| From: | Paul Gettle RunnerPaul@*****.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | APDS |
| Date: | Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:59:46 -0500 |
At 10:12 AM 2/24/99 -0500, Schizi@***.com wrote:
>skipped a part of this earlier, so I am not qouting direct, sorry :-)
>
>I always liked the idea that smartgun-I just points where the gun
points, with
>Smart-II actually changing the point of impact for range.
You're not the only one one the list with that view. Few months back,
there was a huge discussion about smartguns and what they can and
can't do, and that was one of the prevailing views about smartguns.
Since a smartgun gives at least a -1 to the t# whether it feeds into a
pair of smartgoggles, or up through smartlink cyberware, and since
this bonus is identical to the one given for having a lasersight, some
people concluded that the smartlink, like the lasersight, does not
account for balistics, and just puts the targeting recticle in a
straight line from where the gun points.
Acording to this theory, the reason that smartlink is better than
smartgoggles, with a -2 instead of a -1, is because the smartlink
allows the shooter to cybernetically trigger the firing mechanism,
thus freeing the gun from the small jerk caused by the finger pulling
the trigger, making for a more stable gun at the time of firing.
I've always played my smartguns as slightly smarter than this, but not
excessively so. (Some people run their smartguns as having a full
blown Friend-or-Foe image recognition system built in, which is a bit
much for my opinion, I don't think they're _that_ smart.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2
iQCVAwUBNtQh4aPbvUVI86rNAQEM+gQAr+zNMXTUyAXLVokFW5PC1KdnqqKMI3a0
GkhTU/STmqSXrSFEsop+COnE0gaQsxbSSE3GM8w8oFbqO7KkmBM0NCzx8kkAwX6T
vr6SEbcomAE8kvXe8b//x+3eNJzmB7otcKvvcJYPhKiUwYy/BDZiKz0qYnGmNaFh
/q1U4+ER46k=qZpj
-----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
