Rapid Fire bonus and Rcl

[Erling]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Other than higher volume of fire, or increased accuracy, how is the former accomplished?

Let Rcl 2 weapons benefit from full Rapid Fire bonus. Weapons with Rcl 3+ can gain only +1 from Rapid Fire (optionally: unless braced or mounted on a tripod).

[Gigermann]

Originally Posted by Erling

… (optionally: unless braced or mounted on a tripod).

This is the real rub here. Why would bracing improve the ability to control recoil and keep rounds on target? Because without bracing, it's a matter of one's strength to keep control. Therefore, this is really a MinST issue. (if you consider it an issue—I don't; I've fired both types on full auto and semi, and although the 7.62 definitely has a bigger kick, it's not that much bigger.)

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Isn't high recoil and tight groups generally mutually exclusive?

Quite possibly, but I don't think that's at odds with anything I said?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Erling

Let Rcl 2 weapons benefit from full Rapid Fire bonus. Weapons with Rcl 3+ can gain only +1 from Rapid Fire (optionally: unless braced or mounted on a tripod).

What does this represent in real life?

Also this makes weapons like aircraft cannon pretty pointless, when the real-life version for the high cyclic rates for these weapons are to improve the chances of a successful hit.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Also this makes weapons like aircraft cannon pretty pointless, when the real-life version for the high cyclic rates for these weapons are to improve the chances of a successful hit.

Aircraft cannon, I think you'll find, are Rcl 2 with the possible exception of the rare very high caliber (>30mm) types which as far as I know never had high rates of fire.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Aircraft cannon, I think you'll find, are Rcl 2 with the possible exception of the rare very high caliber (>30mm) types which as far as I know never had high rates of fire.

Yeah, I don't have High-Tech with me here and it's one of the few books I don't also own in pdf.

What weapons are we talking about exactly here?

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Yeah, I don't have High-Tech with me here and it's one of the few books I don't also own in pdf.

What weapons are we talking about exactly here?

Well, the OP's main reference is the M14, which you probably know is a 7.62x51mm automatic rifle, with Rcl 3.

For aircraft cannon with published stats, the two examples would be the WWII-vintage MG151/20 and the M61 Vulcan cannon, both 20mm cannons with (like every other Guns (LMG) or Gunner (Machine Gun) representative in High Tech) Rcl 2.

No larger-caliber aircraft cannon are provided. (The 25mm Bushmaster is also Rcl 2 but not an aircraft cannon.) I think that the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger would be given Rcl 2, but I don't have an official stat-line for it. The larger-caliber guns I referred to are decidedly not in High Tech. 37mm cannons were found on a number of WWII planes, as well as a rarer scattering of 40mm, 47mm, 50mm, and even 75mm types. And there's a howitzer on some of the fixed-wing gunships. Those might well have higher Rcl, but also usually also had modest to very low RoF. (Some Soviet jet fighters also had 37mm cannon, I don't know what the RoF on those was like.)

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Well, the OP's main reference is the M14, which you probably know is a 7.62x51mm automatic rifle, with Rcl 3.

What does the M14 do that warrants special treatment then? It's just a rotating-bolt gas-operated magazine-fed rifle, as far as I know. Rcl 3 already means that you aren't going to hit with as many rounds as you would if the Rcl was lower, and the rapid fire modifier isn't going to be enough to fully compensate for that (and at the weapon's full RoF you'll expend your magazine in two seconds anyway, making effective RoF much lower). Making the rapid fire modifier only +1 regardless of RoF seems to be defeating any purpose of firing it on automatic at all.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

What does the M14 do that warrants special treatment then? It's just a rotating-bolt gas-operated magazine-fed rifle, as far as I know. Rcl 3 already means that you aren't going to hit with as many rounds as you would if the Rcl was lower, and the rapid fire modifier isn't going to be enough to fully compensate for that (and at the weapon's full RoF you'll expend your magazine in two seconds anyway, making effective RoF much lower). Making the rapid fire modifier only +1 regardless of RoF seems to be defeating any purpose of firing it on automatic at all.

While a slight overstatement, that's kind of the point. Descriptions of the M14's career and replacement with the M16 often talk about the M14 being uncontrollable in automatic fire as a specific factor. (I am not sure I buy this entirely, but it's certainly commonly stated.) And just reducing the chance of multiple hits as Rcl does doesn't really represent that when generating any hit is a higher concern.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

While a slight overstatement, that's kind of the point. Descriptions of the M14's career and replacement with the M16 often talk about the M14 being uncontrollable in automatic fire as a specific factor. (I am not sure I buy this entirely, but it's certainly commonly stated.) And just reducing the chance of multiple hits as Rcl does doesn't really represent that when generating any hit is a higher concern.

Well that a) seems to be specific to at most a few battle rifles (and should therefore be a quirk to those specific weapons, if it even is within GURPS resolution at all), and b) is the opposite of "better" where that means "give steeper increase to your chance to hit at least once".

Also note that the M14 is still in service as a DM rifle, and most shooters with the M16/M4 are taught to basically never use burst anyway (or at least I was) for the exact same reasoning (which indicates to me that the difference in controlibility isn't that significant).