Forums of the Megaverse®

Gryphon wrote:I sometimes wonder why there aren't Juicer (i.e. JA) series weapons intended for much closer ranged combat, since their auto-dodge makes them a very hard target even at close ranges? 4-8 gauge shotguns, plasma riot guns, mini Boomguns, half length JA series stuff, the list could be pretty long, and in an urban environment, a whole lot of engagements will take place at well under 1,000', most at less then 500'!

Shark_Force wrote:

SittingBull wrote:I would be an incredible article someone could write on who or what the "JA" was. I mean, in theory, if someone came up with this weapon (out of the blue epiphany invention) then he/they would very possibly made more items. More items with the versatility that the JA-11 has. THAT! Would be an awesome article for someone write up.

Lastly, I think of the JA-11 as a big gun. If you look at it and just picture a slightly larger version than you were thinking, its like wow. This gun is hefty.

fairly certain "JA" stands for "Juicer Assassin".

or, in other words, afaict the name won't really tell us squat about who makes it.

Right.
Although it probably explains why they're long-range weapons.
They're for sniping, because they're assassins' weapons.

Giant2005 wrote:It isn't the most powerful, it is just more powerful than the other widely distributed Rifles.
The thing is, it might not be so widely distributed, that is just an assumption we make.
We really know very little about it - we don't even know who makes it. All we know is it is based off a pre-rifts design, it could very well be an Archie product or a re-creation by someone else with superior technology.

My assumption is that the rifle is tough to make and has limited distribution facilities. It's not impossible for a character to own one, and I don't restrict it's use. It's just that if the same player takes the weapon over and over (And we play in a single world setting with tons of characters), then we know what's going on real quick.

I'm fine with the JA-12. It's a really well-made, capable assault rifle that does for Player Characters what the current M-16 model does for the US Army. Some guns are a cut above. The problem is that you have to consider the reason why such a gun would be allowed onto the open market and who has the money to make it. And why?

So, yes. I have a conspiracy built around the JA-12. And it's the best kind of conspiracy, because every time a PC buys one, they further the conspiracy.

I had always thought that the JA-11 was a more advanced version of the C-12, or more appropriately, the JA-11 was a pre-Rifts (and thus super advanced design by Rifts standards) precursor to the C-12. They are both heavy infantry weapons and extremely similiar, both with the MDC/SDC options, built in Cannister clips, ect. The C-12 is just less advanced, with only the laser option, weighing slightly more, having the shorter range, ect.

The C-10 is also a descendant of the JA-9. Again, similiar damage, same idea with the light laser rifle built for accuracy, ect, and same differences, the JA series has the longer range, variable frequency, ect.

The JA-12 is the JA series counter to the C-14, a heavy infantry weapon with grenade launching capabilities.

As to my favourite, I do love grenade launching weapons, but I would have to go with the JA-11 most of the time. The range and variable powers of the laser, as well as the options the SDC round gives you, combined with the Ion for close/heavy assault just carries it to victory for me. What more could you want than an amazing sniper weapon with great range, which can ALSO be an assault weapon with full auto capabilities?

Seto Kaiba wrote:(It's nowhere near as abusive as some of the stuff in the original Japanese Macross franchise, where you really do get fighters that can carry 200+ short-range missiles on top of their other ordinance and push 300+ if you know what you're doing... it gets worse when you consider that those missiles can be .5kt ersatz-nuclear warheads. At last check, the top fighter for maximum Macross missile mayhem could take 274 missiles without using any hardpoints.)

I'm curious where you get those numbers; i'm an avid Macross fan and have no idea how you came up with them. To avoid derailing, PM me if you like.

Little Snuzzles wrote:A few other guns of note:

Arkon M-100 Tri-Beam Crew Served Gun

Single-shot: 5d6
3-Round burst: 1d4x10+10 (x2)**
Payload: 60 shots
Range: 3000'.
**Double damage to everything except forcefields & Arkon armor

Arkon FRA-1 Flechette Auto-Cannon

Single-shot: 1d4x10
10-Round Burst: 2d6x10+10
Payload: 200 round belt
Range: 4000'

Not too shabby.

I don't think that I would consider those to be rifles. Both of those are intended to be mounted when firing, so they're more appropriate for fixed positions or vehicles.

Impressive damage, though.

--flatline

If you're goingto talk about heavy weapons, we might as well bring up the ATL-7 again, but that's SA also...

I always thought of that weapon as a bazooka, just held differently.

SittingBull wrote:I always thought of that weapon as a bazooka, just held differently.

By the look of it, it seems to be shoulder-fired. I don't recall if it's mentioned in the description or not.

For as OP'd as my namesake character could be, I only used an ATL-7 once, and that was picking up an unfired one next to some dead saps to take out the tank that had killed them the round before. Go figure, using an anti-tank weapon against a tank instead of infantry.

Little Snuzzles wrote:

flatline wrote:I don't think that I would consider those to be rifles. Both of those are intended to be mounted when firing, so they're more appropriate for fixed positions or vehicles.

That's where Supernatural or Robotic PS comes in.

Impressive damage, though.

They're nice, aren't they? I ran a game in South America and a PC's Lanotaur Hunter got a hold of the Flechette cannon and 3000 rounds of ammo.

Some shooting did commence and there was much merriment.

