Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: andre eibel <eibel.andre@**.COMCITY.DE>
Subject: recoil and vehicle
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 19:52:54 -0500
Hello out there

After reading lots about Vindicators and so I think it`s time
to address an other stupid think: hardpoints and recoil.
It`s stated that hardpoints half the recoil before modifications.
They do it on every vehicle be it a bike or a panzer, thats plain stupid to
me.
If you have ever seen a Gepard panzer fire in full auto with 4! guns you know
what I mean.
These dammed things hit 98% of all shots in a area about 1m.
Now in SR it would go that the same kind of weapon installed on a lighter
vehicle
would do the same because the hardpoint rule is for all vehicle identical.

Now my house rule:

A hardpoint provides the UNMODIFIED body rating as recoil reduction and half
of that to
weapons firing to the side of the vehicle.

Any comments?
--
Barbie


==================================================
You can see the earth we`re high here we`re
climbing over sumertowm you can kiss the air we`re
gliding follow me for sumerland no sound no life
no essence we lay enstranged in our curious ways
memories lay beside us but i`m seeing through an
age who i`m through sumerland.

(Fields of the Nephilim-Eilzium-Weil of Sumer)

Message no. 2
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:31:10 EDT
On Mon, 2 Jun 1997 19:52:54 -0500 andre eibel <eibel.andre@**.COMCITY.DE>
writes:
>Hello out there
>
>After reading lots about Vindicators and so I think it`s time
>to address an other stupid think: hardpoints and recoil.
>It`s stated that hardpoints half the recoil before modifications.
>They do it on every vehicle be it a bike or a panzer, thats plain
>stupid to
>me.
> If you have ever seen a Gepard panzer fire in full auto with 4! guns
>you know
>what I mean.
>These dammed things hit 98% of all shots in a area about 1m.
>Now in SR it would go that the same kind of weapon installed on a
>lighter
>vehicle
>would do the same because the hardpoint rule is for all vehicle
>identical.


Correct...but not correct. Why? because the smaller vehicles has to
devote just as many hardpoints to mounting that weapon. Since only the
Rotary Cannon-class weapons require more than one hardpoint, and are also
the only ones that have a recoil mod of +4 or something, only a vehicle
capable of mounting something like 4 hardpoints in one location can use
it. Vehicles smaller than a panzer usually can't mount that many
hardpoints-they don't have enough body. You simply cannot mount a
Vigilant on something that doesn't have a Body of 6-it just doesn't fit.
Smaller vehicles tend to mount smaller weapons. Larger ones either mount
big weapons or lots of small ones.


>Now my house rule:
>
>A hardpoint provides the UNMODIFIED body rating as recoil reduction
>and half
>of that to
>weapons firing to the side of the vehicle.
>
>Any comments?

Yeah, see above.
Message no. 3
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 21:09:33 +0100
andre eibel said on 19:52/ 2 Jun 97...

> After reading lots about Vindicators and so I think it`s time
> to address an other stupid think: hardpoints and recoil.
> It`s stated that hardpoints half the recoil before modifications.
> They do it on every vehicle be it a bike or a panzer, thats plain stupid to
> me.

The vehicle's mass should have something to do with it too, yes.

> If you have ever seen a Gepard panzer fire in full auto with 4! guns you know
> what I mean.

I somehow doubt you'll ever see that, since a Gepard only has two guns :)

> These dammed things hit 98% of all shots in a area about 1m.

That's not just because a Gepard weighs about 50 tons, but also because of
the fire control system that takes into account muzzle velocity, vehicle
tilt, and other factors; also the KDA is a very accurate gun, and the fire
control system only fires short bursts (adjusted in length for the range
to target) so less ammo will be wasted going past the target.
BTW, an accuracy figure is worthless unless you also mention the range at
which it was measured :)

> Now my house rule:
>
> A hardpoint provides the UNMODIFIED body rating as recoil reduction and
> half of that to weapons firing to the side of the vehicle.

Sounds good, this way a stronger/heavier vehicle suffers less from recoil
than a light vehicle. A Banshee can fire its cannon pretty well this way,
while the same gun on a Jackrabbit is a lot less accurate.
For military vehicles, you could go further and include the armor in the
recoil reduction, and perhaps give another point if the suspension is
locked out...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
People always talk about long-distance phonecalls as if they had to walk
all the way.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 4
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:52:57 -0600
L Canthros wrote:
|
| On Mon, 2 Jun 1997 19:52:54 -0500 andre eibel <eibel.andre@**.COMCITY.DE>
| writes:
| >Hello out there
| >
| >After reading lots about Vindicators and so I think it`s time
| >to address an other stupid think: hardpoints and recoil.
| >It`s stated that hardpoints half the recoil before modifications.
| >They do it on every vehicle be it a bike or a panzer, thats plain
| >stupid to
| >me.
| > If you have ever seen a Gepard panzer fire in full auto with 4! guns
| >you know
| >what I mean.
| >These dammed things hit 98% of all shots in a area about 1m.
| >Now in SR it would go that the same kind of weapon installed on a
| >lighter
| >vehicle
| >would do the same because the hardpoint rule is for all vehicle
| >identical.
|
| Correct...but not correct. Why? because the smaller vehicles has to
| devote just as many hardpoints to mounting that weapon. Since only the
| Rotary Cannon-class weapons require more than one hardpoint, and are also
| the only ones that have a recoil mod of +4 or something, only a vehicle
| capable of mounting something like 4 hardpoints in one location can use
| it. Vehicles smaller than a panzer usually can't mount that many
| hardpoints-they don't have enough body. You simply cannot mount a
| Vigilant on something that doesn't have a Body of 6-it just doesn't fit.
| Smaller vehicles tend to mount smaller weapons. Larger ones either mount
| big weapons or lots of small ones.

