Your Opinion On why firearms become obsolete

[Crimson_red]

[thedemonapostle]

just in case anyone didnt know, anything over the .223rem/5.56x45mm is officially classified as anti material by NATO standards. but the fun part is NATO doesnt really clarify whats considered material and whats not.

now the real hard part is understanding what each kind of round has a reputation for a one shot one kill.

for example: the .500S&W has a reputation for killing full grown polar bears(500kg average) in one shot. while the .223rem/5.56x45mm has a reputation for killing varmints(coyotes and the like; 6.8–21 kg). now the .308win/7.62x51mm was best know as a big game hunting cartridge(white tail deer to black bears(60-250kg)).

now considering what we already know, we now must decide that whatever damage we assign to the cartridges that they must be doing at least 9(2D+2 average) damage over the creatures natural average strength, in order to incapacitate them.

we can safely estimate that a coyote's strength is 1D, this said then using the above format, we can calculate that the .223/5.56x45mm round does about 3D+2. not many will argue that black bears are pretty weak in comparison to other bears, but can general tear the crap out of your average human, so id estimate their strength at 3D, which in turn puts the .308win/7.62x51mm round at roughly 5D+2. would anyone really argue that a 500kg polar bear is as strong as a wookie, 6D? which make the .500S&W round roughly do 8D+2 damage.
_________________
Aim low, shoot high
I'm a pirate, need I say more?

d6holocron.com: Thedemonapostle

Thedemonapostle Star Wars Crossovers

[Grimace]

Firearms from all ages become obsolete for the following reasons:
Rapidity of fire
Effective range
Quantity of ammunition
Price
Damage potential


You could say that the reason slugthrowers became the "archaic" weapons in Star Wars was one or more of those reasons.

While slugthrowers might be able to fire as fast as a blaster (or faster in some cases), the Star Wars slughthrowers may not have achieved the rapidity of fire that modern day Earth has.

Effective range would likely be in favor of a blaster. A slugthrower pistol might be effective at 50 meters where a blaster pistol might be effective to 100 meters or more. There are obviously exceptions with slugthrowers, where they could hit targets at a kilometer or more away, and blasters don't seem to have that sort of range, but for the most part I think the blasters have a slight edge in this regard.

Quantity of ammunition (and here weight also comes into play) is substantially in favor of blasters. A slugthrower pistol might have 15, 18, heck maybe even 20 bullets. A blaster pistol can fire 50 shots, or possibly up to 100 shots. Even something like the heavy blaster pistol can still fire 25 shots, which is more than 95% of slugthrower pistols. This alone could be why slugthrowers were rendered more obsolete.

Price probably favors the slugthrowers. They're cheaper to make the pistol or rifle compared to a blaster pistol or blaster rifle. What isn't easily factored in here is the cost of ammunition. Slugthrowers cost more to make ammunition for compared to recharging a blaster. So this is probably a wash on the cost.

Damage potential is really dicey. People say blasters are more powerful, but the stats don't really indicate that there's a huge difference. A little plus or minus between them doesn't really make one more damaging than the other. A slugthrower pistol doing 3D damage is pretty much the same as a blaster pistol doing 3D damage in terms of damage potential. However, as mentioned, there is a difference as to the shot's armor penetration. While slugthrowers can undoubtedly penetrate armor, it certainly seems like energy weapons are less affected by armor than slugthrowers are. Where a guy wearing a light armor might receive +1 against a blaster pistol's damage, that same guy getting shot with a slugthrower now gets +1D of protection. Therefore more of the damage from the blaster will affect an armored target compared to the slugthrower. This gives the blaster a slight edge.

So overall, besides some odd other reasons like weight of weapon, ease of training, stun setting, whatever else, it's pretty evident that slughthrower weapons are less effective than slugthrowers in more areas than the blaster is less effective than the slugthrower. So, just as the matchlock musket gave way to flintlocks, which gave way to percussion caps, which gave way to cartridge ammuntion, which gave way to greater ammunition capacity, which gave way to better ammunition, which gave way to greater rate of fire...the slugthrower would give way to blasters. There are enough areas the blaster is favored in that it would become the standard.

How's that for a reason?

[garhkal]

[Fallon Kell]

Blasters overtook firearms for a few reasons:

1) Ease of use. Blaster bolts officially don't drop, and blasters arguably have less recoil (atgxtg have gone over that point plenty, though). That means novice shooters can use them better, and experienced shooters can use them faster. Ease of use is why we here on earth switched to firearms, over bows and arrows.

2) Power. Blasters tend to do more damage, especially against armor.

3) Ammo. Blasters use less expensive ammo, and less of it for their damage rating, so you can carry more, afford more, practice more, kill more.

4) LAZORS! Back in the days of the conquistadors, South Americans ran from muskets and blunderbusses which were not as accurate or fast-firing as their own bows and arrows, just because they made loud noises and belched fire. Blaster bolts look cooler than bullets.

Slugthrowers are still used in some corners of the galaxy, though, for a few reasons.

1) Reliability. Apparently blasters are unreliable in some environments, like jungles. Firearms are more likely to work when the grime seeps in.

2) Suppression. An integrally-suppressed MP-5's report is quieter than the sound of it's bolt working, and the bullets are practically invisible in flight. If you don't want people to know where you are, use a firearm.

3) Payload rounds. Blaster bolts make bigger booms than bullets, but micro concussion missiles make bigger booms than blaster bolts! Fortunately for those of us who GM, they are expensive and hard to find...

