Carbine range table?

[zero]

Thought this merited its own topic.

One player in my game has bought an Assault Grenade Launcher for their main weapon, it is only upon writing up the character sheets that I noticed this issue; it has the skill Gun Combat (Slug Carbine) for its skill, but there is no carbine range table in the MGT Core, just rifle or assault weapon.

The Assault Grenade Launcher is a TL 9 weapon within the SMG table of the CSC, but is not an autoweapon (strange it would be classed as an SMG then... :? ).

I'm swayed to go with rifle range, as it looks like a (chunky) one from the CSC advert, but it says in its fluff that it doesnt have a great range (due to low velocity) but is fine in low grav.

Perhaps this is an errata issue and I have an outdated range table. Any help would be appreciated, thanks

 

[apoc527]

The range is listed in the table on CSC 71 as "Assault Weapon."

Most "carbines" use the Assault Weapon range unless otherwise stated. I also don't use the Carbine specialty, as I think it just creates too many unnecessary weapon skills.

 

[zero]

Thanks for the info, didnt notice the reference :lol:

Thanks to the CSC being mostly a wall of text at the start, I'm still discovering new things to date! :wink:

 

[apoc527]

The best parts are in the wall of text!

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

Thought this merited its own topic.

One player in my game has bought an Assault Grenade Launcher for their main weapon, it is only upon writing up the character sheets that I noticed this issue; it has the skill Gun Combat (Slug Carbine) for its skill, but there is no carbine range table in the MGT Core, just rifle or assault weapon.

The Assault Grenade Launcher is a TL 9 weapon within the SMG table of the CSC, but is not an autoweapon (strange it would be classed as an SMG then... :? ).

I'm swayed to go with rifle range, as it looks like a (chunky) one from the CSC advert, but it says in its fluff that it doesnt have a great range (due to low velocity) but is fine in low grav.

Perhaps this is an errata issue and I have an outdated range table. Any help would be appreciated, thanks

Sounds like, yet another, CSC cock up. (This is the book that thinks a longbow has the range of a rifle (i.e. up to and beyond 500m)).

Looking at the description I down graded the rannge on the Assault Grenade Launcher from page 70 to "pistol", though it is a bit of a duff weapon. As a grenade launcher it should probably be fired using the support weapons skill, though the flechette rounds imply that it is just a big shot gun (shot gun skill). Take your pick.

In regard to the "slug carbine" skill, mentioned in Mercenary and CSC, I ignore it, and roll carbines in with the "slug rifle" skill.

Egil

Edited for spelling and grammar!

 

[rust]

Sounds like, yet another, CSC cock up. (This is the book that thinks a longbow has the range of a rifle (i.e. up to and beyond 500m)).

From Wikipedia:

An inscription on a stone stele was found near Nerchinsk in Siberia:
"While Chinggis (Genghis) Khan was holding an assembly of Mongolian
dignitaries, after his conquest of Sartaul (East Turkestan), Yesüngge (the
son of Chinggis Khan's brother) shot a target at 335 alds (536 m)."

 

[BFalcon]

I agree that beyond 400 is a little doubtful, but no range in medieval times was allowed below 220 yards and 400 is thought to be the maximum (flight arrow) range... and that's a medieval English Longbow (draw strength at 30" up to 185lbs, as found on the Mary Rose).

If you use a higher TL, then a high-TL longbow could probably reach further - wood bows tend to be less sharp on the acceleration than a metal synthetic composite bow would be and metal or carbon-fibre arrows can take a higher acceleration without weighing so much.

 

[Rick]

The Mongols favoured a more powerful composite recurve bow rather than the english type of longbow - more power, but I think they preferred accuracy over speed of firing, so probably lost out on the volume of fire. If a bow shot over 500m, then this would have had to have been a truly exceptional shot (if not very lucky as well!); effective range in good conditions would be lower than this and effective range under combat conditions lower still.

