Forums of the Megaverse®

Take the M1A1 and M1A2 main gun the M256 smooth bore gun, can lob rounds at 5200-5700 ft/s. Speed of sound is 1,125 ft/s so mach 5 is 5625 ft/s meaning that the M1A1 can lob a round as fast as a boom gun. Giving that one of the ammo types used is a 120mm dart with a DU tip witch Traix says does extra MDC that whould imply that it has the abilty to do more damage than the boom gun.

The M829 round isn't DU tipped, the whole penetrator is Depleted Uranium and yes it should do a lot more damage in the book than stated but the game isn't set up that way.
That much mass moving at that velocity with DU's inherent antiarmor ability, oh yeah it should be doing a lot more damage than the boom gun rounds, but oh well you can always change it to your liking.

I know what you mean heck the m16 fires rounds at 3,110 ft/s witch is a little under mach 3, so why did the black market have to scale back mach 5 in a mdc weapon to keep it from breaking? I think that if they want MDC weapons to be so much better then current ones they need to change the boom guns speed by allot. Also not shure why the sonic boom is a stationary affect the it travels with a moving object that is what the wizz of a bullet over head is.

Blue_Lion wrote:I know what you mean heck the m16 fires rounds at 3,110 ft/s witch is a little under mach 3, so why did the black market have to scale back mach 5 in a mdc weapon to keep it from breaking? I think that if they want MDC weapons to be so much better then current ones they need to change the boom guns speed by allot. Also not shure why the sonic boom is a stationary affect the it travels with a moving object that is what the wizz of a bullet over head is.

You are among an unknown number who don't like how the damage was done, you can find a myriad of alternate rules on the boards and around the interwebs if you want to change them as PB isn't going to do it.
This is a horse that was not only beat to death but a vile necromancer keeps bringing it back

The easest way to end it whould be to change or remove the boom guns speed. Such as it is faster than any other weapon known to man.

MDC weapons have been used by earth's militaries at least since the start of the Iron Clad era. The interesting part is how MDC weapons and gear have been slowly creeping closer and closer to the infantryman's standard kit.

Jefffar wrote:MDC weapons have been used by earth's militaries at least since the start of the Iron Clad era. The interesting part is how MDC weapons and gear have been slowly creeping closer and closer to the infantryman's standard kit.

Care to explain that?

See, the vile necromancer brought the dead horse back again

Gamer wrote:See, the vile necromancer brought the dead horse back again

No I cloned the dead horse so we can kill it again.

Munchkin Slappin GM wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:I know what you mean heck the m16 fires rounds at 3,110 ft/s witch is a little under mach 3, so why did the black market have to scale back mach 5 in a mdc weapon to keep it from breaking? I think that if they want MDC weapons to be so much better then current ones they need to change the boom guns speed by allot. Also not shure why the sonic boom is a stationary affect the it travels with a moving object that is what the wizz of a bullet over head is.

The sonic boom caused by a firearm only happens when the round first leaves the gun. The wizzing of a round overhead is just the bullet moving though the air.

That's not how a sonic boom works dude.

Gamer wrote:

Munchkin Slappin GM wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:I know what you mean heck the m16 fires rounds at 3,110 ft/s witch is a little under mach 3, so why did the black market have to scale back mach 5 in a mdc weapon to keep it from breaking? I think that if they want MDC weapons to be so much better then current ones they need to change the boom guns speed by allot. Also not shure why the sonic boom is a stationary affect the it travels with a moving object that is what the wizz of a bullet over head is.

The sonic boom caused by a firearm only happens when the round first leaves the gun. The wizzing of a round overhead is just the bullet moving though the air.

That's not how a sonic boom works dude.

Realy?

"A sonic boom is the sound associated with the shock waves created by an object traveling through the air faster than the speed of sound. Sonic booms generate enormous amounts of sound energy, sounding much like an explosion. The crack of a supersonic bullet passing overhead is an example of a sonic boom in miniature."

