XM8 Assualt Rifle.

[Vanguard]

For those gun nuts out there (As well as those better at creating things in hero then I am).

 

How would you built the new XM8 assualt rifle? Would you do it as a multi-power for the different modes or just a single RKA?

 

I built it as a multi-power but something feels "off" about it. Like I missed something.

 

This is what I've got so far:

 

XM8 Assualt Rifle: Multipower, 82-point reserve, all slots Extra Time (1 Turn (To change slots), Weapon reconfiguration; -1 1/4), STR Minimum 15 (STR Min. Cannot Add/Subtract Damage; -1 1/4), OAF (-1), Real Weapon (-1/4)

u 1) Standard Mode: RKA 2d6 (vs. PD), 30 Charges (+1/4), Autofire (5 shots; +1/2); Required Hands Two-Handed (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Real Weapon (-1/4) [30]

u 2) SMG Mode: RKA 2d6 (vs. PD), 30 Charges (+1/4), Autofire (5 shots; +1/2); Beam (-1/4), Real Weapon (-1/4) [30]

u 3) Parasniper Mode: RKA 2d6 (vs. PD), Increased Maximum Range (925"; +1/4), 30 Charges (+1/4); Required Hands Two-Handed (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Real Weapon (-1/4) [30]

u 4) LMG/SAW Mode: RKA 2d6 (vs. PD), 100 Charges (+3/4), Autofire (10 shots; +1); OAF Bulky (-1 1/2), Required Hands Two-Handed (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Real Weapon (-1/4) [100]

Increased Barrel Length: Penalty Skill Levels: +3 vs. Range Modifier with All Attacks, Only w/Parasniper Mode (+0); OAF (-1), Required Hands Two-Handed (-1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4)

XM8 Construction: +1 w/XM8 Assualt Rifle; OAF (-1), Required Hands Two-Handed (-1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4) plus Penalty Skill Levels: +1 vs. Range Modifier with XM8 Assualt Rifle; OAF (-1), Required Hands Two-Handed (-1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4)

 

Let me know of any improvements things I missed or what ever.

 

Thanks!

[Wildcat]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Vanguard -

Sorry I didn't catch this B4, but I think the STR min should be lower... 15 is prety high, from what I read the XM8 should have less of a kisk to it than the M16A2, and IIRC it's STR min is 12 (??) in any event it's very unlikely that the standard US military personel will have a 15 STR... I know I don't have one, and I think that if I could handel a M16 than the XM8 should be relatively similar.

 

On the Multi-power aspect of it... Hmmm I think I agree with you that it seems a bit clunky... Maybe if it were reduced to a standard RKA, and then the dif advan that each configuation gave were just treated as Advantages with their own Limitations... Don't have any books or HD with me at this time, so it's just an idea right now.

 

In any even I think that so pic of this Bad Boy is in need so that other can fully enjoy this weapon that your trying to show them. & a Link as well:

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=XM8_Rifle.htm

 

WC

[proditor]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

The only thing I came up with was to make it a base 2d6 RKA and then apply variable advantages to it along with the standard disads. Throw a delay on changing the advantage, and you can accomlish much the same thing. Only issues are that it's less defined than 4 clearly labelled slots and you run into the issue of charges on the LMG mode. As clunky as the MP seems to you right now, it might just be the "cleanest" option.

[Vanguard]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Thanks both WC and Proditor.

 

I wasn't really thinking that the MP was "clunky" persay Ok, maybe I was. I just can't help shaking the feeling that I'm missing something. Like there should be something there that isn't.

 

In anycase, I'll change the STR Min (15 is pretty high and I can't remember, off hand, where I plucked it from) and then just leave it as is.

 

Thanks guys!

[Legendsmiths]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

It's acutally a bit closer ballistically to the 7.62 round, since the main reason for the new cartridge is terminal ballistics.

 

I would make it 2d6+1K.

 

As for autofire, I haven't read anything about a SAW mode, but unless it changes the receiver, the Autofire wouldn't change.

 

I would make it as follows:

 

Autofire 5, 25 Charges

 

SMG +1 OCV, +1 rMod

Assault +2 OCV, +2 rMod

Sniper +2 OCV, +4 rMod

 

IR Illuminator +1 OCV, only with NightVision, battery powered

RedDot sight +2 OCV, only with Set Maneuver, battery powered, 50m or less

Reticle +4 rMod, only with Set Maneuver

Bipod +2 rMod, requires 1 phase to deploy

 

You can of course add a 40mm grenade launcher (single shot).

