018, 06:49 PM   #206
sir_pudding
Wielder of Smart Pants
 
sir_pudding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Even if you assume that 9/10 (or whatever) of the shooters have Reluctant Killer and are just suppressing, you still need to ride hundreds of yards through a kill zone, with all that entails. If either the rider or the horse panics, that entire element is hors d'combat.

And the same logic applies equally to the calvarymen too, 9/10 of them (or whatever) should have problems with delivering effective attacks if they do make it through.

Last edited by sir_pudding; 01-13-2018 at 06:53 PM.
sir_pudding is offline  
Old 01-13-2018, 09:06 PM   #207
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
It's a rather silly hypothesis to begin with. If I want someone over there dead, I'm not going to fire a single bullet no matter how good of a shot I think I am.
That depends heavily on my priorities. Reality is, most of the time turning the other guy dead is in the 'nice to have' category, not the primary objective (which is likely something like "make him stop shooting at me and vacate the objective").
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline  
Old 01-14-2018, 08:25 AM   #208
johndallman
Night Watchman
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minuteman37 View Post
Long story short the end result of this rifle's evolution would look a lot like a Enfield SMLE Mk III.
...
3.) Should this Rifle ultimately make the transformation to semi/fully-automatic or stay bolt-action?
Here's a video about one of the several attempts to convert the SMLE to semi-auto. Another one here, and there were several more. None successful. You might well be able to continue using the same cartridge and accessories with a semi-auto, if you started with a plan to do that, but not the same mechanism.
Quote:
1.) What supplementary weapons should be used in conjunction with the rifle. Assuming its matured into the Enfield form.
In an AtE scenario, rifle grenades and light mortars give you advantages against less-organised forces. Real artillery and machine guns cost a lot more.
johndallman is online now  
Old 01-14-2018, 09:12 PM   #209
Minuteman37
 
Minuteman37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Kenai, Alaska
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Quote:
Originally Posted by johndallman View Post
Here's a video about one of the several attempts to convert the SMLE to semi-auto. Another one here, and there were several more. None successful. You might well be able to continue using the same cartridge and accessories with a semi-auto, if you started with a plan to do that, but not the same mechanism.

In an AtE scenario, rifle grenades and light mortars give you advantages against less-organised forces. Real artillery and machine guns cost a lot more.
Even if I have a team of skilled engineers who plan out the development of this army's arsonal to maintain the most production carry over from rifled musket to breach-loader, to bolt-action, to semi-auto, it just can't carry over the mechanism?
Minuteman37 is offline  
Old 01-15-2018, 02:06 AM   #210
johndallman
Night Watchman
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
Default Re: Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minuteman37 View Post
Even if I have a team of skilled engineers who plan out the development of this army's arsenal to maintain the most production carry over from rifled musket to breech-loader, to bolt-action, to semi-auto, it just can't carry over the mechanism?
If you want to prototype and debug all the stages before you start any production, and you accept extra weight and cost at all those stages, then yes, you can do that. But those compromises seem to conflict with the struggles normal to an AtE setting.
johndallman is online now  
Closed Thread

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 03:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.