And that's why those are classified as "pick something else". ^^

GM's I played, with in the past years, use a simple rule of "the bigger your guns/the bigger the guns you face". I just prefer to keep the power/damage levels than these so, yeah. Also, they would make you prime targets in and out of combat. I wouldn't want these as they would make me paranoid of everyone.

SittingBull wrote:

Little Snuzzles wrote:

flatline wrote:I don't think that I would consider those to be rifles. Both of those are intended to be mounted when firing, so they're more appropriate for fixed positions or vehicles.

That's where Supernatural or Robotic PS comes in.

Impressive damage, though.

They're nice, aren't they? I ran a game in South America and a PC's Lanotaur Hunter got a hold of the Flechette cannon and 3000 rounds of ammo.

Some shooting did commence and there was much merriment.

And that's why those are classified as "pick something else". ^^

GM's I played, with in the past years, use a simple rule of "the bigger your guns/the bigger the guns you face". I just prefer to keep the power/damage levels than these so, yeah. Also, they would make you prime targets in and out of combat. I wouldn't want these as they would make me paranoid of everyone.

This is why I continue to sing the praises of the L-20. Relatively cheap, ubiquitous, efficient, will never draw undue attention to you, and yet can still deliver enough damage to be worth carrying. Also makes a great host for TW conversions since people are less likely to pay much attention to them.

--flatline

Well, that brings up an interesting point of discussion. What's the rifle you all have got the best milage out of?

I've heard Sittingbull mention the JA-11 for it's versatility
I think the L-20 is a fine weapon myself, Flatline.
Though i liked the 357 and 457 wilk's and the more modern CS assault rifle with grenade launcher (don't remember the designation), that was basically a competitor for the JA-12.

Alrik Vas wrote:Well, that brings up an interesting point of discussion. What's the rifle you all have got the best milage out of?

I've heard Sittingbull mention the JA-11 for it's versatility
I think the L-20 is a fine weapon myself, Flatline.
Though i liked the 357 and 457 wilk's and the more modern CS assault rifle with grenade launcher (don't remember the designation), that was basically a competitor for the JA-12.

You should start a new thread for this rather than take this thread off-topic.

--flatline

/shrug

It's not that interesting a topic for it's own thread. If you're more keen on it, by all means.

[/quote]

This is why I continue to sing the praises of the L-20. Relatively cheap, ubiquitous, efficient, will never draw undue attention to you, and yet can still deliver enough damage to be worth carrying. Also makes a great host for TW conversions since people are less likely to pay much attention to them.

--flatline[/quote]


The L-20 is a great weapon, constantly overlooked. Neither I nor my normal gaming group really realized it existed for years, but now it's one of the most commonly taken weapons. You really can't argue against a weapon which gets normally double the shots/clip then most weapons, with a good range and can also fire pulses for good damage. It's pretty much a perfect weapon.

L-20 is nice.

Eashamahel wrote:

Flatline wrote:
This is why I continue to sing the praises of the L-20. Relatively cheap, ubiquitous, efficient, will never draw undue attention to you, and yet can still deliver enough damage to be worth carrying. Also makes a great host for TW conversions since people are less likely to pay much attention to them.

--flatline

The L-20 is a great weapon, constantly overlooked. Neither I nor my normal gaming group really realized it existed for years, but now it's one of the most commonly taken weapons. You really can't argue against a weapon which gets normally double the shots/clip then most weapons, with a good range and can also fire pulses for good damage. It's pretty much a perfect weapon.

It would be my ideal weapon if it did kinetic damage rather than energy. This is why I'm a big fan of turning these into TW TK weapons even if it cuts the damage in half.

--flatline

I've never really been all that drawn to it, even though it certainly seems like a nice weapon with a range of options. Not sure why just never caught on with me.

Nightmask wrote:I've never really been all that drawn to it, even though it certainly seems like a nice weapon with a range of options. Not sure why just never caught on with me.

Maybe it was the ugly picture of it in the GMG.

I console myself by observing that lots of makers of the L-20, so the appearance probably varies a lot just like there's huge variation in the appearance of 1911 pistols or AR 15 rifles.

--flatline

flatline wrote:

Nightmask wrote:I've never really been all that drawn to it, even though it certainly seems like a nice weapon with a range of options. Not sure why just never caught on with me.

Maybe it was the ugly picture of it in the GMG.

I console myself by observing that lots of makers of the L-20, so the appearance probably varies a lot just like there's huge variation in the appearance of 1911 pistols or AR 15 rifles.

--flatline

True, there may be many different producers...so there is also the chance that someone was imaginative enough to make an even uglier version.

flatline wrote:

Nightmask wrote:I've never really been all that drawn to it, even though it certainly seems like a nice weapon with a range of options. Not sure why just never caught on with me.

Maybe it was the ugly picture of it in the GMG.

I console myself by observing that lots of makers of the L-20, so the appearance probably varies a lot just like there's huge variation in the appearance of 1911 pistols or AR 15 rifles.

--flatline

I suppose that's possible, although I think I had a 'meh' reaction to the stats as well. Of the Rifts Earth general weapons I tend to favor the Wilderness Rifle from Triax, with the drum energy canister. Again not sure why I just tend to like it for some reason (which may be due in part to the art for it).

