Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by aaron819

There was a pyramid article i read once with stats for a few cheap slamfire guns. Also try low tech muzzle loaders.

Also as safisher mentioned earlier pyramid 88 has an article that's pretty much perfect for this!

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

took me ages to work out you could do that :-)!

That's okay, it took Fallout eleven years to work it out too.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by ericthered

So at what point in history would you personally stop using cavalry charges in war?

Against heavy infantry with good order? I would never use them, unless I have elephants (and not those after field guns).
Against skirmishers? Until shortly after the 30 years war. Later I have them fight dismounted.
Against routed infantry? Well up through the ACW.
Against other heavy cavalry? Up through the end of heavy cavalry, but only if I don't have a better option (fighting dismounted on good ground is almost always preferable).
Against light calvary? Same answer as light infantry.
Against good horse archers? Only if I can box them in.
Against armor or mechanized infantry? Never, unless I am both desperate and fighting in mountains, in which case I am Akmed Shah Massoud and I train my cavalry to fire rockets from horseback (and then I make sure that any journalists wanting to interview me have their equipment fully inspected).
Against artillery? Probably later than the rest, but only if I can surprise them.

I think this is really a setting specific issue, not something hard and fast. The number of bullets floating around just has too many variables that effect it.

The OP says "Falloutlike" and gives a choice between a TL6 option and a TL7 option, both with cartridges.

[acrosome]

Originally Posted by Minuteman37

Ever had one of those moments where you write two pages of text in response to a half dozen posts and when you click submit you get logged out?

Sigh....


Long Story short the end result of this Rifles evolution would look a lot like a Enfield SMLE Mk III.

My big questions
1.) What supplementary weapons should be used in conjunction with the Rifle. Assuming It's matured into it's Enfield form.
2.) On the continuum from crude Flintlock to Refined Bolt-action War Winner Should the PCs enter on. (The answer is highly circumstantial I know)
3.) Should this Rifle ultimately make the transformation to semi/fully-automatic or stay bolt-action?

It seems like you've decided to go the upgrade path of flintlock muzzle loader / breechloading adaption of the flintlock / breechloader of some sort / mature bolt action battle rifle, right?

My next big question, then, is are you supposing a decent supply of smokeless powder at some point? Or are you sticking with black powder? Citing the SMLE Mk.III certainly sounds like smokeless powder.

Where is your setting? If you like the SMLE, are you looking for a "British" feel? Flintlock version of 1853 Enfield, to Snider conversion of the 1853, to Martini-Henry, to SMLE. I myself might be tempted to make that last a black powder Lee-Metford instead. I like black powder weapons, and smokeless powder is quite a bit trickier to manufacture.

To do an American version, which can be stretched to make the upgrade path a little longer: flintlock version of 1861 Springfield Rifle-Musket, to 1873 Trapdoor Springfield, to Rolling Block or Sharps, to Winchester 1886 (those last three all using the same cartridge, .45-70), to 1903 Springfield. (Not much point in having a Krag-Jorgenson phase.) If you want a bolt-action that still uses the black powder .45-70 cartridge for logistical reasons, Adventure Guns has the Remington-Keene, but I don't really think it's an improvement over the Winchester unless you want to mount a scope. It still uses a tube magazine, so no stripper clips. Really, though, you could pick any bolt-action battle rifle that you like for the last phase since you're changing ammunition anyway. So even on this "American" path you could end with your SMLE.

Offhand:

1) A bayonet, of course. Grenades. (German-style stick grenades are both simpler and more sexy.) A mortar is pretty simple (compared to a howitzer) but adds immense effectiveness, especially against someone who can't match it. In fact I personally might build my army around the damned mortars rather than the rifles. A helmet, especially if any opponents do have mortars or other fragment-producing weapon systems.
But how "military" are you going for, here? Because I can keep going. A machinegun. A handgun. Decent boots... and uniforms, and load-bearing equipment. A horse-drawn field kitchen. Mess kits (have a look at the excellent Swedish ones for inspiration). A shelter of some sort (the German WWII shelter-quarter that doubled as a poncho was kinda neat) and sleeping bag. Etc. Etc.

2) Well, one level better than the mooks, I suppose.

3) Only if you have smokeless powder, obviously. Beyond that, personally, if I were building an actual AtE army I would focus on a bolt-action rifle of some sort and not worry about a semiautomatic too much. Assuming that ammo is at least somewhat constrained then having an immense rate of fire from any one weapon won't be very important. Here Dan is very right- good training on fire and maneuver, supporting fires, and such is far more important. But if you want "Fallout-esque" then you need something like an M14 or something, at the least.

[Minuteman37]

Originally Posted by acrosome

It seems like you've decided to go the upgrade path of flintlock muzzle loader / breechloading adaption of the flintlock / breechloader of some sort / mature bolt action battle rifle, right?

My next big question, then, is are you supposing a decent supply of smokeless powder at some point? Or are you sticking with black powder? Citing the SMLE Mk.III certainly sounds like smokeless powder.

Where is your setting? If you like the SMLE, are you looking for a "British" feel? Flintlock version of 1853 Enfield, to Snider conversion of the 1853, to Martini-Henry, to SMLE. I myself might be tempted to make that last a black powder Lee-Metford instead. I like black powder weapons, and smokeless powder is quite a bit trickier to manufacture.

