Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

[tinman]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

How about a AR10 with rails to accept the 203? And toss a muzzle break on it like used in the new M1 SOCOMM.

 

I'd still feel naked...

 

An AR10 would do nicely as well.

 

And maybe something in 10-gauge "for close encounters".

[tinman]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

I'm thinking of any animal target, really, from humans to dinosaurs.

 

In the part you snipped, I did mention bullets that were designed to match initial penetration with good expansion inside...evidently the materials don't expand until they're passing through softer material, somehow. They were originally designed to penetrate body armor, and then expand.

 

From what I've read, as recommended by my brother (who studied the subject extensively as part of his training), hydrostatic shockwave is evidently a major factor in the stopping power of bullets, at least against human targets. I'm trying to recall the details, but evidently the rapid pressure changes mess with the autonomic nervous system and cause a loss of conciousness.

 

The human body is very resilient when it comes to things like "hydrostatic shock" and temporary wound cavities. The only part of the body where this is really a factor is inside the skull, and if your bullet is already inside the skull the rest is pretty much gravy. edit: sorry for the imagery

 

The key factors in bullet "stopping power" are whether or not the CNS is hit and how much tissue is destroyed in areas likely to cause a massive loss of blood pressure.

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

In the part you snipped, I did mention bullets that were designed to match initial penetration with good expansion inside...evidently the materials don't expand until they're passing through softer material, somehow.

 

I know of no bullet design that takes that path with elephants as the target. They are so hard to penetration when bone is hit that the risk isn't justified. I could be behind the times however and would like to look at one if you can provide a source.

 

The whaling articles I linked specifically mentioned FMJ.

 

 

From what I've read' date=' as recommended by my brother (who studied the subject extensively as part of his training), hydrostatic shockwave is evidently a major factor in the stopping power of bullets, at least against human targets. I'm trying to recall the details, but evidently the rapid pressure changes mess with the autonomic nervous system and cause a loss of conciousness.[/quote']

 

That's a very 70s, early 80s worldview.

 

The FBI and IBWA have discredited it, and frankly I don't know any modern sources that still hold to it.

 

But let's sideline that. I'm having fun with the T-Rex.

[tinman]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

So let's go with the premise that you are actually hunting a T-Rex for sport, how would you go about it (weapon of choice, tactic, etc.).

 

First we'd have to address the habitat issue. I don't know much about the latest theories on how T-Rex's lived, but it would likely be a safe bet that if they existed today they would keep to edge habitat (trees to hide their outline, open areas to run down their prey) rather than plains or heavy brush.

 

For purposes of being sporting about it we would rule out the use of AFV's and helicopter gunships, or really moving vehicles of any kind (no chance to make a clean and humane kill from a moving vehicle).

 

So it's you and a couple of buddies, on foot and loaded for T-Rex. What's the plan?

[Warp9]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Can you provide an example where "too specific over a narrow range" occurs?

 

Phoenix Command comes to mind as one example, human centered to the max (if I'm think of the right game)- however that was all it was meant to do.

 

Yes, going back to something you posted in this thread (Post #36), I got the impression that you were basing damage of guns around their impact on humans, rather than keeping things more general. (perhaps I just misunderstood you)

 

From Post #36

This point is key.

 

Simple energy increase by itself is almost meaningless, the actual important issue is where the energy is depleted at.

 

It can be the armor itself, it can be in the projectile itself, it can be on the other side of the target after its passed through. It can be in the form of heat transferred to the bullet and heat tranferred the target.

 

So first key is projectile construction- then energy.

 

Depending upon the construction of the bullet, armor (even if only skin, for skin is a weak type of armor), and target, very counter-intuitive outcomes can and do result.

 

For example, a high velocity AP round fired from a .357 mag will pass through a person causing little actual damage. Meanwhile the same velocity and weight Hollow Point can over-expand (with the bullet taking most of the energy), under penetrate and end up doing less damage to the person the AP round did. The ideal round will expand and just barely exit- sadly this idea round is almost impossible to create although blended metal technology may be a final answer to this need for small arms.

 

 

As I look at it, energy is more important than projectile construction. After all, a projectile that has no energy will do no damage no matter how it is constructed. And your basis for discarding the energy from the "high velocity AP round fired from a .357 mag" assumes a human (or human sized) target.