I don't remember any art depicting the JA-9, but it is extremely similiar to the JA-11 minus the Canister E-Clip, and without the slot for the 7.62mm round, very much like how the C-10 is a slightly longer C-12 without the Canister.

Had to look up the L-20 art from the Game Master's Guide, was pretty sure I remembered it, and yeah, I liked it, though I assumed it looked like the rifle the Wilderness Scout is carrying in the original rulebook art.

While people list off other great guns from across Rifts Earth, I always thought the weapons from Rifts:Japan were too often overlooked. The AT-88 Combat Laser Rifle and At-230 Particle Beam Rifle are both amazing guns that are just plain better than most comparable weapons. The AT-88 particularily outshines CS laser assault weapons, being roughly the same as a C-14, but with an extra 1000ft range.

Eashamahel wrote:I don't remember any art depicting the JA-9, but it is extremely similiar to the JA-11 minus the Canister E-Clip, and without the slot for the 7.62mm round, very much like how the C-10 is a slightly longer C-12 without the Canister.

Had to look up the L-20 art from the Game Master's Guide, was pretty sure I remembered it, and yeah, I liked it, though I assumed it looked like the rifle the Wilderness Scout is carrying in the original rulebook art.

While people list off other great guns from across Rifts Earth, I always thought the weapons from Rifts:Japan were too often overlooked. The AT-88 Combat Laser Rifle and At-230 Particle Beam Rifle are both amazing guns that are just plain better than most comparable weapons. The AT-88 particularily outshines CS laser assault weapons, being roughly the same as a C-14, but with an extra 1000ft range.

I don't tend to list the Japan weapons as they're generally part of the 'exotic' category, there's good chances you can get the Triax weapon even in North America due to the trade but little to no chance of accessing the Japan weapons outside the Japan setting. Otherwise you'd skip the CS SAMAS for the Japanese version for example, with the heavy particle beam weapon.

One of my big problems is with the weight of alot of the guns (except most of the wilks line) the idea of holding a 15 pound rifle on target with out a bipod is not relished in my mind

Zamion138 wrote:One of my big problems is with the weight of alot of the guns (except most of the wilks line) the idea of holding a 15 pound rifle on target with out a bipod is not relished in my mind

QFT

QFT? o.O

SittingBull wrote:QFT? o.O

I was wondering the same.

Hah, sorry. QFT is 'Quoted for Truth.' As in, i am in agreement.

Zamion138 wrote:One of my big problems is with the weight of alot of the guns (except most of the wilks line) the idea of holding a 15 pound rifle on target with out a bipod is not relished in my mind

There are a lot of gun stats that I do not agree with. Some, the range is not quite right (especially on SDC guns). Others the damage is not compatible with the description or purpose of the weapon. While on still others the cost is totally arbitrary (which happens quite often).

I really don't get how the ATL-7 is all that broken I mean seriously, unless you are juicer you can only get 1-2 shots off per melee and even a juicer is only going to get 2 shots off per melee.....and it STILL doesn't have the range of a normal Railgun....Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)? Damage wise it does slightly more, it's range is only about 1/4 that of a Boomgun and there are spells that can make you immune/impervious to it unlike the Boomgun that will pretty much damage anything and everything it fires at.

If a GM let's a player take this weapon as a regular rifle and allows him the resources to use it as such then that's not the fault of the weapon or the game but the fault of the GM.

jaymz wrote:I really don't get how the ATL-7 is all that broken I mean seriously, unless you are juicer you can only get 1-2 shots off per melee and even a juicer is only going to get 2 shots off per melee.....and it STILL doesn't have the range of a normal Railgun....Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

Compare the cost of the ATL-7 to the cost of a suit of Glitter Boy armor.

If a GM let's a player take this weapon as a regular rifle and allows him the resources to use it as such then that's not the fault of the weapon or the game but the fault of the GM.

Agreed.
But "Any GM that allows this in his game is responsible for the consequences" is a hallmark of a broken weapon.
If it's balanced, then no such warning would need to be applied.

jaymz wrote:Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

The 19% extra damage on average per hit is the obvious answer...

Nightmask wrote:I don't tend to list the Japan weapons as they're generally part of the 'exotic' category, there's good chances you can get the Triax weapon even in North America due to the trade but little to no chance of accessing the Japan weapons outside the Japan setting. Otherwise you'd skip the CS SAMAS for the Japanese version for example, with the heavy particle beam weapon.

I get that, any gear from Japan is going to be exceedingly rare, as it even states so in the book. A lot of the Japan stuff is not so far off what it was Pre-Rifts, however, so I've always thought it was a good base for pre-Rifts finds and technology.

Also, would you really pick the Japanese SAMAS? I liked it for the unlimited ammo from the energy weapon as opposed to the railgun, but it has 50% greater damage (1D6x10 as opposed to 1D4x10) at half the range (from 4000ft to 2000ft), and that's a huge range drop, especially for a fast moving power armour which has the real ability to stay out of range of most infantry weapons (at 4000ft) and can freely disengage if it runs out of ammo.


