Will buy: Ultra-Tech 2 / Revised / Reworked Weapon Tables (Post-Pyramid etc.)

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Langy

The problem with UT weapons isn't really that their damage is so low. It's that there are options to make the slugthrowers way too powerful, compared to the Gauss weapons.

I'd look at the same thing a little differently. There aren't options to make Gauss weapons really potent. An article that gives electromagnetic guns the same treatment the new guns article gave (almost exclusively) to firearms could be a huge boost.

10mm storm carbine vs 4mm Gauss rifle, and all that...

[apoc527]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

It's not about lethality. Or, more precisely, not just about it.

Assuming the renaissance of personal armour in TL9+ (that is, more so than now), weapons will focus on penetration more than wounding. This is also why I gave examples including a setup where injury levels are minimal.

The current setup, however, is weird, in that some of the TL8 ammo is just more scary than TL9+. Right now, when facing a Powered Combat Armour (TL9, DR70), it is totally appropriate to use +P (dmg×1.1, CPS×1½) APDS ammo (AD(2), damage×1.3, Range×1½, CPS×3, minus damage type) with an FN FAL, doing a final average of 10d(2), or 70 points of penetration on average. That means almost half the bullets will injure.
If you take the FN BAR, you can no longer rely on rapid fire, but most shots will be likely to injure. If you have a heavy machine gun team in your squad (if facing battlesuits, you definitely should), giving them the above ammo will shred the 'suits (assuming .50 Browning, KPV or Mauser).

----------------------

I'd rather see some more gameable stuff like ablative armour/shields, penetration-oriented weaponry and the like. It's what I'm gonna add to my setting, anyway.

Ah yes, so the problem is really HT's grabbag of crazy ammo types. Well, for one, I'd never allow a "+P" rifle round. I've never heard of +P rifle rounds, as you tend to only see those manufactured for pistols. Most rifles are already at their optimum performance unless you start dipping into specialized magnum sniping cartridges or other crazy stuff (i.e. match rounds). Those cost modifiers are going to make them wonderful "in theory" weapons but no military could afford to equip a full force with the fancy ammo. I think it's a theoretical problem more than a practical one.

For PCs who want to spend the money and time to hand-load individual APDS+P rounds in 7.62mm NATO, perhaps the issue is larger, but I'm not so sure if that's a real problem. DR70 powered combat armor isn't immune to damage and shouldn't be considered a "body tank" (to borrow from Alternity). I don't have HT handy, but it's way better than anything you can get today! That FN FAL holds 20+1 shots, has beastly recoil, and is freakin' heavy and every time you pull the trigger, you shoot something like $10 down-range. It's comparable to a storm carbine, and when you load the storm carbine up on special ammo types, it's way better.

Now, I wouldn't mind an update to convert UT ammo types to HT ammo type rules, but that shouldn't be too hard to just house rule either.

[vierasmarius]

Originally Posted by apoc527

I need to compare things on a deeper level, but I didn't notice any weapon mods or accessories from HT that don't have an equivalent in UT. Hyperspectral scopes are far superior to anything in HT after all!

A TL8 Mini-Computer Sight is basically equivalent to a TL9 Compact Targeting Sight. But the TL8 sight gives a total bonus of +4 or +5 Acc, while the CTS gives just +2 Acc. Likewise, the TL8 Computer Sight gives +4 to +6, compared to +3 for a TL9 ETS. Largely this is because HT added rules for Rangefinders, which aren't clearly compatible with UT rules. (Though I actually question if the huge bonus for rangefinders is strictly realistic...)

Also, as has been mentioned, some of the HT specialized ammo types are superior, in effect and/or economy, to UT types.

[apoc527]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

A TL8 Mini-Computer Sight is basically equivalent to a TL9 Compact Targeting Sight. But the TL8 sight gives a total bonus of +4 or +5 Acc, while the CTS gives just +2 Acc. Likewise, the TL8 Computer Sight gives +4 to +6, compared to +3 for a TL9 ETS. Largely this is because HT added rules for Rangefinders, which aren't clearly compatible with UT rules. (Though I actually question if the huge bonus for rangefinders is strictly realistic...)

Also, as has been mentioned, some of the HT specialized ammo types are superior, in effect and/or economy, to UT types.

Those are things I would support errataing, rather than creating and buying a whole new PDF for. I'll have to check out those sights when I get home, but they sound overpowered. Tactical Shooting gives a bonus for rangefinders in very specific sniping situations. I don't know if they would apply in general run-of-the-mill firefights.

Agreed on the HT ammo types, though I think that in real life, most of the crazy ammo types are only used in tank cannon rounds or autocannons. Like I said, show me an APDS+P 7.62mm NATO round manfactured by a real company and I'll eat one (with a knife and fork)...

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by apoc527

Those are things I would support errataing, rather than creating and buying a whole new PDF for. I'll have to check out those sights when I get home, but they sound overpowered. Tactical Shooting gives a bonus for rangefinders in very specific sniping situations. I don't know if they would apply in general run-of-the-mill firefights.

It's restricted to aimed shots, right? Rangefinding is an expected feature on a modern tank gun, and I'm pretty sure that's because it's useful. Small arms don't usually have computer sights and rangefinding hardware today, but technology may change that.

