[UT] Gun Generator v0.3

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by RogerBW

Just in case, I should probably say again that this playtest isn't for any kind of "GURPS Gun Design". You don't start from scratch and design a pistol as you can with the system in this thread. You start with real-world numbers and get out GURPS stats that should be reasonably consistent with the stats already in High-Tech etc..

Yeah, that's part of why I'm thinking it would be best for me to sit it out. Real world gun specifications can be interesting, but my primary interest is in designing novel weapons rather than converting existing ones. I'll certainly be getting the book when it comes out - probably on release day - and then seeing if I can break and twist it into some flavor of design system (although even if I can't, it would still a worthy purchase, even if only to demonstrate interest in gearhead-adjacent products - and I'm sure I'd find other uses for it).

...

To actually add something to the discussion, I wanted to look at three of the things I've struggled with for my own design attempts - ST, Bulk, and Rcl.

For ST, it looks like you basically have it scaling roughly with the square root of ST for pistols, the fifth root of ST for rifles, and the third root of ST for cannon. I'm curious as to why you opted for this. For my own, I just went with ST = 5*(Weight)^0.5, and had rifles (which are two-handed) use 2/3 normal weight, as is typical for two-handed weapons.

For Bulk, your length-based numbers almost match the Size and Speed/Range Table, but are a bit off. Why did you opt for these cutoffs instead of SSR? Does it simply match better with existing weapons? For my own, I put a 200 mm overall length at -1, 300 at -2, 500 at -3, etc, with in-between values rounding up, as is standard for SSR.

Finally, for Rcl, I'm simply curious where you came up with your equation from. For my own... I pretty much had no idea where to start, so I just set the most powerful weapons - those with a muzzle velocity of 320 m/s (the speed limit for my gear rifles) - to have Rcl 5 and had Rcl scale linearly with muzzle velocity (which worked out to Rcl=V/64). I think I like your suggestion better.

[Jinumon]

I didn't realize this thread had a bit of a renaissance after its initial posting. I'll do my best to respond to everyone's comments and questions.

Originally Posted by CaptainBetts

I absolutely love this system, and it's created a lot of "feels right" results for me through a lot of use over the last few weeks.

Thank you so much! I'll be honest, there was a time when I thought this was genuinely unsolvable to my satisfaction, so believe me when I say this was an absolute joy to get out of my brain. I'm glad someone is getting some use out of it.

Originally Posted by CaptainBetts

I was wondering whether you saw this from David Pulver - is this taken into account in the system? Figured I'd flag it just in case, I guess the L/D ratio is the equivalent of the "Relative Power" stat?

I guess I missed this point. That said, Relative Power (which does, after a fashion, include L/D ratio) and Bore Size (i.e. "caliber") have considerable influence over 1/2D Range, which determines Accuracy. It ended up being consistent with the weapons in Ultra-Tech, so I didn't feel the need to add an exception.

Originally Posted by CaptainBetts

I'm curious if you've tried working out things like Shotguns/Gyrocs etc. (though Gyrocs are admittedly an entirely different class of weapon).

I haven't yet. To be honest, I haven't even LOOKED at this since getting it out in this current iteration. I'll circle back and make sure to post when I've got something to add.

Originally Posted by CaptainBetts

For clarity, would you suggest using "firearm" configuration with Low power to represent shotguns? Not sure exactly how to work out things like the Shots characteristic and how that impacts things.

As I recall, there was some comment (can't remember if it came from Pulver himself) that the anti-materiel rifle should have been LC2 - I've tended to reduce the LC of weapons with "very high power" with this system by an additional -1.

My assumption is that shotguns are likely Low Relative Power. However, without having figured out how smoothbore interacts with things like Range, Damage, etc, I can't say for sure yet.

Regarding the AMR, Very High Relative Power reducing LC by an additional -1 is probably reasonable, though I might also consider making the Bore Size threshold for reducing LC 15mm instead of 20mm. That would have the same effect, though it would also alter the Magnum Pistol, 15mmCLP.

Thanks again for your enthusiasm. It really does mean a lot!

Originally Posted by Varyon

I need to give this system a proper readthrough before I have anything really worth saying. One thing I will note is that I'm leery of how the Barrel Multiplier factors into the damage. With the gun design system from VDS, damage roughly scaled linearly with absolute barrel length (it was essentially BorexLength, but Length was in multiples of Bore and was only available in a few distinct sizes rather than being able to be arbitrarily set, which concealed the linear relationship). Of course, that assumed the propellant was always scaled to be optimal for that weapon's barrel length, while it sounds like yours may be essentially using the same ammunition for any, say, 9.11 Medium Power firearm, regardless of barrel length.

I realize that Barrel Multiplier increasing damage ad infinitum isn't realistic. That said, the exponential nature of its relationship does make it unfeasible, logistically speaking. The v0.3 Generator does indeed assume identical ammo if the Bore Size and Relative Power are the same. That way, you can theoretically get varying damage with varying Barrel Length, like with the Holdout Pistol, 7.5mmCLP and Medium Pistol, 7.5mmCLP.

Originally Posted by Varyon

For ST, it looks like you basically have it scaling roughly with the square root of ST for pistols, the fifth root of ST for rifles, and the third root of ST for cannon. I'm curious as to why you opted for this. For my own, I just went with ST = 5*(Weight)^0.5, and had rifles (which are two-handed) use 2/3 normal weight, as is typical for two-handed weapons.

This involved a lot of experimentation and a lot of logarithms. I kind of cheated and assumed that TL9 recoil compensating systems will be efficient enough to make that aspect a non-issue as far as basic operation is concerned. The narrower spread on ST values for rifle configuration (9 to 12 compared to 5 to 10 for most beam weapons) implied to me that the exponent needed to be significantly smaller than 0.5.

Originally Posted by Varyon

For Bulk, your length-based numbers almost match the Size and Speed/Range Table, but are a bit off. Why did you opt for these cutoffs instead of SSR? Does it simply match better with existing weapons? For my own, I put a 200 mm overall length at -1, 300 at -2, 500 at -3, etc, with in-between values rounding up, as is standard for SSR.

I found it matched better to existing weapons, primarily. It more-or-less is the SSR progression, except it rounds off more than up.

Originally Posted by Varyon

Finally, for Rcl, I'm simply curious where you came up with your equation from. For my own... I pretty much had no idea where to start, so I just set the most powerful weapons - those with a muzzle velocity of 320 m/s (the speed limit for my gear rifles) - to have Rcl 5 and had Rcl scale linearly with muzzle velocity (which worked out to Rcl=V/64). I think I like your suggestion better.

This one was just kind of an epiphany. I figured that since thrust and swing Damage scale linearly with ST, but that Basic Lift scales as a square, the same should be true for energy distributed through a firearm, only inverted (i.e. the square root). The numbers I played with scaled conveniently so I went with it.

Hope this has been helpful. Again, I appreciate the enthusiasm.

Jinumon