As to the Anti-Tank Laser Rifle, in the context of the original Rifts rules, it's really not that wild. The JA-11 with it's 3D6 Ion and Aimed, burst, wild as standard rate of fire could just as easily fire off the entire clip, doing x10 damage and using up 2 melee attacks, so 3D6x10 for 2 attacks. The advantages of the ATL-Rifle is that, of course, it's more accurate (with the single aimed shot instead of the burst) and has a longer range, but as far as damage it's right in line with most energy weapons which empty their entire clip.


As for the ATL vs the boom gun, it costs more to recharge an E-Clip than buy one attacks worth of ammo for a boom gun. Also, the difference between 914m and 3200m seems a pretty solid advantage for the boom gun, especially when you are using it for anti-tank fire. Oh, and of course, when you compare them directly to each other and against each other, the ATL is a LASER...

Killer Cyborg wrote:

jaymz wrote:I really don't get how the ATL-7 is all that broken I mean seriously, unless you are juicer you can only get 1-2 shots off per melee and even a juicer is only going to get 2 shots off per melee.....and it STILL doesn't have the range of a normal Railgun....Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

Compare the cost of the ATL-7 to the cost of a suit of Glitter Boy armor.

If a GM let's a player take this weapon as a regular rifle and allows him the resources to use it as such then that's not the fault of the weapon or the game but the fault of the GM.

Agreed.
But "Any GM that allows this in his game is responsible for the consequences" is a hallmark of a broken weapon.
If it's balanced, then no such warning would need to be applied.

That's like comparing the cost of a LAW to that of an MBT. (one of the same era like an M-60)

Compare that said GB can also fire its boom gun every attack (minimum of 6 times) not only 1 -2 times per melee and has 1000 rounds whereas I wouldn't think it would reasonable for the guy in the field to have more than a dozen or so e-clips for the express purpose of powering the ATL-7. Look at the cost of operating this weapon. Its what? 1500 to recharge an e-clip? So 1500 per shot? Seems a rather prohibitive to me t use it in such a way. Put it on a generator of some kind then it becomes even less man portable than it already is. Hook into a PA suit or borg then it is may be portable and able to be fired every attack. How long does it take for that PA or Borg to get treated as the primary target just like a GB? And those PA's and Borgs wont have the armour of a GB or be laser resistant either.....I really think there are bigger issues in this game than a weapon like the ATL-7

It is like the LAW rocket above. If the GM lets the player have unlimited access to rockets all the time is the weapon broken or is that the fault of the GM?

Giant2005 wrote:

jaymz wrote:Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

The 19% extra damage on average per hit is the obvious answer...

All well and good but how armoured are those PA's and Borgs in comparison to a GB? Also how far does that weapon reach in terms of range in comparison to the boomgun? I'll answer, the PA's and Borgs are likely to have bout half the armour of a GB (and not be laser resistant either) and less than 1/3 the range of the boom gun. Seems ot be prety well balance to me.

Real this seems rather over blown to me.

jaymz wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

jaymz wrote:I really don't get how the ATL-7 is all that broken I mean seriously, unless you are juicer you can only get 1-2 shots off per melee and even a juicer is only going to get 2 shots off per melee.....and it STILL doesn't have the range of a normal Railgun....Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

Compare the cost of the ATL-7 to the cost of a suit of Glitter Boy armor.

If a GM let's a player take this weapon as a regular rifle and allows him the resources to use it as such then that's not the fault of the weapon or the game but the fault of the GM.

Agreed.
But "Any GM that allows this in his game is responsible for the consequences" is a hallmark of a broken weapon.
If it's balanced, then no such warning would need to be applied.

That's like comparing the cost of a LAW to that of an MBT. (one of the same era like an M-60)

Except that in that case, the MBT did more damage.
Here, it's the other way around.

Compare that said GB can also fire its boom gun every attack (minimum of 6 times) not only 1 -2 times per melee

You were talking about Borgs/bot that have the ATL tied to their nuclear power supply.
They'd also be firing every attack.

and has 1000 rounds

Which is significantly less than the infinite ammo from a nuclear power supply.

I really think there are bigger issues in this game than a weapon like the ATL-7

Just because there are bigger fish to fry doesn't mean that this isn't a fish.

It is like the LAW rocket above. If the GM lets the player have unlimited access to rockets all the time is the weapon broken or is that the fault of the GM?

A LAW is a one-shot weapon. You only need one of them.
The ATL-7 can shoot as many times as you have E-Clips.
If the party gets ONE ATL-7, then as long as they have it, the only way to restrict them is to monitor and restrict the number of E-Clips they have.
Which isn't the same thing as restricting the number of rockets that they have.

jaymz wrote:

Giant2005 wrote:

jaymz wrote:Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

The 19% extra damage on average per hit is the obvious answer...

All well and good but how armoured are those PA's and Borgs in comparison to a GB? Also how far does that weapon reach in terms of range in comparison to the boomgun? I'll answer, the PA's and Borgs are likely to have bout half the armour of a GB (and not be laser resistant either) and less than 1/3 the range of the boom gun. Seems ot be prety well balance to me.

Real this seems rather over blown to me.

I agree.
In a confrontation between a Borg with a Rifle Vs a Glitterboy, I'd certainly place the odds in favour of the GB. I just hadn't realized that was the comparison you were trying to make...

