Energy weapon burst firing

Ley Line walkers, Juicers, Coalition Troops, Samas, Tolkeen, & The Federation Of Magic. Come together here to discuss all things Rifts®.

Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones

AdamB85
D-Bee
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 11:00 pm

Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by AdamB85 »

My brothers and I have returned to playing Rifts after a 20 year hiatus! Great to see some rules updated in the RUE and Conversion book 1, but I have noticed that there is no mention of energy weapons doing bursts. In the original main book it mentioned that you could do short/long/full bursts for x2/x5/10 damage, but there is no mention in the RUE. Is it regarded now that unless it specifically mentions in the weapon description that it can do a double/triple pulse etc, that it can only fire single shots?

Thanks in advance :-)
User avatar
Nekira Sudacne
Monk
Posts: 15488
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:22 pm
Comment: The Munchkin Fairy
Location: 2nd Degree Black Belt of Post Fu
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Nekira Sudacne »

Correct. The general Burst rules were cut and "Standard" rate of fire no longer exists. Energy weapons are either single shot or pulse, which counts as a single shot with no penalties to strike (unless aimed or called when W.P. bonuses are halved. also modern W.P.'s are now broken down by type and they don't all have the same bonus progression). Going by the updated SDC guns in Merc Ops under GAW, it seems 3-round bursts is the limit of most guns, while machineguns have defined short and long bursts that do specific damage for 10 or 20 rounds per burst. No such thing as a full melee burst at all that I can find.
Sometimes, you're like a beacon of light in the darkness, giving me some hope for humankind. ~ Killer Cyborg

You can have something done good, fast and cheap. If you want it done good and fast, it's not going to be cheap. If you want it done fast and cheap it won't be good. If you want something done good and cheap it won't be done fast. ~ Dark Brandon
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Correct. The general Burst rules were cut and "Standard" rate of fire no longer exists. Energy weapons are either single shot or pulse, which counts as a single shot with no penalties to strike (unless aimed or called when W.P. bonuses are halved. also modern W.P.'s are now broken down by type and they don't all have the same bonus progression). Going by the updated SDC guns in Merc Ops under GAW, it seems 3-round bursts is the limit of most guns, while machineguns have defined short and long bursts that do specific damage for 10 or 20 rounds per burst. No such thing as a full melee burst at all that I can find.

It is more accurate to say that only weapons with burst stats can now do bursts now. Do to the laser vulcan on the iron heart main battle tank. PG 108 rifts mercenaries. It is a energy weapon that says it does bursts. It would be in theory possible to make other burst fire energy weapons.
(In my games I allow creation of Laser mini guns would fire bursts doing similar damage to rail guns, 1d4X10 or 1d6X10 depending on size. So they do not break the game damage wise. Making one would require a weapons engineer but typically require special power packs. )
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Nekira Sudacne wrote:Energy weapons are either single shot or pulse,


Ehh... no.

There are plenty that still fire bursts, but they are listed as such in their descriptions. Hell, the C-12 fires a 5-shot burst. But its a hard-wired burst setting and described in the weapon itself.

However, the rest of the statement (the old RoF rules are out the window and the vast majority of energy weapons are now single shot or pulse weapons) is correct. If it fires pulses, itll say so. If it still fires a burst (there aren't a lot, but still a decent small minority that fires bursts, not pulses) itll say so.

If it doesn't say so, its single shot.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Nekira Sudacne wrote:Energy weapons are either single shot or pulse,


Ehh... no.

There are plenty that still fire bursts, but they are listed as such in their descriptions. Hell, the C-12 fires a 5-shot burst. But its a hard-wired burst setting and described in the weapon itself.

Actually it fires a burst of 3 now in its flavor text but does not have the damage value for the weapon in burst fire. PG 257 rue. This means with currant rules there is no bonus damage for firing the 3 round burst in the c-12.(so most charters would not use burst fire)
On page 91 of Coalition war campaign WB11 it had statement in flavor text about shooting a 5 round burst but also lacks a burst damage amount. The C10 has burst fire damage built in to its write up in WB 11 but looses it in the write up in RUE.

