Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 11:25:29 -0400
I'm sure we all have our guesses as to how a Smartgun link
operates, but I'm wondering if FASA does. I'm gonna throw out the way I
believe it works and those of you with opinions I'm sure won't hesitate to
reply.
The gun-hand (or gun-datajack) connection is made. Ammo supply &
capacity is present, as well as whether or not there's a clip in the gun
(of course). When the user points the smartgun at nothing in particular,
there is a dot or crosshair (depending on manufacturer) visible in the
users field of vision (sent directly to the optic centers of the brain,
therefore not requiring modifications to the eyes). The user is able to
fire the smart weapon by either mental command or by use of the physical
trigger. Designating a target is unneccessary when given direct commands.
With regards to targets: a properly integrated individual (i.e.
smartgun, smartgun link combination) designates targets, firing mode
(single shot, semi-auto, burt or full auto) and points the gun in the
proper direction. As the gun passes over the designated target(s),
the gun fires itself in the selected mode at the selected target(s). When
a target is not available within the firing arc, the gun does not fire on
its own, but can be given commands to fire.
Ok, FIRE AT WILL!

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 2
From: Thomas Charron <thomascharron@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 10:05:17 PDT
>From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
>Subject: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations

> I'm sure we all have our guesses as to how a Smartgun link
>operates, but I'm wondering if FASA does. I'm gonna throw out the way
I
>believe it works and those of you with opinions I'm sure won't hesitate
to
>reply.

I like it.. I think that is the best logical definition according to
what it does.. You could probrably modifyit slightly to allow for 2
guns as well..


---
Thomas Charron
thomascharron@*******.com - Address for ShadowRN mail..
tcharron@*******.ups.com - Other stuff..

"Lemme get this strait, your married with
2 kids, and you take time every onceand a while
to sit around with a bunch of other guys and make
believe??"

- Buddy at work..


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 3
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 14:58:44 -0400
On Thu, 10 Sep 1998, Thomas Charron wrote:

->>From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
->>Subject: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
->
-> I like it.. I think that is the best logical definition according to
->what it does.. You could probrably modifyit slightly to allow for 2
->guns as well..

Uhm, can you send it back? I forgot to BCC myself... ]:-)

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 4
From: westln@***.EDU
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 03:56:19 -0400
> I'm sure we all have our guesses as to how a Smartgun link
>operates, but I'm wondering if FASA does. I'm gonna throw out the way I
>believe it works and those of you with opinions I'm sure won't hesitate to
>reply.
> The gun-hand (or gun-datajack) connection is made. Ammo supply &
>capacity is present, as well as whether or not there's a clip in the gun
>(of course). When the user points the smartgun at nothing in particular,
>there is a dot or crosshair (depending on manufacturer) visible in the
>users field of vision (sent directly to the optic centers of the brain,
>therefore not requiring modifications to the eyes). The user is able to
>fire the smart weapon by either mental command or by use of the physical
>trigger. Designating a target is unneccessary when given direct commands.
> With regards to targets: a properly integrated individual (i.e.
>smartgun, smartgun link combination) designates targets, firing mode
>(single shot, semi-auto, burt or full auto) and points the gun in the
>proper direction. As the gun passes over the designated target(s),
>the gun fires itself in the selected mode at the selected target(s). When
>a target is not available within the firing arc, the gun does not fire on
>its own, but can be given commands to fire.
> Ok, FIRE AT WILL!
>
>Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,

I would disagree with your approach on designating targets. What your
describing here is much more like a sentinel gun which is more expensive
than a smart link. I have yet to find any section in the rules indicating
that a user needs to designate a target or friend/foe. This also implies
the weapon can identify images which means it has an optical system. Yet
all I've read would tend to indicate that the modifications on the gun
consists of gyros to note it's direction and elevation.

I prefere a different approach to defining smart links. I sent the orginal
out last week but I'll see if I can repeat the high points.

Since the system is already tied into the brain I'd prefere to use the
brain to do the decision making. Let the system that monitors the brain
monitor your desire to fire. As the dot passes over a target you want to
shoot your brainwaves shift indicating your desire to shoot now. The system
detects that desire and fires the weapon. If your spreading a burst between
targets as the dot leaves the first target you don't have a desire to
shoot. The system detects this change in brainwaves and and stops you from
wasting bullets. When the dot passes over your intended second target, it
will fire again because you desire it.

This approach avoids the problem of having to designate a target or
friend/foes. This approach also can be used to explain why smart goggles
do not get the same bonus. Smart goggles lack the ability to monitor your
thoughts. So it cannot deal with wasted shots. It also cannot detect your
desire to fire so it cannot cause the weapon to fire. You have to rely upon
your own meat finger and the slow nerves connecting your brain to the
finger to fire the weapon.

It works fine for shooting walls. It senses your desire to shoot, so it
shoots. As for called shots that is dealt with by the free action of
calling your shot. The free action can be interpreted as your concentrating
on hitting a small subtarget. This results in different brain waves. You
don't have the desire to shoot until the dot is on the target your
concentrating on.

