HEAP and KEAP small-arms

[Timerover51]

Okay, guys, you win. I am not going to waste any more of my or your time arguing Tech Level, or what is feasible verses what fantasy equipment GDW threw together. I will never be in your Traveller universe, and I would hazard a guess that you would not like mine in the least, as I have a low tolerance for the fantasy gadgets of Striker and the like.

 

[Carlobrand]

Okay, guys, you win. I am not going to waste any more of my or your time arguing Tech Level, or what is feasible verses what fantasy equipment GDW threw together. I will never be in your Traveller universe, and I would hazard a guess that you would not like mine in the least, as I have a low tolerance for the fantasy gadgets of Striker and the like.

1. I'm not aware that anyone was arguing with you.
2. I'm not aware that anyone has said anything warranting this kind of reaction.
3. You are free to hazard any guesses you'd like, but you would most likely be wrong. In my experience, players are more interested in the adventure than in the hardware and adapt pretty readily to whatever rules they find themselves under, provided they know the rules in advance and the adventure is sufficiently engaging. I'm no different on that score, and I've been given no reason to believe anyone else here would not be perfectly happy playing in a game you moderated. Esoteric hardware discussions are more of a game-master thing, and any player sitting down with any game master knows - or should know - that he is going to have to adapt to that game master's view of the universe.

The discussion at hand probes the question of what might or might not be acceptable - and balanced - within the spirit of this game's rules. These are the same people who gave us sandcasters, so I would expect some limited degree of tolerance for "fantasy gadgets" in the typical Traveller player, even if one does not allow them in one's own game; my TU will never, ever, ever experience Virus, for example, but I have no great trouble sitting in on a game that includes that feature.

Your contributions have been welcome and your opinions thought-provoking. However, do feel free not to waste your time with me if that is your inclination, though I will admit to some puzzlement as to why you would engage in a Striker-based discussion when you have so little tolerance for Striker paraphernalia.

 

[Hyphen]

Dear Folks -

timerover, I've re-read this thread, and I am unsure why you're upset. It looks like a straight-forward discusion, and people are agreeing with you for the most part:

When you look at the data on the LAG, it is basically a slightly higher-velocity shotgun. A 30 gram projectile at 500 meters per second converts into a 460 grain slug at 1640 feet per second. A Brenneke 12 gauge shotgun slug weighs 490 grains at about 1320 feet per second. ...

I do agree, however, that the LAG as presented in Traveller is totally underpowered. The various .5 calibre and more impressive 20mm canon rounds fired by the sniper/antimaterial rifles of today are far superior.

Agreed. It's definitely not what was advertised in the sales manual. I expect something with a kick more like a good ol' fashioned .577 Nitro and more punch than what the book gives it.

I think the only disagreement is over TL (and yes, I want my flying car!). The TL's were "best guesses" of GDW at the time. We could opine that, due to the numerous military actions the US has been involved in of late, that a similar TL increase is occuring along the lines of WWII. (Perhaps not as spectacular: WWII went from horses & biplanes to MBTs, jets & nukes.) It's also possible to say that some technologies increase while others do not. Maybe our slug-thrower weaponry is edging towards TL 8, spurred on by the current military's needs and wants?

Anyway, I'm enjoying the discussion, so i hope it continues. FWIW, I never used Striker against PCs: it's too nasty, and leaves little room for PC heroics. Die Hard would simply become Die Quickly. Unless you like that sort of thing: try doing a web search for the "Grim 'n' Gritty" rules.

It's only too easy for a GM to kill off PCs; the trick is to balance the forces so they can "win", even if this is just surviving (maybe even just barely!) but still having an enjoyable game. (If they don't enjoy it, you'll soon have NO players.)

Back to the topic: have any of you seen the incredibly nasty man-portable version of the VRF Gauss Gun? This is the one with the grav "sleeve" that reduces it's weight. It's probably something I would only let the players see from a distance, preferably used against *someone else's* vehicle. Hopefully then they'll run and keep their stupid heads down...

 

[Timerover51]

If you read the editor's notes in one of the early JTAS, the design team at GDW did not know enough about the chemistry of smokeless powder to know that it was possible for a gun to be fired underwater.

I think the only disagreement is over TL (and yes, I want my flying car!). The TL's were "best guesses" of GDW at the time. We could opine that, due to the numerous military actions the US has been involved in of late, that a similar TL increase is occuring along the lines of WWII. (Perhaps not as spectacular: WWII went from horses & biplanes to MBTs, jets & nukes.) It's also possible to say that some technologies increase while others do not. Maybe our slug-thrower weaponry is edging towards TL 8, spurred on by the current military's needs and wants?

As for Tech Levels, they cannot get the Tech Levels that the Earth has already passed through correct, why should I give them any credence whatsoever as to future tech levels. As for further discussion, I view it as a total waste of my time.

 

[far-trader]

If you read the editor's notes in one of the early JTAS, the design team at GDW did not know enough about the chemistry of smokeless powder to know that it was possible for a gun to be fired underwater.

