Striker Combat - Armor, Penetration and Damage
- Thread starter kilemall
- Start date
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Hmm yes, but a shield that stops rifle shots much less heavier weapons is MUCH heavier.
The deployment in the picture highlights my point that unless you have a specific threat axis or are operating large phalanxes, wedges, squares or some other formation, that a small unit could use shields forward but be beaten by flank shots likely due to the dispersed yet increased firepower of the rifle battlefield.
Just to give you some idea....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYiNMIVxnFM
Last edited:
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Ok, sidebar before going back to shields, which needed a looksee to how they would work in melee before considering their use with guns and tech.
Looked over the ammo rules, and boy you can burn through that ammo in no time at all, especially on auto. There is a reason for all the emphasis on magazine cost, a prolonged battle can see ammo use exceed the cost of the weapon.
But that's realistic, a lot of the shooting is about keeping the other guy suppressed while taking partial cover yourself, and bullets are cheaper then taking hits.
Until you run out and the enemy hasn't.
So I came up with this one.
Divide the ammo use rate by the skill level of the shooter in that weapon.
So a weaponl-1 guy uses at the stated rates, weapon-2 means using half as much, weapon-3 1/3, weapon-4 1/4, etc.
The divisor cannot drop below the number of targets engaged.
Looked over the ammo rules, and boy you can burn through that ammo in no time at all, especially on auto. There is a reason for all the emphasis on magazine cost, a prolonged battle can see ammo use exceed the cost of the weapon.
But that's realistic, a lot of the shooting is about keeping the other guy suppressed while taking partial cover yourself, and bullets are cheaper then taking hits.
Until you run out and the enemy hasn't.
So I came up with this one.
Divide the ammo use rate by the skill level of the shooter in that weapon.
So a weaponl-1 guy uses at the stated rates, weapon-2 means using half as much, weapon-3 1/3, weapon-4 1/4, etc.
The divisor cannot drop below the number of targets engaged.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Alright, melee shields.
I would postulate three levels of armor that a shield would be made of- jack/wood, soft metal (roughly corresponding to mesh) and plate.
I'm further postulating that shields in melee are sort of a hybrid armor/weapon- when used actively it parries as a defensive weapon and could be used as a bludgeon attack, when the fighter is concentrating on weapon use it's more of a supplemental armor.
Finally, they come in small and large versions, the relationship of effectiveness would be like small shields to flak jacket, large shields to cloth- a matter of coverage. So small shields will have a lower value, but weigh less.
Using shields means wielding the shield in one hand, the primary weapon in the other. Since otherwise the assumption would be two hands on the sword/polearm, we have to assume that strength applied to the weapon is cut in half.
Possibly 1-2 STR shifts to the blade hand as the character is defined as 'right-handed' or 'left-handed'.
I would postulate three levels of armor that a shield would be made of- jack/wood, soft metal (roughly corresponding to mesh) and plate.
I'm further postulating that shields in melee are sort of a hybrid armor/weapon- when used actively it parries as a defensive weapon and could be used as a bludgeon attack, when the fighter is concentrating on weapon use it's more of a supplemental armor.
Finally, they come in small and large versions, the relationship of effectiveness would be like small shields to flak jacket, large shields to cloth- a matter of coverage. So small shields will have a lower value, but weigh less.
Using shields means wielding the shield in one hand, the primary weapon in the other. Since otherwise the assumption would be two hands on the sword/polearm, we have to assume that strength applied to the weapon is cut in half.
Possibly 1-2 STR shifts to the blade hand as the character is defined as 'right-handed' or 'left-handed'.
Last edited:
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Still cogitating on the most elegant yet thorough way to handle shields and/or two handed weapons (say a pistol in each hand, or fighting short sword/long sword or two daggers).
In the meantime, been rethinking IMTU task rolls a tad, and came up with this-
Combat ranges are still by Striker but using their literal task type names, and new ranges for different situations- shift down one task level for ambush/surprise, shift two down for execution/immobile 'targets', Impossible range is Extreme range + 10% Extreme.
By stretching the outlier task rolls I'm making the easier more reliable and the impossible tougher.
In the meantime, been rethinking IMTU task rolls a tad, and came up with this-
- Simple 9+
- Routine 11+
- Effective 15+
- Long 17+
- Extreme 19+
- Impossible 23+
Combat ranges are still by Striker but using their literal task type names, and new ranges for different situations- shift down one task level for ambush/surprise, shift two down for execution/immobile 'targets', Impossible range is Extreme range + 10% Extreme.
