The difference in caliber is indeed massive but I would imagine it is far offset by the considerably more advance gas compression and containment systems in modern firearms as well as much greater explosive force generated by the bullet itself.
The effect of the round on your internals is different though I'll grant you that
though there were numerous reports that the reason armies during, say, the Napoleonic Wars fought at such close ranged in ranks was not just because of problems with accuracy but also because muskets were rather low in power, and at longer ranges they simply didn't hit hard enough to kill or even injure.
So you're saying that the Napoleonic wars needed
more dakka?
Miss me? Find me on:
Twitch (I stream most days of the week) Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
the difference of calibre isn't necessarily as important as load.
.700 NE is a powerful round, but isn't actually as powerful as .600 NE which was the preferred elephant rifle round of choice. Said to if not kill the elephant in a single headshot, to knock it out in one go.
Neither of which are close to .50 BMG, which would jut go through something like an elephant because it's made to shoot through light armoured transports.
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
In EP we made a weapon system that would identify the target you were shooting at, and select the correct round from a smart magazine in order to put them down. Little to no armour? Hollow-point. More armour? HEAP round. designated non-combatant? Either a misfire or a non-lethal flux round. Designated hostage target? Shock or flux.
Best thing was you didn't even have to choose every time you fired, the tacnet would just select the round based on what the gun was pointing towards at the time. The first time I shot a spray of bullets at three underworld enforcers, hitting the one wearing the advanced armour suit with AP rounds and the two back-up goons with hollowpoints was pretty damn cool I can tell you.
no, but why are we comparing modern combat firearms to pre-20th century weapons on the first place?
a .50 black power rifle is going to hit at hard and more accurately than a .50 musket, because rifling stabilizes the round and can use the same charge.
The difference in caliber is indeed massive but I would imagine it is far offset by the considerably more advance gas compression and containment systems in modern firearms as well as much greater explosive force generated by the bullet itself.
The effect of the round on your internals is different though I'll grant you that
though there were numerous reports that the reason armies during, say, the Napoleonic Wars fought at such close ranged in ranks was not just because of problems with accuracy but also because muskets were rather low in power, and at longer ranges they simply didn't hit hard enough to kill or even injure.
no, but why are we comparing modern combat firearms to pre-20th century weapons on the first place?
a .50 black power rifle is going to hit at hard and more accurately than a .50 musket, because rifling stabilizes the round and can use the same charge.
napoleon spearheaded the switch to thermal clips after analysis of battlefield telemetry revealed the british were capable of putting more shots down range faster
no, but why are we comparing modern combat firearms to pre-20th century weapons on the first place?
a .50 black power rifle is going to hit at hard and more accurately than a .50 musket, because rifling stabilizes the round and can use the same charge.
rifles in pathfinder use cartridges though
which is what started this whole thing
So, the old fire arms are black powder, and the advanced ones use modern rounds?
Is this what's going on. i'm confused why not having the tamp makes a difference.
0
Options
GrogMy sword is only steelin a useful shape.Registered Userregular
The difference in caliber is indeed massive but I would imagine it is far offset by the considerably more advance gas compression and containment systems in modern firearms as well as much greater explosive force generated by the bullet itself.
The effect of the round on your internals is different though I'll grant you that
though there were numerous reports that the reason armies during, say, the Napoleonic Wars fought at such close ranged in ranks was not just because of problems with accuracy but also because muskets were rather low in power, and at longer ranges they simply didn't hit hard enough to kill or even injure.
So you're saying that the Napoleonic wars needed
more dakka?
well
who doesn't need more dakka?
Wotz dis? Sumbudy seyz I ain't nee mo' dakka?
0
Options
DepressperadoI just wanted to see you laughingin the pizza rainRegistered Userregular
Posts
what about burning hands
literally a magic flamethrower
not particularly well in comparison, however
So you're saying that the Napoleonic wars needed
more dakka?
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
still rather have one chucked at me than be shot with a modern firearm
.700 NE is a powerful round, but isn't actually as powerful as .600 NE which was the preferred elephant rifle round of choice. Said to if not kill the elephant in a single headshot, to knock it out in one go.
Neither of which are close to .50 BMG, which would jut go through something like an elephant because it's made to shoot through light armoured transports.
well yes but you're arguing a difference in centuries of technology
i think i would rather take a NATO round than a .58 caliber minie ball
tumblr | instagram | twitter | steam
it's just not the same
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
in sci-fi games
the variation in weapon technology means that you use guns for a number of different reasons
like, instead of having just regular guns
you might have regular guns, lasers, plasma guns, shard throwers and so on
basically I like a bit of gun porn in my sci-fi
that's not...
you're missing the point here
a spear will cause more damage when it connects than an m16
not like, a spear is better in a fight or something
because you are a sane person who likes all her limbs and organs where they are supposed to be
i don't know. 5.56 nato is going to fucking hurt. .50 BMG would put an exit hole the size of a small car in you.
Best thing was you didn't even have to choose every time you fired, the tacnet would just select the round based on what the gun was pointing towards at the time. The first time I shot a spray of bullets at three underworld enforcers, hitting the one wearing the advanced armour suit with AP rounds and the two back-up goons with hollowpoints was pretty damn cool I can tell you.
I dunno if it will
chuck a spear at a pig carcass and it won't actually go through it
it'll stick in a few inches and then fall out, yeah, but a NATO round will just piss through you
well, either one is going to hurt
but 5.56 nato is more likely to exit tissue and is of a significantly smaller diameter
that said i may not be taking hydrostatic shock into account since i have not ever been actually shot
tumblr | instagram | twitter | steam
a .50 black power rifle is going to hit at hard and more accurately than a .50 musket, because rifling stabilizes the round and can use the same charge.
well
who doesn't need more dakka?
in the heart
yeah but 5.56 is designed to do a lot of tissue damage. when it makes impact it twirls to fuck up muscle and other soft tissue.
rifles in pathfinder use cartridges though
which is what started this whole thing
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
abort abort
tumblr | instagram | twitter | steam
thermal clips man
So, the old fire arms are black powder, and the advanced ones use modern rounds?
Is this what's going on. i'm confused why not having the tamp makes a difference.
Wotz dis? Sumbudy seyz I ain't nee mo' dakka?
you're a racist
That's why.
Let's Play Final Fantasy 'II' (Ch10 - 5/17/10)
no
nonononono
NONONONONO
this way lies madness