I suspect the rangefinding bonus is only really appropriate beyond point-blank range, where bullet drop is sufficient to require compensation. It may not be expected that you'd be aiming a weapon so equipped closer than that.

Also, I'm not sure, but the rangefinding bonus may be in the bucket of bunuses that are not allowed to exceed the base accuracy of the weapon...

Originally Posted by apoc527

Agreed on the HT ammo types, though I think that in real life, most of the crazy ammo types are only used in tank cannon rounds or autocannons. Like I said, show me an APDS+P 7.62mm NATO round manfactured by a real company and I'll eat one (with a knife and fork)...

It may not come in +P, but there is SLAP, which appears to be an APDS round, in 7.62mm NATO. Designated M948 by the US army. Undercaliber and even fin-stabilized small-arms ammo is a real thing. It's not usually used much, I think, but that's more a matter of applicability. Remember, flechette rifles are technically do-able but tend to be rejected because small caliber fin-stabilized darts are lacking in antipersonnel performance.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

It may not come in +P, but there is SLAP, which appears to be an APDS round, in 7.62mm NATO. Designated M948 by the US army. Undercaliber and even fin-stabilized small-arms ammo is a real thing. It's not usually used much, I think, but that's more a matter of applicability. Remember, flechette rifles are technically do-able but tend to be rejected because small caliber fin-stabilized darts are lacking in antipersonnel performance.

They also aren't exactly needed. Allowing a squad of conscripts with simple TL7 rifles to threaten a marine 'canned' in an expensive battlesuit with a switch of a magazine instead of requiring an RPG/Panzerfaust/etc. for this purpose? Yes, please.

[apoc527]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

They also aren't exactly needed. Allowing a squad of conscripts with simple TL7 rifles to threaten a marine 'canned' in an expensive battlesuit with a switch of a magazine instead of requiring an RPG/Panzerfaust/etc. for this purpose? Yes, please.

I think "threaten" is a little bit strong. As you said, each round has a 50% chance to penetrate, but not a very significant chance to do more than a couple points of damage. Unless the battlesuit operator just stands out in the open and lets himself be shot, he's unlikely to be incapacitated in fewer than 5 hits and the TL7 conscripts are unlikely to ever get the chance to hit that many times. Why? The other problem comparing things using mostly DR/damage is that it ignores every other aspect of the battlesuit. First, DR 70 is a substantial improvement in battlefield survival over anything available before TL9. Second, the suits are IR cloaked and can easily be given chameleon coatings (which is always worth it against lower TL opponents). So, the squad of TL7 conscripts won't be able to see the battlesuit. Third, the battlesuit is sealed but doesn't prevent the wearer from smelling and hearing. He's got more built-in comm equipment than a TL7 squad can ever carry and can be equipped with incredible sensors to pinpoint enemy location. His suit has biomedical sensors and can be equipped with TL9 medical technology and drugs to keep him going after getting shot a few times. I haven't even gone into the weapon that the battlesuited trooper can carry--between smart grenades/rockets and the devastating firepower of ETC weapons (7mm LSW with 200 rounds at RoF 15!), I would be highly surprised if that TL7 squad existed for more than 10 seconds against my single TL9 chameleon-coated battlesuit soldier.

I think comparing just the DR and weapon damage of stuff in UT to stuff in HT is a gross oversimplification of the power level of these respective TLs (7-8 and 9). I don't think TL9 is supposed to represent such an advanced force so as to be unbeatable by lower TLs, so it's not a problem for me that a highly specialized, expensive, and rare bullet can be constructed that gives a TL7 conscript a small chance of penetrating TL9 armor, especially since when the REST of the TL differences are accounted for, there's almost no chance that the TL 7 conscript is going to get much of a chance to use those expensive bullets.

[apoc527]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

If you have a heavy machine gun team in your squad (if facing battlesuits, you definitely should), giving them the above ammo will shred the 'suits (assuming .50 Browning, KPV or Mauser).

No battlesuited TL9 trooper would allow himself to get caught by a mounted .50 caliber machinegun. If he does, he deserves being chewed to shreds. Given all the technology at the TL9 battlesuit trooper's disposal, that .50 cal should be destroyed and its crew killed LONG BEFORE it represents a credible threat to the trooper or the trooper's squadmates.

Again, you can't just take the damage values and the DR and say "Look, HT stuff is awesome compared to UT!" That's only a fraction of the story.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by apoc527

Could you give some examples? I want to know what I need to outlaw/ban when I GM my upcoming GURPS game (which will be the first time most of my group has played GURPS). :-)

The options that HT has that UT doesn't have already been covered well (different ammo types, computer targeting sights, etc).

Weapons in HT (and Tactical Shooting) have access to a few different features that UT doesn't; for example, the # RoF stat (where if you fire in bursts, your weapon has effective Rcl 1), or the SMG recoil compensator giving a TL8 SMG Rcl 1. I think UT also lacks RoF !, etc.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Langy

SMG recoil compensator giving a TL8 SMG Rcl 1.

Uh? Only thing I know of like that gives +1 to skill when firing rapidly, not a modification to Rcl.