AT AT ASsault wrote:...the 20 range gun...was a 5.56NATO Assault Rifle in v0.2

OK, that's a problem. But the problem isn't the overall rules structure, it's the particular range number assigned to that particular firearm--it should be much lower, probably 12 or so. If it's 20, that makes the long range 200 and the very long range 400 (333 yds and 666 yds, respectively), which aren't very realistic. If it's 12, the point-blank range is 20 yds, the long range is 200 yds, and the very long range is 400 yds--much more realistic for an M-16.

AT AT ASsault wrote:An Armored Jeep, which is something you'd fire at with the .50 Rifle...is about as tall as a person, so its going to appear even small within the upper range of the .50's first range increment

Here's some rough numbers:

Apparent area of a standing person: 6 ft x 3 ft. At 30 yds (18 squares), that's 0.67 x 0.33 radians

Apparent area of a crouching person: 3 ft x 3 ft. At 30 yds, that's

Apparent area of a jeep from the side: 12 ft x 6 ft. At 60 yds (36 squares), that's 0.33 x 0.67 radians

Apparent area of a jeep from the front: 6 ft x 6 ft. At 60 yds, that's 0.33 x 0.33 radians.

So, a person at 30 yds is about the same size target as a jeep at twice that distance. Of course, this doesn't factor in the ballistic advantages of a round that has higher mass and energy, so PB range for a .50 cal rifle should be more than twice the PB range of a 5.56 mm assault rifle.

AT AT ASsault wrote:...the 20 range gun...was a 5.56NATO Assault Rifle in v0.2

OK, that's a problem. But the problem isn't the overall rules structure, it's the particular range number assigned to that particular firearm--it should be much lower, probably 12 or so. If it's 20, that makes the long range 200 and the very long range 400 (333 yds and 666 yds, respectively), which aren't very realistic. If it's 12, the point-blank range is 20 yds, the long range is 200 yds, and the very long range is 400 yds--much more realistic for an M-16.

AT AT ASsault wrote:(it is NOT a Sniper Rifle, btw, anti armor/material is more accurate)

I know some guys who've been using it as a sniper rifle in Afghanistan. Guess I'd better tell them they're using it wrong.

AT AT ASsault wrote:But the guy standing next you with an SMG can line up his shot WAY easier and quicker than you can with your mounted gun.

If he's

right next to me, that's adjacent, and it's already covered in the rules. If he's ten feet away or farther, I'll take the gun on a swivel mount any day over a gun I have to bring up to my shoulder and look down the sight. A well-designed (and well-maintained) swivel mount makes it extraordinarily easily to point your weapon exactly where you want to, quickly.

AT AT ASsault wrote:And if you're using a long rifle against somebody who's within 5 feet or less of you, good luck

That would be adjacent, which is already covered under the rules.

AT AT ASsault wrote: I realize an upper limit of 6 squares for the ease of use difference (penalty to large guns, bonus to small guns, whichever way seems better) seems a little long, but adjacent seemed a little short.

[/quote]

Adjacent

is a little short. 6 squares is probably about right. That's not the point. The point is that the "adjacent" rule is good enough, while the "6 squares" rules adds an unnecessary layer of complexity. It would probably make things more realistic, but it's OK if it's a little bit unrealistic because it's simple.

"You’re entitled to your own opinions. You’re not entitled to your own facts."

-Daniel Patrick Moynihan