How heavy is a Fusion Gun?

[BetterThanLife]

Classic traveller/Snapshot rules state that 100 points of damage from an energy weapon will put a hole in a bulkhead. 16D (Since it is a burst weapon) that hits twice in one shot is likely to penetrate a bulkhead.(Average roll of 3.5 on 32 dice is 112 points of damage.) Plus severely damage either side of the hole. (Group hits by autofire.) Definitely not a typical use on a starship weapon. Explosive Decompression has other unfortunate side effects besides making it difficult to breath.

In MT with the Armor pen rules you basically had to use one of these to penetrate combat armor or battledress but it wouldn't slice through bulkheads as nicely. (Armor pen 32 vs armor 40.)

I have never seen a reference to a Gauss SMG either. MT had a Gauss pistol. Closest I have found.

Originally posted by kaladorn:
[QB]

Originally posted by LordRhys:
The Gauss SMG appears in several other versions of Traveller, including CT.

Please cite a CT reference for the Gauss SMG.
Or an MT reference.

It may exist in GT and T20. Maybe even T4. But I do not recall ever seeing it in CT or MT.

I'm always willing to learn that I am wrong, but I would love to see a specific citation to back up this claim.

The PGMP-12, PGMP-14, and the FGMP-15 are all usable by people not wearing Battle Dress. The PGMP-12 is an early plasma weapon, and you do need to be wearing Combat Armor to protect yourself from weapon side effects. The PGMP-14, and FGMP-15 are gravitic assisted weapons, and are the most powerful weapons available to infantry at their respective Tech Levels. These particular weapons outclassed every other weapon available to infantry in most versions of Traveller. They were designed as anti-armor weapons, and no starship captain in his right mind would allow one to be used onboard ship. They were quite capable of punching through the hull in most versions of Traveller, and the collateral damage associated with these weapons would prohibit their use around anything you wanted to keep intact for later use (like the ship).

I don't think you are correct here, at least not from an MT perspective (and I wouldn't be surprised if this was true in AHL too, and I don't believe (though I'd have to go grab the rulebook) that Snapshot covered these and I don't recall anything in books 1-5 that would suggest whether an FGMP would actually penetrate a starship hull or not in CT). Starship armour 0 was armour value 40 in MT. No hand held FGMP or PGMP could reach this level of penetration.

Now, it would make a mockery of most internal walls and doors, I concede. But not the hull or pressure bulkeads and hatches.

 

[zephyrus]

Page 158 in the THB for T20 list's the AR's for various materials including special comments for vehical scale and ship scales. The question is what would a bulkhead be in terms of these AR's and how much SI they would have.

 

[justacaveman]

I'm probably wrong about the Gauss SMG (It may have been in an old magazine article). But it woudn't be difficult to do up your own stats for such a weapon.

On page 159 of the T20 THB, an interior bulkhead is listed as AR: 10, and SI: 50. An FGMP-14 or FGMP-15, would probably penetrate the bulkhead in a single shot. However, it would take quite a few shots to create a 1-meter diameter breach that you could crawl through (350 points SI damage as far as I could tell).

In T20 an FGMP-15 will probably damage an AR:0 ship's hull with a single normal hit. Example: An FGMP-15 has a damage rating of 9d20. If it hits an AR:0 ship, the damage would be 1d20-2 (9d20 - a scale reduction of 10 = 1d20-2), an FGMP-14 would cause 1d20-4 damage after scale reduction. On a critical hit they would do even more damage, and would also cause some internal damage.

It would be hard to destroy a ship with FGMP's, but you can damage them.

 

[snrdg082102]

Evening kaladorn,

I just got a copy of Marc Miller's Traveller (T4) Emperor's Arsenal and opened to page 78 and 79. Page 78 is the start of TL 12 weapons, on the top of page 79 is a "Machinegun, RF Gauss-12." The description for the Battle Dress, Augmented-12 lists as one of the weapons a "RF Gauss MG-12" on page 84. However, in the table below the battle dress indicates that the weapon is a "Rifle, RF Gauss-12."
Addition 10/09/03

TL-13 page 87 Machinegun, VRF Gauss-13, table page 90 agrees with text.

TL-14 page 93 Machinegun, VRF Gauss-14, table page 97 agrees with text.

Also at TL-14 in T4 you have a Machinegun, Laser-14 text is above the TL-14 MG, VRF Gauss.

Anyone have errata for this book or know where I can find such on the web.

Originally posted by kaladorn:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LordRhys:
The Topic Is: "How heavy is a Fusion Gun?"

The Topic Is Not: "What weapon is best for close quarters combat?"

Well, it isn't explicit (though upon re-reading it may be implicit) that this is a T20 discussion from the original post. I do see it is posted in the T20 section (sorry, I arrived here from the 'active topics' area and missed that small print at the top)

And in other versions of traveller, there is no such thing as a gauss SMG and battle dress is worn by (in varying descriptions) most or all of the Imperial Marines and therefore is not a support item and probably doesn't weigh what it does in T20. And in fact, one of the fusion guns (or is it a PGMP?) can be used by people NOT in battle dress.