So while the C-12 now has a 3 shot burst under currant rules there is no advantage to using it because there is not damage value for burst by default. (The text is changed so not a simple cut and paste error, but a editing error.)

I had already presented a weapon that is a better example the Vulcan laser cannon.
I also pointed out that it was more accurate to say that only weapons that have burst stats can do burst. (the C-12 has what can be seen as partial burst stats in the flavor text with number of rounds but no damage for burst.)
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Blue_Lion wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Nekira Sudacne wrote:Energy weapons are either single shot or pulse,


Ehh... no.

There are plenty that still fire bursts, but they are listed as such in their descriptions. Hell, the C-12 fires a 5-shot burst. But its a hard-wired burst setting and described in the weapon itself.

Actually it fires a burst of 3 now in its flavor text but does not have the damage value for the weapon in burst fire.


ORLY? The RUE description says quite clearly (Setting One: 2d6 MD Single shot, Setting Two: 6D6 (burst), and a Setting Three (S.D.C.): 6D6 S.D.C)

So.. it clearly lists the burst damage, though this inexplicably changes the weapon to what is effectively a pulse weapon with perfect scaling. Theres literally no reason for the CS to have replaced this with the CP-40, as they are now identical in performance.

Still, my point stands - the C-12 fires bursts, not pulses. Wether it is now 3 or 5 is irrelevant.

And in the older listings, the 4D6 MD setting is the 5-shot burst. And that's straight from Kevin's mouth, in the presence of half a dozen people who post here regularly.

PG 257 rue. This means with currant


Current. A Currant is a berry/fruit.

rules there is no bonus damage for firing the 3 round burst in the c-12.(so most charters would not use burst fire)
On page 91 of Coalition war campaign WB11 it had statement in flavor text about shooting a 5 round burst but also lacks a burst damage amount.


Still no. Its the 4D6 MD amount. It always was, no matter how poorly worded.

The C10 has burst fire damage built in to its write up in WB 11 but looses it in the write up in RUE.


No, it doesn't. It just says "Aimed, Burst, Wild", which comports with the burst-fire rules at the time (the one's were talking about that no longer exist). The writeup in RUE is simply changed to reflect the new burst rules (I.E. most guns dont). This is an exact wax-and-paste from the old RMB.

So while the C-12 now has a 3 shot burst under currant rules there is no advantage to using it because there is not damage value for burst by default. (The text is changed so not a simple cut and paste error, but a editing error.)


Soooo.... we covered why this is wrong.

I had already presented a weapon that is a better example the Vulcan laser cannon.


Which is a bad example as its a vehicle mounted weapon, and the OP was asking about personal weapons. There are far better examples, like almost all of Free Quebec's laser weapons. Or a few of Wilks' weapons that fire variable sized bursts, not pulses (there's on in New West, IIRC, that fires anywhere from 1-6 shots, i dont remember the exact model number; edit - this actually uses both terms, so.. who knows. Its the Wilks 567 'Long Gun'). Or a few triax weapons... or the Naruni "Sutterer" plasma submachinegun, or the full-up Plasma machinegun. Also several TW guns in Federation of Magic (and reprinted in SoT) - wether you call them true energy weapons or not, i'd think they qualify.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Nope that is not burst that is the variable damage setting listed in c-12 write. The flavor text list the c-12 as having one sdc and 2 MDC damage settings in addition to a three round burst.

rue pg 258 wrote: The rifle has three settings, one S.D.C. and two M.D.C. settings. The rifle can also be set to fire a single shot or a burst of three.

So it is clear that the three damage settings are in addition to the 3 round burst. (not to mention if it was single shot and burst damage there would only be two damages listed like the C-10 in wb 11 and not the three that appear in both wb 11 and rue.) The C-12 is badly stated as you can fire the same number of 2d6 attacks as 4d6. (the damage was updated in the errata for RUE but 1st and 2nd have incorrect damage.)