"Since the boom is being generated continually as long as the aircraft is supersonic, it fills out a narrow path on the ground following the aircraft's flight path, a bit like an unrolling red carpet and hence known as the boom carpet. Its width depends on the altitude of the aircraft. The distance from the point on the ground where the boom is heard to the aircraft depends on its altitude and the angle."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_boom

That seams to say that it works. Most assault rifels fire super sonic rounds, actualy i think all do. so the sound of the bullet passing over head is a sonic boom just on a smaller scale.

Blue_Lion wrote:

Gamer wrote:

Munchkin Slappin GM wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:I know what you mean heck the m16 fires rounds at 3,110 ft/s witch is a little under mach 3, so why did the black market have to scale back mach 5 in a mdc weapon to keep it from breaking? I think that if they want MDC weapons to be so much better then current ones they need to change the boom guns speed by allot. Also not shure why the sonic boom is a stationary affect the it travels with a moving object that is what the wizz of a bullet over head is.

The sonic boom caused by a firearm only happens when the round first leaves the gun. The wizzing of a round overhead is just the bullet moving though the air.

That's not how a sonic boom works dude.

Realy?

"A sonic boom is the sound associated with the shock waves created by an object traveling through the air faster than the speed of sound. Sonic booms generate enormous amounts of sound energy, sounding much like an explosion. The crack of a supersonic bullet passing overhead is an example of a sonic boom in miniature."

"Since the boom is being generated continually as long as the aircraft is supersonic, it fills out a narrow path on the ground following the aircraft's flight path, a bit like an unrolling red carpet and hence known as the boom carpet. Its width depends on the altitude of the aircraft. The distance from the point on the ground where the boom is heard to the aircraft depends on its altitude and the angle."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_boom

That seams to say that it works. Most assault rifels fire super sonic rounds, actualy i think all do. so the sound of the bullet passing over head is a sonic boom just on a smaller scale.

Did you even bother to read what he posted?

Blue_Lion wrote:

Jefffar wrote:MDC weapons have been used by earth's militaries at least since the start of the Iron Clad era. The interesting part is how MDC weapons and gear have been slowly creeping closer and closer to the infantryman's standard kit.

Care to explain that?

Well, one could probably go back farther than I did, but I picked that as an era in which mankind began to field weapons systems (and a naval ship is a weapon system) that were impervious to the weapons of their predecessors and capable of killign ther predacessors with virtual impunity.

The Iron Clad Ship, plus high velocity naval gun was essentially invincible in combat with the wooden ships of the previous generation. The wooden ships are definitely SDC. High SDC (ie hundreds if not thousands) but still SDC. When they fired at the ironclads, they watched their cannon balls bounce off. When the ironclads fired at the wooden ships, the wooden ships were helpless to resist the shots that punched through their sides, killed their crews and blew up their powder magazines. Sounds a lot like MDC vs SDC to me.

Since the debut of the iron clad we've introduced tougher and stronger ships with more powerful guns. We then moved that technology on land and the race between tank and anti-tank weapons was born. Add to that anti-shp and anti-tank missiles and bombs carried by aircraft and an entire MDC arms race has come into being during the lead up to WWII.

Then in WWII we saw two major waypoints ont he journey to man-portable MDC weaponry. The nuclear weapon and the man portable MDC weapon (anti-tank rifles, bazookas and the like).

Right now our militaries have MDC ships and fighting vehicles. A few aircraft are approaching MDC level f protection, but overall they remain SDC, as does the individual infantryman. The infantryman's primary weapon remains SDC as well, but he has access to anti-materiel rifles, anti-tank weapons and anti-armour grenade launchers to bridge that gap a bit. Additionally he is able to accurately direct the MDC weapons of various fire support platforms against hardened targets if need be.

We are waiting on the next stage in the evolution of MDC right now. The point at which the individual infantryman is himself an MDC weapons platform. New body armours, exoskeletons and personal weapons are in development, but nothing has reached the level of protection and firepower needed to really say we have personal level MDC.

When will we have it? I don't know. But when we reach the point that a .50 caliber machinegun becomes inadequate for killing infantry, we have personal level MDC.