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Yes, going back to something you posted in this thread (Post #36), I got the impression that you were basing damage of guns around their impact on humans, rather than keeping things more general. (perhaps I just misunderstood you)

 

Yes, but the case where this causes a failure of the game system to loosely (as all games system do) model reality is rather rare and minor- and anything that would remove those failure points would either:

 

a) Result in a game that is no longer HERO in significant ways.

 

Raise the complexity of the game past the point where I could use it.

 

and/or

 

c) Fail to represent reality when humans are the target.

 

 

I can see people going with problem A, no so much B but it has been done. I don't understand why anyone (unless humans are minor issue in their games) selecting C.

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

So it's you and a couple of buddies' date=' on foot and loaded for T-Rex. What's the plan?[/quote']

 

Assuming Mr. Rex is the only thing I have to worry about...

 

 

M82A1 Barrett Rifle, standard .50 BMG military round, one for me and each of my buddies.

 

Sadly I think the GL/rocket launchers are out- first they aren't sporting and second their min. arm range would hose you right when you needed it most).

 

 

He likely would be noticed in heavy growth, stealth isn't likely his strong point. So moving from such growth to next such growth one at a time with your buddies on overwatch would be best I think.

 

Bring a tracker, this guy should be easy to track.

 

If range of encounter is a big out there (a few hundred yards), set up the rifles and go for a brain shot through the scope. If he jumps you in close, go for the heart lung shot in mass (i.e. everyone unloads) and hope you made out your will.

 

I'm sure the .50 BMG would reach the brain, the only question I have is how close of a hit to brian I'd have to get in order to do the job. It may be worth having one M82A1 without a scope as a backup (use a reflex sight. One may have to be custom made for the weapon, I'm uncertain if a standard one could take the recoil) for just such a try in close.

[Warp9]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Yes, but the case where this causes a failure of the game system to loosely (as all games system do) model reality is rather rare and minor- and anything that would remove those failure points would either:

 

a) Result in a game that is no longer HERO in significant ways.

 

Raise the complexity of the game past the point where I could use it.

 

and/or

 

c) Fail to represent reality when humans are the target.

 

 

I can see people going with problem A, no so much B but it has been done. I don't understand why anyone (unless humans are minor issue in their games) selecting C.

I'm currently running a game which takes place on an alien world. The PCs are mainly human, but most often they will be shooting at aliens.

 

And I've run other games like that in the past (including several alien invasion scenarios), it makes little sense for me to use human-o-centric damage.

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

And I've run other games like that in the past (including several alien invasion scenarios)' date=' it makes little sense for me to use human-o-centric damage.[/quote']

 

So you want to model a alien target that is vastly different from human normal, and if the human reaction to being shot with their own weapons is incorrect, it doesn't matter?

 

I take it the alien weapons are built in reverse and would also be incorrect with respect to themselves.

 

Ok. Have fun.

[tinman]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

I'm pretty much in agreement about the armament, but I think I'd prefer to find raised terrain features and glass the countryside, moving from high-open feature to high-open feature in covering teams. I'd probably stay clear of obscuring tree growth so that there'd be less of a risk of surprising the T-Rex at close range.

 

It might also work to set up a blind overlooking water or a recent kill (if a T-Rex actually leaves anything for later).

 

Assuming one could get ahold of a pair of horses, a gun-carriage and a 5-pounder you could even try for a T-Rex in the early season...

[Warp9]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

So you want to model a alien target that is vastly different from human normal, and if the human reaction to being shot with their own weapons is incorrect, it doesn't matter?

 

I take it the alien weapons are built in reverse and would also be incorrect with respect to themselves.

 

Ok. Have fun.

No. I don't believe that weapons should be built for any specific target.

 

IMO a weapon's characteristics exist completely separately from the target. For example a weapon has the same energy no matter which target you are using it on.

 

You wouldn't rate your character's STR based on what objects he was most likely to pick up. And I wouldn't rate my attacks based on the target. I seek an objective rating for damage (not subjective to a given target).

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

I'm pretty much in agreement about the armament' date=' but I think I'd prefer to find raised terrain features and glass the countryside, moving from high-open feature to high-open feature in covering teams. ...[/quote']

 

Sort of a deer stand approach, I considered that. Of course you still need to reach the deer stand on foot in his roaming range.