 

[Egil Skallagrimsson]

Sounds like, yet another, CSC cock up. (This is the book that thinks a longbow has the range of a rifle (i.e. up to and beyond 500m)).

From Wikipedia:

An inscription on a stone stele was found near Nerchinsk in Siberia:
"While Chinggis (Genghis) Khan was holding an assembly of Mongolian
dignitaries, after his conquest of Sartaul (East Turkestan), Yesüngge (the
son of Chinggis Khan's brother) shot a target at 335 alds (536 m)."

:lol: :lol:

Amazing what fantastical prowess is attached to legendary and semi-legendary figures (and their relatives).

Perhaps that is why the ranges don't work, CSC assumes everyone is a mythological super hero! Doesn't really fit with the rest of MgT (more War Hammer 40K), but it is now much clearer.

BFalcan pointed out that this could reflect a TL16 "bow of the ancients". No, the csc says TL2 (so, a good old fashioned bent stick).

Egil

 

[rust]

Amazing what fantastical prowess is attached to legendary and semi-legendary figures (and their relatives).

Well, I can hit a target at 500 m, too, but I would need a hill, a strong
wind at my back and a rather big target - a barn should do ... 8)

 

[far-trader]

Sounds like, yet another, CSC cock up. (This is the book that thinks a longbow has the range of a rifle (i.e. up to and beyond 500m)).

I'm certainly no expert but even I know better than that. What's more it took literally a few seconds to google the basic data and come up with a better effective range. "165m-228m" for the English longbow (the height of the technology and training). Not some mythical 500m.

Further a brief perusal of the article found would also have educated the author on the basics as I've known them. That modern longbows are no better or worse for effective range ("180m" in the same sentence as the ranges above). That compound bows are effective to the same ranges (not longer) but easier to draw and hold ready. That best range, accuracy, and damage all depend more greatly on the type of arrow and you only get to choose one. And more... but even that little seems to have eluded the authors from what I'm seeing here. That is sad.

In the dark ages of RPG rules production one had to go to a physical library or engage in other time consuming research to get the data right. They can be forgiven for making errors (or just plain making things up). That excuse holds no water today with the internet at practically everyone's fingertips.

 

[Rick]

Sounds like, yet another, CSC cock up. (This is the book that thinks a longbow has the range of a rifle (i.e. up to and beyond 500m)).

I'm certainly no expert but even I know better than that. What's more it took literally a few seconds to google the basic data and come up with a better effective range. "165m-228m" for the English longbow (the height of the technology and training). Not some mythical 500m.

Further a brief perusal of the article found would also have educated the author on the basics as I've known them. That modern longbows are no better or worse for effective range ("180m" in the same sentence as the ranges above). That compound bows are effective to the same ranges (not longer) but easier to draw and hold ready. That best range, accuracy, and damage all depend more greatly on the type of arrow and you only get to choose one. And more... but even that little seems to have eluded the authors from what I'm seeing here. That is sad.

In the dark ages of RPG rules production one had to go to a physical library or engage in other time consuming research to get the data right. They can be forgiven for making errors (or just plain making things up). That excuse holds no water today with the internet at practically everyone's fingertips.

Funny - I did exactly what you suggested, look stuff up on t'internet. From the information on there, it looks like the English Longbowman could hit a target at up to 400 yards, but rarely did as he was usually shooting at an armoured target - at ranges above about 220 yards, the arrows didn't have enough power to penetrate the armour. For weapons like these, perhaps you should reduce the maximum range by one step for every 2 points of armour on the target!

 

[rust]

By the way, the world record in field archery is held by Don Brown (USA)
with a documented range of 1,336 yards. :wink:

 

[far-trader]

By the way, the world record in field archery is held by Don Brown (USA)
with a documented range of 1,336 yards. :wink:

Great. Now some player somewhere is going to demand of his ref that he can hit and damage a man size target with a simple bow and arrow at up to some 1200m :roll:

Just kidding... this was of course in Flight competition (all about range, recall my choose one of above) where there is no target but the ground, which is sorta hard to miss

 

[far-trader]

Funny - I did exactly what you suggested, look stuff up on t'internet. From the information on there, it looks like the English Longbowman could hit a target at up to 400 yards, but rarely did as he was usually shooting at an armoured target - at ranges above about 220 yards, the arrows didn't have enough power to penetrate the armour. For weapons like these, perhaps you should reduce the maximum range by one step for every 2 points of armour on the target!