AS to the C-10 in WB 11. It clearly has damage for a four round burst listed in its damage.
WB 11 pg 91 wrote: 2D6 M.D. per single shot, or a short burst for 5D6 M.D. (uses up four blasts).

So in WB 11 the C-10 had proper built in burst stats even by the currant rules. So it was not cut to match currant rules but changed for some unknown reason. It makes no reference to aimed burst and wild but instead says each single attack or burst uses 1 attack. (I looked it up in the PDF version I bought from drive through rpg dated 2016.)

Nothing in the original post appears to be limited to just personal weapons. So a properly stated burst fire laser on a vehicle counts.

Basically the only thing that you just posted that was not wrong according to my books was the grammar nazi attack.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Irony:

With the RUE change to the C-12 to 3-shot bursts that do 6D6 MD...

Its actually BETTER than the CP-40 that replaces it.

Because it can take an E-Canister, as well.

Lulz.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
HarleeKnight
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 11:01 pm
Comment: For the White Rose!!!
Location: South-East of Arzno

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by HarleeKnight »

...and the RAW vs. extrapolation argument continues.
There are two kinds of people in this world... 1: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
User avatar
Daniel Stoker
Knight
Posts: 4837
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Comment: Non Impediti Ratione Cogitationis
Location: Jewdica

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Daniel Stoker »

HarleeKnight wrote:...and the RAW vs. extrapolation argument continues.


... same as it ever was.


Daniel Stoker
Judaism - More Old School than either Christianity or Islam.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

HarleeKnight wrote:...and the RAW vs. extrapolation argument continues.


Since i extrapolated exactly nothing, you would be wrong.

Before you try to say "but you extrapolated the C-12's 4D6 damage being a burst!"

No, no i didn't.

its just worded poorly, but it shares literally the exact same wording with the CP-40, which ALSO says it has four settings (Two MD and Two SDC) AND can be set to fire pulses... but then lists two of those (four) settings as the pulses.

There's no extrapolation. When the C-12 says it has two MD settings, and then says it can be set to fire a five (or later, three) round burst, it is saying one of those two MD settings IS the 5/3 round burst.

Just like the CP-40 says it has Two MD settings and Two SDC settings, then says it can be set to fire pulses, it is saying that two of those settings (one each of the SDC and MD) ARE the pulses.

The only difference is that in the Damage part of the blocking, it bothers to say (single shot) or (pulse) after the damage listings.

Which also has nothing to do with the fact that my statement was true:

Nekira said that all (energy) weapons are now either single shot or pulse; this was incorrect, which i pointed out. There are still plenty of energy weapons out there that straight-up fire Bursts, not pulses. I listed several.

ALSO as i stated (and she/they intimated, and i think the point they were getting at) - and Blue Lion also stated, i believe, our disagreement being primarily about what makes a good example of this statement - if weapons can fire bursts, they are now listed in the stat blocking for the individual weapons. If the stats dont say they can fire bursts, they cant. If they say they can, they will generally list the shots consumed and the damage.

MOST energy weapons now fire pulses (what was once a rare, Pre-Rifts-Tech-Required technology (or Alien tech, like the Kittani), used only by Wilks (pre-Rifts), Triax (Pre-Rifts), and the New Navy (Pre-Rifts) is now basically the default, with everyone from NG to Wellington to GAW producing Pulse Weapons, as well as all of South America), but there is still a decently sized minority that fire bursts, not pulses. As i said, see Free Quebec's weapons (almost all of them fire bursts; they dont have a Pulse Rifle at all, i dont think), possibly the Wilks "Long Rifle" - though this uses both 'burst' and 'pulses' so it could go either way - several South American weapons (there's a plasma rifle that fires bursts that i remember reading about just a week or two ago), the Naruni Plasma Machinegun and Sub-Machinegun, and a couple Triax and Mindwerks weapons ... and the C-12, as it still, even as of RUE, fires a burst, not a pulse.