Anyway, if you want to talk strictly about T20, I'll leave you to it. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

[kaladorn]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
[QB] Classic traveller/Snapshot rules state that 100 points of damage from an energy weapon will put a hole in a bulkhead. 16D (Since it is a burst weapon) that hits twice in one shot is likely to penetrate a bulkhead.

I'm not sure that isn't a wee bit of a liberal interpretation of the burst rules. But you might be right...

(Average roll of 3.5 on 32 dice is 112 points of damage.) Plus severely damage either side of the hole. (Group hits by autofire.) Definitely not a typical use on a starship weapon. Explosive Decompression has other unfortunate side effects besides making it difficult to breath.

The effects you describe, given I'm in BD and laugh at the splash hits beyond point blank range, and probably the rads too, aren't a problem. The ED is a problem for the crew... but chances are is is *their* vessel and I really don't give a tinkers cuss... (I'm a Marine charged with taking the vessel).

In MT with the Armor pen rules you basically had to use one of these to penetrate combat armor or battledress but it wouldn't slice through bulkheads as nicely. (Armor pen 32 vs armor 40.)

Yep.

I have never seen a reference to a Gauss SMG either. MT had a Gauss pistol. Closest I have found.

Me too. And Tom's citation from the Emperor's Arsenal is a ref to a Gauss MG, not a Gauss SMG.

 

[kaladorn]

Originally posted by LordRhys:
I'm probably wrong about the Gauss SMG (It may have been in an old magazine article). But it woudn't be difficult to do up your own stats for such a weapon.

Using 3G I did just that. But they don't tend to be much more deadly than a gauss pistol. They tend to have marginally better penetration (maybe a 4, mabye a 5) in MT terms, but the same damage. Just more ammo. Why? Barrel length is a vital aspect of gauss weapon design. The SMG just can't manage enough accelerator length.

On page 159 of the T20 THB, an interior bulkhead is listed as AR: 10, and SI: 50. An FGMP-14 or FGMP-15, would probably penetrate the bulkhead in a single shot. However, it would take quite a few shots to create a 1-meter diameter breach that you could crawl through (350 points SI damage as far as I could tell).

Bulkheads exist for structural reasons, but also in a spaceship should exist for life support reasons. I submit to you that a bulkhead that can be penetrated with an FGMP is actually too weak for a proper military vessel which would expect even larger amounts of incoming energy from ship weapons.

This is, of course, just an opinion.

 

[zephyrus]

quote:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LordRhys:
I'm probably wrong about the Gauss SMG (It may have been in an old magazine article). But it woudn't be difficult to do up your own stats for such a weapon.

Using 3G I did just that. But they don't tend to be much more deadly than a gauss pistol. They tend to have marginally better penetration (maybe a 4, mabye a 5) in MT terms, but the same damage. Just more ammo. Why? Barrel length is a vital aspect of gauss weapon design. The SMG just can't manage enough accelerator length.
</font>[/QUOTE]So wouldent in effect a Gauss SMG realy be something more of a Gauss Carbine or such?

as a SMG, wouldent a higher ROF be an advantage in some form?

 

[kaladorn]

Well, there's higher and there's higher. If you are already firing 10 round burst (3 extra AF targets), as I think the Gauss Rifle does in MT, then unless you go to (is it 100 rounds) big bursts to get the 4th AF target, there ain't much to gain. I think the GP also fires bursts, but they may (I forget) be the 2 AF target 4 round bursts). And all are capable of 'Rapid Fire'.

A Gauss Carbine should be a mid-size weapon firing the same ammo size/length as the Gauss Pistol (so too the SMG.... in a sense, the carbine is an SMG with a stock or the SMG is an auto-carbine - the distinction isn't a lot). Most modern Carbines (like the M4/C8) actually fire *rifle* rounds. So maybe an SMG is a pistol-round-firing shoulder arm (what my Gauss SMG was, because I didn't want 40mm long projectiles) and a Gauss Carbine would be a rifle-round-firing shoulder arm.

Where they would differ respectively:
The pistol is short barrelled and has a very limited mag.
The SMG has a longer barrel than the pistol, hence a bit more zoom. And a bigger mag.
The carbine has probably a bit smaller mag than the SMG (longer, heavier rounds) and about the same amount of zoom behind them.
The rifle is bigger yet still, with full power.
The first two fire 4mm x 24mm and the last two fire 4mm x 40mm.

or something like that.

 

[Zutroi]

MTU has had a Gauss SMG almost from day one. It's called a GaussMag and is basically just a heavier gauss pistol designed to fire the 40 round gauss rifle clip instead of the 15 round gauss pistol one. Your only advantages over the standard pistol are magazine capacity in single-fire mode, and volume of fire in auto.