To quote you. " Ok, FIRE AT WILL!"
-Lorden
Message no. 5
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 10:08:30 -0400
On Fri, 11 Sep 1998 westln@***.EDU wrote:

->> I'm sure we all have our guesses as to how a Smartgun link
->>operates, but I'm wondering if FASA does. I'm gonna throw out the way I
->>believe it works and those of you with opinions I'm sure won't hesitate to
->>reply.
->> The gun-hand (or gun-datajack) connection is made. Ammo supply &
->>capacity is present, as well as whether or not there's a clip in the gun
->>(of course). When the user points the smartgun at nothing in particular,
->>there is a dot or crosshair (depending on manufacturer) visible in the
->>users field of vision (sent directly to the optic centers of the brain,
->>therefore not requiring modifications to the eyes). The user is able to
->>fire the smart weapon by either mental command or by use of the physical
->>trigger. Designating a target is unneccessary when given direct commands.
->> With regards to targets: a properly integrated individual (i.e.
->>smartgun, smartgun link combination) designates targets, firing mode
->>(single shot, semi-auto, burt or full auto) and points the gun in the
->>proper direction. As the gun passes over the designated target(s),
->>the gun fires itself in the selected mode at the selected target(s). When
->>a target is not available within the firing arc, the gun does not fire on
->>its own, but can be given commands to fire.
->> Ok, FIRE AT WILL!
->>
->>Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
->
->I would disagree with your approach on designating targets. What your
->describing here is much more like a sentinel gun which is more expensive
->than a smart link. I have yet to find any section in the rules indicating
->that a user needs to designate a target or friend/foe. This also implies
->the weapon can identify images which means it has an optical system. Yet
->all I've read would tend to indicate that the modifications on the gun
->consists of gyros to note it's direction and elevation.

The gun doesn't designate targets, the mind would. The gun just
shoots when a designated target (it gets this info from the mind) is in
it's firing arc. The designation is more instinctual than (this image).
The firing arc of the weapon can be modified slightly by the gyros you
describe.

->I prefere a different approach to defining smart links. I sent the orginal
->out last week but I'll see if I can repeat the high points.
->
->Since the system is already tied into the brain I'd prefere to use the
->brain to do the decision making. Let the system that monitors the brain
->monitor your desire to fire. As the dot passes over a target you want to
->shoot your brainwaves shift indicating your desire to shoot now. The system
->detects that desire and fires the weapon. If your spreading a burst between
->targets as the dot leaves the first target you don't have a desire to
->shoot. The system detects this change in brainwaves and and stops you from
->wasting bullets. When the dot passes over your intended second target, it
->will fire again because you desire it.

We're saying the same thing two ways.

->This approach avoids the problem of having to designate a target or
->friend/foes. This approach also can be used to explain why smart goggles
->do not get the same bonus. Smart goggles lack the ability to monitor your
->thoughts. So it cannot deal with wasted shots. It also cannot detect your
->desire to fire so it cannot cause the weapon to fire. You have to rely upon
->your own meat finger and the slow nerves connecting your brain to the
->finger to fire the weapon.

We're still agreeing, I just hadn't gotten to smart goggles,
wanting feedback on my opinion of the smartgun link operation first.

->It works fine for shooting walls. It senses your desire to shoot, so it
->shoots. As for called shots that is dealt with by the free action of
->calling your shot. The free action can be interpreted as your concentrating
->on hitting a small subtarget. This results in different brain waves. You
->don't have the desire to shoot until the dot is on the target your
->concentrating on.

Smartgun Link II has a reduced penalty on called shots, so this
option would be available for that model, but I was trying to take the
Smartgun Link family in small steps. The reduction in TN from a normal
smartgun link in response to a called shot is simply the benefit of having
a crosshair on your target.

->To quote you. " Ok, FIRE AT WILL!"

Nothing to really shoot at. We agree but use different words.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 6
From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 14:51:58 -0400
My comment on smartguns is that the indicator is a ballistic arc, dangnabit!
What the hell good does a pipper in your field of vision do? A ballistic arc
gives you a LOT more info (including where the strays are going.) Besides,
what depth is the pipper at?

Ian Silvercat claims the above in the name of himself!
--------------
Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security - Benjamin Franklin
That which does not exist has never been named - Mirumoto Nohito
Jonathan Hurley (mailto:jhurley1@************.edu)
Homepage : http://attila.stevens-tech.edu/~jhurley1
Message no. 7
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 15:28:31 -0400
On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Jonathan Hurley wrote:

->My comment on smartguns is that the indicator is a ballistic arc, dangnabit!
->What the hell good does a pipper in your field of vision do? A ballistic arc
->gives you a LOT more info (including where the strays are going.) Besides,
->what depth is the pipper at?