And because of that, its ironically now better than the CP-40 that replaced it because of that (because it has +1 to hit on single/aimed shots, same range, same damage, and can take a CE-clip in addition to a traditional E-clip/Long E-clip for quite a bit more shots).
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Basic English comprehension is that if it has Y in addition to X then X and Y are not the same.

What you are claiming is that if a weapon has X in addition to Y, But lacks proper stats for both X and Y then X and Y are the same.

But what you really found was bad editing where the description/flavor text does not match the stats.

The C-40 has pulse setting but only has 1 damage setting sdc and 1 damage setting MD. So it also has incomplete stats. Because it lacks the other two non pulse setting that are in addition to the pulse.

That means the difference is that the C-12 is missing the damage for the burst and the C-40 is missing the damage setting that is referenced in addition to the pulse.

This type editing error is what triggers the flavor text vs rules debates.

(I am just going to assume the 6d6 MD you claimed the C-12 was doing in rue is just you hit a wrong key.)
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Proseksword
Adventurer
Posts: 719
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:20 pm
Location: Chi-Town, IL
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Proseksword »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Irony:

With the RUE change to the C-12 to 3-shot bursts that do 6D6 MD...

Its actually BETTER than the CP-40 that replaces it.

Because it can take an E-Canister, as well.

Lulz.


That got fixed back in the errata on the main page. C-12 damage remains 4d6.
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Proseksword wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Irony:

With the RUE change to the C-12 to 3-shot bursts that do 6D6 MD...

Its actually BETTER than the CP-40 that replaces it.

Because it can take an E-Canister, as well.

Lulz.


That got fixed back in the errata on the main page. C-12 damage remains 4d6.


Good to know.

Its hard for them argue that it was erratta though, since the actual wording in the descriptive text changed almost completely.

I mean, they can say "that was a mistake" - like, we made a bad choice mistake, and thats fine, but trying to be like "that wasn't an intentional change" is somewhat... silly.

TBH ive never looked too much at the Erratta files as for the longest time they were basically web-gathered fanfic. If they are actual rulings from PB now, and maintaned by PB, ill give them another look over.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Blue_Lion
Knight
Posts: 6226
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Clone Lab 27

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Blue_Lion »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Proseksword wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Irony:

With the RUE change to the C-12 to 3-shot bursts that do 6D6 MD...

Its actually BETTER than the CP-40 that replaces it.

Because it can take an E-Canister, as well.

Lulz.


That got fixed back in the errata on the main page. C-12 damage remains 4d6.


Good to know.

Its hard for them argue that it was erratta though, since the actual wording in the descriptive text changed almost completely.

I mean, they can say "that was a mistake" - like, we made a bad choice mistake, and thats fine, but trying to be like "that wasn't an intentional change" is somewhat... silly.

TBH ive never looked too much at the Erratta files as for the longest time they were basically web-gathered fanfic. If they are actual rulings from PB now, and maintaned by PB, ill give them another look over.

Errata are official changes to a book by nature of being errata. They are used to fix errors. Newer versions of rue have the changes in them. All changes as I understand where added to the third printing of RUE. My copy from drive through rpg has the changes from the errata in it. (Rue is the only time PB did not do a stealth update to fix the text.) So if you have a first or second printing you should look at them and make notes of the red text. Go to the resources from PB main page.

More correctly the errata was PB asking people if they found any mistakes then they changed the errors. So they crowd sourced finding editing jobs.
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.
User avatar
Proseksword
Adventurer
Posts: 719
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:20 pm
Location: Chi-Town, IL
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Proseksword »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Good to know.

Its hard for them argue that it was erratta though, since the actual wording in the descriptive text changed almost completely.

I mean, they can say "that was a mistake" - like, we made a bad choice mistake, and thats fine, but trying to be like "that wasn't an intentional change" is somewhat... silly.

TBH ive never looked too much at the Erratta files as for the longest time they were basically web-gathered fanfic. If they are actual rulings from PB now, and maintaned by PB, ill give them another look over.