Killer Cyborg wrote:

jaymz wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

jaymz wrote:I really don't get how the ATL-7 is all that broken I mean seriously, unless you are juicer you can only get 1-2 shots off per melee and even a juicer is only going to get 2 shots off per melee.....and it STILL doesn't have the range of a normal Railgun....Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

Compare the cost of the ATL-7 to the cost of a suit of Glitter Boy armor.

If a GM let's a player take this weapon as a regular rifle and allows him the resources to use it as such then that's not the fault of the weapon or the game but the fault of the GM.

Agreed.
But "Any GM that allows this in his game is responsible for the consequences" is a hallmark of a broken weapon.
If it's balanced, then no such warning would need to be applied.

That's like comparing the cost of a LAW to that of an MBT. (one of the same era like an M-60)

Except that in that case, the MBT did more damage.
Here, it's the other way around.

Compare that said GB can also fire its boom gun every attack (minimum of 6 times) not only 1 -2 times per melee

You were talking about Borgs/bot that have the ATL tied to their nuclear power supply.
They'd also be firing every attack.

and has 1000 rounds

Which is significantly less than the infinite ammo from a nuclear power supply.

I really think there are bigger issues in this game than a weapon like the ATL-7

Just because there are bigger fish to fry doesn't mean that this isn't a fish.

It is like the LAW rocket above. If the GM lets the player have unlimited access to rockets all the time is the weapon broken or is that the fault of the GM?

A LAW is a one-shot weapon. You only need one of them.
The ATL-7 can shoot as many times as you have E-Clips.
If the party gets ONE ATL-7, then as long as they have it, the only way to restrict them is to monitor and restrict the number of E-Clips they have.
Which isn't the same thing as restricting the number of rockets that they have.

--Actually in Compendium of Modern Weapons LAWs can do similar damage to a Tank gun.

--Yes PA and borgs could fire every attack, however that is not the norm or typical but an exception. If we want to start taking exceptions into account we'll be here a while as to what is broken and what isn't. Those unit would also have less armour than the GB, won't be laser resistant and still only have less than 1/3 the range. Also after a few encounters or even during a single encounter that person carrying the weapon is GOING to become a primary target just as any GB would. Also a simple spell won;t make you impervious to a boomgun. Still not out of whack to me.

--Ammo may be infinite but the unit carrying the weapon still becomes a primary target of any opponents they may face, just like a GB. Also 1000 rounds for a boomgun, in most respects will last long enough to be essentially infinite in terms how most campaigns last if not long enough to actually be able replenish the ammo supply. AGian though this is also an exception for the ATL-7 not the norm.

--It's only a fish of you view it as such and it should be obvious by now that I do not really see it as such.

--Those are all largely disposable so that just makes the ATL-7 a reloadable energy based LAW. Is there anything comparable in North America? Yep the CR-1. Comparable damage (MRM warheads) and can keep firing as long as you have missiles to fire. Needs a two man team to essentially be portable and effective and that is in RUE. Is that weapon broken as well?


Like I've already said i do not think this the problem everyone else seem to think it is but to each their own. I'm obviously in the minority so I'll gladly agree to not agree *shrugs*

Giant2005 wrote:

jaymz wrote:

Giant2005 wrote:

jaymz wrote:Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

The 19% extra damage on average per hit is the obvious answer...

All well and good but how armoured are those PA's and Borgs in comparison to a GB? Also how far does that weapon reach in terms of range in comparison to the boomgun? I'll answer, the PA's and Borgs are likely to have bout half the armour of a GB (and not be laser resistant either) and less than 1/3 the range of the boom gun. Seems ot be prety well balance to me.

Real this seems rather over blown to me.

I agree.
In a confrontation between a Borg with a Rifle Vs a Glitterboy, I'd certainly place the odds in favour of the GB. I just hadn't realized that was the comparison you were trying to make...

What other comparison would you make? A borg or PA is a heavy combat unit not infantry. And this weapon isn't exactly commonplace nor is it generally deployed in such a common way. Having one tied to a PA or borg is an exception. Compare apples to apples. GB's being around are uncommon. PAs or Borgs with an ATL-7 cabled into the m is an exception. Apples to Apples.

If you want to tie the ATL-7 to a non borg or PA supply (or to a vehicle one for that mater) then it really won't be all that portable anymore will it? In this regard it becomes a a static defensive system that can be target relatively easily from beyond it's range with other weapons.

If carried by infantry you need a two man team (unless you are wearing exoskeletal body armour maybe) and are limited to how many e clips you can carry. This is no different than the CR-1 out of RUE that the CS has. Two man team and is good as long as you have missiles to fire and not quite the same damage has superior range as an anti-armour weapon and the damage actually isn't that far off using MRM warheads.

Again not the big deal so many seem to think it is but to each their own.

Also remember that as of the time that weapon was introduced, I do not believe there was any ability for a Cyborg to hook it into his power supply. Cyborg weapons (such as the Forearm Blasters) had removeable E-Clips which provided their energy, and Cyborgs could have additional Energy-Clip Hand and Arm Ports. It was only later that cyborg weapons were hooked into their own personal power supply. Power armour and robots are a different story.

