1918 Mauser Tank Gewehr

1'st edition, Deluxe Revised. Military strategies are the thing to discuss here. Oh yeah and how much damage that land mine will do.

Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones

User avatar
Josh Sinsapaugh
Palladium Books® Freelance Writer
Posts: 5228
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 8:01 pm
Comment: Carrying friends out of crowds and standing in the doorway looking like the Jack of Hearts since November 2008.
Location: Desolation Row
Contact:

1918 Mauser Tank Gewehr

Unread post by Josh Sinsapaugh »

I' trying to stat this out Palladium-wise, and need some help and opinions.

The 1918 Mauser Tank Gewehr was an anti-tank rifle developed at the end of the First World War. The weapon is fairly large (167 cm long, weighs 39 lbs) and fires 13.3 mm rounds, and is obviously meant to be an anti-armor weapon.

Thoughts?

~ Josh
Image
User avatar
Grey Death
Adventurer
Posts: 446
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 10:43 am
Location: Hiding from zombies in the Winchester pub

Unread post by Grey Death »

One of my favorites. I would say that the damage would be comperable to a .50 cal. (single shot of course). Caliber wise they are close. 12.7mm compared to 13.3mm. For palladium damage purposes they are close enough. Remember tank armor in WWI wasn't as strong as in most WWII tanks. The Mauser as well as most AT rifles produced from WWI onward were obsolete by WWII. As a matter of fact there was an AT rifle used by the german army (the name of which escapes me at the moment) which they realised not longer penetrated armor. So they converted them to launch grenades. Sorry getting a little off track. But hope that helps. By the way the national firearms museum in Fairfax, Virginia has a 1918. Its way more impressive in person. If you've never been, its a must. Lots of interesting firearms.
Hale Chidduck: Do you believe in karma?
Joe Sarno: Karma's justice without the satisfaction. I don't believe in justice.
User avatar
Jefffar
Supreme Being
Posts: 8607
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2000 1:01 am
Comment: Being a moderator doesn't mean I speak for Palladium Books. It just makes me the lifeguard at their pool.
Location: Unreality
Contact:

Unread post by Jefffar »

Yeah, the .50 is a fair benchmark for damage, though if I remember correctly, this gun didn't have all that great a range (but then again since it was designed to engage rolling barns at point blank, it didn't need it).

Incidently, the .50 was designed as an anti-tank weapon as well. It's just that the crazy yanks made it a machinegun first and didn't get around to usign it in a rifle until the late 1970s/early 1980s.
Official Hero of the Megaverse

Dead Boy wrote:All hail Jefffar... King of the Mods

Co-Holder with Ice Dragon of the "Lando Calrissian" award for Smooth. - Novastar

Palladium Forums of the Megaverse Rules

If you need to contact Palladium Books for any reason, click here.
Locked

Return to “Recon® & Recon® Modern Combat”