Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Jan-bart van Beek <flake@***.NL>
Subject: Armor Piercing
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 1995 21:23:31 +0100
I was looking at the rules for Merc: 2000 and saw something interresting.
Most Armor piercing weapons, that means all anti-vehicle weapons, all
rockets and a lot of the cooler ammo, not only have a damage rating but
also a penetration rating. They don't just halve the rating of any
barrier or armor, but they can pierce a certain amount of armor, this has
nothing to do with the explosion forces of the actual warhead, but more
to do with the way a weapon works.
Have you ever seen a Tomahawk or a Durandal hit a building. Well it
breaks right through the walls, continues for about a meter or two, and
then blow the crap out of it. thus, from the inside.

I suggest the following:

Any type of ammo has a penetration value. This penetration value is added
to the damage rating and the total is substracted by the armor rating.
Optionally you can also judge that penetration value degrades over
distance, as is usually the case with rifle fired ammunition.

Her's an example:

Stalk, a Street Ops, has some trouble with an armored Panzer. He drags
his faithful Tank Breaker from his back and fires.
This missile has got a pen. Value of 9 and Dam. Rate of 12.
The Panzer has got an Armor Rating of 9 and a body of 4, totalling 13.
9+12-13=8, the actual damge after impact is 8.
Note that the Pen. Value does no damage on it's own.
If the total Armor Rating would have been 6. The final damage would only
be 12 , and not 9+12-6= 15.

This is a lot closer to how anti-armor weapons actually work, so what do
you think.

Also, ther seems to be one kind of missile that FASA accidently forgot.
FASA has rockets and missile's, rocket's sre just fired and hit or don't
hit and missile's are guided by on-board computers.
But in reality ther's one more, the opreator guided missile. If you guys
are familiar with this, the Dutch army's Stinger is such a weapon. It's
guided by the firer or a special operator and homes in on the location
this operator aims at. The missile has to be aimed all the time while
it's in-flight. Your ECM can't do very little about this kind of
guidance, as you are not the source of guiding, like in the case of an IR
gided-missile which you can distract.

Such missile's would in game terms be rockets with Smartlinks, giving the
firer a -2 to his target number. These things would probably be the price
normal rockets cost. Real rockets, like the once found in Bazooka-type
weapons would cost abou a fifth of the stated price. The black-market
price would be about 400 NuYen, and are quit easy to get.

--------------------------------------------------------------
| Beware of what you ask for you may recieve it |
--------------------------------------------------------------

**** The Cornflake Killer Strikes again ****
Message no. 2
From: MR DELIVAN S HARDERS <YUBM21A@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 1995 17:42:33 EST
In regards to the subject of armor-piercing ammo, it should also be noted
that these types of rounds do less damage than your conventional types.
The hope is to hit something important. This is especially true with small
arms. The penetrator is made of a very hard substance which won't deform
when hitting a body, which means less hydrostatic damage being imparted to
the target, which means he has a better chance of surviving (unless it goes
through his heart or brain). The same can be said for anti-armor weapons.
You could hit the vehicle and only take out the commander and the radio,
meanwhile the main gun is pointing at you and sending a 120mm round down to
you. As for operator guided weapons, you have two problems (especially in
SR). 1) You have to stand nice and still (ohh nice target *bang*) and 2)
the missile could be jammed depending on how it's being guided. Wire
guided couldn't be easily jammed (but that damn passing truck just broke my
wire). FASA decided to take the cowards way out and make everything very,
very simple and they actually did a not too bad job.

-Reaver
Message no. 3
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 11:16:44 +0100
>But in reality ther's one more, the opreator guided missile. If you guys
>are familiar with this, the Dutch army's Stinger is such a weapon. It's
>guided by the firer or a special operator and homes in on the location
>this operator aims at. The missile has to be aimed all the time while
>it's in-flight. Your ECM can't do very little about this kind of
>guidance, as you are not the source of guiding, like in the case of an IR
>gided-missile which you can distract.

