From:	dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject:	Re: questions
Date:	Thu, 9 May 1996 08:09:09 -0600 (MDT)

Justin Thomas wrote:
|
|At 02:39 PM 5/8/96 -0600, you wrote:
|>|Firmpoints (mounts normal weapons up to LMG) give 1 pt of recoil
|>|compensation,
|>|
|>|Hardpoints may mount any weapon. Each weapon is at HALF recoil.
|>
|>Which brings up a bitch of mine. I've always felt that the recoil
|>compensation gained from Firmpoints and Hardpoints were bogus. I think
|>that the recoil gained should be based on the body of the vehicle that
|>the weapon is mounted on.
[snip]Me ranting.
|
|it is not necessarily the vehicle it is mounted on, it is the casing around
|the weapon, sure the tank wouldn't move but the weapon mounted would be
|bouncing all over the place, plus it they didn't alow it to move it would
|rip free of it's moorings...

Okay, I'll agree that if you strap down something like a HMG to a large
imovable object to the point that it won't budge at all that you would
probably do some serious damage to the weapon when you fired it. But, I
think that the mass of the vehicle should be used to figure recoil
compensation, not the type of mount. Or maybe in addition to the type of
mount. The vehicle compensates for recoil equal to it's body and firmpoints
provide an additional plus one, and hardpoints halve the final recoil.

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
~~~~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.html~~~~~~