By stretching the outlier task rolls I'm making the easier more reliable and the impossible tougher.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Okay-
Small shield is going to be the 18-24" variety, Large is Norman kite to Roman/police body shield. This is a placeholder, going to put in weight, Striker stats, costs, etc.
The valuation will be for melee purposes, most of the pre-steel stuff will just have a melee weapon defense value, if it's being used against guns it will have the gun/pen value and resolve that way.
Thinking mostly valued as a cudgel/club offensively, but with a far higher parry value.
Working off this and that site-
http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/cariadoc/shield_and_weapon_weights.html
http://www.mercwars.com/shieldtypes.shtml
Finding that shields were darn heavy, interesting question is should they be treated like body armor or encumbrance?
Target weight for small would likely be 3-4 lbs and 6-12 lbs for the large.
Also thinking of doing up the latter tech shields strictly off the Striker armor system, and going wild with 1 80kg shield for the Battle Dress version- big toys have 100kg of lift, let's use it.
Plate armor, lances, and bow weapons are also missing from the Striker table in addition to maces.
Finally, on the two handed front simplest effect, I'm thinking it's a -1 STR/DEX per weapon kg effect on attack on both weapons, rounded off. Adjust -1 kg effect for zero recoil guns, and +1 kg effect for auto or high recoil guns.
That neatly covers both big weapons like the halberds and broadswords and rifles, while light daggers and pistols are handy and light enough to use without penalty.
SM Shield Jack
LG Shield Jack
SM Shield Wooden
LG Shield Wooden
SM Shield Plate
LG Shield Plate
SM Shield Cloth
LG Shield Cloth
SM Shield CE
LG Shield CE
SM Shield CA
LG Shield CA
SM Shield Improved CA
LG Shield Improved CA
LG Shield BD Body
Small shield is going to be the 18-24" variety, Large is Norman kite to Roman/police body shield. This is a placeholder, going to put in weight, Striker stats, costs, etc.
The valuation will be for melee purposes, most of the pre-steel stuff will just have a melee weapon defense value, if it's being used against guns it will have the gun/pen value and resolve that way.
Thinking mostly valued as a cudgel/club offensively, but with a far higher parry value.
Working off this and that site-
http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/cariadoc/shield_and_weapon_weights.html
http://www.mercwars.com/shieldtypes.shtml
Finding that shields were darn heavy, interesting question is should they be treated like body armor or encumbrance?
Target weight for small would likely be 3-4 lbs and 6-12 lbs for the large.
Also thinking of doing up the latter tech shields strictly off the Striker armor system, and going wild with 1 80kg shield for the Battle Dress version- big toys have 100kg of lift, let's use it.
Plate armor, lances, and bow weapons are also missing from the Striker table in addition to maces.
Finally, on the two handed front simplest effect, I'm thinking it's a -1 STR/DEX per weapon kg effect on attack on both weapons, rounded off. Adjust -1 kg effect for zero recoil guns, and +1 kg effect for auto or high recoil guns.
That neatly covers both big weapons like the halberds and broadswords and rifles, while light daggers and pistols are handy and light enough to use without penalty.
SM Shield Jack
LG Shield Jack
SM Shield Wooden
LG Shield Wooden
SM Shield Plate
LG Shield Plate
SM Shield Cloth
LG Shield Cloth
SM Shield CE
LG Shield CE
SM Shield CA
LG Shield CA
SM Shield Improved CA
LG Shield Improved CA
LG Shield BD Body
Last edited:
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Big question with the shields, especially advanced tech against guns, should they be considered additional armor for the armor set it supports and just add a value, a separate armor piece like the two armor values, or a gun attack has to pen the shield THEN pen the body armor?
Would it not be functionally equivalent in Striker to taking cover behind a tree or door?
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
That's one way to take it, but then you get that whole odd +8 thing if the armor is equivalent.
So, say you have a cloth shield and cloth armor, full cloth is normally 5, let's say you take a large shield so it's equivalent value 5, being near full body coverage.
On the armor combination table, which handles 'shots through concrete' resolution, a 0 difference works out to +8, or armor value 13.
Okay, let's do a small shield, value 3 (just like flak jacket, smaller area coverage, slightly less well built). That is a 2 difference yielding +7, armor value 12.
That's a helluva upgrade for just a shield.
Course that is only for people conveniently shooting in LOS through the shield coverage area, side and back shots would be normal armor 5.
So CE 6 + large CE shield, armor 14, small armor 13 (better then BD!).
CA/BD 10 large shield goes to 18, small 17 (Improved BD levels!).
Improved CA/BD 18, large shield to 26 small to 25. Great, but not good enough for stopping the dread Hammer of the RAM GL.
