11-30-2014, 02:14 PM | #11 | |||||
Join Date: Oct 2012
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
In the Navy, it's (from the inside:) MCP vacc suit (everything but the head, absolutely no DR, no more than a pair of latex gloves, and head, DR 15 goldfish bowl helmet, only pressurized part). Ballastic cloth shirt and pants as above, (DR 18, hostiles are usually DR 16 or less, it has more DR simply because it's a little heavier and thicker, and can stay at no encumbrance (sans any equipment) since the gravity on the ships lower then the others) Uniform The ballistic shirt and pants aren't connected at all, nowhere near enough to count as sealed. There won't be any DR against the 4d. Quote:
Quote:
Also, Dr 100 seems high for something that's structural shipbuilding grade, not armor grade. I used the stats for soft steel. Quote:
Quote:
Also, with the barricade, the idea was to simply blow it up. One hit will destroy it, if only by mangling the plate and destroying what's holding it up, the only question being what happens to the gunners right behind it. Likely casualties if they have any body parts above the barricade, likely casualties if ducked behind by being hit by a flying hull plate, if only broken bones. The general idea of using it against a barricade was in the "initial clearing out the MG's in the cargo bay behind the blasted open 10-20 ft wide cargo door" phase, after which it wouldn't be as much use. The other use in with a landing party on a planet, same reason there's a trio of 81mm mortars on board. In that situation, often the vacuum issue goes away, and you can blow stuff up much better. PS: Added more quotes in the middle of typing the post, sorry. |
|||||
11-30-2014, 05:19 PM | #12 | |
Join Date: Nov 2014
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
and on the topic of making something that gives the fragmentation that we are talking about to damage this armour, its pretty hard if not impossible with the filler and metal hardness we are talking about, so i would just design it as needed and explain it away or use a MF load with some kind of AP dart, though i am not sure how feasible that would be |
|
11-30-2014, 06:23 PM | #13 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
I wouldn't actually expect hull plates to be structural material either. The skeleton/framework carries the weight. The only reason to put plates that thick on is for micro-meteoroid protection. The WWII corebook is 3e. Don't mix 3e and 4e explosive weapon stats. They are fundamentally incompatible due to basic rules changes. They might look similar in the range of 1 lb of TNT. That's 6Dx2 in both editions but in 3e 4 lbs of TNT is 6Dx8 and in 4e it's 6Dx4. In 3e damage goes up linearly. In 4e it goes up as the square root of lbs of TNT. Then the rules about adjusting damage for distance are different too. If you have to convert stats you need to change D of damage to lbs of TNT and then derive a new D using the 4e rules in Campaigns.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
11-30-2014, 07:45 PM | #14 | |
Join Date: Oct 2012
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
In an atmosphere, a 5dx4 cr explosion has a definite full casualty radius of 2 yards, and an out-of-the-fight radius of 3 yards, and a 50-50 major wound radius of 4 yards, while a 5dx5 cr explosion adds one yard to all those. Going by GURPS:WWII - Dogfaces, at 5dx5 it would take 5 rounds to destroy a 50 x 20 ft wood frame house, 12 to knock down a brick house.At 5dx4 it would take 8 rounds to bring down a wood frame house, the same for a brick one. Perhaps 5dx5 [7d] damage? With perhaps a -1 to hit with fragmentation? Or not? Now going on a tangent... I know that there's rules on being hit by fragments. I looked them up, and it's around a 7 or 8 or less to be hit at the edge of the danger area, which isn't actually all that bad, although it should be maybe 2 lower. I've actually used them, although adjusted for being from splinters from the starship's armor and hull in a narrow cone from a laser hit on the bridge. I think that's happened in three different battles I've played, although one of them had three different hits. And the poor SoB who got a starship laser to the chest, putting a hole right through it. I also once greatly reduced the chances of being hit and the falloff distance for one game where the characters were in a flying boat and the "shells" were only 20mm cannon shells. As for an equivalent to beehive, it seems the best option is good old fashioned grapeshot. 50 round balls would be +6 to hit, and do an average of 32 pi++, and be doing 36 damage past DR 16 armor, easily killing a man, although it won't do anything other than 6 pts? of blunt trauma if the target is wearing trauma plates. 25 round balls would be +5 to hit, and be doing an average of 46 pi++ per ball, 22 damage past trauma plates, and an instant kill to the torso if not wearing them. enough to kill somebody past body armor with trauma plates. No fancy armor divisors, and simple round lead balls, but with enough energy and size to kill past body armor anyway. On the other hand, that assumes the muzzle energy of a full sized howitzer, which a recoilless rifle likely wouldn't have. Really, you're best off with an airburst of the regular high-frag HE round. The easiest way to do that would be to insert a simple time fuze in the nose instead of an impact fuze, with settings for 50 yards, 75 yards, 100 yards and the like, so no math is needed in action. Perhaps simply a scale around the edge of the fuze and turning something on the fuze, so you could simply interpolate intermediate settings. (They did the math using the gun's muzzle velocity when they designed the fuze.) Likely best to keep a few rounds with the time fuze already installed nearby, so you don't have to waste time installing them. Back to the original question, it seems that a 5dx5 [7d] enhanced fragmentation (specifically designed for that) round would work well, if that can be done. |
|
11-30-2014, 08:12 PM | #15 | |
Join Date: Nov 2014
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
the inverse might hold true for a smaller bursting load my advice is to just put it where you want without putting much more thought into it then that *or does that sound sacrilege to say here ?* but something around 5DX5 and [6D+2] ? it means a fair amount of damage would still hit the target after the 16 DR and the cutting modifier |
|
11-30-2014, 08:38 PM | #16 | |
Join Date: Oct 2012
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
|
|
11-30-2014, 09:07 PM | #17 | |
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
|
|
12-01-2014, 04:14 PM | #18 | ||
Join Date: Oct 2012
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
Quote:
The intermediate pressure frames are (going from memory here, I didn't go and dig out the sheet of paper with actual numbers) something like a 6x8 inch box beams, with walls something like an inch think. Or it might have been 4x6 inches instead, with walls around an inch thick. The density of the ship as a whole is about 2/3rds of a metric ton per cubic meter. The ships I did the math for uses much of that weight for armor, merchants use that weight for cargo, and their holds still often wind up with a lot of empty space when carrying a cargo of metal billets. (Reached maximum mass limit for cargo.) It's a Traveller style starship, sort of, although without actually using any of GURPS Traveller, and at TL 8+a bit of^. The exact design and weapons doesn't match anything you'd recognize, since my setting and it's technology is just so different. Certainly agree there. A blast is a blast, regardless of whether your armor's sealed or not, it's all blunt trauma and limb ripping anyway. On the same note, why the heck does armor help at all against falls? A suit of plate is just more inertia and a bigger splat when you hit the ground. Last edited by BraselC5048; 12-01-2014 at 04:50 PM. |
||
12-01-2014, 06:29 PM | #19 | |
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
|
|
12-01-2014, 10:21 PM | #20 | |
Join Date: Nov 2014
|
Re: Designing an Artillery piece - 3e vs 4e
Quote:
|
|
Tags |
artillery, fourth edition, fragmentation, gun design, gurps wwii, third edition, wwii |
|
|