Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: One Ronin <ronin@*******.COM>
Subject: Scope questions...........
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 16:22:43 PST
Alright.....enough damned mouthwash jokes......this post is about the
kinda of scope shadowrunners use.....image magnification scopes. This
question actually has little to do with the current thread on
magnification/smartlink systems, so even if you are sick of that
discussion, read on.

Let me start by saying that I have VERY little experience with scopes.
The Army taught me how to accurately shoot several different types of
weapons, but gave me no training on scopes of any kind. I do have much
conceptual knowledge, and have actually fired a scope-equipped weapon in
the past (controlled hunting enviroment), but I know little else. I do,
however know enough about scopes to realize that their representation in
Shadowrun is a little off.

Let me give you an example. Sniper A and sniper B are both on a
rooftop, practicing their sharpshooting. Sniper A is using a Walther MA
2100 sniper rifle with a store-bought generic Mag-2 scope. Sniper B is
using his trusty M-22, mounted with the EXACT same store-bought Mag-2
scope. They are shooting at a human sized target on the top of a
building exactly 500 meters away. The base target number for Sniper A
is 4 (short range shot), but the base target number for Sniper B is 5
(long range shot)! Given, the assault rifle round will be a little more
unstable at that range and will drop a little further than the sniper
rifle round, but this still seems a little off. Both Snipers, knowing
their weapon capabilities like they should, would be able to account for
round drop at a set distance. If that's the case, then the only thing
that should matter in this instance is the distance to target. Why
would looking through 2 identical scopes give two different target
pictures?

Next example:
Sniper B (using his trusty M-22) spots a target at 550 meters. His
scope allows him to shoot as though the target is no more than 150
meters away (this calculated according to rules in my BABY). Therefore,
it can be said that this Mag-2 scope effectively puts Sniper B 400
meters closer to his target. Sniper B then decides to pull out his HK
PSG-1. He then proceeds to mount the scope from his M-22 on his HK.
Now, looking though the SAME scope now mounted on the HK, he spots a
target 1000 meters away. If this scope puts Sniper B 400 meters closer
to target, then his effective range to the 1000 meter target while using
this scope is 600 meters. Wow, that's still a long range shot,
according to the table on pg. 111 of the BABY. BUT WAIT! He's got a
MAG-2 scope on his rifle! Shouldn't that move him from Extreme range
(701-1000M) to Medium range (151-300M)?

I know this is a little complicated, so think of it this way. You have
a camcorder that can zoom. Zoom in to the maximum of the camcorder's
ability. Now, mount that camcorder to a sniper rifle and look at
something far away. This time, mount that same camcorder to an assault
rifle and look at the same target. The target is just as big when
looking through the camcorder no matter what it is mounted on. I kinda
feel like scopes should be treated the same way. If a scope puts you
200 meters closer to your target, it shouldn't matter what kind of gun
it's mounted on.

Here's another way to look at it. To the human eye, a small target is
going to be SMALL not matter which type of firearm the body is carrying.
Therefore, a human-sized target is going to be just as small at 300
meters no matter what kind of weapon you are using. I know I've
repeated my self about 1000 times, but just bear with me.

I think that Short range/Medium range/Long range/Extreme range should be
set at a static distance for all weapons. Now, weapons should still
have a listed "maximum effective range" beyond which the round fired
would tumble or otherwise lose almost all accuracy. I think this would
more accurately affect shoot difficulties for targets that are very far
away, even when using a scope.

Now, I'd like to hear from all you sniper/hunter/rifle shooting types.
What's your opinion on this? Am I somewhat correct in assuming how
scopes and ranges effect shooting, or, am I just way off and totally
full of shit? If I am correct, what distances would you assign to
static range categories? If I am wrong, please explain why. Not that
I'd be questioning your answer, I'd just like to be educated. Thanks
for the input! Oh, and if you are happy with the existing rules for
scopes and ranges in Shadowrun......good for you. Less hassel in your
game.




Mai mentsu konna mai kikyo.

-ICQ #:11373195

P.S. What's the average/maximum power scope available on the open
market, how much closer does it put you to your target, and is the
relation of ##x power scope to how much closer to targe it puts you? I
never did understand how that damned ##x power was coputer.
(ie: 12x power rifle scope)


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 2
From: Iridios <iridios@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Scope questions...........
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 20:22:03 -0500
One Ronin wrote:

> Let me start by saying that I have VERY little experience with scopes.
> The Army taught me how to accurately shoot several different types of
> weapons, but gave me no training on scopes of any kind. I do have much
> conceptual knowledge, and have actually fired a scope-equipped weapon in
> the past (controlled hunting enviroment), but I know little else. I do,
> however know enough about scopes to realize that their representation in
> Shadowrun is a little off.

I am not experience with using scopes on weapons at all, in fact the
closest thing to a scope I have ever used was a surveyors sight.
However, I do have some opinions.

>
> Let me give you an example. Sniper A and sniper B are both on a
> rooftop, practicing their sharpshooting. Sniper A is using a Walther MA
> 2100 sniper rifle with a store-bought generic Mag-2 scope. Sniper B is
> using his trusty M-22, mounted with the EXACT same store-bought Mag-2
> scope. They are shooting at a human sized target on the top of a
> building exactly 500 meters away. The base target number for Sniper A
> is 4 (short range shot), but the base target number for Sniper B is 5
> (long range shot)! Given, the assault rifle round will be a little more
> unstable at that range and will drop a little further than the sniper
> rifle round, but this still seems a little off. Both Snipers, knowing
> their weapon capabilities like they should, would be able to account for
> round drop at a set distance. If that's the case, then the only thing
> that should matter in this instance is the distance to target. Why
> would looking through 2 identical scopes give two different target
> pictures?

