Tactical reloads of shotguns

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by reb

tell that to the leathernecks who carried the 12 ga through the pacific where it was the preferred waepon of choice and veitnam where the 12 ga was widely used as a bush weapon as well as a ambush weapon.need to read up on your history there.a rifle is fine for areas where your going to be shooting at 200+ yards on a regular basis,which is'nt going to happen in a jungle or a urban area.thats what saws are for and m-4's.
in a cqb urban clearing op i sure would want a 12 ga over a m-4 anyday.where you get your whacky notions?i am a ex marine with 18 yrs in a combat arms mos(f.o n inf)so i know what i'm talking about.just because you do work with appropiations don't tell you what actual combat arms units are doing out in the field at the battallion level or the company level.nuff said.

Crakkerjack doesn't work with appropiations. As far as I know, he was just a regular Leatherneck.

Without any automatic shotguns, I note.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by safisher

There are millions of variations on loading/handling issues, and some organizations may not allow one to pull the trigger except when the barrel is in a bullet catching device or deliberately fired at a target (I know, but have seen the range rules) and I am sure some shotgun exists that probably does not have a slide release, or has one that is easily depressed so that it would not require a separate action or unready the weapon. Still, I hoped to explain why one-for-one and filling an empty gun may differ in reload time. <shrug> Hopefully folks appreciate the effort. Honestly, a lot of times it feels like a waste.

How does this feel like a waste?

Not everyone has access to the manuscript of Tactical Shooting. Yet situations come up which require more precise rules than the ones given in High-Tech. The assumption there seems to be that the shooter has enough time to completely reload his weapon one shell at a time. This situation, in fact, rarely comes up in my games. If someone has time to do that, I'm usually not tracking time in 1-second turns anyway.

The more usual situation is one of:

GM: "Awright, your two blasts drop the second Godless Killing Machine and he goes down snarling in pain. From the rustling behind you it's likely that there is something prowling around there and you can see what appears to be an even larger beast behind the hedge 20 yards away. You've got a shot if you want, but it's in cover."
Shotgun Pete: "Nah, I don't take the shot. Don't wanna be caught with a dry long arm and have to rely on a dinky pistol against these things. I guess I've got at least a second or two of grace before the next one reaches me, even if they run all out. How many shells can I top up with in that time?"

And you've given me valuable guidelines to how to adjudicate that. For one, that Double-Loading can be adapted to loading shotguns with internal magazines. Second, that readying more than one shell at a time is possible (though I still have to make up my mind about rules for precisely how many and what checks I require for it).

Now if I just had an idea what sidesaddle shellholders do in comparison with keeping the shells in a pouch at the belt and I'd be a happy man.

[BMR]

[Dips in for a quick break from writing manuscripts, and finds a pot to stir]

I have difficulty imagining the USAS12 being deployed in Iraq beyond very small and quite informal numbers. Perhaps being lended by PMCs or even Iraqis themselves as a lark, but not an official Pentagon program!

Any sanctioned small arms program fielded in the Gulf would be reported in Marine Times and Janes Information Group at least, since the USMC doesn't keep procurement of infantry arms a secret. This stuff gets in the AP news too. That pretty much settles it for me. They declared IAR candidates, the XM8 trials, the dismal performance of the C-Mag, the delight over M32, etc. etc. So I'd like to see the reports on USAS deployment.

I know from experience and research that the Marines do indeed forge their own paths, as demonstrated by their trailblazing decision to adopt M240s as an infantry machine gun. Shotguns have an important CQB and security function as I've expressed in the past.

But the Marines already have the M1014 for support, and the M26 MASS to play around with for door breaching. Otherwise DoD has been killing programs left and right because they've already spent the farm on Iraq and Afghanistan, and they want off-the shelf interims until LSAT produces results. (Or tanks out like ACR and SPIW and OICW and so on...). There are reasons why our boys still have M4s and '16s.

While I freely dispute minutae with the ol' fella, Hans is correct. Tube-fed shottys make us happy, because that supports the operating environment, ergonomics, and economics. As those Pacific leathernecks knew. Those same Marines also started their island wars with the big drum fed Thompsons, too. By the end of the war it was stick mags because the drums were too noisy and too big and too fragile.

