Re: [GZG] Question: small-arms tech and troop quality....

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Robert Mayberry
<robert.mayberry@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jon, one thing you might consider is an obsolete firearms rule. This
> would cover obsolete weapons, plus hunting weapons, hand weapons and
> even improvised weapons not intended for combat. Once you have that
> (obviously, such weapons are exceptions to the rule), the weapons you
> have left are military-grade weapons that will kill or wound an
> unarmored target if they hit, and can put out a decent enough rate of
> fire for suppression. Weapons can have a penetration ability (as
> currently in SG2 with "impact") that is technical in nature, as John
> suggests to defeat armor/countermeasures, much as they do now.

There is no practical difference between a hunting rifle and a
military rifle if we are speaking of unarmored targets.  A round that
will kill a deer will kill a man.  The differences lie in how one
expects to use them.  Hunters and snipers use congruent methods and
hence congruent weapons.

John
-- 
"Thousands of Sarmatians, Thousands of Franks, we've slain them again
and again.  We're looking for thousands of Persians."
--Vita Aureliani

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l