 

My understanding is that this thing is not a transformer. you can reconfigure in the field, but it would probably take a minute or so. 12 seconds seems too fast.

 

That still is a very solid weapon that when set for sniping would be +3 OCV AND +10 rMod.

 

Max range of 925" is a bit much... way too much. 300-400m is the effective range, and out to 700-800m for extreme range. Even then, beyond 300-400m it should be -1 to -2 DC (it slows way down).

 

http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/bullet.html

[Vanguard]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

So you're saying a flat 2d6+1 with AF5 and then the seperate bonuses instead of the multipower?

 

And yeah, the 925" is WAY too much. Will adjust it downward.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Yeah. Make the other barrels attachments requiring Extra Time (1 minute), PS: Soldier or Weaponsmith roll at +0, Lock out (can't use the other configs while in a particular config). The big advantage to the SMG would be using the DC Close Quarters rules and that the SMG is more or less pistol sized... perfect for tight places but still packing a punch.

 

The scope is rail mounted, so that probably takes 1 turn. That includes all the sighting bonuses (i.e. not in SMG config).

[Vanguard]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

How's this look?

 

M8 Assault Rifle

20 1) M8 Assualt Rifle: RKA 2d6+1 (vs. PD), 30 Charges (+1/4), Autofire (5 shots; +1/2); OAF (-1), STR Minimum 12 (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Real Weapon (-1/4) [30]

3 2) SMG Barrel: +1 w/M8 plus Penalty Skill Levels: +1 vs. Range Modifier with M8 0

5 3) Assualt Barrel: +2 w/M8 plus Penalty Skill Levels: +2 vs. Range Modifier with M8 0

8 4) Sniper Barrel: +2 w/M8 plus Penalty Skill Levels: +4 vs. Range Modifier with M8 0

3 5) Bipod: Penalty Skill Levels: +2 vs. Hit Location modifiers with M8

Advanced Combat Scope, all slots OAF (-1), OBS (-1), Real Weapon (-1/4)

2 1) Type III Nightsight: (Total: 8 Active Cost, 2 Real Cost) Nightvision (5 Active Points) (Real Cost: 1) plus Detect Infrared Light 11- (Sight Group) (3 Active Points) (Real Cost: 1) 0

3 2) x3 Telescopic: (Total: 9 Active Cost, 3 Real Cost) +4 versus Range Modifier for Sight Group (Real Cost: 2) plus Penalty Skill Levels: +1 vs. vs Darkness mods with All Attacks (Real Cost: 1) 0

1 3) Thermal Sighting: IR Perception (Sight Group)

 

The Barrels and bipod don't have any lims on it because I have to go to the really expensive ones to do that.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Minor point... the magazines are supposed to only hold 25 rounds.

 

Why does the bipod help vs. Hit Location? Are you just going for cool sniping effect? I think actually that it might be worth +1 OCV, since you will already be able to use it to brace.

 

Unless I misread I don't believe the scope is a nightvision scope. It is a 2x or 4x optical scope with reticle. In addition, it provides an IR laser out to range, and a visible RedDot laser at less than 50m. The optical would give +4 vs. range, only with Set Maneuver, the IR laser would be +1 OCV +1 rMOD (detectable only with Nightvision), and the RedDot would be +1 OCV, only under 50m. Both the IR and RedDot require batteries. That's what I meant. I'm sure the scope itself may change prior to production.

 

Looks good. Oh, don't forget +1 STUNx (STUN die of 1d6) for a +1/4. That makes it in many ways one of the most versitile weapons, as well as extremely effective.

 

The Real Weapon limitation might be reconsidered as well. Not that it isn't, just that one of the main features is its reliability and environmental resistance. The main thing is how the gas is expelled in that it doesn't return it to the receiver, supposedly allowing you to fire 15000 rounds without maintenance. That might be worth Real Weapon (-0), because that is a lot less maintenance than an M16.

[Teflon Billy]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Unless I misread I don't believe the scope is a nightvision scope. It is a 2x or 4x optical scope with reticle. In addition, it provides an IR laser out to range, and a visible RedDot laser at less than 50m..

I've read in the Army Times that the advanced optics that they plan on fielding with this weapon will include nightvision/infrared sighting capabilities. Although, that could be meant for the XM-37 (the fully integrated model that includes a 25mm "munitions" launcher that the XM-8 is the rifle component part of it), or might be only for the sniper model, but I'm pretty sure that it was for the general model.

 

TB

[Legendsmiths]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

That sounds a little more like the OICW, which I think this is an offshoot of. Either way, it's an experimental weapon so anything goes.