A Smartgun II probably gives you a ballistic arc while a Smartgun
I gives you a point on your target.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 8
From: Dom T-J <phobic@**.NET.AU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 12:18:27 +1000
>What the hell good does a pipper in your field of vision do? A ballistic arc
>gives you a LOT more info (including where the strays are going.) Besides,
>what depth is the pipper at?
>Ian Silvercat

No depth (unless you have a rangefinder in your cybereye and are using
smartlink 2 hardware)... it only operates through one eye, so it reads your
field of vision as a flat plane and sticks the targeting dot on wherever
the gun's aimed. Of course, this means that because you're using both
eyes, the dot is going to appear to be on the front surface of whatever
you're targeting. And IMO, it wouldn't show a ballistic arc; having to
compensate for that is part of the reason it's a +2 and not a +3, or 4,or
5...

Later-

Phobic
"He who fears nothing save fear itself. And trolls with clubs."
Message no. 9
From: Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 21:47:34 -0500
From: Dom T-J <phobic@**.NET.AU>
Date: Friday, September 11, 1998 9:14 PM


>No depth (unless you have a rangefinder in your cybereye and are
>using smartlink 2 hardware)... it only operates through one eye, so
>it reads your field of vision as a flat plane and sticks the
>targeting dot on wherever the gun's aimed.

How do you know it only operates in one eye? Humans are, by nature,
binocular beasties. While I don't think it shows a ballistic arc, I don't
think it operates in just one eye, either.

---
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 10
From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 00:16:04 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shadowrun Discussion [mailto:SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET]On
> Behalf Of David Foster
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 1998 15:29
> To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
>
>
> On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Jonathan Hurley wrote:
>
> ->My comment on smartguns is that the indicator is a ballistic
> arc, dangnabit!
> ->What the hell good does a pipper in your field of vision do? A
> ballistic arc
> ->gives you a LOT more info (including where the strays are
> going.) Besides,
> ->what depth is the pipper at?
>
> A Smartgun II probably gives you a ballistic arc while a Smartgun
> I gives you a point on your target.
>

And how, exactly, does the smartgun decide the range at which the pip is
produced?

Ian Silvercat claims the above in the name of himself!
--------------
Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security - Benjamin Franklin
That which does not exist has never been named - Mirumoto Nohito
Jonathan Hurley (mailto:jhurley1@************.edu)
Homepage : http://attila.stevens-tech.edu/~jhurley1
Message no. 11
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 00:06:07 -0700
:No depth (unless you have a rangefinder in your cybereye and are using
:smartlink 2 hardware)... it only operates through one eye, so it reads
your
:field of vision as a flat plane and sticks the targeting dot on wherever
:the gun's aimed. Of course, this means that because you're using both
:eyes, the dot is going to appear to be on the front surface of whatever
:you're targeting. And IMO, it wouldn't show a ballistic arc; having to
:compensate for that is part of the reason it's a +2 and not a +3, or 4,or
:5...


Given that it already has to relate the guns position to your heads
just to put any accurate impact point info in your eye, (and thus figure
the path of the barrel), wouldn't it be EASIER to show that (in both eyes,
for 3d) as a illusionary path, instead of running a "world model" or some
scanner to figure where that will intersect the first solid object? Think
if you had a pair of glasses with almost parallel lines on each lens- it
would appear to create a line in space.
Now, as long as you know the bullets speed, making that path an arc
would be pretty damn easy. If the arc seemed to intersect where you
wanted it to, you would shoot; no range finder needed. The SL2 would have
a way for you to test, using a range finder, if the arc really was lined
up- at long distances, apparent relative depth is not a perfect judgement.

Mongoose
Message no. 12
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 00:41:36 -0700
:> A Smartgun II probably gives you a ballistic arc while a
Smartgun
:> I gives you a point on your target.
:>
:
:And how, exactly, does the smartgun decide the range at which the pip is
:produced?
:

Thats exactly why I said in my last post that I think it would use
images in both eyes to produce an "illusionary fire-line". The USER could
then judge the likely point of impact.

Mongoose
Message no. 13
From: Dom T-J <phobic@**.NET.AU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 18:00:29 +1000
> Given that it already has to relate the guns position to your heads
>just to put any accurate impact point info in your eye, (and thus figure
>the path of the barrel), wouldn't it be EASIER to show that (in both
>eyes, for 3d) as a illusionary path, instead of running a "world model"
>or some scanner to figure where that will intersect the first solid
>object? Think if you had a pair of glasses with almost parallel lines on
>each lens- it would appear to create a line in space.
> Now, as long as you know the bullets speed, making that path an arc
>would be pretty damn easy. If the arc seemed to intersect where you
>wanted it to, you would shoot; no range finder needed. The SL2 would
>have a way for you to test, using a range finder, if the arc really was
>lined up- at long distances, apparent relative depth is not a perfect
>judgement.
>Mongoose