I think that the difference in target numbers is supposed to reflect
the differences in performances between the weapons, i.e. the MA2100
is more accurate at longer distances making hitting the target easier.

<snip example 2 and etc.>

> I think that Short range/Medium range/Long range/Extreme range should be
> set at a static distance for all weapons. Now, weapons should still
> have a listed "maximum effective range" beyond which the round fired
> would tumble or otherwise lose almost all accuracy. I think this would
> more accurately affect shoot difficulties for targets that are very far
> away, even when using a scope.

I don't think making the ranges static is the answer. Where would you
divide the ranges at, and still balance the capabilities of the
various weapons? I would suggest, and am considering this, that
scopes act as a target number modifer, reducing the to hit by some
number, maybe by straight rating. Or have the scopes rating translate
into a distance that the shooters POV changes by.

--
Iridios
iridios@*********.com
ICQ UIN:6629224
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9489

-------Begin Geek Code Block------
GS d-(++) s+: a- C++ U?@>++ P L E?
W++ N o-- K- w(---) O? M-- V? PS+@
PE Y+ !PGP>++ t++@ 5+ X++@ R++@ tv
b+ DI++ !D G e+@>++++ h--- r+++ y+++
-------End Geek Code Block--------
Message no. 3
From: Adam Hargrave <Technofiend@***********.COM>
Subject: Re: Scope questions...........
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 21:01:47 -0500
>One Ronin wrote:
>
>> Let me start by saying that I have VERY little experience with scopes.
>> The Army taught me how to accurately shoot several different types of
>> weapons, but gave me no training on scopes of any kind. I do have much
>> conceptual knowledge, and have actually fired a scope-equipped weapon in
>> the past (controlled hunting enviroment), but I know little else. I do,
>> however know enough about scopes to realize that their representation in
>> Shadowrun is a little off.


Army ?? ok...maybe this will help. Maximum range on an
M-16A2 is 1100 meters. Maximum EFFECTIVE range is 800 meters. What is the
difference ?? At 800 meters your weapon has the power to actually do
damage, plus keep a relitivaley flat trajectory.
At 1100 meters, no power for damage, and bullets trajectory degrades.
Message no. 4
From: Jhary-a-Conel <Jhary-a-Conel@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Scope questions...........
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 22:30:45 +0100
On 4 Nov 98, at 16:22, One Ronin wrote:
> Let me give you an example. Sniper A and sniper B are
[snip setup]
> The base target number for Sniper A
> is 4 (short range shot), but the base target number for Sniper B is 5
> (long range shot)!
[snip TNs]
> Why
> would looking through 2 identical scopes give two different target
> pictures?
What gives you the impression A and B receive different images?
The difference in TNs is most probably (and rule-wise) a difference on
the range capabilities of the weapons used. Sniper rifles, having
longer barrels, do reach further then the more compact assault rifles,
plus are probably of higher quality (check the difference in prices).
Both may be able to _see_ their target equally good, but the weapon
just is different.

A sniper would be able to calculate wind, drop and the like into his
aiming... yeah. That's why a sniper would have a higher skill the
your average gang member.


Jhary
--
+---___---------+----------------------------------------+--------------------+
| / / _______ | JaC / SP | *BLAM!* *BLAM!* |
| / /_/ ____/ | Jhary-a-Conel@***.net | "Stop!" *BLAM!* |
| \___ __/ | ICQ#: 7 517 216 | "Police!" *BLAM!* |
|==== \_/ ======| *Wearing hats is just a way of life* | -- Officer Axly |
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| - Me |Phoenix Command SACS|
+------------- http://www.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de/~jhary -----------------+
Message no. 5
From: Zixx <t_berghoff@*********.NETSURF.DE>
Subject: Re: Scope questions...........
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 21:18:32 +0100
On 4 Nov 98, at 21:01, Adam Hargrave wrote:

> Army ?? ok...maybe this will help. Maximum range on an
> M-16A2 is 1100 meters. Maximum EFFECTIVE range is 800 meters. What is the
> difference ?? At 800 meters your weapon has the power to actually do
> damage, plus keep a relitivaley flat trajectory.
> At 1100 meters, no power for damage, and bullets trajectory degrades.

Hmm...well, the Marines used to have something online called the
"FactFiles" (is it still there) and they listed the M16A2 to have a
maximum "point-target"-range (which probable mean "hitting what you
aim for") of 550m and an "area-traget"-range (hitting something pretty
close to what you aim for :)) of 800m.


I told you I was going to do some nitpicking! ;))



Tobias Berghoff a.k.a Zixx
ICQ: 9293066

A society without religion is like a crazed psychopath without a loaded .45

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------------
GAT/CS/S/IT d--- s+:-- !a>? C++(++++)
UL++(++++) P+ L++ E W+ N+ w---() O-
M-- PS+(+++) PE- Y+>++ t+(++) 5+ X++
R* tv b++ DI(+) D++ G>++ e>+++++(*)
h! r--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Scope questions..........., 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.