 

Nice work.

[HewhoisMatt]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Guys I'm not sure the grunts in the field will have all the barrels and other gear with him all the time, thats alot of extra weight. I think the weapon will be set up before the mission starts and only altered at base.

[gewing]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Just another point....

 

The 6.8mm cartridge is NOT a certainty. I would probably rate the 6.8 or the 6.5 grendel as 2d6+1, no stun multile, or you could call it 2d6 with a +1 stun multiple. It is NOT as powerful as the 7.62, but more powerful than the 5.56.

 

Personally, I hope the XM8 is NOT a certainty.

[Teflon Billy]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Personally' date=' I hope the XM8 is NOT a certainty.[/quote']You better start getting used to it, because everything I've seen written shows that the Army is going full bore with this weapon. They need to field the XM8 for they're ever going to be able to field the XM37 which is the real weapon the Army wants.

 

What is your problem with this weapon? The only thing you've consistently harped about is that it's "different" from the M16 requiring retraining. I don't see this as a problem, this is our job, if we can't adapt to a new weapon then we shouldn't be soldiers. We adapted to the SAW over the M60.

 

I have not seen a single major fault in the weapon mentioned.

[gewing]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

The XM8 is an adequate gun. NOT imo enough of an improvement to make it worth spending MILLIONS to buy and replace the M-16 with it. I believe the only thing it can do that the M-16 could not easily be made to do is have the side swinging buttstock. The interchangeable barrels would even be an easy conversion(free float foreends, etc).

 

Petty, but... The shrouded receiver design looks like it was designed by an industrial design firm to look like it belonged in a Science Fiction movie. The whole gun looks bulkier than it needs to be.

 

The gun is somewhat lighter. GIven the shorter barrel, that isn't a big surprise to me.

 

 

I have serious doubts about the reports of reliability for the xm8. there are claims of HUGE numbers of rounds between failures. OK, that is great, but...

I don't think I have seen any reports that were not based on numbers provided by HK Advertising department.

 

How does it stand up to sustained use? This is a completely different issue.

 

The XM8 is an HK product. They make many wonderful weapons. I would love to shoot an HK21.

 

Afaik, NONE of their products fall into the category of "affordable."

 

It sin't just a matter of the soldier needing retraining. To a large extent, a gun is a gun.

 

Imo it is more a matter of retooling all of our armoreries, retraining the armorers, making new order and record forms for all the different parts, changing the supply system to buy all those spare parts, and get the software right to get the new parts out instead of the old ones.

 

 

Even the army isn't apparently looking at switching over to the 6.8mm. Maybe for the SOF, but not for the army as a whole. So that really isn't that much of an issue. And it can be put in an M-16 pretty easily too.

 

I just don't see ANYTHING it does that is really enough of an improvement to make it worth while. Greater mrbtf is good. Easier to clean is good. Is that worth spending ??? How many millions???

 

Maybe you see something that I don't in it. I would rather see them go to the F2000, at least if they got their heads out and put a longer barrel on it as an option, at least. and note, I was not hugely impressed by teh F2000 at the Shot show. I don't hate "plastic guns". I definately don't hate HK guns (I would LOVE a P7). I just don't see that this is anywhere near as big an upgrade as the advertising hacks who seem to write much of the content for Popular Mechanics, etc keep saying.

 

Why can't somebody just modernize the Steyr AUG? Make the durability/reliability a little better, and mount rails on it for all the "go fast" accessories, and it might imo be the best gun around.

 

OTOH, I think the Russians have some SERIOUSLY good ideas in their line of 9x39mm submachine guns and rifles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You better start getting used to it, because everything I've seen written shows that the Army is going full bore with this weapon. They need to field the XM8 for they're ever going to be able to field the XM37 which is the real weapon the Army wants.

 

What is your problem with this weapon? The only thing you've consistently harped about is that it's "different" from the M16 requiring retraining. I don't see this as a problem, this is our job, if we can't adapt to a new weapon then we shouldn't be soldiers. We adapted to the SAW over the M60.

 

I have not seen a single major fault in the weapon mentioned.

[HewhoisMatt]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

Gewing you are saying all the same things people said when the U.S. changed over to the M-16. I am not saying this is the right gun for the job but the M-16 is due to step aside and the XM8 seems to be the front runner for the job.

[gewing]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

The M-14 never accomplished what it intended. There were plans to replace SMGs, Rifles, and the BAR with versions of the same gun. Instead the M-14 was uncontrollable on full auto.