Yeah, but as described, it's a dot. Not a 'three dimensional' arc tracking
the path the bullet will take. Besides, to do it the way you describe it'd
have to run a 'world model' anyway... otherwise the arc will simply overlay
your field of vision and not appear to 'penetrate' any solid objects,
making it quite difficult to tell where you're aiming after all. And for
this to work it would *have* to utilise both eyes.
Anyway, I've never been entirely satisfied with the description of how
smartlinks work... after some thought the only practical way I can come up
with is for the gun to have a small camera, or optic fibre or similar,
mounted on it, and for the headware part of the smartlink to use a software
routine that compares the image from the gun to the image that your eye's
picking up. When it works out the closest match in your field of vision to
the feed from the gun, it lays the targeting dot or crosshair there.
If this is the correct explanation, 'depth' doesn't matter, and there's
no necessity for horrendously complex 'world modelling' software, either,
because as I said in my previous post, it's treating your view as a flat
image and placing the dot on whatever you're aiming at. BTW, this is the
same method that smart goggles would use, IMO... otherwise I think they'd
be a touch more expensive for the kind of processing power necessary to
generate that 'world model'.

Later-

Phobic
"He who fears nothing save fear itself. And trolls with clubs."
Message no. 14
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 10:29:46 -0400
On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Patrick Goodman wrote:

->From: Dom T-J <phobic@**.NET.AU>
->Date: Friday, September 11, 1998 9:14 PM
->
->
->>No depth (unless you have a rangefinder in your cybereye and are
->>using smartlink 2 hardware)... it only operates through one eye, so
->>it reads your field of vision as a flat plane and sticks the
->>targeting dot on wherever the gun's aimed.
->
->How do you know it only operates in one eye? Humans are, by nature,
->binocular beasties. While I don't think it shows a ballistic arc, I don't
->think it operates in just one eye, either.

Actually, I believe this stems from the fact that the GUN knows
where it's pointing, and it doesn't have enough width for accurate
binocular vision. The gun software & link puts the crosshair in the
wielder's instinctive field of vision but does not use the wielder's field
of vision to determine distance. The distance guess and range modifiers
is why SGL doesn't get bonuses ( or, reduction of penalties ) for the
longer ranges while a SGLII with a rangefinder does.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 15
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 10:32:27 -0400
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Jonathan Hurley wrote:

->> On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Jonathan Hurley wrote:
->>
->> ->My comment on smartguns is that the indicator is a ballistic
->> arc, dangnabit!
->> ->What the hell good does a pipper in your field of vision do? A
->> ballistic arc
->> ->gives you a LOT more info (including where the strays are
->> going.) Besides,
->> ->what depth is the pipper at?
->>
->> A Smartgun II probably gives you a ballistic arc while a Smartgun
->> I gives you a point on your target.
->>
->
->And how, exactly, does the smartgun decide the range at which the pip is
->produced?

Rangefinder link. In order to get the bonuses you describe, the
SGLII requires a Rangefinder Link.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 16
From: Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 18:07:12 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 06:00 PM 9/12/98 +1000, Phobic wrote:
> Anyway, I've never been entirely satisfied with the description of
how
>smartlinks work... after some thought the only practical way I can
come up
>with is for the gun to have a small camera, or optic fibre or
similar,
>mounted on it, and for the headware part of the smartlink to use a
software
>routine that compares the image from the gun to the image that your
eye's
>picking up.

The artwork for the Smartlink II in Fields of Fire certainly supports
this hypothesis. (I know, I know... you can't really go by the
artwork; the artwork for cyberguns lead to years of confusion, but
still)

Perhaps it's a combination of both gun camera, and world model
calcuation?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNfrwfKPbvUVI86rNAQEInwP+ICTW/mpBhLUDtMl8qGUoLXa1a7qt+Ywx
TERN70wEUGQcw5rUTkPE/hbCKWXiPW0M3GueF8sVVmiAj/jCQk5xiU5XS/RSo4J9
FDFJWlyPXi5x27673rXEkAVnmEF0GiQVntu/nxBg4WJ9tiyNTa3Yxt+buXlPk45x
XbK2Rqiyp8g=
=Srw8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344
Message no. 17
From: Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 18:58:49 -0500
>>... after some thought the only practical way I can come up
>>with is for the gun to have a small camera, or optic fibre or
>>similar, mounted on it, and for the headware part of the
>>smartlink to use a software routine that compares the image from
>>the gun to the image that your eye's picking up.
>
>The artwork for the Smartlink II in Fields of Fire certainly supports
>this hypothesis. (I know, I know... you can't really go by the
>artwork; the artwork for cyberguns lead to years of confusion, but
>still)

You know, I was *always* under the impression that this was how the thing
worked. You'd have to have something on the gun getting that sort of data
for the thing to work, else what's the point of having it? I always
accepted the camera portion as a given. How did you guys think it worked?
(Not a troll; genuine curiosity on this end.)

---
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 18
From: "D. Ghost" <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 19:13:53 -0500
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998 18:07:12 -0400 Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM>
writes:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>At 06:00 PM 9/12/98 +1000, Phobic wrote:
>> Anyway, I've never been entirely satisfied with the description of
how
>>smartlinks work... after some thought the only practical way I can come
up
>>with is for the gun to have a small camera, or optic fibre or similar,
>>mounted on it, and for the headware part of the smartlink to use a
software
>>routine that compares the image from the gun to the image that your
eye's
>>picking up.