Never having fired a Stinger :) I don't know if I'm completely correct, but
as far as I know, the Stinger gunner acquires a target in his sights, and
presses the trigger. This gives the missile a signal, like "See this heat
source? That's your target!" Then the missiles says "ok," after which the
firer can pull the trigger, launching the missile toward the target. If the
missile doesn't say "ok" you can't fire. All this is usually coupled to an
IFF (Identify Fried-Foe) system to avoids shooting down your own planes.
Stinger is a heat-seeker; you're confusing them with TOW anti-tank missiles,
which are wire-guided and virtually impossible to jam (shooting at the
operator will help :)
And it's the Air Force that uses Stingers, BTW :)


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Every time you shake someone's hand It determines where you stand
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y?
Message no. 4
From: "Thomas W. Craig" <Craigtw1@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 07:43:42 -0500
Gurth,
There are 2 different versions of the Stinger missile. The first is mounted
on aircraft and is fired at other aircraft. The second is fired from the
shoulder of a soldier and is also used to shoot down aircraft. Granted I
have never used either version, but I do know that the Afghanis were using
the shoulder mounted version in the fight against the Soviets.
Tom Craig
Message no. 5
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 16:17:40 -0600
Snip!
>Never having fired a Stinger :) I don't know if I'm completely correct, but
>as far as I know, the Stinger gunner acquires a target in his sights, and
>presses the trigger. This gives the missile a signal, like "See this heat
>source? That's your target!" Then the missiles says "ok," after which
the
>firer can pull the trigger, launching the missile toward the target. If the
>missile doesn't say "ok" you can't fire. All this is usually coupled to an
>IFF (Identify Fried-Foe) system to avoids shooting down your own planes.
>Stinger is a heat-seeker; you're confusing them with TOW anti-tank missiles,
>which are wire-guided and virtually impossible to jam (shooting at the
>operator will help :)
>And it's the Air Force that uses Stingers, BTW :)
>\
FYI Stinger missiles do not have any IFF capablities except for the MK I
eyeball. Also you can flush one out the tube without a lockon just your
chances to hit are greatly decreased. Yes you can jam IR hormers, flares
are just method, there are much more sophisticated ones available today.
Yes you can also jam optically guided missiles in essence. You remove your
self from the LOS of the operator, smoke, blind him, get behind something.

>Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html

Sinbad Sam "Competor in the Olongopo Beer Consumption Marathon '80,'81,'83"
sinbad@********.com
Message no. 6
From: MR DELIVAN S HARDERS <YUBM21A@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 23:49:46 EST
In reply to Sam Thomas' comment about Stinger's not having IFF code
systems, I'm afraid you're wrong on that one. The shoulder launched
version does have an IFF system, but the damn thing is so slow that most
smart infantry personnel don't hook it up. As to jamming IR missiles,
you're dead right on that. I noticed he mentioned that this was a Dutch
weapon system so they may have a different missile system that has the name
Stinger on it.

-Reaver
Message no. 7
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 01:06:17 -0600
> In reply to Sam Thomas' comment about Stinger's not having IFF code
>systems, I'm afraid you're wrong on that one. The shoulder launched
>version does have an IFF system, but the damn thing is so slow that most
>smart infantry personnel don't hook it up. As to jamming IR missiles,
>you're dead right on that. I noticed he mentioned that this was a Dutch
>weapon system so they may have a different missile system that has the name
>Stinger on it.
>
> -Reaver
>
The shipboard ones that we had did not have IFF, but that was over a few
years ago. Hopefully they know have something moew modern. Yea right.;-)

Sinbad Sam
sinbad sam
Message no. 8
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 11:20:34 +0100
>I noticed he mentioned that this was a Dutch
>weapon system so they may have a different missile system that has the name
>Stinger on it.

Nope. It's the American Stinger missile (FIM-92 I think it's called,
right?), shoulder launched only -- the helicopter-launched model isn't in
service here because they haven't decided what attack chopper to buy, the
PAH-2 Tigre or the AH-64 Apache... I won't bother anyone with the details
behind _that_ story :)


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Every time you shake someone's hand It determines where you stand
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y?
Message no. 9
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 09:44:41 -0800
On Fri, 17 Feb 1995, MR DELIVAN S HARDERS wrote:

> In regards to the subject of armor-piercing ammo, it should also be noted
> that these types of rounds do less damage than your conventional types.
> The hope is to hit something important. This is especially true with small
> arms. The penetrator is made of a very hard substance which won't deform
> when hitting a body, which means less hydrostatic damage being imparted to
> the target, which means he has a better chance of surviving (unless it goes

A couple of notes:
Armor piercing ammunition generally does "less" damage because it
retains most of its kinetic energy when passing through the target. Any
bullet, irrespective of its hardness, that comes to a complete stop
within its target has delivered its complete kinetic energy. But
generally this is difficult to accomplish without squashing the bullet
down or some other braking mechanism.
And "hydrostatic shock" is not a significant damage mechanism for
personnel, as proved by the Wound Ballistics Lab in Aberdeen, Maryland.