Again though, in the context of it's time, this gun did not do much more damage PER E-CLIP than most other good rifles did PER E-CLIP, namely around 3D6x10. It's advantage was a single shot as opposed to a sustained burst, and longer range. Of all the guns in SA, it doesn't really rank terribly high up, especially considering for the cost, you can get TWO I-11 Long Guns, which have an extra 1000ft range, do 1D6x10/shot, and get 10 shots out of a clip! For me, the Long Gun is actually vastly more broken, but I suppose it lacks the 'My Gosh, 3D6x10!!' shock factor that catches people. I admit when myself and my friends were running games around the time SA2 came out, everyone wanted to take the ATL-7 for that exact reason.

Eashamahel wrote:
Again though, in the context of it's time, this gun did not do much more damage PER E-CLIP than most other good rifles did PER E-CLIP, namely around 3D6x10. It's advantage was a single shot as opposed to a sustained burst, and longer range. Of all the guns in SA, it doesn't really rank terribly high up, especially considering for the cost, you can get TWO I-11 Long Guns, which have an extra 1000ft range, do 1D6x10/shot, and get 10 shots out of a clip! For me, the Long Gun is actually vastly more broken, but I suppose it lacks the 'My Gosh, 3D6x10!!' shock factor that catches people. I admit when myself and my friends were running games around the time SA2 came out, everyone wanted to take the ATL-7 for that exact reason.

Wilks 457. 7d6x10 possible per eclip iirc.

If you use the atl as an anti matrial high value sniper/long range weapon like a Barrett is these days its great, and not over powered if you hook it up to your borg or pa suits nuclear power plant then its such a game changer you have to as the gm up the enemies pretty high.
A silent weapon with good range and more damage than a rail gun is an extrme advantage. And yeah they can cast immunity to energy, but not on the first shot or if they are say the cs with no magic.
I dont think its broken for sa but for na its huge.

jaymz wrote:
Wilks 457. 7d6x10 possible per eclip iirc.

I think you meant 3D6x10, as the Wilks 457 does 3D6MD. Yeah, that's a great one, with it's 2000ft range only 18,000cr and full auto capabilities it's actually stunningly good, the comparable C-10 with the same 2000ft range and same shots/clip with standard rate of fire is only 2D6MD, and doesn't get the +1 to strike on aimed shot base (does get the +3 because of the scope, but if you threw that scope on the 447, you'd be running at a +4), and that CS rifle costs 16,000cr.

The JA-11 manages to be able to do 3D6x10 as well (though for a shorter range) and since it's Ion doesn't have the laser resistant problems, and can do more (or less) per single shot than the 447 and at a longer range, and has 2x the ammo capacity. And can fire SDC rounds. But of course, the JA-11 weighs 1.5lbs more, and costs 40,000cr, so more than 2x as much as a 447.

Eashamahel wrote:

jaymz wrote:
Wilks 457. 7d6x10 possible per eclip iirc.

I think you meant 3D6x10, as the Wilks 457 does 3D6MD. Yeah, that's a great one, with it's 2000ft range only 18,000cr and full auto capabilities it's actually stunningly good, the comparable C-10 with the same 2000ft range and same shots/clip with standard rate of fire is only 2D6MD, and doesn't get the +1 to strike on aimed shot base (does get the +3 because of the scope, but if you threw that scope on the 447, you'd be running at a +4), and that CS rifle costs 16,000cr.

The JA-11 manages to be able to do 3D6x10 as well (though for a shorter range) and since it's Ion doesn't have the laser resistant problems, and can do more (or less) per single shot than the 447 and at a longer range, and has 2x the ammo capacity. And can fire SDC rounds. But of course, the JA-11 weighs 1.5lbs more, and costs 40,000cr, so more than 2x as much as a 447.

Actually no 7d6x10 as it can fire 7, 1d6x10 triple pulse blasts.

Edit - Correction, it can dish out the equivalent of 1d6x100 damage using a standard clip (30 single blasts or 10 triple pulse blasts) and 1d6x100+3d6x10+20 from a long eclip (40 single blasts or 10 triple pulse blasts and 10 single blasts)

Edit 2 - JA-12 can do 3d6x10+30 + 3d6+3 per short eclip and 1d6x100+100 per long eclip.

JA-11 can do 4d6x10 per short eclip and 12d6x10 per long eclip (for the laser, 3d6x10 and 9d6x10 respectively for the ion gun)

Both weapons (laser on the JA-11) have longer ranges than the ATL-7 (35% more) and Wilks 457 (100% more).

Eashamahel wrote:

jaymz wrote:
Wilks 457. 7d6x10 possible per eclip iirc.

I think you meant 3D6x10, as the Wilks 457 does 3D6MD.

You're thinking of the 447, not the 457. The 457 is a pulse rifle, originally introduced in SB1; it does 3d6+2 per single shot and 1d6x10 on a pulse.

Yeah, that's a great one, with it's 2000ft range only 18,000cr and full auto capabilities it's actually stunningly good, the comparable C-10 with the same 2000ft range and same shots/clip with standard rate of fire is only 2D6MD, and doesn't get the +1 to strike on aimed shot base (does get the +3 because of the scope, but if you threw that scope on the 447, you'd be running at a +4), and that CS rifle costs 16,000cr.

The JA-11 manages to be able to do 3D6x10 as well (though for a shorter range) and since it's Ion doesn't have the laser resistant problems, and can do more (or less) per single shot than the 447 and at a longer range, and has 2x the ammo capacity. And can fire SDC rounds. But of course, the JA-11 weighs 1.5lbs more, and costs 40,000cr, so more than 2x as much as a 447.