>The artwork for the Smartlink II in Fields of Fire certainly supports
>this hypothesis. (I know, I know... you can't really go by the
>artwork; the artwork for cyberguns lead to years of confusion, but
>still)
>
>Perhaps it's a combination of both gun camera, and world model
>calcuation?

The Savalette Guardian Art supports this as well. :)

Querry: would the Smartgun link be able to get ranges from comparing the
image from two eyes?

I would say that the SL 1 is just some gear to determine elevation, angle
of incidence, etc .. And the SL 2 additionally adds a camera for a 3rd
POV for better range *ESTIMATIONS* but that a rangefinder of some sort is
neccissary for the really accurate range measurements required for
grenade launchers ...

<SNIP PGP>
> -- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
<SNIP More PGP>

Out of the 1000 Paul Gettles in the world, only #970 is a member of
ShadowRN?
;)

D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` Trideo killed the Video Star ... o/`

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 19
From: Dom T-J <phobic@**.NET.AU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 14:41:59 +1000
<SNIP theory of smartlink operation>

>You know, I was *always* under the impression that this was how the thing
>worked. You'd have to have something on the gun getting that sort of data
>for the thing to work, else what's the point of having it? I always
>accepted the camera portion as a given. How did you guys think it worked?
> Texas 2-Step

Well, this *is* how I always assumed it worked... I only brought it up
because the topic's been under a great deal of discussion.
On a tangent issue... does anyone else feel that FASA leaves a *lot* of
leeway in their own explanations of how things work? It'd take a couple of
lines of text per item max, and prevent this kind of 'spirited debate'. Or
was it intentional...?

Later-

Phobic
"He who fears nothing save fear itself. And trolls with clubs."
Message no. 20
From: Ron Clark <rclark@****.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 23:38:35 -0500
At 12:06 AM 9/12/98 -0700, you wrote:
> Now, as long as you know the bullets speed, making that path an arc
>would be pretty damn easy. If the arc seemed to intersect where you
>wanted it to, you would shoot; no range finder needed. The SL2 would have
>a way for you to test, using a range finder, if the arc really was lined
>up- at long distances, apparent relative depth is not a perfect judgement.
>
If it was only that easy I'd be a better shot in RL. Not only do you have
to worry about muzzle velocity, you also have to worry about bullet weight,
as well as the ballistic coefficient.

Now if you really want to get really specific you also need to know the
ballistic coefficient change points, wind speed, wind direction, elevation
angle, and altitude.

Back to SR, The main reason that SLII only gives bonuses with the range
finder at longer ranges, is that most pistols (especially high velocity
rounds) have a somewhat flat tragectory. It's only at long ranges that the
trajectory begins to drop drastically.

As far as trajectory lines are concerened, I would almost say that you
would have to have a tactical computer.

Ron
Message no. 21
From: Michael Coleman <mscoleman@********.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 03:19:40 -0500
> > Now, as long as you know the bullets speed, making that path an arc
> >would be pretty damn easy. If the arc seemed to intersect where you
> >wanted it to, you would shoot; no range finder needed. The SL2
> would have
> >a way for you to test, using a range finder, if the arc really was lined
> >up- at long distances, apparent relative depth is not a perfect
> judgement.
> >
> If it was only that easy I'd be a better shot in RL. Not only do you have
> to worry about muzzle velocity, you also have to worry about
> bullet weight,
> as well as the ballistic coefficient.
>
> Now if you really want to get really specific you also need to know the
> ballistic coefficient change points, wind speed, wind direction, elevation
> angle, and altitude.
>
> Back to SR, The main reason that SLII only gives bonuses with the range
> finder at longer ranges, is that most pistols (especially high velocity
> rounds) have a somewhat flat tragectory. It's only at long ranges that the
> trajectory begins to drop drastically.
>
> As far as trajectory lines are concerened, I would almost say that you
> would have to have a tactical computer.
>
> Ron
>
In a world where you can place the knowledge of a physicist or a world class
athlete on a 2x3x1 cm optical chip, I dont see the problem of the smartgun
link being able to calculate all the variables.

Mike
Message no. 22
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 12:43:42 -0400
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Patrick Goodman wrote:

->>>... after some thought the only practical way I can come up
->>>with is for the gun to have a small camera, or optic fibre or
->>>similar, mounted on it, and for the headware part of the
->>>smartlink to use a software routine that compares the image from
->>>the gun to the image that your eye's picking up.
->>
->>The artwork for the Smartlink II in Fields of Fire certainly supports
->>this hypothesis. (I know, I know... you can't really go by the
->>artwork; the artwork for cyberguns lead to years of confusion, but
->>still)
->
->You know, I was *always* under the impression that this was how the thing
->worked. You'd have to have something on the gun getting that sort of data
->for the thing to work, else what's the point of having it? I always
->accepted the camera portion as a given. How did you guys think it worked?
->(Not a troll; genuine curiosity on this end.)