> You could hit the vehicle and only take out the commander and the radio,
> meanwhile the main gun is pointing at you and sending a 120mm round down to

APDS rounds hitting enemy tanks usually have enough energy to
blow the turret/ring assembly some distance into the air.

> you. As for operator guided weapons, you have two problems (especially in
> SR). 1) You have to stand nice and still (ohh nice target *bang*) and 2)

Not true with "fire and forget" systems, or systems where the
launcher is offset from the guidance package.

> -Reaver

========================================================================
Adam Getchell "Invincibility is in oneself,
acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu vulnerability in the opponent."
http://instruction.ucdavis.edu/html/Adam/getchell.html
Message no. 10
From: Guy Swartwood <gswartwo@*********.WICHITAKS.NCR.COM>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 13:13:00 PST
A couple of notes:
Armor piercing ammunition generally does "less" damage because it
retains most of its kinetic energy when passing through the target. Any
bullet, irrespective of its hardness, that comes to a complete stop
within its target has delivered its complete kinetic energy. But
generally this is difficult to accomplish without squashing the bullet
down or some other braking mechanism.
================================

I also thought one of the reasons for less damage was that the bullet
retained most of its original shape (which isn't flatten) so the was less of
an impact area.

Of course, I am no expert in ammo, so correct me if i am wrong.
Message no. 11
From: Sean Sheridan <sean@**.WISC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 13:53:04 -0600
Just a few questions about this AP thread.. Is it about a rules problem or
is it just about AP bullets.? In SRII damage is calculated not by the bullet
or shell but by the firers skill. IE, where the bullet hits, not what the
bullet is. I think I read in Ripleys BION once that a man was hit by 57
rounds from a machinegun in WWII. And lived. My point is that damage done
by the bullet is inconsequential to the rules, just what effect the arbitrary
AP effect has on the arbitrary armor value when compared to an arbitrart
power level. I've found that the APDS ammo rules work well in stopping
the infamous layering armor effect in some games i've played in. And
it allows munchkins to carry reasonably sized weapons and still pull an
actionhero effect like blowing up a car with his SMG. Do you think the rules
actually need tweaking here?
Sean
Message no. 12
From: Adam Getchell <acgetche@****.UCDAVIS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Armor Piercing
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 14:18:14 -0800
On Tue, 21 Feb 1995, Guy Swartwood wrote:

> I also thought one of the reasons for less damage was that the bullet
> retained most of its original shape (which isn't flatten) so the was less of
> an impact area.

The impact area only bears on how efficiently the bullet
transfers its kinetic energy. Flechettes, which have a miniscule frontal
area, can still transfer energy because they yaw and tumble within the
body. And *all* bullets, up to .50 cal, tumble upon hitting foliage or
someone's flesh. (Wound Ballistics Lab again)
The energy transfer of the bullet, most experts agree, is the
primary damage mechanism. The size of the wound channel also bears, but
tissue damage is a complex medical subject, not really suitable for
Shadowrun.

========================================================================
Adam Getchell "Invincibility is in oneself,
acgetche@****.engr.ucdavis.edu vulnerability in the opponent."
http://instruction.ucdavis.edu/html/Adam/getchell.html
Message no. 13
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Armor-piercing
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 11:13:26 +0100
>> Yes, it's pretty tough seeing that "anti-tank" missiles do only 20D or
so
>> damage. Even attributing this to the "breakthroughs in armor tech"
mentioned
>
>Realise that the 20D is armour piercing. That means the Banshee takes 11D if
>hit by one. And has 15 dice to resist. I'd like to see one survive that.

I do realise it's armor-piercing, but if an MBT has armor of, say, 50, the
20D won't give it a scratch. 20D will (and should) kill any character hit by
it, but if you compare the missile's 20D to an assault rifle's 8M, and then
compare them to real-world figures 20D is rediculously low...


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Blabbering on like rubbish there...
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y?
Message no. 14
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Armor-piercing
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 00:19:43 +1000
Gurth writes:

> I do realise it's armor-piercing, but if an MBT has armor of, say, 50, the
> 20D won't give it a scratch. 20D will (and should) kill any character hit by
> it, but if you compare the missile's 20D to an assault rifle's 8M, and then
> compare them to real-world figures 20D is rediculously low...