 

 

 

I'd probably stay clear of obscuring tree growth so that there'd be less of a risk of surprising the T-Rex at close range.

 

I discounted that. Was more worried about not be spotted by him.

 

I may have bought into the Hollywood image of the big earth shaking monster however. Wouldn't it bite if not only Mr. Rex had Steath on a 18-, he also had excellent chameleon like blending...

 

 

Assuming one could get ahold of a pair of horses, a gun-carriage and a 5-pounder you could even try for a T-Rex in the early season...

 

 

Best hope you have someone good at quick priming...

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

IMO a weapon's characteristics exist completely separately from the target. For example a weapon has the same energy no matter which target you are using it on.

 

So you're just happy with weapons being wrong when fired at humans.

 

Ok.

 

You could have just said that up front.

[Susano]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Nuke the T-Rex from orbit. It's the only way to make sure.

 

Someone had to say it!

[Warp9]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

So you're just happy with weapons being wrong when fired at humans.

 

Ok.

 

You could have just said that up front.

Yes, I am willing to accept less than perfectly accurate results.

 

Although, you've already admitted that your system is not 100 percent perfect either (even against humans).

 

So being "wrong" is only a matter of degree.

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Yes, I am willing to accept less than perfectly accurate results.

 

Although, you've already admitted that your system is not 100 percent perfect either (even against humans).

 

So being "wrong" is only a matter of degree.

 

True.

 

But I'd rather the weapons be ordered correctly and be sort of right for humans, then assume that everything has infinite body depth but even then is subject to destruction from the shallowest of wounds (i.e. the result of a pure energy model).

 

But to each their own.

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Let's take the T-Rex to HERO...

 

Using my house rules....

 

The M82A1 does 3d6K with a +5 Stun Modifier, 5 points resistant piercing with just a FMJ bullet. It has a 22 STR Min, but it has a muzzle break and a bipod- I"m sitting at a -1 OCV for lack of enough strength even so.

 

 

I'm DEX 10, WF- rifles, Skill: +2 Firearms. We'll count the range as 60 yards (30") and has just reached that point with his charge.

 

 

The rifle has +4 Rmod, scope gives another +4, so no range modifier. Set gives me +1 OCV as does the scope.

 

I'm setting at an OCV of 7.

 

Mr. Rex has a Dex is of 15, however he takes -4 DCV due to size. So he's DCV 1

 

With the head shot modifier (going for that brain), I have a -8.

 

So...

 

11 + 7 -1 -8 = 9 or less

 

Great, I have less than a 50/50 chance. I'm not happy.

 

 

Mr. Rex would have a Body of 20, STR and Stun somewhere around 70. Lets give him 8 points of resistant defense (thick hide, big bones, monster like ability to shrug off minor injury) and a PD of 30.

 

Assuming I hit and that I roll 11 points of damge on my base damage roll..

 

I'm doing 110 points of stun and 11 body.

 

After his defenses (5 of the 8 points resistant is lost), I'm doing 16 body to his head and 77 stun.

 

HE'S STUNNED, DOWN, AND BLEEDING TO DEATH.

 

Not bad.

 

Now if he had 50% resistant damage reduction on top of that....

 

I need a bigger gun. And more skill levels.

[tinman]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Would the head-shot penalty for a T-Rex still be -8? His head is certainly bigger, but the important bits are much smaller. I'd give it a -10.

 

Yeah, I think in a charge situation bigger bullets and a higher rate of fire would be the order of the day.

 

Ugh. Stealthy chameleon T-Rex = Bad bad bad.

[tinman]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

I'm thinking that 8 resistant defense might be a little high for a T-Rex, after all the USS Iowa only has 10

 

Maybe 5...

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Now Steve Long vs. the T-Rex at 60 yards.

 

Using all HERO write-ups.

 

Steve: Dex 8 (he's a normal), SPD 2, no WF or skill levels (looking at the gun write-ups in HERO, the man has never fired a gun in his life). It's STR Min still gives him a -1 OCV.

 

So OCV 3 - 3 -1 = -1

 

He gets no Range Mods, and the gun itself gives him a +1 OCV, no bonus for scope, but he is set for +1.

 

Total OCV 1

 

T-Rex has a DEX of 15, but here takes a -6 DCV, so it totals out for a -1 DCV. Going for the head shot at -8

 

11 + 1 - -1 -8 = 5 or less.