Actually, what appeared happened was that a big chuck of the stat block for the CV-212 got accidentally swapped with that for the C-12, & that the errata swapped it back. The CV-212 had a 6D6 MD burst since Sourcebook One, but there it was doing only 4D6 MD.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Here's how it all breaks down:

The C-10 Light Assault Laser Rifle is "an earlier version of the C-12," and "the only difference in appearance is a longer barrel and there is a built-in computer enhanced laser targeting system."
We don't know if the C-10 was semi-automatic or fully automatic, and it's never been entirely clear whether it was intended to use the "Burst or Sprays from Automatic Weapons and Sub-Machine Guns" rules for burst, or if it was supposed to use the "Burst or Sprays from a Machinegun" rules,
BUT either way the damage for a Short Burst would have been 2d6x2 MD, which in Palladium math equals 4d6 MD.
So if the C-10 used the rules for "Automatic Weapons," the damage would have originally been:
2d6 MD per Single Shot
4d6 MD per Short Burst
2d6x5 MD (or 1d6x10 MD) per Long Burst
2d6x10 MD per Entire Magazine Burst

The C-12 Heavy Assault Laser Rifle is basically just a C-10 with a shorter barrel, no targeting system, a SDC setting, and the ability to use E-Canister (which was new when the C-12 was made, invented after the C-10 was designed).
AND they added another feature: the pre-set 5-shot burst setting, which conflicted with the ROF: Aimed, Burst, Wild, but Palladium accidentally neglected to update the ROF in the description, which (among other things) has lead to 30 years worth of confusion over how the gun was supposed to work.
The net result is that the C-12 was intended to work just like a C-10, only with more ammo, different targeting, AND instead of being able to fire Full Auto, the C-12 was only able to fire a single MD shot (Setting One) for 2d6 MD, a 5-shot MD burst (Setting 2) for 4d6 MD (single shot x 2 damage), and a single SDC shot (Setting 3).
When the description says "The rifle has three settings, one SDC and two MDC," THAT's all it's trying to say.
But Palladium botched it, especially because they screwed up THIS following sentence:
The rifle can also be set to fire a single shot or a burst of five.

As has been noted, this would technically mean--IF Palladium was good with precision writing--that in addition to the 3 Settings, there was also a burst toggle.
Which would mean that the C-12's three settings would have been:
Setting 1: 2d6 MD per single shot, OR a 5-shot burst for 4d6 MD.
Setting 2: 4d6 MD per single shot, OR a 5-shot burst for 8d6 MD
Setting 3: 6d6 SDC per single shot, OR a 5-shot burst for 12d6 SDC.

Even today, many people believe this was how the weapon was supposed to work, for some reason finding it more plausible that Palladium...
a) Has never listed the burst damage for any of those settings.
b) Described the 2d6-MD-per-shot CP-40 as having "increased firepower" over the C-12.
c) Has never again had any CS weapons that could fire bursts of 4d6 MD blasts.
d) Uses the exact same phrasing "The rifle can also be set to fire a single shot or..." even though it's clear that the word "also" conflicts with the rest of the description of the weapon.
e) Never (AFAIK) gives a weapon a preset burst/pulse setting without specifying the damage for that setting.

Than that Palladium simply
a) Used the word "also" erroneously.

Anyway, Palladium fixed the C-12's ROF in CS War Campaign, changing it to "Equal to the number of combined hand to hand attacks of its user."

The CV-212 Variable Light Frequency Laser Rifle showed up in SB1, and it was originally (as Doom III pointed out long ago) just a VF version of the C-12.
It's right there in the name:
"CV-212" is simply "C-12" with an extra V and an extra 2.
Palladium is pretty simple when it comes to naming things, and it's plain to see that the CV-212 is named what it is because it was a variation of the same platform.