The JA-11 isnt capable of firing anything more than single shots, RAW. It doesn't even enter this contest. Now, i happen to believe that the old weapons need to have some erratta released for them, because as of right now they are largely useless space-wasters. Anything that doesn't have a burst setting or pulse setting listed in its sheet is junk in eyes of most players.

I dont necessarily share that opinion, as i try to have my PCs and NPCs behave realistically, which means that if they are experienced fighters at all, they dont blow through their clips needlessly by always firing in pulse mode. In fact, military-esque NPCs in my games tend to practice fire discipline, making guns that have high single-shot damage capability still useful and desired....

but, RAW, the JA-11 and JA-9 aren't even in the running for damaging capability. Theyre specialist weapons.

the weapon was designed for one of the strongest by the book warrior classes. a super soldier and his super weapon. the reason nobody uses juicer equipment is simple it angers juicers to see non-juicers using their stuff. as proof my asgardian elf warlock used to wear juicer plate after several fist fights with "REAL juicers" as they put it they called him "SlowBoy the juicer wannabe mage". and that was just armor i imagine using a JA12 would most likely get you killed.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:

Eashamahel wrote:

jaymz wrote:
Wilks 457. 7d6x10 possible per eclip iirc.

I think you meant 3D6x10, as the Wilks 457 does 3D6MD.

You're thinking of the 447, not the 457. The 457 is a pulse rifle, originally introduced in SB1; it does 3d6+2 per single shot and 1d6x10 on a pulse.

Yeah, that's a great one, with it's 2000ft range only 18,000cr and full auto capabilities it's actually stunningly good, the comparable C-10 with the same 2000ft range and same shots/clip with standard rate of fire is only 2D6MD, and doesn't get the +1 to strike on aimed shot base (does get the +3 because of the scope, but if you threw that scope on the 447, you'd be running at a +4), and that CS rifle costs 16,000cr.

The JA-11 manages to be able to do 3D6x10 as well (though for a shorter range) and since it's Ion doesn't have the laser resistant problems, and can do more (or less) per single shot than the 447 and at a longer range, and has 2x the ammo capacity. And can fire SDC rounds. But of course, the JA-11 weighs 1.5lbs more, and costs 40,000cr, so more than 2x as much as a 447.

The JA-11 isnt capable of firing anything more than single shots, RAW. It doesn't even enter this contest. Now, i happen to believe that the old weapons need to have some erratta released for them, because as of right now they are largely useless space-wasters. Anything that doesn't have a burst setting or pulse setting listed in its sheet is junk in eyes of most players.

I dont necessarily share that opinion, as i try to have my PCs and NPCs behave realistically, which means that if they are experienced fighters at all, they dont blow through their clips needlessly by always firing in pulse mode. In fact, military-esque NPCs in my games tend to practice fire discipline, making guns that have high single-shot damage capability still useful and desired....

but, RAW, the JA-11 and JA-9 aren't even in the running for damaging capability. Theyre specialist weapons.

He was talking about total damage dealt by using an entire clip.

jaymz wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

jaymz wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

jaymz wrote:I really don't get how the ATL-7 is all that broken I mean seriously, unless you are juicer you can only get 1-2 shots off per melee and even a juicer is only going to get 2 shots off per melee.....and it STILL doesn't have the range of a normal Railgun....Give it to a PA or Borg and hook into its nuclear power supply how is it any better or worse than a Boomgun (which everyone recalls IS available in SA as well)?

Compare the cost of the ATL-7 to the cost of a suit of Glitter Boy armor.

If a GM let's a player take this weapon as a regular rifle and allows him the resources to use it as such then that's not the fault of the weapon or the game but the fault of the GM.

Agreed.
But "Any GM that allows this in his game is responsible for the consequences" is a hallmark of a broken weapon.
If it's balanced, then no such warning would need to be applied.

That's like comparing the cost of a LAW to that of an MBT. (one of the same era like an M-60)

Except that in that case, the MBT did more damage.
Here, it's the other way around.

Compare that said GB can also fire its boom gun every attack (minimum of 6 times) not only 1 -2 times per melee

You were talking about Borgs/bot that have the ATL tied to their nuclear power supply.
They'd also be firing every attack.

and has 1000 rounds

Which is significantly less than the infinite ammo from a nuclear power supply.

I really think there are bigger issues in this game than a weapon like the ATL-7

Just because there are bigger fish to fry doesn't mean that this isn't a fish.

It is like the LAW rocket above. If the GM lets the player have unlimited access to rockets all the time is the weapon broken or is that the fault of the GM?

A LAW is a one-shot weapon. You only need one of them.
The ATL-7 can shoot as many times as you have E-Clips.
If the party gets ONE ATL-7, then as long as they have it, the only way to restrict them is to monitor and restrict the number of E-Clips they have.
Which isn't the same thing as restricting the number of rockets that they have.

--Actually in Compendium of Modern Weapons LAWs can do similar damage to a Tank gun.

CoMW isn't statted the same as Palladium's other games.

--Yes PA and borgs could fire every attack, however that is not the norm or typical but an exception.

You were the one picking that comparison, not me.