Umm... wrong. The bit (JTAS #2 "From the Management") concerned Traveller Book 4 Mercenary that said modern guns fire normally in vacuum and a reviewer/review in Dragon magazine that disputed this saying guns needed oxygen to fire. The staff at GDW knew they were right and further commented that guns work underwater just fine*

* they fire, they do not perform very well though, water being a more resistive environment than air

As for Tech Levels, they cannot get the Tech Levels that the Earth has already passed through correct, why should I give them any credence whatsoever as to future tech levels. As for further discussion, I view it as a total waste of my time.

And how exactly has Traveller got the tech levels that the Earth had already passed through incorrect? I really can't imagine that being a credible position at all and would await your enlightening essay...

...but you probably won't indulge us as such 'discussion' is pointless. And if that is your attitude and take on these issues then yes I'd have to agree with you.

As for not giving the game designers any credence whatsoever as to future tech levels... are you kidding? They can't possible get that "wrong" as it's total fabrication, perhaps built on some theory. It may turn out to be wrong in fact, but it is by default entirely credible for the game. It can't logically be anything else.

 

[mike wightman]

The only TL measurement that is seriously wrong in CT is the computer development.

I note that in CT LBB0 the designers give the TL of current day Earth (1981) as 7.5.

I really don't see any real world major TL breakthrough since the invention of electronics and atomic power. Existing technology has been improved and refined but there have not been any major new technologies othere than the two mentioned.

 

[aramis]

The only TL measurement that is seriously wrong in CT is the computer development.

I note that in CT LBB0 the designers give the TL of current day Earth (1981) as 7.5.

I really don't see any real world major TL breakthrough since the invention of electronics and atomic power. Existing technology has been improved and refined but there have not been any major new technologies othere than the two mentioned.

There have been several - but they're not yet marketed. Controlled hydrogen fusion (H-Bombs are triggered but definitely NOT controlled), albeit not viable as a power source yet, is post 1977. Carbon Nanotubes. Synthetic Precious Stones of gem quality (process is new, not evolutionary from the processes of the 60's)‡. Sheet diamond‡. eInk type displays*. Internetwork portability of communications and public access to the networks.†

Funny thing: only one of these is on the TL tables - Controlled Fusion.

We're right on the verge of net energy output from controlled fusion - it could turn out to require some fundamental breakthrough, or it could just be a matter of tightening up the extant polywell tech. We'll have to wait and see.


-=-=-=-
† Also predicted well before its accomplishment. Predicted in the 40's by Doc Smith, possibly earlier by others. Practical attempts date to the mid 1960's - implementation for military and education by the early 1970's, adoption of the needed standards in the 1980's, and implementation in the 1990's.
‡ Both of these were predicted by Sci-Fi authors - but not accomplished until the last 20 years.
* ISTR a functional description of the basic idea in some pre-1950 sci-fi - using charge to move ink in front of or behind an opaque mesh...

 

[Icosahedron]

The staff at GDW knew they were right and further commented that guns work underwater just fine*

* they fire, they do not perform very well though, water being a more resistive environment than air

I don't want to derail the thread (though it may already have derailed itself) but...

Do they?
I'm not questioning the Oxygen supply, I'm well aware that cartridges provide their own, but I wonder about barrel pressure as the bullet tries to compress the water ahead of it, and I wonder about automatic actions failing to spring back against increased resistance.

I imagine a snub-nose revolver might be the most reliable underwater (at a range of a few feet) but I can picture a rifle with a barrel split like a banana skin - like some cartoon gun after Tweety Pie has wedged his finger in the end...

 

[aramis]

I don't want to derail the thread (though it may already have derailed itself) but...

Do they?
I'm not questioning the Oxygen supply, I'm well aware that cartridges provide their own, but I wonder about barrel pressure as the bullet tries to compress the water ahead of it, and I wonder about automatic actions failing to spring back against increased resistance.

I imagine a snub-nose revolver might be the most reliable underwater (at a range of a few feet) but I can picture a rifle with a barrel split like a banana skin - like some cartoon gun after Tweety Pie has wedged his finger in the end...

They do. Mythbusters and several others have demonstrated that, in fact, slugthrowers DO work underwater, including semi-automatics - they may need to be manually cycled, however.

 

[Hyphen]

...I can picture a rifle with a barrel split like a banana skin - like some cartoon gun after Tweety Pie has wedged his finger in the end...

And Mythbusters disproved this one too.

Did Carlobrand's original questions ever get answered? That is, is someone going to create a 20 mm grenade or not??

 

[mike wightman]

There have been several - but they're not yet marketed. Controlled hydrogen fusion (H-Bombs are triggered but definitely NOT controlled), albeit not viable as a power source yet, is post 1977.

When we have a working fusion power plant that can be installed in a ship we are TL8, until then we are still working towards it.
50 years is a conservative estimate for a working commercial reactor, it'll be a long time until one can be installed in a ship.