 

Go Steve.

 

T-Rex has tough skin for PD of 15, of that only 5 is resistant.

 

 

Phase 12 BANG.

 

We'll assume he hits.

 

Average damage for the HERO system Barret on a head hit is 11 Body and 66 stun.

 

T-Rex takes 51 stun, and 12 body.

 

T-Rex has 35 body, so that didn't faze it. It's CON however is a 40, so it's stunned for a phase. It has 80 total stun so it's still coming.

 

T-Rex is spd 4.

 

Phase 3 T-Rex gets unstunned.

 

Phase 6, T- Rex moves 48 yards non-combat towards Steve in mindless rage. He's now a mere 12 yards out.

 

Steve fires, we gave him a hit on that five or less- this time he misses even though he's up to a 10 or less for the non-combat run.

 

Phase 9, T-Rex makes half move and attacks. Steve aborts to dodge.

 

OCV 5 + 2 Hand-to-Hand vs. DCV 3 + 3, needs a 12-

 

Misses!

 

Phase 12, T-Rex attacks, Steve is still dodging. Needs a 12- and hits.

 

Steve takes 5d5+1K with STR...

 

Opps..

 

Oh well.

 

 

 

All tongue in cheek.

[Warp9]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

True.

 

But I'd rather the weapons be ordered correctly and be sort of right for humans, then assume that everything has infinite body depth but even then is subject to destruction from the shallowest of wounds (i.e. the result of a pure energy model).

 

But to each their own.

If I were going to deal with body depth, here is how I'd go about it:

 

I would rate each attack in terms of energy, and also in terms area in square inches. (both rated on an exponential scale)

 

During each individual attack, based on the resistance of the individual target, I'd figure out how deep a hole the attack (of that area, and that energy) would make. The same energy will dig a much deeper hole if it is focused into a much smaller area.

 

I would then use that data (a hole of X area, and Y depth) to figure out what impact it would have on that particular creature. Some creatures/objects are very homogenous (clay golems, and borg cubes); running a narrow hole all the way through a zombie will have little effect. Also, a hole beyond a certain depth is wasted on a small creature (that would be the "blow-through effect") .

 

That would be how I'd proceed if I was deeply concerned about taking this stuff into account. (and I have actually been doing some thinking along these lines)

 

With a bit of tweaking, I'd bet I could make such a system as accurate against humans as the one you've got, but nothing about it would have to be "hard coded" to humans.

[Susano]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Steve: Dex 8 (he's a normal)' date=' SPD 2, no WF or skill levels (looking at the gun write-ups in HERO, the man has never fired a gun in his life). It's STR Min still gives him a -1 OCV.[/quote']

 

In all fairness, many of the gun write ups in 5th Edition Hero are virtually unchanged from older books, such as DANGER INTERNATIONAL, which Steve didn't work on. The only major changes are in Range Modifiers, which were altered in 4th Edition to begin with.

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

With a bit of tweaking' date=' I'd bet I could make such a system as accurate against humans as the one you've got, but nothing about it would have to be "hard coded" to humans.[/quote']

 

Go for it.

 

I may even switch over if it actually works. And I don't have to modifier the weapon when switching targets.

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

Would the head-shot penalty for a T-Rex still be -8? His head is certainly bigger' date=' but the important bits are much smaller. I'd give it a -10.[/quote']

 

Hmm. You have a point.

 

DCV +2, Only to avoid head shots (-1/2)...

 

 

 

 

I'm thinking that 8 resistant defense might be a little high for a T-Rex, after all the USS Iowa only has 10

 

Maybe 5...

 

A pact of T-Rexes would sink the Iowa....

 

If it had only a 5, the piercing would remove all resistant defenses. That should mean that all the stun ignores the PD meaning I can make do with a damage roll of only 7 points on 3d6.

 

Wimpy T-Rex.

 

How about 5 points in general, and 8 only for the head (representing that huge skull of his)?

[Fox1]

Re: Why does the USS Iowa only have a 10 Defense?

 

In all fairness' date=' many of the gun write ups in 5th Edition Hero are virtually unchanged from older books, such as DANGER INTERNATIONAL, which Steve didn't work on. The only major changes are in Range Modifiers, which were altered in 4th Edition to begin with.[/quote']

 

Yeah, but those Range Modifiers are major whacked.