The unit would also have less armour than the GB, won't be laser resistant and still only have less than 1/3 the range. Also after a few encounters or even during a single encounter that person carrying the weapon is GOING to become a primary target just as any GB would. Also a simple spell won;t make you impervious to a boomgun. Still not out of whack to me.

I don't think that "isn't quite on equal terms with a Glitter Boy" is a good standard for whether or not something is broken, though.
As I said, compare the COST.
How much does an ATL-7 cost?
How much does a Boom Gun cost?
(Seriously- I'm away from my books. So there's an off-chance that the ATL-7 costs MORE... but I doubt it.)

--Ammo may be infinite but the unit carrying the weapon still becomes a primary target of any opponents they may face, just like a GB.

So they're equal... except that one has infinite ammo.

Also 1000 rounds for a boomgun, in most respects will last long enough to be essentially infinite in terms how most campaigns last if not long enough to actually be able replenish the ammo supply.

If you want to agree that ammo isn't a factor, that's fine... but you were holding up the GB's ammunition as if it somehow made the weapon superior to a weapon with infinite ammo.
And that doesn't work.

--It's only a fish of you view it as such and it should be obvious by now that I do not really see it as such.

Reality isn't dictated by perception.

--Those are all largely disposable so that just makes the ATL-7 a reloadable energy based LAW. Is there anything comparable in North America? Yep the CR-1. Comparable damage (MRM warheads) and can keep firing as long as you have missiles to fire. Needs a two man team to essentially be portable and effective and that is in RUE. Is that weapon broken as well?

Compare the damage, compare the cost, compare the encumberance of the ammo.
You keep trying to compare only the similarities, and by that standard, NOTHING is broken.
"Oh, that Synchro Pistol that shoots a mile? A mini-missile has the same range. What's the big deal...?"
"A vibro-blade doesn't have a better strike or parry bonus than a normal sword, so they're really not significantly better."
And so forth.

I order to argue for or againt balance honestly, you also need to take a good look a the differences.

--Ok then in the HU Guide a LAW and Tank guns still do similar damage. Though now looking at the weapons the ATL-7 would be more like a recoilles rifle. Which also does similar damage to a tank gun and if the cost listed in the book is accurate at all then it is dirt cheap compared to a tank gun too.

--Originally I stated the weapon as it's meant to be used can only do 1-2 shots per melee. Yes connected to a borg or PA it would be every attack like a Boomgun. If that is the only way the weapon is broken then it isn't broken. It's an exception and even then the exception still does not make it superior to a Boomgun when mounted to a Glitterboy.

--Cost between an ATL-7 and a Boomgun is pretty inaccuarate comparison as well since no way even a 2 man team could carry and use a Boomgun. A more accurate comparison would be a similar use weapon. I was incorrect about the CR-1 as it only fires mini missiles. However the WI-40M. Damage is lower in the book but would be closer to the damage of the ATL-7 as per the newer missile damage tables. Range is significantly longer. It is however a truly single shot weapon. It's cost is 37 000 maximum. Would it be all that difficult to make a version with a reusable launcher? Probably not. Would that increase the cost to the point of being more than an ATL-7? Not likely. Using an uncommon application of the weapon does not make it broken.

--No my point was not that the Boomgun was superior but that infinite ammo of the ATL-7 when used in an uncommon way does not make IT superior.

--Reality isn't what one always perceives it to be.

--Ok we'll go the opposite. We'll remove the Boomgun from the GB:

ATL-7: Range - 900m, 3d6x10+20 damage, 1-2 shots per melee as long as there eclips to be had. Cost 100 000 plus cost of eclips, about 5-6000 per new clip or 1500 per recharge. Encumberance - used by a two man team to carry and use effectively. Ammo size - about the size of a standard assault rifle ammo clip. Availability - Outside of South America: Rare. In South America - Uncommon. Can be be completely mitigated by magic or partially mitigated by laser resistant armours.

Boomgun: Range - 3200m, 3d6x10 damage, as long as there is ammo it can fire every time the trigger is pulled when using a belt or 2-4 (estimated) times per melee if hand loading a round for every shot. Cost ? (but likely much higher than 100 000) plus cost of ammo, about ? per round (I recall 200 per round but do not remember where that was). Encumberance - used by a multi man team to be lugged around and anchored for use. Ammo size - each one is about the size of a Soda Can. Availability - North America: Rare to Uncommon, South America: Rare to uncommon.

For me the above makes them pretty balanced but that's just me.

Mind you that's like trying to compare the above recoilles rifle to a dismounted tank gun. Would mounting the recoilles rifle on a tank make it superior to the tank gun because you could now carry more ammo? I don't think it would.

If we were to start doing everything in an exceptional or uncommon way then we could "break" virtually anything or everything in the game somehow.

how could technowizardry affect the ATL-7 by converting it to a magic power source. could the magic version deal 3d6x10+20 md for the cost of 1ppe to recharge it since its "ammo" capacity is one round?

say652 wrote:how could technowizardry affect the ATL-7 by converting it to a magic power source. could the magic version deal 3d6x10+20 md for the cost of 1ppe to recharge it since its "ammo" capacity is one round?

Not sure. Do they have spells for recharging an eclip? I think there is one that allows you too but it only charges one shot in the eclip so that would get PPE prohibitive as well.