How about dedicating extra hardpoints to a weapon to lower the
recoil. Say, each extra hardpoint reduces the recoil by half. So a
heavy weapon with a recoil of +2 per round is reduced to +1 for one
extra hard point, +1 per 2 rounds for a second hard point, and so
on.

-David
--
/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 5
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 19:00:11 EDT
On Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:52:57 -0600 David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
writes:
<snip>
>How about dedicating extra hardpoints to a weapon to lower the
>recoil. Say, each extra hardpoint reduces the recoil by half. So a
>heavy weapon with a recoil of +2 per round is reduced to +1 for one
>extra hard point, +1 per 2 rounds for a second hard point, and so
>on.

Except that the large weapons already require multiple hardpoints, the
Vigilant cannon needs something like four. Maybe for every one over
what's needed. I think what you're going to have to do is use a little
bit of common sense:) A Jackrabbit isn't plausibly going to be able to
mount a Rotary Cannot. It may not even be big enough to fit a Rotary
Cannon onto. And if you did, there probably wouldn't be room for the
driver or any passengers:) And the recoil would probably throw the
vehicle back quite a ways...

--
-Canthros
And ye shall know the truth, and lobo1@****.com
the truth shall set you free. canthros1@***.com
--John 8:32, KJV
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 6
From: andre eibel <eibel.andre@**.COMCITY.DE>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 01:28:34 -0500
At 02-Jun-97 wrote L Canthros:


>bit of common sense:) A Jackrabbit isn't plausibly going to be able to
>mount a Rotary Cannot. It may not even be big enough to fit a Rotary
>Cannon onto. And if you did, there probably wouldn't be room for the
>driver or any passengers:)

Thats open to discussion, how big are the guns realy?
I think one rotary cannon build to shot streight forward must be manageable.

>And the recoil would probably throw the
>vehicle back quite a ways...

Yup my meaning!

>--
>-Canthros


--
Barbie


==================================================
You can see the earth we`re high here we`re
climbing over sumertowm you can kiss the air we`re
gliding follow me for sumerland no sound no life
no essence we lay enstranged in our curious ways
memories lay beside us but i`m seeing through an
age who i`m through sumerland.

(Fields of the Nephilim-Eilzium-Weil of Sumer)

Message no. 7
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 06:48:51 -0600
L Canthros wrote:
|
| On Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:52:57 -0600 David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
| writes:
| <snip>
| >How about dedicating extra hardpoints to a weapon to lower the
| >recoil. Say, each extra hardpoint reduces the recoil by half. So a
| >heavy weapon with a recoil of +2 per round is reduced to +1 for one
| >extra hard point, +1 per 2 rounds for a second hard point, and so
| >on.
|
| Except that the large weapons already require multiple hardpoints, the
| Vigilant cannon needs something like four. Maybe for every one over
| what's needed.

That's exactly what I meant. And I'm starting to like the other idea of
using body as recoil compensation for each extra hard point applied to a
weapon (simple is almost always better).

| I think what you're going to have to do is use a little
| bit of common sense:) A Jackrabbit isn't plausibly going to be able to
| mount a Rotary Cannot. It may not even be big enough to fit a Rotary
| Cannon onto. And if you did, there probably wouldn't be room for the
| driver or any passengers:) And the recoil would probably throw the
| vehicle back quite a ways...

It'd make a good NPC car for a laugh though :)

-David
--
/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 8
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:52:16 EDT
On Tue, 3 Jun 1997 06:48:51 -0600 David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
writes:
>L Canthros wrote:
>|
>| On Mon, 2 Jun 1997 14:52:57 -0600 David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
>| writes:
>| <snip>
>| >How about dedicating extra hardpoints to a weapon to lower the
>| >recoil. Say, each extra hardpoint reduces the recoil by half. So a
>| >heavy weapon with a recoil of +2 per round is reduced to +1 for one
>| >extra hard point, +1 per 2 rounds for a second hard point, and so
>| >on.
>|
>| Except that the large weapons already require multiple hardpoints, the
>| Vigilant cannon needs something like four. Maybe for every one over
>| what's needed.
>
>That's exactly what I meant. And I'm starting to like the other idea of
>using body as recoil compensation for each extra hard point applied to a
>weapon (simple is almost always better).


D'oh! That's also what you wrote:) I'll have to start reading more
closely. I kinda like the idea that was originally proposed, because it
takes into account the vehicle's mass. Maybe you could give a vehicle
weapon recoil comp equal to the vehicle's body plus it's armor (or maybe
divide that entire number by two). This would give something like the
Banshee _tons_ of recoil comp. In fact, it might be a good idea to
distribute the recoil comp obtained that way so that each weapon being
fired at the same time on the vehicle receives an equal amount of
compensation.