As mentioned in the battle rifles and bulk thread, that tube-fed shotgun has a subjectively better profile for its duty than something with a magazine, a drum, or grips sticking out. If one needs more than 8 loaded rounds of 12 gauge in close-quarters, maybe its time to use an M4A1.

Using USAS as a field support weapon sounds even more dubious, especially for MOUNT combat. Just use an M32 or a SAW. They exist and have greater tactical flexibility. I wouldn't turn my nose up at a shotgun for outdoors combat, but I'd be going with that 9-shot 590 before a USAS.

However... Icelander may have his shotgun solution in Reb's suggestion of that particular auto gun. I was going to say that on issues of hair splitting inconsistencies in rules, that you just make those rules consistent without consulting us. But look at the unexpected gift it has given you! Godlless Evil, meet USAS 12. Remember those fixers!

Ahh. I hope Cyberpunk is down the line just long enough for me to prove myself worthy of contributing to it, but not so far away that we all have to wait for them fixers. [Slinks back to his assignments].

[BMR]

Now if I just had an idea what sidesaddle shellholders do in comparison with keeping the shells in a pouch at the belt and I'd be a happy man.

They don't necessarily offer any difference. I used a nylon stock shell holder from Blackhawk (not my choice--I'm a Bianchi man) with my M590A1. I wouldn't say it's any faster than a pouch at my waist, or even my hip. Reaching for your body is more natural than reaching for the stock or the reciever. And the shells weigh down the gun, so you might lose in keeping the gun level and downrange what you gain in supply proximity. Plus, its a temptation to look at the gun when you should be keeping your eyes on the battlespace (reloading is to be done by feel). I'm a big believer in keeping your piece light and widget free. If you really need to reload quickly, that's what a back-up gun and a reserve team are for.

This is what GMs can do if minutia matters. If the PC is prone, assign a penalty to any worn pouch, if its between his body and the dirt. Make up the penalty as you see fit. If the PC uses a stock or reciever holder instead, just go with the default roll. If the guy is specifically trained to Fast Draw reload from his own weapon, go with that skill or give him a small bonus.

As detailed as GURPS is, the GM has to wing a lot of this stuff. That's a tough admission to make from a psychotic control freak like me, but that's also part of the beauty of SJGI.

Okay, now I'm back to work.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by BMR

However... Icelander may have his shotgun solution in Reb's suggestion of that particular auto gun. I was going to say that on issues of hair splitting inconsistencies in rules, that you just make those rules consistent without consulting us. But look at the unexpected gift it has given you! Godlless Evil, meet USAS 12. Remember those fixers!

Restricted under the NFA from 1934. In semi-automatic configuration (the WM-12), restricted under the Assault Weapon Ban which still exists in Massachusetts as it is a semi-automatic shotgun with a detachable magazine and pistol grip. If you could convince the US manufacturer (who no longer sells the weapon) to make a special weapon for you with a thumbhole grip instead of the pistol grip, maybe you could have it shipped to a licenced FFL dealer in MA and buy it from him. In any event, specifically restricted in Boston under an Act from 1989 unless the detachable magazine was permanently limited to 5 rounds or less.

The end result would be that you'd have gone through enormous trouble and probably spent upwards of $5,000 on a weapon that is heavier than shotguns you can legally buy in every sporting store and holds fewer rounds than some of them. The sole benefit would be the faster reloading time, with 2 seconds to switch mags on a successful Fast-Draw (Ammo) roll.

But with a combination of Double-Loading, judicious use of Fast-Draw (Ammo) to ready more than one shell at a time and suchlike, it may be that this is only marginally faster than reloading their Mossberg 500 Persuaders. If HANS and safisher agree that a successful Double-Loading check would suffice to top up two shells in a Mossberg in one second*, I don't see the need for a detachable mag shotgun.

*I've got a hunch that this should probably be at least at a penalty, for not having two barrels side-by-side and thus requiring them to be fed one after another in effectively the same time.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by BMR

They don't necessarily offer any difference. I used a nylon stock shell holder from Blackhawk (not my choice--I'm a Bianchi man) with my M590A1. I wouldn't say it's any faster than a pouch at my waist, or even my hip. Reaching for your body is more natural than reaching for the stock or the reciever.

