Forums of the Megaverse®

When I read the descriptions on the weapons used by cyclones and other handheld weapons I keep seeing parts where they say this weapon is better then that weapon. But when you compare the stats they are not. All the handhelds are basically the same, with minor(if at all) improvements over the previous weapons. The only thing that really changes is the look and/or form of the weapon.

OrionPrime wrote:When I read the descriptions on the weapons used by cyclones and other handheld weapons I keep seeing parts where they say this weapon is better then that weapon. But when you compare the stats they are not. All the handhelds are basically the same, with minor(if at all) improvements over the previous weapons. The only thing that really changes is the look and/or form of the weapon.

I'm assuming you mean in the core book?

True, many of the man-portable weapons fall into a very narrow damage band in the core book. Partly, this is because Palladium is determined to make every pistol, rifle, and support weapon a mega-damage weapon for some reason even when it doesn't fit with a depiction of the weapon in the source material. Take out the mega-damage aspect and this is actually how it's supposed to be for a number of those weapons (the SAL-9, FAL-2, H90, and "M-30") in the OSM. They were all light, anti-infantry laser weapons that had comparable offensive capability to a modern 9x19mm bullet, and only really improved in terms of the number of shots that could be fired from each power pack.*

The others, like the 40mm beam pistol and 60mm beam rifle, were more along the lines of anti-materiel weapons, and really should be a lot more powerful compared to the various pistols and rifles.

The weapons in subsequent sourcebooks are working mostly from standard damage levels for various types of bullet or a couple of variations of the profile for a laser weapon, but are all still represented as mega-damage weapons for some reason. There wasn't any info on the weapons in Southern Cross for them to work from, and they may not have been aware of the information on the few hand weapons seen in Macross (which is perfectly understandable, as said info is very well hidden).


* The laser submachine gun the RPG calls the M-30 had 18 or 36 shot power packs, the SAL-9's packs held 30, the FAL-2's stock pack could hold 100, and the Gallant H90 laser hound had magazines of "energy cartridges" that held 6 shots apiece, giving the pistol form 48 shots per magazine and the larger rifle adapter magazines had 288.

make sure your looking at more than just damage.

look at range. (some weapons have better range)
look at ammo capacity (some weapons have better ammo capacity, or have the ability to recharge when not in use)
look at weight (a big one people overlook.. heavier things are harder to carry for long times and will be harder to aim and such. there are no game rules for this but it is an issue for things like encumbrance)
Look at size (some weapons are physically larger than other. while while there are no official game effect, this will make it harder to carry them and use them in some environments.)

things that have no no game rules attached are fodder for the GM to impose situational effects.

glitterboy2098 wrote:make sure your looking at more than just damage.

look at range. (some weapons have better range)
look at ammo capacity (some weapons have better ammo capacity, or have the ability to recharge when not in use)
look at weight (a big one people overlook.. heavier things are harder to carry for long times and will be harder to aim and such. there are no game rules for this but it is an issue for things like encumbrance)
Look at size (some weapons are physically larger than other. while while there are no official game effect, this will make it harder to carry them and use them in some environments.)

things that have no no game rules attached are fodder for the GM to impose situational effects.

In addition: look at how the rate of fire effects both the ammo and damage. Some weapons are much better at burst firing than others, and some can't even fire bursts but can hit similar to burst weapons.

and keep in mind often what is considered 'better' has little to do with the stats. for example, in terms of range, damage, rate of fire, ammo capacity, and reliability there isn't much difference between an M-16A2 Assault Rifle and an M-4 Carbine. but the M-4 carbine is considered the better of the two because it is newer (and therefor seems better) and because it includes some features as standard the M16A2 requires custom refits to get (like the adjustable shoulder stock, the extra picatinny rails, the ability to mount an M203 grenade launcher, etc)