Well, if you work out the probablilities, a power of 20 is around 36 times
more difficult to resist than a power of 8. You'll need about 7 dice to get
a single success when hit with a power 8 weapon, while you'll need 260 odd
to get a single success with a power of 20. Now, while this may not be a
true to life reflection of the differences, it's well and good enough if you
ask me. No-one, except perhaps the luckiest bugger alive, will resist 20D
armour piercing. The only way to do it is to burn a hell of a lot of karma
in the process. But I do see your point, an MBT, with somewhere around 30-50
armour, is not going to be terribly worried about a 20D armour piercing
attack. Why do you think the RBB mentions a rail gun, but, like the MBT,
fails to give stats? FASA wanted to make sure there was something around
which could damage the MBT, that's why. Shadowrun is a game about _people_,
not vehicles. If you want to go and blow up combat vehicles, play Btech or
something. Shadowrun is, more or less, restricted to the people end of the
scale, so I don't see it neccessary to be concerned about tanks, and
anti-tank weaponry. If players are getting mixed up in that kind of stuff,
then they (and their GM) are delving off into an area SR wasn't exactly
designed for (read the blurb in FoF at the beginning of the rules section).
While there isn't really anything wrong with this (each to their own and all
that), it isn't quite SR any more in my view, it becomes a game using the SR
system, but with a different setting.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a18 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 15
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Armor-piercing
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 11:46:00 +0100
[probabilities deleted]
>Now, while this may not be a
>true to life reflection of the differences, it's well and good enough if you
>ask me. No-one, except perhaps the luckiest bugger alive, will resist 20D
>armour piercing. The only way to do it is to burn a hell of a lot of karma
>in the process.

Like I said, 20D should kill any character who comes into close contact with
it (well, maybe Reaver would survive it :).

>But I do see your point, an MBT, with somewhere around 30-50
>armour, is not going to be terribly worried about a 20D armour piercing
>attack.

Which is why I think the anti-tank missiles should he more like 40D -- which
is also something most runners would't get their hands onto :) Imagine them
walking around with a Hellfire missile and portable launcher...


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Blabbering on like rubbish there...
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y?
Message no. 16
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Armor-piercing
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 23:45:58 +1000
Gurth writes:

> Which is why I think the anti-tank missiles should he more like 40D -- which
> is also something most runners would't get their hands onto :) Imagine them
> walking around with a Hellfire missile and portable launcher...

If you give it stats runners _will_ get their hands on it. And, yes, I could
imagine it - all the more reasons _not_ to give such things stats. I think a
mysterious weapon like the rail gun mentioned in the RBB is much better,
because the players can never get one, and the problem of taking out big and
nasty tanks is also solved. Sure, we can speculate that the rail gun has
damage codes of whatever we like, 20D, 50D, 100000D, whatever we wish. And
if we really want to, we as GMs can introduce such things into our games
(and MBTs too), but if we do, then it will be an unknown quantity to the
players (which is a good thing in my view). If players know everything about
the game, then a lot of the fun can be spoiled (and I quote &&&& as my
proof). I'm glad SR doesn't do the &&&& (and many other games) thing of
giving major "artifacts" and NPCs stats, as this allows GMs to tailor things
very much to their game. As it says in Harlequins Back "The Number One Rule
of Role-Playing: If you give an NPC stats, no matter how tough he is supposed
to be, somebody, somewhere will kill him" (or similar).

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a18 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 17
From: Eve Forward <lutra@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Armor-piercing
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 08:26:48 -0800
Damion writes:

>>>if we really want to, we as GMs can introduce such things into our games
(and MBTs too), but if we do, then it will be an unknown quantity to the
players (which is a good thing in my view).<<<<

I agree, such things as are not detailed to players should be left up to
the use of the GM only, in situations where the players don't stand a
chance of getting hold of one.

I recall when my cocky rigger was flying a mission at one point, shot down
a plane or two, very "I can beat anything in the sky kinda attitude." Then
a pair of Stonewalls came up over the rise. He (my rigger) went from "Yahoo!
Let's kick ass!" to "Oh frag, oh frag, we're gonna die we're gonna die we're
gonna DIE! Oh frag frag frag... game over, man, game over!" in 0.2 seconds.
That kind of blind helpless terror is what role playing games are all about.

I still have no clue what those things are capable of.

-E

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Armor Piercing, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.