I figured similarly, and if the SGL owner pointed the gun around
the corner and closed their eyes, they could see through the gun (no
bonuses to hit, though... as there wouldn't be the real view of the
operator to compare the gun's view to... ok, maybe only a -1 bonus). Not
to mention the lack of distance information due to the lack of the
binocular effect.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 23
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 13:17:04 -0400
On Sun, 13 Sep 1998, Michael Coleman wrote:

<snippy>
->In a world where you can place the knowledge of a physicist or a world class
->athlete on a 2x3x1 cm optical chip, I dont see the problem of the smartgun
->link being able to calculate all the variables.
->
->Mike

Knowledge and processing are two seperate issues. Knowsofts don't
require any processing in themselves (they need a softlink, encephalon or
other cyber) until they are used.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 24
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 13:19:16 -0700
:> Now, as long as you know the bullets speed, making that path an arc
:>would be pretty damn easy. If the arc seemed to intersect where you
:>wanted it to, you would shoot; no range finder needed. The SL2 would
have
:>a way for you to test, using a range finder, if the arc really was lined
:>up- at long distances, apparent relative depth is not a perfect
judgement.
:>
:If it was only that easy I'd be a better shot in RL. Not only do you
have
:to worry about muzzle velocity, you also have to worry about bullet
weight,
:as well as the ballistic coefficient.

Most of which a SL could be designed to figure- one test shot could give
it a VERY acurate measure of bullet speed at muzzle.
:
:Now if you really want to get really specific you also need to know the
:ballistic coefficient change points, wind speed, wind direction,
elevation
:angle, and altitude.

Thats why you still use your firearms test; it is your skill in
accounting for those errors, among other things. Seeing the "likely" arc
would just make things easier, like using a scope with range/ drop
indicators.


:As far as trajectory lines are concerened, I would almost say that you
:would have to have a tactical computer.


A tactical computer would do things like correct that arc for target
motion. It also helps with MELEE attacks, so it obviously does a lot more
than give visual cues.

Mongoose
Message no. 25
From: Thomas Charron <thomascharron@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 17:27:02 PDT
>From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
>Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations

> Uhm, can you send it back? I forgot to BCC myself... ]:-)

Done..


---
Thomas Charron
thomascharron@*******.com - Address for ShadowRN mail..
tcharron@*******.ups.com - Other stuff..

"Lemme get this strait, your married with
2 kids, and you take time every onceand a while
to sit around with a bunch of other guys and make
believe??"

- Buddy at work..


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 26
From: westln@***.EDU
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 02:14:57 -0400
Just a reminder to people Smartlinks despite their name should be
considered rather dumb. In SR3 they only cost 2500Yen.
A DNI link is 4500.
Base line Cyberware Simrig is 300000.
The cheapest eye mod I could find was the retinal clock for 450.
A pocket secretary is 2000.

Smartlinks have been arround for a long time. Probably before 2045 I
don't have enough early material to know. They are probably based
on early technology and concepts. While it is reasonable to think
of ways to add new features to it, they would come with extra costs.
The ability to see arround corners while usefull is not a default
ability. There is lots of room for adding custom features but the
default system should be kept simple, and the extra features should
cost more, possibly both in essence and money.
Message no. 27
From: Michael Coleman <mscoleman@********.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 01:29:31 -0500
> Behalf Of westln@***.EDU
>
> Just a reminder to people Smartlinks despite their name should be
> considered rather dumb. In SR3 they only cost 2500Yen.
> A DNI link is 4500.
> Base line Cyberware Simrig is 300000.
> The cheapest eye mod I could find was the retinal clock for 450.
> A pocket secretary is 2000.
>
> Smartlinks have been arround for a long time. Probably before 2045 I
> don't have enough early material to know. They are probably based
> on early technology and concepts. While it is reasonable to think
> of ways to add new features to it, they would come with extra costs.
> The ability to see arround corners while usefull is not a default
> ability. There is lots of room for adding custom features but the
> default system should be kept simple, and the extra features should
> cost more, possibly both in essence and money.
>
You can not judge something on it's price. In SR3 a katana is 1000Y (an
outrageous price unless it is antique) and an Ares Predator is only 450Y.
Even with a smartlink the Predator is only 900Y. Even a Survival Knife cost
450Y. Price in Shadowrun is more a function of balanced gaming than
reality.

Mike
Message no. 28
From: Rick Riessen <chrome@********.ORG>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 09:09:07 -0400
>You can not judge something on it's price. In SR3 a katana is 1000Y (an
>outrageous price unless it is antique) and an Ares Predator is only 450Y.
>Even with a smartlink the Predator is only 900Y. Even a Survival Knife
cost
>450Y. Price in Shadowrun is more a function of balanced gaming than
>reality.


