RE: [SG] Needle Weapons

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Brian Bell wrote:

> I figured that the Needle Pistol fired 10-20x the fire rate and area
> coverage of a autopistol. Along the same lines, I figured the NAW
would fire
> 10-20x the rate of an AAR. It would fire slightly faster than a gauss
AAR
> and the adjustable choke would allow for a larger coverage (adjusts to
have
> each needle follow the same path or spread out in a shotgun like
pattern).
> That is why I chose a higher firepower. But perhaps, the FP of the NAW
> should be dropped to a FP of 3 (like the gauss AAR).

Like gauss AAR + GL, actually. So that sounds heavy enough to me ;)

> True, needles are lighter than bullets and do not travel as far with
the
> same accuracy. However, the system does not give a .50 calbur shell an
> advantage in range over a .22, so I am unsure if it should have a
range
> penalty. Also, the GL is not seperated for range either. I would have
> trouble believing that it is not less accurate at long range than the
AAR
> that it is attacked to (let alone that an  elite can fire it 6000m
away
> [12"x5 range bands]). If we give it a penalty, it should be 1
down-shift in
> range band size (veterans use the range of regulars, and regulars use
green
> ranges, etc. = 2" less rb).

Then again, a GL does not need to be as accurate as a rifle; it will
still
have the same explosive radius at that range. Now, you were suggesting a
weapon that has a shotgun-like spread. That seems another story, really?

> Due to the high rate and spread of fire, perhaps these weapons should
shift
> up 2 in a close assault (like a shotgun)?

Not if you're not taking the rnge penalty of a shotgun, as well, I'd
think.
 
> So revised:
>		     Range     FP   Impact
> Needle Pistol:      Close	2      d4
> NAW:				3      d6
> Needle SAW:				    [removed]
> 
> As for why this weapon would be suited for police and security is the
lower
> leathality and penetration of the weapons. They would have a less
chance of
> damaging sensitive equipment and structures (such as the sides of an
> aircraft) and less chance of causing collateral deaths.

Ah. That's why I thought 'shipboard weapon', really. As for police use,
I
don't see that happening. Police'll go for something that'll drop the
bad
guy for sure, and miss the bystanders; not something that would probably
mildly damage both bystanders and bad guy. Case in point is current
police
'manstopper rounds'; they're absolutely vicious to the target, as they
shred their energy to reduce the odds ofblast-through resulting in
injuries behind the target.

Cheers,

    Derk

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine

iD8DBQE63WH9JXH58oo6ncURAhLsAJ48M9Gr7HK8rbxEcvCvqdctETd1DwCgsAUc
4XEJBqQjLABsWzK8QKVhmus=
=Fggc