 

This doesn't exactly equate, imo.

 

They claimed the M-16 wouldn't have the stopping power or range needed. Well, NOw people are trying to get the 6.8mm.

 

5.56 works. 6.8 would imo be marginally better.

6.5 grendel better yet.

 

I just don't see any real advantage to the XM8. Sorry.

 

Gewing you are saying all the same things people said when the U.S. changed over to the M-16. I am not saying this is the right gun for the job but the M-16 is due to step aside and the XM8 seems to be the front runner for the job.

[HewhoisMatt]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

My point had nothing to do with the M-14 persay. What I am saying is people are slow to accept change and no one more so than gun lovers. There are still people screaming over the 9mm replacing the .45 acp. I'm sure the military will run all the weapons thru the wringer before deciding on the one that meets their needs.

[gewing]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

I'd Love to think they will properly test everything, but istr the HK was pretty much the default choice for the personal defense weapon part of the OICW, and since that was where a lot of the interest in the g-36 based rifle seemed to be coming from...

 

Problem is, HK has been on a MEDIA BLITZ. THe Army seems to be running this as a GIVEN, which makes the cynic in me think that some high ranking officers either expect promotions or LUCRATIVE post-retirement jobs at HK.

 

I have heard some recent rumbles that Colt and FN have an extremely interesting competitor, but since it has the look of a DONE DEAL...

 

I am getting to the point that I don't trust the Army hierarchy to properly develop ANY system. Waste, mismanagement, corruption....

 

Specops has the capability to do direct purchases. Rummy has been trying to take that away from them so they have to go through the rest of the Army's bureaucracy. Instead of a month or two of testing and a 50 k check, it will take years and millions.

 

Then again, I may never forgive Rumsfeld for cancelling the new Artillery piece. It WAS such an improvement over what we have... 10rpm, Self TOT, longer range, much better protection, standardized engine with the M-1...

 

If the xm8 is a 20% improvement, that system was a 70%, imo.

 

and note that the Special forces are/have gone back to 9mm HOW THE BLAZES DID I TYPE 9mm??? I meant .45

 

Personally, I think an FN 5.7 for a general duty "pistol" or a .357 sig, .40 s&W or better yet a 10mm would be the way to go if equipping a force from the ground up, but...

 

 

 

 

 

My point had nothing to do with the M-14 persay. What I am saying is people are slow to accept change and no one more so than gun lovers. There are still people screaming over the 9mm replacing the .45 acp. I'm sure the military will run all the weapons thru the wringer before deciding on the one that meets their needs.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

The only advantage the 9mm has over the .45 is the fact that NATO uses 9mm. Sort of the same reason that QWERTY keyboards are better than Dvorac keyboards, or Windows is better than Linux...not that it's better or even as good, but just that more people use it.

 

Isn't the XM8 supposed to use 5.56? As I understand it, when the OICW was first being hammered out, they were looking to replace M203 rather than the M16. The only reason XM8 is needed is because the OICW is too heavy to become the standard weapon, and to allow greater interchangibility of parts between the heavy weapon and the standard version. Making it use different ammo seems like it would cause as many problems as it's supposed to solve.

 

Of course, I'm no big gun-bunny, so someone may very well have a good answer for why it ain't so....

[gewing]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

that is part of the issue. Many people are arguing for the XM8 as if it will be in 6.8mm, but so far that is ONLY an option.

 

 

The only advantage the 9mm has over the .45 is the fact that NATO uses 9mm. Sort of the same reason that QWERTY keyboards are better than Dvorac keyboards, or Windows is better than Linux...not that it's better or even as good, but just that more people use it.

 

Isn't the XM8 supposed to use 5.56? As I understand it, when the OICW was first being hammered out, they were looking to replace M203 rather than the M16. The only reason XM8 is needed is because the OICW is too heavy to become the standard weapon, and to allow greater interchangibility of parts between the heavy weapon and the standard version. Making it use different ammo seems like it would cause as many problems as it's supposed to solve.

 

Of course, I'm no big gun-bunny, so someone may very well have a good answer for why it ain't so....

[CorpCommander]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

I am not going to defend the XM8. I have heard it is easier to maintain than the M4/M16 series and if so then its a valuable, if evolutionary change.

 

As for retooling and retraining - that isn't an issue. When you are not spending time on your MOS you are training in the military. So, I don't see replacing a weapon system as being impossible because their might be training involved.

 

What I would like to see is some of the new support weapons that are coming out get fielded. The 25mm guns that have bullets that home, do air bursts, etc. That would be a major difference on the battlefield.