Gamer wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:

Gamer wrote:

Munchkin Slappin GM wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:I know what you mean heck the m16 fires rounds at 3,110 ft/s witch is a little under mach 3, so why did the black market have to scale back mach 5 in a mdc weapon to keep it from breaking? I think that if they want MDC weapons to be so much better then current ones they need to change the boom guns speed by allot. Also not shure why the sonic boom is a stationary affect the it travels with a moving object that is what the wizz of a bullet over head is.

The sonic boom caused by a firearm only happens when the round first leaves the gun. The wizzing of a round overhead is just the bullet moving though the air.

That's not how a sonic boom works dude.

Realy?

"A sonic boom is the sound associated with the shock waves created by an object traveling through the air faster than the speed of sound. Sonic booms generate enormous amounts of sound energy, sounding much like an explosion. The crack of a supersonic bullet passing overhead is an example of a sonic boom in miniature."

"Since the boom is being generated continually as long as the aircraft is supersonic, it fills out a narrow path on the ground following the aircraft's flight path, a bit like an unrolling red carpet and hence known as the boom carpet. Its width depends on the altitude of the aircraft. The distance from the point on the ground where the boom is heard to the aircraft depends on its altitude and the angle."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_boom

That seams to say that it works. Most assault rifels fire super sonic rounds, actualy i think all do. so the sound of the bullet passing over head is a sonic boom just on a smaller scale.

Did you even bother to read what he posted?

well actualy I was posting in respawnce to person saying that the sonic boom was static affect, but I quoted the last person with it in.

Most rifle rounds have been supersonic since the late 19th Century, that doesn't make them MDC however as speed is only a portion of the kinetic energy equation that tells us how much power a weapon has.

Of course kinetic energy equations also only give us a general idea of how well a round can penetrate. There are much more complicated equations involving sectional density, angle of incidence, relative hardness, relative density and other factors to determine penetration. As such I tend to avoid using a strict numeric designation for what is and isn't MDC.

I figure if it can withstand a .50 BMG round more or less unscathed, it's MDC. If it can kill something that a .50 BMG would probably bounce off of, it's MDC.

The Iron Clad Ship, plus high velocity naval gun was essentially invincible in combat with the wooden ships of the previous generation. The wooden ships are definitely SDC. High SDC (ie hundreds if not thousands) but still SDC. When they fired at the ironclads, they watched their cannon balls bounce off. When the ironclads fired at the wooden ships, the wooden ships were helpless to resist the shots that punched through their sides, killed their crews and blew up their powder magazines. Sounds a lot like MDC vs SDC to me.

Sounds like somebody wasn't getting over the targets A.R. to me.
There are accounts of cannon balls ricocheting off wooden hulls during this era as well.
I would really still classify them as very high sdc weapons firing at very high sdc with high A.R. rating for those weapons of that era instead of MDC.

When will we have it? I don't know. But when we reach the point that a .50 caliber machinegun becomes inadequate for killing infantry, we have personal level MDC.

I can sit there and fire .50 bmg and slap at the front of a M1 tank and all year and not come close penetrating it and the same with a KPV -14.5mm- machinegun.
I've fired at scrapped hull of M1 in Iraq with .50s and did nothing to it, it had many .50s fired at it that did nothing to it, the only weapons that did anything to it were the anti-tank rockets.
Sounds like an sdc round not penetrating an mdc hull to me.
The only .50 round I would even classify as mdc capable is the mk 211, a round that is the perfect example of the Wellington Industries explosive round turning a sdc projectile firing weapon into doing mega damage.
I have never liked bursts of SDC rounds are some how now doing enough to damage MDC armor.
That's not what we see in combat today -if the M1 is actually an mdc hulled vehicle- show me factual data of any machinegun up to 15mm doing any damage to the front hull of a M1.
No heard-tells, actual factual data.


But as I said and have seen from the threads from the past and distant past, this subject has been beat to death and people are going to have their own point of view on the subject regardless what anyone says or what data brought to the table.

Blue_Lion wrote:well actualy I was posting in respawnce to person saying that the sonic boom was static affect, but I quoted the last person with it in.

I figured, I was just pulling on yer leg

Jefffar wrote:Most rifle rounds have been supersonic since the late 19th Century, that doesn't make them MDC however as speed is only a portion of the kinetic energy equation that tells us how much power a weapon has.