Actually considering the currency exchange between today's currency and
nuyen,
1000¥ is not THAT outrageous. Combat ready swords from reputable dealers
can cost somewhere between $350-$600 US. Anything else is geared for the
showcase and wouldn't last long being used for combat. As for the gun
prices,
I don't understand why those are so low.


CT
Message no. 29
From: Shaun Gilroy <shaung@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 09:22:17 -0400
At 09:09 AM 9/14/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>You can not judge something on it's price. In SR3 a katana is 1000Y (an
>>outrageous price unless it is antique) and an Ares Predator is only 450Y.
>>Even with a smartlink the Predator is only 900Y. Even a Survival Knife
>cost
>>450Y. Price in Shadowrun is more a function of balanced gaming than
>>reality.
>
>
>Actually considering the currency exchange between today's currency and
>nuyen,
>1000¥ is not THAT outrageous. Combat ready swords from reputable dealers
>can cost somewhere between $350-$600 US. Anything else is geared for the
>showcase and wouldn't last long being used for combat. As for the gun
>prices,
>I don't understand why those are so low.

How-bout the fact that many, many more guns sell than swords and knives?
Katanas are man-forged, not mass produced(if they were mass-produced, they
wouldn't be much better than a standard western sword), and I'd bet there
are fewer Katana-forgers :) in 2060.


(>)noysh the spoonë bard
-> jack of all trades, master of none. <-
Message no. 30
From: John E Pederson <pedersje@******.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 08:45:57 -0500
Rick Riessen wrote:

> Actually considering the currency exchange between today's currency and nuyen,
> 1000¥ is not THAT outrageous. Combat ready swords from reputable dealers
> can cost somewhere between $350-$600 US. Anything else is geared for the
> showcase and wouldn't last long being used for combat. As for the gun prices,
> I don't understand why those are so low.
>
> CT

To tell the truth, how 'outrageous' that price is depends on what you think
you're getting. You can get a 'combat ready', mass-produced katana for about the
price (350-600+ US dollars) you quoted. A handmade sword starts around... about
8000 dollars US, I think. An old one starts around 5000 or so. 1000 nuyen for a
handmade sword is a steal. 1000 nuyen for a machine-made sword is probably too
much.

--
John Pederson otherwise known as Lyle Canthros, shapeshifter-mage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes
convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe -- a
spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we
with our modest powers must feel humble."
--Albert Einstein
lobo1@****.com canthros1@***.com pedersje@******.rose-hulman.edu
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/4864 ICQ UIN 3190186
"I'm not fifty!" "SPOONMAN!!!" Number Two -- with a bullet!
Message no. 31
From: Rick Riessen <chrome@********.ORG>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 10:00:01 -0400
>
>To tell the truth, how 'outrageous' that price is depends on what you think
>you're getting. You can get a 'combat ready', mass-produced katana for
about the
>price (350-600+ US dollars) you quoted. A handmade sword starts around...
about
>8000 dollars US, I think. An old one starts around 5000 or so. 1000 nuyen
for a
>handmade sword is a steal. 1000 nuyen for a machine-made sword is probably
too
>much.


Oh, no doubt there are nicer pieces that gor for money. For the generic
katana that
the average street sam carries, I'd say these are the equiv of what they are
selling
in the book. If you want a more outlandish sword, I'd hike the price
significantly.
Handmade and 'ancient' pieces would be very nice indeed.

CT
Message no. 32
From: Sean McCrohan <mccrohan@*****.OIT.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 10:02:13 -0400
Rick Riessen wrote:
> Actually considering the currency exchange between today's currency and
> nuyen,
> 1000¥ is not THAT outrageous. Combat ready swords from reputable dealers
> can cost somewhere between $350-$600 US. Anything else is geared for the
> showcase and wouldn't last long being used for combat. As for the gun
> prices,
> I don't understand why those are so low.

It could just be game balance, as the person you replied to
suggested, but it could also be simple business. People in 2060 are
more aware of how dangerous the world is, and weapons of some sort aren't
terribly uncommon. Presently, people tend to treat people who carry
a gun with them on a daily basis with wariness, at best. In 2060, with
a substantial percentage of everyday citizens carrying some form of
self-defense whenever they're out on the streets, it's a lot more
socially acceptable. The market for light pistols would be a whole
lot larger than it is now...that makes it bigger business, which means
more competition, and generally lower prices. At least, that's the theory.

--Sean
(I'm not a businessman, but I play one in Shadowrun...)
Message no. 33
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 10:21:11 -0400
On Mon, 14 Sep 1998, Rick Riessen wrote:

->>You can not judge something on it's price. In SR3 a katana is 1000Y (an
->>outrageous price unless it is antique) and an Ares Predator is only 450Y=
.
->>Even with a smartlink the Predator is only 900Y. Even a Survival Knife
->cost
->>450Y. Price in Shadowrun is more a function of balanced gaming than
->>reality.
->
->
->Actually considering the currency exchange between today's currency and
->nuyen,
->1000¥ is not THAT outrageous. Combat ready swords from reputable deale=
rs
->can cost somewhere between $350-$600 US. Anything else is geared for the
->showcase and wouldn't last long being used for combat. As for the gun
->prices,
->I don't understand why those are so low.