The CV-212 originally (SB1 7th printing p. 57) had a ROF of "Aimed, Burst, Wild," just like the original RMB C-12.
This is because the CV-212 was simply a VF version OF the C-12.
The only real difference is that the CV-212 got rid of the E-Cannister option in favor of an energy cable that could connect with

Here are the stats FOR BOTH WEAPONS:

Damage:
Setting 1: 2d6 MD
Setting 2: 4d6 MD
Setting 3: 6d6 SDC
Range: 2000'
Rate of Fire: Aimed, Burst, Wild (later changed/corrected to one blast per attack)
Payload: 20 blasts per E-Clip, or 30 blasts per long E-Clip. PLUS another 30 blasts from an E-Canister.

AND both weapon descriptions say "The rifle can also be set to fire in a single shot mode or a burst of five."
The key difference is that with the CV-212 that sentence directly follows a description of multiple damage settings, but with the CV-212 the sentence follows a description of the weapon being "a sturdy, reliable rifle that can survive a fair amount of combat abuse," and so forth.
There's a similar description of reliability with the C-12, but sandwiched between this time is the sentence about the weapon having different damage settings, and I suspect that Palladium intended the mysterious "also" to refer to the reliability passage, NOT the part about the damage settings... just like it's actually written in the CV-212 description.

In CWC, the CV-212 is changed from a 5-shot burst to a 3-shot pulse, and this changes the Setting 2 damage from 4d6 MD to 6d6 MD, and the e-canister is dropped in favor of an energy cable that allows the weapon to use hip or backpack carried energy canisters that hold even more ammunition.

Yet another variant is The CV-213, which is the skelebot version of the CV-212 (which is the VF version of the C-12, which is itself a larger version of the C-10).
Originally (SB1) identical to the CV-212 except that it had an energy cable for hooking to robots and such, the CV-213 has the same stats, but without any mention of a burst setting in the weapon's description, and without any SDC setting.
It's simply "Mega-Damage: 2d6 MD or 4d6 M; two settings."
But because of its tie to the CV-212, we can safely assume that the 4d6 setting is once again a burst setting, just as with the CV-212 and the C-12.
It's either THAT, or we assume that the CS simultaneously decided that the CV-213 should have an energy cable that gives it unlimited ammunition in the hands of a robot, AND that the weapon should lose the burst feature in favor of an option to fire a single 4d6 MD shot instead of the 2d6 MD shot that uses the same amount of energy.
Which doesn't make much sense.

CWC doesn't change or update the CV-213 any.
RUE likewise doesn't make any changes, but because the C-12 and the CV-212 have seen various changes since SB1/RMB days, newcomers will likely think that the CV-213 functions differently than those other weapons.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Proseksword wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Good to know.

Its hard for them argue that it was erratta though, since the actual wording in the descriptive text changed almost completely.

I mean, they can say "that was a mistake" - like, we made a bad choice mistake, and thats fine, but trying to be like "that wasn't an intentional change" is somewhat... silly.

TBH ive never looked too much at the Erratta files as for the longest time they were basically web-gathered fanfic. If they are actual rulings from PB now, and maintaned by PB, ill give them another look over.


Actually, what appeared happened was that a big chuck of the stat block for the CV-212 got accidentally swapped with that for the C-12, & that the errata swapped it back. The CV-212 had a 6D6 MD burst since Sourcebook One, but there it was doing only 4D6 MD.


No, the damage for the burst in SB1 was 4d6. Looking at it right now.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Proseksword wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Good to know.

Its hard for them argue that it was erratta though, since the actual wording in the descriptive text changed almost completely.

I mean, they can say "that was a mistake" - like, we made a bad choice mistake, and thats fine, but trying to be like "that wasn't an intentional change" is somewhat... silly.

TBH ive never looked too much at the Erratta files as for the longest time they were basically web-gathered fanfic. If they are actual rulings from PB now, and maintaned by PB, ill give them another look over.


Actually, what appeared happened was that a big chuck of the stat block for the CV-212 got accidentally swapped with that for the C-12, & that the errata swapped it back. The CV-212 had a 6D6 MD burst since Sourcebook One, but there it was doing only 4D6 MD.


No, the damage for the burst in SB1 was 4d6. Looking at it right now.