To do an American version, which can be stretched to make the upgrade path a little longer: flintlock version of 1861 Springfield Rifle-Musket, to 1873 Trapdoor Springfield, to Rolling Block or Sharps, to Winchester 1886 (those last three all using the same cartridge, .45-70), to 1903 Springfield. (Not much point in having a Krag-Jorgenson phase.) If you want a bolt-action that still uses the black powder .45-70 cartridge for logistical reasons, Adventure Guns has the Remington-Keene, but I don't really think it's an improvement over the Winchester unless you want to mount a scope. It still uses a tube magazine, so no stripper clips. Really, though, you could pick any bolt-action battle rifle that you like for the last phase since you're changing ammunition anyway. So even on this "American" path you could end with your SMLE.

Offhand:

1) A bayonet, of course. Grenades. (German-style stick grenades are both simpler and more sexy.) A mortar is pretty simple (compared to a howitzer) but adds immense effectiveness, especially against someone who can't match it. In fact I personally might build my army around the damned mortars rather than the rifles. A helmet, especially if any opponents do have mortars or other fragment-producing weapon systems.
But how "military" are you going for, here? Because I can keep going. A machinegun. A handgun. Decent boots... and uniforms, and load-bearing equipment. A horse-drawn field kitchen. Mess kits (have a look at the excellent Swedish ones for inspiration). A shelter of some sort (the German WWII shelter-quarter that doubled as a poncho was kinda neat) and sleeping bag. Etc. Etc.

2) Well, one level better than the mooks, I suppose.

3) Only if you have smokeless powder, obviously. Beyond that, personally, if I were building an actual AtE army I would focus on a bolt-action rifle of some sort and not worry about a semiautomatic too much. Assuming that ammo is at least somewhat constrained then having an immense rate of fire from any one weapon won't be very important. Here Dan is very right- good training on fire and maneuver, supporting fires, and such is far more important. But if you want "Fallout-esque" then you need something like an M14 or something, at the least.

Upgrade path is as follows
1.) Flintlock Musket with poor quality powder.
2.) Rifled Barrel + mini-ball.
3.) Improved quality black powder.
4.) Trapdoor breech-loader converstion, w/ poor quality 5.56mm.
5.) Improved quality (Smokeless) 5.56mm.
6.) Bolt-Action Conversion. Takes M16 Magazines

I'm looking for a professional, Imperial feel. A bit of the British Empire, a bit of Nazi Germany, and very Military. Any idea what would make good machineguns, handguns, decent boots, etc?

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

That's okay, it took Fallout eleven years to work it out too.

heh!

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

...
Against armor or mechanized infantry? Never, unless I am both desperate and fighting in mountains, in which case I am Akmed Shah Massoud and I train my cavalry to fire rockets from horseback (and then I make sure that any journalists wanting to interview me have their equipment fully inspected).
....

v.true

[Purple Haze]

Last American cavalry charge, and a successful one at that, was by G Troop, 26th Cavalry Regiment in the Philippines 16 January 1942. They scattered superior numbers of armour supported Japanese infantry.

General George Patton is on record as wishing he had cavalry in both Tunisia and Sicily.

The Battle of Mount Tumbledown, 13-14 June 1982, Falkland Islands featured several successful bayonet charges even though both sides were equipped with automatic weapons (the FN-FAL).

Things that may be "obsolete" on a grand scale can still be useful on a company or brigade scale.

The .303 British (7.7x56mmR) was designed and fielded as a black powder cartridge. As long as you are dealing with bolt action rifles, you can use both black and smokeless in your weapons.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Purple Haze

Last American cavalry charge, and a successful one at that, was by G Troop, 26th Cavalry Regiment in the Philippines 16 January 1942. They scattered superior numbers of armour supported Japanese infantry.

General George Patton is on record as wishing he had cavalry in both Tunisia and Sicily.

The Battle of Mount Tumbledown, 13-14 June 1982, Falkland Islands featured several successful bayonet charges even though both sides were equipped with automatic weapons (the FN-FAL).

Things that may be "obsolete" on a grand scale can still be useful on a company or brigade scale.

Equipment is irrelevant. It is all about tactics and logistics. A blade will win against modern firearms if it is deployed properly and wielded by men who are aware of its tactical advantages. Modern firearms can expand the list of tactical options but they won't guarantee a win.

[talonthehand]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

Equipment is irrelevant. It is all about tactics and logistics. A blade will win against modern firearms if it is deployed properly and wielded by men who are aware of its tactical advantages. Modern firearms can expand the list of tactical options but they won't guarantee a win.

This sounds a lot like the arguments some martial arts aficionados make - “sufficiently skilled, a weaker person can defeat a stronger foe”.

There’s this unsaid condition though - the other side has to be sufficiently unskilled.

[Flyndaran]

Of course well trained soldiers armed with sporks could defeat 1000 copies of me armed with rifles. I don't see how those types of hypotheticals really matter for gaming. Combat is simply never going to be that mismatched except for story purposes where the GM already decided on the end result anyway.