Depends on training. Two PCs have been established as training rather extensively in urban assault and room clearing with pump shotguns. One, in particular, spent almost a decade in various MP duties, among them several years in a SRT unit and a year training Iraqi police in blasting in doors. He carried a Mossberg 590A1 as his prefered weapon for years and specifically mentioned having used a sidesaddle shell holder for all of them.

If any Perks or Techniques for this exist, I think I'd allow this PC to have them.

Originally Posted by BMR

And the shells weigh down the gun, so you might lose in keeping the gun level and downrange what you gain in supply proximity. Plus, its a temptation to look at the gun when you should be keeping your eyes on the battlespace (reloading is to be done by feel). I'm a big believer in keeping your piece light and widget free. If you really need to reload quickly, that's what a back-up gun and a reserve team are for.

Good point. Four or six shells on the stock shouldn't hurt Bulk enough for an actual penalty, but loading all the shells you can on a gun that's already at the line for a Bulk breakpoint should probably give a -1 to Bulk.

Originally Posted by BMR

This is what GMs can do if minutia matters. If the PC is prone, assign a penalty to any worn pouch, if its between his body and the dirt. Make up the penalty as you see fit. If the PC uses a stock or reciever holder instead, just go with the default roll. If the guy is specifically trained to Fast Draw reload from his own weapon, go with that skill or give him a small bonus.

Position penalties are a good point.

But I was thinking that good shell holders, at least, might give a +1 or +2 to Fast-Draw (Ammo) in the same way that good web gear does. And maybe, just maybe, a shell holder gives a +1 as an equipment bonus, before modifying for quality.

[safisher]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

I'm not an expert on all the myriad actions of shotguns, but range rules should not be a part of mechanics. The default assumption is a combat situation, as I know you're well aware.

Sadly, "train how you fight; fight how you train" is important when we talk about training versus combat when we talk about BS rules. Agencies once were so successful at ingraining dumb behavior that officers made stupid mistakes in the field that they learned as administrative range rules. Look up the phrase "cruiser safe, cruiser ready." That said, it's never a good idea to in-grain a trigger pull as a firearm manipulation step unless it's to shoot the bad guy. That's a philosophy not all share, I realize. And, of course, I realize the things were discussing are not absolutes -- I am not the end-all and be-all of shotgun knowledge, even though I am a trainer and have extensive experience with the subject. Always can learn more.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Crakkerjack doesn't work with appropiations. As far as I know, he was just a regular Leatherneck.

Without any automatic shotguns, I note.

Indeed. Reb may be former jarhead with umpteen years of experience in combat arms, but I know a) the USAS12 isn't an issue weapon, and b) shotguns were almost never the "preferred" weapon in any situation. They're a compromise weapon, they were certainly preferred by some folks in some situations, but it was incredibly rare for someone to take a shotgun when they could take a weapon with a higher rate of fire, higher ammo capacity, better handling characteristics, and longer range. They were used as trench guns in WWI, some folks took them into the brush in 'Nam, and they've always been issued to various people like MPs and such, but that doesn't mean anything close to a majority ever preferred them. Their ammo is too heavy, their range too short, and their sustainable rate of fire too low.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

They were used as trench guns in WWI, some folks took them into the brush in 'Nam, and they've always been issued to various people like MPs and such, but that doesn't mean anything close to a majority ever preferred them. Their ammo is too heavy, their range too short, and their sustainable rate of fire too low.

Well, fixing the sustainable rate of fire with high skill in Fast-Draw (Ammo) and Perks is why I started this thread.

I ought to write up my idea of the modified Double Loading Technique and a modified Quick Reload Perk which is fractionally less cinematic.

Of course, I also ought to be sleeping and not fiddling with rules I won't need until Sunday. Or at the very least preparing tomorrow's Fantasy game and not Sudany's Modern Action Secret Fantasy Horror. Will I never learn? ;)

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Well, fixing the sustainable rate of fire with high skill in Fast-Draw (Ammo) and Perks is why I started this thread.

I was talking about the real world, fool that I am. A shotgun will never compare to a SAW for being able to keep an area suppressed.

Originally Posted by Icelander

Of course, I also ought to be sleeping and not fiddling with rules I won't need until Sunday. Or at the very least preparing tomorrow's Fantasy game and not Sudany's Modern Action Secret Fantasy Horror. Will I never learn? ;)

Most likely not. We only learn what we want to, not what we should.