Of course kinetic energy equations also only give us a general idea of how well a round can penetrate. There are much more complicated equations involving sectional density, angle of incidence, relative hardness, relative density and other factors to determine penetration. As such I tend to avoid using a strict numeric designation for what is and isn't MDC.

I figure if it can withstand a .50 BMG round more or less unscathed, it's MDC. If it can kill something that a .50 BMG would probably bounce off of, it's MDC.

Well i was not saying it was MDC based on just the speed but the round. I assume that the round in most MDC slug throwers has to be able to withstand penitrating the MDC matreal so MDC iron/steel or others. However Traix states that Depleted Unium (sp) or DU rounds are MDC and get a bonus to mega damage. So giving that it matches the speed of the boom gun and is using a round capable of MDC damage the 120mm main gun of a abrams should be capable of inflicing MD damage.

Gamer wrote:

The Iron Clad Ship, plus high velocity naval gun was essentially invincible in combat with the wooden ships of the previous generation. The wooden ships are definitely SDC. High SDC (ie hundreds if not thousands) but still SDC. When they fired at the ironclads, they watched their cannon balls bounce off. When the ironclads fired at the wooden ships, the wooden ships were helpless to resist the shots that punched through their sides, killed their crews and blew up their powder magazines. Sounds a lot like MDC vs SDC to me.

Sounds like somebody wasn't getting over the targets A.R. to me.
There are accounts of cannon balls ricocheting off wooden hulls during this era as well.
I would really still classify them as very high sdc weapons firing at very high sdc with high A.R. rating for those weapons of that era instead of MDC.

When will we have it? I don't know. But when we reach the point that a .50 caliber machinegun becomes inadequate for killing infantry, we have personal level MDC.

I can sit there and fire .50 bmg and slap at the front of a M1 tank and all year and not come close penetrating it and the same with a KPV -14.5mm- machinegun.
I've fired at scrapped hull of M1 in Iraq with .50s and did nothing to it, it had many .50s fired at it that did nothing to it, the only weapons that did anything to it were the anti-tank rockets.
Sounds like an sdc round not penetrating an mdc hull to me.
The only .50 round I would even classify as mdc capable is the mk 211, a round that is the perfect example of the Wellington Industries explosive round turning a sdc projectile firing weapon into doing mega damage.
I have never liked bursts of SDC rounds are some how now doing enough to damage MDC armor.
That's not what we see in combat today -if the M1 is actually an mdc hulled vehicle- show me factual data of any machinegun up to 15mm doing any damage to the front hull of a M1.
No heard-tells, actual factual data.


But as I said and have seen from the threads from the past and distant past, this subject has been beat to death and people are going to have their own point of view on the subject regardless what anyone says or what data brought to the table.

He wasnt arguing about wether we have mdc vehicles, he was talking about personal scale MDC.

Gamer wrote:I have never liked bursts of SDC rounds are some how now doing enough to damage MDC armor.

RMB outright says that SDC bursts can NOT do MD, even if the total damage is over 100SDC, unless a single round is capable of doing 100+SDC. Only individual attacks that do 100+damage deal any amount of MD, anything less bounces off, no matter how many hit at once. Let me see if I can find a quote.

Yup. Found it. But damn, is that ling. I'm not typing that all out. It's page 12 of RMB. Oddly, RUE page 288 has the equivalent passage, and it makes no mention of bursts or individual rounds, just that 100+ damage has to be dealt in a single attack.
I personally intend to continue using the RMB ruling saying that no amount of SDC rounds will deal MD unless an individual one can do 100+.

Certainly the Army is (and by extension the Navy) already using MDC capable rounds in some of the vehicles. I would say that the entire reason damage *A* is, perhaps, not up to par is Kevin's concept of "game balance", the idea was to make the game enjoyable for everyone. Unfortunately what sounds right isn't always accurate IRL, so he chose to go with "the next best thing", namely; that which sounds cool.
I regularly play in a game where we run our damages at a more "realistic" level (realistic in our imagining) and if you think the current power levels in RIFTS are "too high", well they represent (in some cases) the lower end of our scale.
In the end the issue is one of "scale", if the damage matches the scale then it's not "power creep" or "over powered".