 

I'd like to see more ways of gathering situational awareness. Right now the biggest problem in Iraq is the enemy will only engage in ambush fights. I don't blame them. I wouldn't want to face off against the US in a straight up fight either. So far its been a good force equalizer and really they just have to wait for the US public to give up in order to win. Worked in Vietnam, and I am sure it will work here. Being able to detect ambushes better would be a good way for the US to offset the one advantage the insurgents and foriegn fighters have. It would be nice to think that peace and soverignty could be restored in that poor country. Anyway, nuf said, don't want to get too political here.

 

I agree with GEWING - don't trust the guys put in charge of procuring these weapon systems. It only takes one bag egg up near the top of the chain to skew the results. Lets spend our money on real solutions to existing problems.

[Toadmaster]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

The problem with the XM-8 in my opinion is it isn't really better than the M16 / M4, at best it is equal. It may have a few advantages but the AR family has almost 30 years or actual use, all of its bugs have been dealt with. The XM-8 is a new weapon based on another newish weapon (G-36). The AR can be had in just about any caliber from 5.56mm to .50 Browning. There are .45 ACP and 9mm SMG versions, big bore "entry guns" (.458 SOCOM, .50 Beowulf) and even sub-sonic suppressed weapons (9mm CQB, .300 Whisper). There have also been SAW versions with heavy barrels and even belt feed.

 

The AR has been around quite awhile and has become a versatile reliable weapon. Much is made about many weapons like the AUG and XM-8 that are sold on the idea they can be quickly modified in the field to use differant length barrels, optics, bipods etc. The thing is nobody will be carrying all these parts with them to switch them in the field. The AR can do the same thing without much more trouble, the upper is easily changed allowing differant calibers, optics, barrel length, feed mechanism etc. So what is the advantage of the weapons like XM-8 and AUG?

 

There was an article I read awhile back suggesting the AR-10A4 (7.62mm) as the base weapon of a weapons system, by changing the uppers it would allow units to easily switch between 5.56mm, 6.8mm, 7.62mm and even .50 Browning (single shot), short barrels, standard barrels, heavy barrels, marksman rifles etc. This would allow one weapon to be easily modified for mission and have the advantage of minimum training requirements between weapons. The AR-15 (M16) can do the same thing except for use of the 7.62mm. The AR family is currently capable of filling all small arms needs from SMG to sniper rifle.

 

The use of 9mm and M14 are not very good examples of peoples resistance being wrong. The M14 is still being used, many were reissued in the 1st Gulf war and Afghanistan due to the long ranges involved, it was found the complete change to 5.56mm was not a good thing. The 9mm has pretty well been proven to be marginal and the .45 is making a return (SOCOM pistol and custom M1911A1's are being used by Spec Ops), law enforcement has been making a switch to other cartridges as well (.357 SIG, .40 S&W, 10mm Auto, .45 ACP). Many regret the change to 9mm.

 

The XM-8 is probably a good rifle but not good enough to warrant a change from the M16 / M4, its all politics. Unfortunately much of the US military has become fixated on high tech wizbang gadgets instead of more practical cost effective solutions. Certainly the XM-8 will be satisfactory for those in the field but what are they giving up to get it (what project is the money taking away from), at this point it is just change for change sake.

[CorpCommander]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

The M14 was used in GW1? Wow, did not know that. I am shocked because where are the spare parts coming from?

 

The M4 is the primere reconfigurable weapon par exelence in my humble opinion. From adding lasers, lights, handles, mp3 players and George Foreman Grills its the one to get.

 

There are real benefits to the 6.5 and 6.8mm ammo. Better range and stopping power with a trade off in accuracy.

 

So, what else is on the drawing boards? When do we get the gun from Eraser?

[Vondy]

Re: XM8 Assualt Rifle.

 

There is one advantage I see the XM-8 as having - smaller size. In Israel the M-16 is called the "slicha eshdak" (the "excuse me gun") because whenever you get onto a bus with one and walk down the isle you end up saying excuse me to everyone you pass by. Their also called "brooms" because of their size. The M-4, however, is a big improvement on this. I don't think the Army needs a new main line battle rifle (the AR family works for that, and the M-16 has enough variants, like the M-4 to do a number of tasks), but I can see the weapon being useful for certain types of special forces elements, especially those who specialize in close quarters combat, hit and run, and other small unit direct action operations - which isn't really what the Army's mainline troops do, oddly enough. It seems like a niche weapon to me.