Yup.
It was 4d6 MD for a 5-shot burst until Coalition War Campaign, then it got changed to 6d6 MD for a 3-shot pulse.
:ok:
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Axelmania »

Killer Cyborg wrote:either way the damage for a Short Burst would have been 2d6x2 MD,
which in Palladium math equals 4d6 MD.
So if the C-10 used the rules for "Automatic Weapons," the damage would have originally been:
2d6 MD per Single Shot
4d6 MD per Short Burst


Hold on now, I don't agree with that, it should clearly be 2D6x2 for a short burst.

Short bursts can't inflict odd damage, and they have exactly the same odds of rolling minimum/maximum as the base shot.

I mean, realistically speaking we shouldn't use multipliers at all and just add up the dice (so instead of 2D6x10 you roll 20D6) but that's not how it says to do.

CB11 for example had a long burst from a laser do 2D4x3 rather than 6D4 MD. This shows they do know to write multipliers to base roll instead of multiplying dice rolled.

Killer Cyborg wrote:they added another feature: the pre-set 5-shot burst setting, which conflicted with the ROF: Aimed, Burst, Wild, but Palladium accidentally neglected to update the ROF in the description

It had a basic payload of 20 blasts from a short clip which would've been a 25% (1/4) expenditure, where it's meant to be 20% (1/5) for x2 and 50% for x5.

Of course, 5 shots is 1/6 (~16.6%) of the 30 shots you get from a long clip...

I'd say the simplest explanation is that it's treated as having an effectively payload of 25 shots (which falls right between 20 short 30 long) so that 5 shots is 20% of that.

That's one of the major problems with bursts firing a fixed % variable of shots (instead of a fixed number of shots with variable %) when you have different ammo capacities with short/long clips: it makes using long clips only helpful for single shots.

I figure most people house-ruled that 'shots used' was based upon shots you got from a the standard (short) clip except for canister-only weapons like the C-27.

Killer Cyborg wrote:the C-12 was intended to work just like a C-10, only with more ammo, different targeting, AND instead of being able to fire Full Auto, the C-12 was only able to fire a single MD shot (Setting One) for 2d6 MD, a 5-shot MD burst (Setting 2) for 4d6 MD (single shot x 2 damage), and a single SDC shot (Setting 3).

The problem with your logic here, is this:
1) it is logical to assume that setting one is just a burst of setting two
2) it is not logical to assume that setting two is a burst of setting three

I understand the temptation to do that: we do know that "one mega-damage blast" uses up "six SDC shots" so even if we didn't think of the "MDC blast" as "burst of six shots" it gives us the idea of "higher damage blast requires more energy".

Given that the 4D6 MD blast does NOT use more energy, it's tempting to think it uses up more energy in another way: because it is a burst, even though that's never specified.

The FIRST error in your logic is when you look at the C-10's Mega-Damage.

"2D6 M.D., no variable settings"

If "variable settings" for damage indeed just meant "I'm firing a burst" (as you hypothesize for C-12 "setting one") then the C-10 would have variable settings: RMB p 203 allowed it to fire a burst explicitly.

The SECOND error in your logic, is that we have other examples of energy weapons which also use up just as much e-clip energy when firing higher-damage shots as when they do lower-damage ones:
    1) pg 224 the Wilk's Portable Laser Torch: 100 shots regardless of which of the 5 MD or 4 non-MD options you choose
    2) pg 224 the Wilk's Laser Wand: 50 shots regardless of which of the 1 MD or 4 non-MD options you choose.
    3) pg 224 the NG-57 Northern Gun Heavy-Duty Ion Blaster: 10 shots regardless of whether you use the 2D4 or 3D6 MD setting
    4) pg 225 the JA-11 Juicer Assassin's Energy Rifle : 10 shots (and weirdly 30 from a long) regardless of whether you fire at 4D6 or 2D6.

The last example also highlights something we should consider: was 20 shots ALWAYS the intended payload of the C-10/C-12?

The JA-11 description makes long clips sound like they have +200% capacity (30 instead of 10) relative to standard/short clips, rather than +50% (30 instead of 20).