4) Range. Some slugthrowers are easier to use at longer ranges than their blaster counterparts, possibly because bullets in flight dissipate energy more slowly than blaster bolts?
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier

Complete Starship Construction System

[thedemonapostle]

[vanir]

big logical fallacy in how you're rating damage. Using the d6 system as representative of real world physics is fallacious.

You can't translate creature mass IRL as a measure of game statistics for firepower.

For example, where you suggest a polar bear may have a 6d STR ergo the firearm calibre/type which you regard as a reliable one shot kill weapon for that creature should be 8d+2 is based in faulty premise.

It would be more accurate representation to use optional/house rules for increased sniper damage for firearms: rifle specialists whereupon an additional pip is added to damage after a round aiming, for a targeted hit location (cancelling the skill bonus for aiming), per die of skill in the specialisation, as an example off the top of my head.
Ergo, you may have firearms:rifle 7D and shoot a 6d polar bear with a 5D high powered rifle after one round of aiming for a heart/head kill shot, for a total of 7D+1 damage (+2D+1 sniper skill bonus for the one kill shot) for that shot only, only if you have initiative for the round and establish surprise for the shot.

That would more accurately represent how that should work, rather than having a long arm that shoots through tank armour just to ensure you down polar bears with hip shots whilst lighting a cigarette and cracking a one liner to a large breasted bikini model.

Of course with this system too, if you incapacitate with the first shot, next shot taken after another aimed hit location gets full specialisation benefits too, so will doubtlessly be a kill shot.

Sounds about right putting down a polar bear with anything short of a nitro express really.
With a nitro express, 700cal seen one hit a bull elephant square in the forehead once, stopped it dead in its tracks, but a still didn't kill it. Second shot did that.


Here's a rough guideline we're using in our game for handgun firearms.
Space tech level uses caseless ammo (magical star warsy tech), whilst older tech levels use traditional cartridges.
Treat "explosive rounds" as incendiary, by default rounds are hollow point or mushrooming type for use against soft targets (-1D vs hard armour), jacketed rounds cancel this penalty but must be specified, core-penetrator type AP rounds are available (+1D vs hard armour).

Note that whilst indicative of recoil, muzzle velocity is less factor of receiving energy than momentum in power factor, measured in grain-ft/1000secs.
eg. a 25ACP compares well with a 32S&W because despite much lower muzzle energy (a function of muzzle vel.x projectile mass), it has a significantly higher muzzle velocity and only marginally less momentum in power factor at the receiving end.
ie. until they dig the bullet out they won't know if it was a 25 or a 32.

Note2 that receiving damage can be capped by using overpowered firearms upon low mass targets, projectiles pass through without releasing energy so that a 475wildey does more trauma damage against big game than it does to a person, for example (though is just as lethal aimed at a vital location). eg. most security experts suggest large calibre magnums like the 44 used for home defence should be chambered with half loads for best results against human sized targets, more energy is released with a typical mushrooming hollow point or flat tipped round, best results if projectile remains in the target without passing through.


32S&W, 25ACP
2D+2

Coruschal Dagger pistol or similar
7.65mm-euro, 32ACP
3D

Czerka Adjudicator
9mm-short, 380ACP
3D+1

Czerka SH9
9mm-parabellum, 7.63mm-mauser, 7.62mm-tokarev
3D+2

40cal SW, 38super
4D

10mm-auto, 45ACP
4D+1

44automag, 475wildey
5D

50AE
6D

48cal Morellian, 454casull
6D+1

base damage small calibre 3D, medium calibre 4D, large calibre 5D
variations based on modification rules. max handgun damage with muzzle brake capped at 6D+2 for customised firearm.

special "kill shot sniper" hit location rules for higher circumstantial damage.

cut down weapons reduce damage, eg. a .45ACP derringer palm sized gun does 4D not 4D+1.
similarly a long barrelled, custom built casull would be the maximum 6D+2, in carbine form same damage but better ranges.

[thedemonapostle]

perhaps im just trying to use too much real world knowledge in an attempt to simplify firearms for use in star wars.

i am convinced as to the simplicity of blasters that made them popular enough to put firearms into the history books. yet i am not convinced that blasters do more damage than most firearms.

[thedemonapostle]

[vanir]

interesting about real world caseless, only time I'd heard of it was in Aliens ("pulse rifles fire explosive tipped 10mm caseless with 90 rounds in the clip and an over-under 30mm grenade launcher" or something like that), fascinating it's a real ammunition type.


The point I was making that you're failing to notice is things like vehicle hull. You're using body mass as a measure and ridiculously arguable damage effects for centre of mass, hip shots.

The damage v str rating for wound value of a SW weapon is irrespective of hit location. According to you if you hit a polar bear with a hip fired whatever and got it anywhere randomly it is always on average incapacitated.

I suggest this real world experience of yours isn't big game hunting.

[Ray]

Lack of OVER-Penetration, once a major facet of military combat (One musket ball could go through, what, four, five men standing in line), it's now a major concern with non-combatants. Urban warfare (even not involving the police) has a great advantage when the shot discharges all it's power into a single body instead of going through the Tango and hitting Little Susy down the road.

Stun settings would also be a major boon for tactical adaptation as it easily allows the capture of intelligence sources. Or criminals for trial. Or slaves.

Finally, in my mind, Electricity and cheap and easy to acquire across the galaxy (Blaster Gas, not so much, but still small and portable) while if you're in a place where you don't have a munitions factory and are getting close to bingo ammo when the next transport ship with beans, bullets, and band-aids just got shot down...

[Fallon Kell]

[Ray]

[Fallon Kell]

[garhkal]