| From: | Gossamer <kajohnson@*******.TEC.WI.US> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Long range guns (was RE: Ah the large bore shotgun and |
| Date: | Fri, 14 Mar 1997 19:11:42 -0600 |
Who was thinking it? Why? How do we know that?
>that most firefights in SRII occur in a confined space,
Confined space should have no impact on aiming.
> with the participants firing from the hip
from where do you derive this?
>in poor lighting
If that were true, then vision enhancing equipment would be *much*
more valuable, especially thermal sights...
>while other people are shooting at them.
hmmm... combat shock might be a realistic explanation
for some of this, but it would affect pistol ranges too.
A good example of this would be the Clint Eastwood
movie 'Unforgiven' in which our antihero (Clint) guns
down a group of men, going really slowly at distances of
about 3-5 feet. They can't hit him because of this
combat shock. However, I simulate combat shock
with low skill scores... I don't see the need to simulate
it twice... My rationale is that as you get more skilled,
this fog of war goes away, and that's part of what makes
you better able to hit people.
> The range tables are intended to be used for "streetfighting."
Then, why do pistols have realistic ranges while rifles have
unrealistic ones?
> When you took that 2km shot with the .50 cal, how long
> did you aim for?
Ranging, sight adjustment, windage, sight adjustments,
check settings, check target, breathe, relax, slow the heart,
breathe, aim, exhale, heartbeat, shoot. I think about 15
seconds for the first shot, and then only about 3-5 for follow
up shots (If I were really working).
>Was it over open sights?
No, but I have fired an M-16A2 with iron sights at targets
1000m out (32 out of 50 hits), and 800m (41 out of 50).
On those occasions, aim time was less than 10 seconds
per shot.
>Was the target shooting back?
If they *see* you, you're not doing your job. ; >
[alternate system deleted]
This is close to the system we use. Yours is
much more streamlined.
Gossamer