IMNSHO, one word could sum up the low gun prices: Ares.
Ok, maybe it wouldn't sum it up real well, but guns aren't REAL
expensive right now (at least, not where I'm at).

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 34
From: Mongoose <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 14:38:59 -0700
:In 2060, with
:a substantial percentage of everyday citizens carrying some form of
:self-defense whenever they're out on the streets, it's a lot more
:socially acceptable. The market for light pistols would be a whole
:lot larger than it is now...that makes it bigger business, which means
:more competition, and generally lower prices. At least, that's the
theory.


??? An increase in demand drives price DOWN? Not normally! The
establishment of cheaper distribution (as in, gun taxes lowered and more
stores carry guns) and larger manufacturing, especially with vertical
integration of supply and distribution, could reduce prices, though. SR
Multinationals are good at at accomplishing both those ends; they can
dictate Govt. economic policies, and can get stuff to market cheap, if
they want to.

Mongoose
Message no. 35
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 19:43:16 -0400
At 02:38 PM 9/14/98 -0700, you wrote:

> ??? An increase in demand drives price DOWN? Not normally! The

Actually, in a backasswards way, yes. All the things you mention below,
all that economies of scale stuff, doesn't happen unless there's sufficient
demand. You've gotta have solid economies of scale to bring down prices
and you don't get that unless you've got solid demand. Nasty catch-22
sometimes; can't spur demand without lower prices, but you can't lower
prices until there's demand...

>establishment of cheaper distribution (as in, gun taxes lowered and more
>stores carry guns) and larger manufacturing, especially with vertical
>integration of supply and distribution, could reduce prices, though. SR
>Multinationals are good at at accomplishing both those ends; they can
>dictate Govt. economic policies, and can get stuff to market cheap, if
>they want to.

Which, like I said, are all indicative of sufficient demand somewhere in
the process.

Erik J.


http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World
Message no. 36
From: Michael vanHulst <Schizi@***.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 20:53:15 EDT
In a message dated 9/14/98 6:05:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
chrome@********.ORG writes:

> As for the gun
> prices,
> I don't understand why those are so low.
supply and demand, I think after the NAN became a reality and the USA became
history, people kinda lost the blind faith in government. They went out and
bought guns, lotsa guns. They elected people that would get them access to
more guns, they elected people that did away with a 10rd limit on magazines.
People were afraid that the awakening would take their lives, and they could
no longer believe in police (especially rentals)
Cheaper dependable guns became in demand, they were produced more
efficiently. Katanas were not as in demand :-)
Message no. 37
From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 21:32:22 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shadowrun Discussion [mailto:SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET]On
> Behalf Of Mongoose
> Sent: Monday, September 14, 1998 17:39
> To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
>
>
> :In 2060, with
> :a substantial percentage of everyday citizens carrying some form of
> :self-defense whenever they're out on the streets, it's a lot more
> :socially acceptable. The market for light pistols would be a whole
> :lot larger than it is now...that makes it bigger business, which means
> :more competition, and generally lower prices. At least, that's the
> theory.
>
>
> ??? An increase in demand drives price DOWN? Not normally! The
> establishment of cheaper distribution (as in, gun taxes lowered and more
> stores carry guns) and larger manufacturing, especially with vertical
> integration of supply and distribution, could reduce prices, though. SR
> Multinationals are good at at accomplishing both those ends; they can
> dictate Govt. economic policies, and can get stuff to market cheap, if
> they want to.

An increase in demand, *in the long run*, will drive the prices down, as
increased manufacturing capability is brought to bear, and more entities
enter the supply-side. (Example: Memory prices... Remember how much memory
cost two years ago? And now the manufacturers can barely turn a profit on
it.)

Ian Silvercat claims the above in the name of himself!
--------------
Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security - Benjamin Franklin
That which does not exist has never been named - Mirumoto Nohito
Jonathan Hurley (mailto:jhurley1@************.edu)
Homepage : http://attila.stevens-tech.edu/~jhurley1
Message no. 38
From: westln@***.EDU
Subject: Re: [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 00:36:35 -0400
>An increase in demand, *in the long run*, will drive the prices down, as
>increased manufacturing capability is brought to bear, and more entities
>enter the supply-side. (Example: Memory prices... Remember how much memory
>cost two years ago? And now the manufacturers can barely turn a profit on
>it.)
>
>Ian Silvercat claims the above in the name of himself!

The cost of memory was so high then because of a fire that destroyed a chip
factory in Japan. It was the worlds largest supplier, I believe. There are
very few chip factories that actually make memory chips. Hence the spike in
cost when supply didnot keep up of demand. Although it was more a case of
people fearing a shortage rather than a real shortage. They never ran out
but people got gauged by the prices.

Lorden

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [SR3] Smartgun Link Operations, 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!