You'd have to allow inclining of the shield for radical sloped effect to increase armor, that's 18 x2 for 36, 18 difference means +2 for a total of 38. Whew, our mighty high tech knight can finally be on even terms with a TL8 weapon.
So not a casual upgrade, especially for our low tech friends.
That security officer in the starship hallway sporting cloth armor, a cloth shield and a HEAP Snub Autopistol is looking mighty formidable if we go with these rules.
I do not disagree with your analysis or conclusion: "Things that make you go 'What?'"
I only suggest that the problem already exists whether I hide behind the trash can or grab the trash can lid to defend myself in the rules as written.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
I do not disagree with your analysis or conclusion: "Things that make you go 'What?'"
I only suggest that the problem already exists whether I hide behind the trash can or grab the trash can lid to defend myself in the rules as written.
Hmmm, trash can armor would be a 1 for bullets and maybe 2 for melee, with trash can lid together they would be +8 for a result of 9.
Turns out Oscar the Grouch was an urban tactical genius.
:rofl:
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Anyway, try this on for size-
Minimum rolls for base chance hit and +1 unmodded hit small shields.
Minimum rolls for base chance hit and +1-2 unmodded hit large shields.
So Effective range
Unmodded 8-9 hits small shield instead of main body, 8-10 hits large shield.
Long range
Unmodded 10-11 hits small shield instead of main body, 11-12 hits large shield.
Extreme range
Unmodded 12-13 hits small shield instead of main body, 12-14 hits large shield.
Example Elite sniper weapon-4 fires on large shield target at effective range, no defensive mods, at 8-10 he hits the large shield, on 11-16 he hits the body.
Long range, at 10-12 he hits the large shield, on 13-16 he hits the body.
Extreme range, at 12-14 he hits the large shield, on 15-16 he hits the body.
On shield hits heavy/mortal wounds get downgraded to serious, if the weapon readily penetrates the shield the shield armor value is subtracted from the round's penetration and another roll to hit is made to see if it goes on to the body or not (shield hit rule ignored).
Minimum rolls for base chance hit and +1 unmodded hit small shields.
Minimum rolls for base chance hit and +1-2 unmodded hit large shields.
So Effective range
Unmodded 8-9 hits small shield instead of main body, 8-10 hits large shield.
Long range
Unmodded 10-11 hits small shield instead of main body, 11-12 hits large shield.
Extreme range
Unmodded 12-13 hits small shield instead of main body, 12-14 hits large shield.
Example Elite sniper weapon-4 fires on large shield target at effective range, no defensive mods, at 8-10 he hits the large shield, on 11-16 he hits the body.
Long range, at 10-12 he hits the large shield, on 13-16 he hits the body.
Extreme range, at 12-14 he hits the large shield, on 15-16 he hits the body.
On shield hits heavy/mortal wounds get downgraded to serious, if the weapon readily penetrates the shield the shield armor value is subtracted from the round's penetration and another roll to hit is made to see if it goes on to the body or not (shield hit rule ignored).
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Well the above is a mess, I'm going to do a rethink on that.
In the meantime, I'm wanting to define recoil straight from Striker stats, thinking something like
(weight round x penetration x effective range) / weapon weight
In other words the heavier the round the more kick, but the less recoil/climb the heavier the weapon.
Reasonable assumption?
In the meantime, I'm wanting to define recoil straight from Striker stats, thinking something like
(weight round x penetration x effective range) / weapon weight
In other words the heavier the round the more kick, but the less recoil/climb the heavier the weapon.
Reasonable assumption?
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
Pretty much. Recoil is based on the mass of the projected material, to include propellant, and its velocity in comparison to the mass of the firing weapon. Do you want the formula for computing recoil, as I have that in several places? You can also add recoil and muzzle rise compensators as well. Those would add somewhat to the weight of the weapon, and a bit more to its cost, however.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Problem with computing recoil as per a professional formula is we don't have the bullet densities and propellant vs. slug/warhead.
I'm not looking for a hard number per se, but as a differentiating input into fire sequence, i.e. the main issue with recoil is not 'missing' but rather taking more time to handle/compensate and so lighter recoil weapons should have a second or two advantage.
I'm thinking at the TL point we have the PGMP/FGMP grav compensators, recoil is then a non-issue. So a grav compensated high tech autorifle might be desirable, especially if you can then go ultra-light materials since recoil dampening/material limits are not an issue, and possibly fire them one handed.
Calculating ACR recoil, which is a lighter round and likely more dense penetrator, PG/MGs, and gauss weapons should probably work on different formulas.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
The is correct, so about all you can do is assume a heavier round is going to have greater recoil than a lighter round, assuming the weapon remains the same.