Are you (one of?) the author? I applaud the research but still fail the application. I recognize the need for game rules to be condensed and simple, but taking 400 yards at face value doesn't cut it as you note. There are so many variables. I suspect 400 yards would be massed fire of light arrows upon unarmoured troops from behind your own ranks. Quite different from the presumed game scenario of an individual targeting another individual, under direct threat themselves.

The armour adjustment suggested would help. More so would be halving the range listed as the maximum for typical combat. Permit longer range for extraordinary circumstances at greatly reduced chances to hit the standard man sized target.

For simplicity I'd just drop the maximum range to half. Players are not likely to be standing shoulder to shoulder with hundreds of archers firing on a mass of thousands of unarmoured pikemen

 

[rust]

I recognize the need for game rules to be condensed and simple, but taking 400 yards at face value doesn't cut it.

I consider it as possible that the English or Welsh equivalent of a well trai-
ned and experienced "sniper" could have hit his target at 400 yards, and
I would not rule out that a Mongol "sniper" could have done it at 500 yards
- but these were certainly extraordinary events, nothing a normal archer
could hope to achieve, just as a normal rifleman or even a normal sniper
will not be expected to hit his target at 2,000 yards. In my view the effec-
tive range is probably 200 yards for the longbow and 250 yards for the
Mongol bow.

 

[zero]

In MGS4 they had a VR training field where you shoot at VR baddies and they were placed at varying positions away from you.

Something in a game that shows you far you could snipe something would be a pretty cool feature in any sort of applicable game, maybe even a training feature in a new CoD game.

 

[Rick]

Umm - ok, when I said 'hit a target at up to 400 yards', I was suggesting that a good archer, under ideal field competition conditions could put an arrow into a straw target at that range. I completely agree that in a combat situation, 200 yards is about the maximum range and 50-80 yards would probably be the usual range that an archer would reasonably expect to kill a moving opponent (i.e: hit somewhere vital).

 

[BFalcon]

I recognize the need for game rules to be condensed and simple, but taking 400 yards at face value doesn't cut it.

I consider it as possible that the English or Welsh equivalent of a well trai-
ned and experienced "sniper" could have hit his target at 400 yards, and
I would not rule out that a Mongol "sniper" could have done it at 500 yards
- but these were certainly extraordinary events, nothing a normal archer
could hope to achieve, just as a normal rifleman or even a normal sniper
will not be expected to hit his target at 2,000 yards. In my view the effec-
tive range is probably 200 yards for the longbow and 250 yards for the
Mongol bow.

Well, as I said earlier - no medieval target range was allowed to be less than 220 yards... and a standard target butt is around 5 feet across today - presumably it'd be around the same.

Remember that any bow strength less than 75lbs was considered a children's bow and many medieval English Longbows were up to 185lbs (based on bows found on the Mary Rose), possibly more. But then you also have to remember that in England, you either went to church on Sunday or practiced at the butts...

but yeah, bows weren't really designed to aim at individuals at 400 yards - just a case of if you get enough of them, it'll hit something...

 

[zozotroll]

Hundreds of guys loosing at hundreds of targets, may get some hits. but targets is very different from combat. You only have so many shots, how many do you want to mostly waste at 400 yards, when them suckers are going to be a lot closer in a very short time.

Besides, in Traveller, I would hope to return thier arrow fire with gauss gun fiore. See how long it takes them to get tired of that.

I have an all wood longbow. Once some time ago when a player was making some absurd statement, I dug it out, handed it to him and said show me. oddly he seemd to feel that was unfair.

Owen