From:	Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject:	Smartlinks
Date:	Wed, 24 Feb 1999 21:00:43 +0000

In article <199902241924.OAA14312@****.vtc.vsc.edu>, Kevin Dole
<kdole@***.vsc.edu> writes
>I think the ideas about figuring out how the ballistics of various
>loadings difer is interesting, I'd only worry about it if the characters
>where shooting in a compition or in a very odd situation (ie, the
>dwarf sam with lots of armour and cyber, who kicked out the
>kneecaps of a troll, and now using said troll as a human shield with a
>gun to the temple). For the most part, a "point-blank" or
"battlefield"
>zero is good enough.

I'd say it could matter a little at longer ranges, but as you say in the
text I snipped, at battlesight ranges there isn't a great deal of
difference: a couple of inches high or low aren't going to matter.

Loading lightweight flechette, gel or APDS in a weapon set up for heavy-
bullet subsonics will be a problem, though...

>For extreme long range or highly precise
>marksmanship, it makes a difference, but for most shooting, not
>really.

Especially not at SR ranges. We zeroed our assault rifles to hit dead-
centre at 300 metres: that meant at 100-200 metres our bullets would hit
a couple of inches above the point of aim. BFD.

> If there is any place for the modifier to be placed, it would be
>for called shots.

I've suggested previously that careful choice of ammunition, picking
what worked best, expending several hundred rounds, and setting the
weapon up for that particular round, could get you an extra die to roll
in your Firearms test. Like customising the grips, weight and balance;
certainly nothing as dramatic as a modifier to the target number.

--
Paul J. Adam