Carbon Nanotubes. Synthetic Precious Stones of gem quality (process is new, not evolutionary from the processes of the 60's)‡. Sheet diamond‡. eInk type displays*. Internetwork portability of communications and public access to the networks.†

I almost added these as breakthrough tech, but as you say...

Funny thing: only one of these is on the TL tables - Controlled Fusion.

The science and engineering behind nanoscale manufacture isn't really a breakthrough though, it builds on an understanding of atomic theory. In the field of microelectronics the breakthrough was the microprocessor, all we've been doing is refining and reducing in size - no new science.

We're right on the verge of net energy output from controlled fusion - it could turn out to require some fundamental breakthrough, or it could just be a matter of tightening up the extant polywell tech. We'll have to wait and see.

I have a physics text from 1963 that mentions controlled fusion is about 20 years away...

like I've posted before, I hope it happens in my lifetime but I'm beginning to doubt.

-=-=-=-

† Also predicted well before its accomplishment. Predicted in the 40's by Doc Smith, possibly earlier by others. Practical attempts date to the mid 1960's - implementation for military and education by the early 1970's, adoption of the needed standards in the 1980's, and implementation in the 1990's.
‡ Both of these were predicted by Sci-Fi authors - but not accomplished until the last 20 years.
* ISTR a functional description of the basic idea in some pre-1950 sci-fi - using charge to move ink in front of or behind an opaque mesh...

So we add these to the charts as TL7

Genetic engineering is a relatively new field, but again I wouldn't classify it as a TL leap.

To my mind a TL increase has to be a fundamental discovery that redefines our understanding of nature.

 

[aramis]

There are hints of internet and GPS as TL8 in later CT materials. Not outright stated on the tables, tho'. We're definitely TL8 computers.

And the Polywell fusion reactor was, before going behind the military research blackout curtain, only costing 102% of the energy extracted. That's pretty damned close to "viable" for controlled fusion as power plant. 3% gains might be obtained by a variety of trivial step improvements. It's good enough for me to consider us "Early TL8" energy production rather than late TL7.

Likewise, when we expand to include the stuff in Striker... Teleguided missiles with 3kg onboard guidance units have been around since the early 1980s. Heck, we've got 1kg ones now... and striker says that's TL10.

We still don't have maser guided missiles, tho'... and striker says TL7 for those... because masers are impractically large at present. (but tight beam microwave is almost as good, and a lot smaller)

And we've had Hypersonic airframes (SR71) since the mid 1960's, but striker lists those as TL8.

 

[hiro]

back stepping a little to the thread...

Question: would you allow HEAP rounds - a la the 10mm snub pistol - for other large caliber weapons like the 13mm hunting rifle, 18mm shotgun or 20mm LAG

yes, the snub pistol sets the precedent for making it possible in the TU

how would you rate them?

Page 51 of the CSC gives HEAP adding 1D to the standard round and HE a +2DM. It also makes then really expensive.

Would the round itself need to be underpowered - with shorter range - in order for the HEAP warhead to work (and would that be an advantage in the case of the LAG) or could it fire with normal power and range at TL-7+ (as in Striker)?

from what I've read its true that current HEAP rounds are less accurate than solid penetrator rounds. You could drop the range class by one or apply a DM to simulate this. This may improve with TL.

Question: would you allow tech level progression for the rounds of more mundane weapons like rifles, as with KEAP rounds, as more exotic materials became available for specialty rounds? Would you allow specialty DS rounds? Would you allow KEAP tech level progression for the LAG?

Question: would you allow a HEAP small-arm to benefit from the HEAP progression found in Striker and MegaTraveller?

Yes! But thats often missing with Traveller where the next TL brings a new weapon rather than an improved version. It's a while since I looked at Striker but I'd imagine the progression would work.

Question: the smallest in-game rifle/ram grenade is the 4cm, but modern armies are experimenting with grenade launchers as small as 20mm and 25mm, perhaps also rifle grenades. Would you introduce such weapons, perhaps using the Striker rules to extrapolate their performance?

Why not? Traveller does a great job of simplifying the myriad of weapons available in the real world. For example there are dozens of versions of assault rifles currently available but when you distill them down to game stats they're all really quite similar. Adding back in some of that diversity can add detail to a game that adds depth, always a good thing in my book and yes, do extrapolate but dont be surprised when the game stats all look the same! On a side note, I believe some of the reason for going to 25mm rounds is the ability to carry more rounds and to make a magazine fed version practical. If your 25mm round still has the lethality you want then you can carry more for the same weight or reduce the weight carried.

Something else to bear in mind with HE/HEAP (though I dont recall reading anything in Traveller books about this), the rounds have fuses some of which may take time to arm. Current 40mm grenades have to travel X meters before they will arm. It seems likely that an increase in TL could bring a safe way of handling the rounds but have them go live sooner but just how close would the shooter want to be to an exploding round?