--
-Canthros
And ye shall know the truth, and lobo1@****.com
the truth shall set you free. canthros1@***.com
--John 8:32, KJV
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 9
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:44:52 -0600
L Canthros wrote:
|
| On Tue, 3 Jun 1997 06:48:51 -0600 David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
| writes:
| >
| >That's exactly what I meant. And I'm starting to like the other idea of
| >using body as recoil compensation for each extra hard point applied to a
| >weapon (simple is almost always better).
|
|
| D'oh! That's also what you wrote:) I'll have to start reading more
| closely.

Null persperation chummer :)

| I kinda like the idea that was originally proposed, because it
| takes into account the vehicle's mass. Maybe you could give a vehicle
| weapon recoil comp equal to the vehicle's body plus it's armor (or maybe
| divide that entire number by two). This would give something like the
| Banshee _tons_ of recoil comp. In fact, it might be a good idea to
| distribute the recoil comp obtained that way so that each weapon being
| fired at the same time on the vehicle receives an equal amount of
| compensation.

<tries to find thinking cap>

Okay, how about if a vehicle provides an amount of recoil
compensation equal to its Body plus 1/2 it's Armor rating (if any).
If multiple weapons (producing recoil) are fired on the same action
the recoil is divided evenly among them. The recoil compensation
provided by the vehicle may only be applied to weapons mounted on
hardpoints (use the standard recoil rules for weapons on
firmpoints).

<gives up search for thinking cap and puts on his best face>

Sound good so far?

-David
--
/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 10
From: andre eibel <eibel.andre@**.COMCITY.DE>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 18:16:42 -0500
At 02-Jun-97 wrote Gurth:



>I somehow doubt you'll ever see that, since a Gepard only has two guns :)

sorry I mixed somethings in my mind, you are right

>> These dammed things hit 98% of all shots in a area about 1m.

>That's not just because a Gepard weighs about 50 tons, but also because of
>the fire control system that takes into account muzzle velocity, vehicle
>tilt, and other factors; also the KDA is a very accurate gun, and the fire
>control system only fires short bursts (adjusted in length for the range
>to target) so less ammo will be wasted going past the target.
>BTW, an accuracy figure is worthless unless you also mention the range at
>which it was measured :)

KDA? which gun is that?
My Info about the equipment of the Gepard says:
Two Oerlikon maschincannons 35 mm typ L/90 range 3500 m theoretical fire rate
>660/min.
Fire controlsystem: one standart radar, one target Radar after vehicle nr. 196
laser rangefinder
and the firecontrolcomputer.

The accuracy figure was from a friend of mine.
He had shot this at a range of 2000m several times at his time by the army.
Ok he was one of the bests in his battalion.

>> Now my house rule:
>>
>> A hardpoint provides the UNMODIFIED body rating as recoil reduction and
>> half of that to weapons firing to the side of the vehicle.

>Sounds good, this way a stronger/heavier vehicle suffers less from recoil
>than a light vehicle. A Banshee can fire its cannon pretty well this way,
>while the same gun on a Jackrabbit is a lot less accurate.
>For military vehicles, you could go further and include the armor in the
>recoil reduction, and perhaps give another point if the suspension is
>locked out...

Good idea with the armor.....

>--
>Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
> People always talk about long-distance phonecalls as if they had to walk
> all the way.
> -> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
>-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

>-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
>Version 3.1:
>GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
>Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
>------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
--
Barbie


==================================================
You can see the earth we`re high here we`re
climbing over sumertowm you can kiss the air we`re
gliding follow me for sumerland no sound no life
no essence we lay enstranged in our curious ways
memories lay beside us but i`m seeing through an
age who i`m through sumerland.

(Fields of the Nephilim-Eilzium-Weil of Sumer)

Message no. 11
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:48:31 EDT
On Tue, 3 Jun 1997 09:44:52 -0600 David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
writes:
<snip>
><tries to find thinking cap>
>
>Okay, how about if a vehicle provides an amount of recoil
>compensation equal to its Body plus 1/2 it's Armor rating (if any).
>If multiple weapons (producing recoil) are fired on the same action
>the recoil is divided evenly among them. The recoil compensation
>provided by the vehicle may only be applied to weapons mounted on
>hardpoints (use the standard recoil rules for weapons on
>firmpoints).
>
><gives up search for thinking cap and puts on his best face>
>
>Sound good so far?


Works for me.
Message no. 12
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: recoil and vehicle
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 19:13:17 +0100
In message <yam7093.2134.136170776@****.comcity.de>, andre eibel
<eibel.andre@**.COMCITY.DE> writes
>KDA? which gun is that?
>My Info about the equipment of the Gepard says:
>Two Oerlikon maschincannons 35 mm typ L/90 range 3500 m theoretical fire rate
>>660/min.

The Oerlikon KDA is the 35mm/90 fitted to the Gepard.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about recoil and vehicle, 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.

Thwap!