It would depend on how much all of the high-tech compensators add to the weight of the weapon, along with the power pack to power them. Keep in mind that one-handed fire of a longer weapon is going to be less accurate than using two hands.
ACR and the Gauss would work on the same formula, with the Gauss not having to worry about propellant mass.
However, when you look at the characteristics of the rounds fired, you do have some problems.
Mercenary, as least the digital copy on my computer, I have not checked with my hard copy gives the following data on the ACR.
Five grams equates to 77 grains, and 9mm equates to 0.354 inch. That means that the round has a really bad sectional density (weight of bullet divided by area of cross-section} and is going to slow down very rapidly. Basically, the trajectory is going to resemble a rainbow. I will not comment on the HE capability.
As for the 6mm bullet, that equates to 0.236 inches, and actually has been a military caliber in the past, with the 6mm Lee-Navy being around in the 1880s, and used as the basis for the .220 Swift cartridge. Three grams equates to about 46 grains, which is a little light for a 6mm slug. However, that 3 grams is the total weight of the projectile, including the discarding sabot, so the actual penetrator is going to be lighter, which again makes for a poor sectional density and rapid velocity loss. Another issue would be making sure the rifling could stabilize both rounds. That 9mm round is going to be a problem.
I would have to get out my Cartridges of the World to give you some examples of actual bullet weight for 9mm and 6mm rifles, but most of the military 6mm weapons used bullet weights of over 100 grains, or 6.2 grams, for acceptable sectional density and good long-range performance. A 9mm rifle is going to need more like 12 gram round or heavier for acceptable long-range performance.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
Kitemail, since you are working on armor penetration, here is a report on tests done by a US Army anti-tank company on the Japanese Type 97 Medium Tank in 1945.
The armor thicknesses on the tank were as follows.
Thin Japanese armer tended to be very hard, so resistant to small arms fire, but the hardness made it brittle, so if hit with heavier projectiles of greater than armor thickness, it could shatter. The performance of the 37 mm gun was in line of what would be expected against that thickness of very hard armor.
The armor thicknesses on the tank were as follows.
Thin Japanese armer tended to be very hard, so resistant to small arms fire, but the hardness made it brittle, so if hit with heavier projectiles of greater than armor thickness, it could shatter. The performance of the 37 mm gun was in line of what would be expected against that thickness of very hard armor.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
On the 37mm vs. Japanese tank, I have complete confidence handling that, especially WWII armament.
The US 37mm was a magnificent high velocity system, and the Japanese tanks were at least 3-4 years behind everyone else, with concomitant results.
From your description I assume the Japanese used carbonization or FHA- good relatively cheap upgrade against outdated Chinese guns, not so good against modern US and USSR guns.
The ACR description specifies a cheap round that performs like the earlier TL slug throwers despite being a smaller round overall, so we can probably treat that one like a current round.
The main ACR DS round however performs much better, and so we likely have to assume both a more dense slug and higher performing propellant. My proposed conceptual formula should capture that.
I'm not sure why gauss guns would have significant recoil, there would presumably be some resistance between the mass driver and the round, but the whole system is not having to deal with any of the propellant/pressure issues. Am I missing something?
The US 37mm was a magnificent high velocity system, and the Japanese tanks were at least 3-4 years behind everyone else, with concomitant results.
From your description I assume the Japanese used carbonization or FHA- good relatively cheap upgrade against outdated Chinese guns, not so good against modern US and USSR guns.
The ACR description specifies a cheap round that performs like the earlier TL slug throwers despite being a smaller round overall, so we can probably treat that one like a current round.
The main ACR DS round however performs much better, and so we likely have to assume both a more dense slug and higher performing propellant. My proposed conceptual formula should capture that.
I'm not sure why gauss guns would have significant recoil, there would presumably be some resistance between the mass driver and the round, but the whole system is not having to deal with any of the propellant/pressure issues. Am I missing something?
There's that whole Newton thing.
Being frictionless would abdicate some of the recoil, but it would not be recoilless. It's still accelerating the bullet quite quickly, and quite fast.
The only practical compensation would be the overall weight of the rifle (which isn't really that heavy). Since it doesn't use propellant, there's no force to absorb when cycling the action, like would happen in a gas or recoil operated action. Now, it does have the advantage that the net impulse can be applied less forcefully (i.e. over the time of the entire barrel, rather than all at once). So, that could certainly lower the felt recoil.
So, I think it would be the same or more than a modern AR-15, but not some monster .300 Magnum thing. In the end, it's accelerating a bullet of similar mass, but 50% faster.