 

[MrMorden]

Guys, a PGMP/FGMP is not an infantry weapon, it is a SUPPORT weapon. In a 10 man squad, you might have ONE guy with a PGMP/FGMP. The rest will be carrying Gauss Rifles or ACRs.

A PGMP/FGMP is for attacking vehicles or structures. It can be used against personnel, but that is not its primary function, nor is it designed for anything like CQB.

 

[Crashlogic]

Well its an interesting discussion. For CQB, pistols and sub machinegunes and carbines are most common, though in a starship I would go with a riot gun. I am not sure an armoured hull of a dreadnought would be affected by gauss, laser or fusion weapons, but The unarmoured hull of a free trader is, at least IMTU-it makes boarding actiosn interesting.

I think that one thing about fusion guns is that they are not exactly meant for what we think of as modern CQB. One big difference about modern CQB is that it tends to happen in an enviromnet which is wary of collateral damage.

In the world of fusion guns, we don't worry about CQB in built up areas. We take out the buling and everything in it.

Battldress usually means marines, and the Imperial marines do not mess around. If they come in, some very bad has happened, and the Imperial Marines are supposed to be much worse than very bad. In a starship boarding actions, marines with fusion guns are there to eliminate the enemy, thus they are not allowed on the starship at all. But God help anyone in such a boarding action.

 

[BetterThanLife]

One little point about Crits on vehicles or Starships. The rules on crits say they ignore armor, not scale reduction. While scale reduction has the same effect as armor it isn't armor. So a 9d20 damage weapon is still going to do 1D20-2 on a crit, same as on a non-crit against a target with AR0.

Further Battledress is an armored vehicle so it will take something more than a typical vehicle weapon to engage it effectively, consistently. (In MTU Marine Battledress is 249vls (hence M size) AR14 or 15 with an agility of 4 and TL14+ camo granting it an AC of 32 or 33, a very nasty thing to hit and nastier to damage.) Matter of fact the higher tech tanks are in a similar situation, they are virtually immune to each other. Defensive systems have outstripped offensive systems. Try it, grab a pair of Trepedia Tanks and have them slug it out. Fire an FGMP14 at an Empress or a Trepedia and see what happens. (Nothing.)

Marines, expecting to engage similar targets are going to be carrying PGMPs/FGMPs as the only choice to deal with any realistic armor. (BTW a Gauss Rifle is almost useless against Combat Armor in T20.) So you can expect Marines to be carrying PGMP/FGMP as a matter of course. They aren't support weapons, they are anti-high tech infantry weapons. (They certainly aren't anti-armor weapons.) Therefore the idea of the FGMP being 80kg isn't a viable option. even for BD equipped troops.

 

[Crashlogic]

I had always thought the fusion gun the standard weapon of the marines. and things like meson sleds and such the support weapons.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
...In MTU Marine Battledress is 249vls (hence M size)

The problem I have with this (and the definition of M size Battledress as a vehicle) is that by the books definition of vl (I know, this again

) the two are not the same.

Your 249vl Battledress is 2490 liters. I can accept that as a vehicle but not a suit (as so often depicted). It's a smallish combat walker. As a simple cylinder it would be about 2m tall and 1.25m in diameter. As an anthropomorphic walker with arms it's going to be considerably larger. No way it'll fit in standard seats, or down normal hallways or through regular doors, all of which Battledress is supposed to be able to do.

Even the official unofficial fudge of changing the vl definition to only 5 liters helps but a little.

I'm sure the tables relating sizes to vl are off. Or the definition of vl is wrong. Or both.

I just don't think an "M size" "vehicle" should count as a "vehicle" for damage definitions.

 

[kurtis]

Completely off-topic, but I think Mr. Morden is bucking for the special title, "Topic Necromancer". LOL!

 

[G. Fieendish]

Re: Last Post
No, he's retreated to his Underground lair, somewhere in the west of London....
However, if Vandenmar & Croup ever get hold of him, he's going to need all the "Shadow Medical Technology" he can get his hands on....
(If you can quote Babylon 5, then I can quote from Neverwhere....
Incedentally, there is a London Underground Station called Morden....).

 

[aramis]

Battledress was hotly debated during the T20 playtest.

In general, treating it as a specialized vehicle was the TNE approach (Illos not withstanding). Further, In order to replicate the levels of protection shown in MT and TNE, it was best handled as a vehicle.

Now, 2.4m³ is a bit much....

There were design sequences in TNE's FF&S, and the heavy battledress is almost that big.

THe MT design sequence was unofficial, but replicated just about all the DGP versions, including the scout walkabout....

Battledress, especially heavy battledress, distorts the line between suit and vehicle.

Oh, BTW, some of the japanese lifting suits are about 2-2.5m³