What if the C-10/C-12 were originally written with a payload of 10 shorts from a short clip, just like the JA-11?

This would mean that the "5 shot burst" would be referring to a 50% (long) burst, and so it would do 4D6x5 or 2D6x5 mega-damage.

A likely explanation is that KS wrote it that way, then went back and doubled the ammo capacity of these rifles without changing "burst of five" to "burst of ten".
Last edited by Axelmania on Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
jaymz
Palladin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by jaymz »

-reads thread-

I find it quite funny that several in this very thread have repeatedly said over the years "the rules are fine as is" all while this thread proves the rules as well as any number of others things (like the previously argued damage values) are written so haphazardly we STILL get threads like this every few months ad nauseum for the past 20 years....but the rules are fine as is....
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Axelmania »

Killer Cyborg wrote:As has been noted, this would technically mean--IF Palladium was good with precision writing--that in addition to the 3 Settings, there was also a burst toggle.
Which would mean that the C-12's three settings would have been:
Setting 1: 2d6 MD per single shot, OR a 5-shot burst for 4d6 MD.
Setting 2: 4d6 MD per single shot, OR a 5-shot burst for 8d6 MD
Setting 3: 6d6 SDC per single shot, OR a 5-shot burst for 12d6 SDC.


Even today, many people believe this was how the weapon was supposed to work, for some reason finding it more plausible that Palladium...
a) Has never listed the burst damage for any of those settings.
[/quote]
If 5 shots was intended to follow standard rules (20% of 25 or 50% of 10) then there wouldn't have been a need to do that.

More conspicuous would be why there's no mention of a "burst of 13/25" or "burst of 5/10" for long/full bursts there too.

Or why the C-18 ("Standard, see Modern Weapon Proficiency Section") or C-10 ("Aimed, burst, wild; see Modern Weapon Proficiencies") do not mention burst length in their "pre-Weight" descriptive paragraph (I won't call it flavor text?)

Killer Cyborg wrote:b) Described the 2d6-MD-per-shot CP-40 as having "increased firepower" over the C-12.

Pg 92 of CWC actually mentions "the advantage to both" (relative to preceding "infantry assault rifles", presumably) is THREE things (so it should have been "advantages" plural) and lists them:
1) "increased firepower"
2) "rapid pulse firing action"
3) "durability"

I'll assume the 3rd refers to how much MDC the guns have, but I can't recall where to look at that up. Unless that's some weird way of saying 'payload' since the CP-40 gets "21 blasts (7 shots )" per standard clip. I expect that's an error and they meant to write "pulse blasts" like they did for the CP-30 on CWCp90.

We know that "increased firepower" does NOT refer to the damage of a single shot, because the CP-40 and CP-50 on pg 92 both do 2D6, which is not an improvement over the 2D6 done by the C-10 or C-12.

In fact it falls short of the 3D6 from a single shot that the C-14 Fire Breather STILL does.

I think the obvious reason it has increased "firepower (item 1) could be as a result of item 2: the rapid-fire mode.

Even though the C-12 (and the C-14) have higher single-damage shots, CWC removed their burst capabilities ("Rate of Fire: Equal to number of combined") so the pulse allows the CP-40/CP-50 to do more damage in a single attack, despite having inferior damage-per-shot than the C-12/C-14.

Killer Cyborg wrote:c) Has never again had any CS weapons that could fire bursts of 4d6 MD blasts.

Why would we expect to see that? Kev decided it was too powerful and nerfed the RAW by removing the burst capability for the C-12 the same way her nerved the long/full burst multipliers from x5/x10 to x3/x7 in CB.

Later weapons were written with this nerf in mind, and balanced against the nerfed single-shot-only C-10 and C-12.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Anyway, Palladium fixed the C-12's ROF in CS War Campaign, changing it to "Equal to the number of combined hand to hand attacks of its user."

That's called a nerf, not a fix.

The 4D6 MD attack is a single shot. They just stripped it (and the C-10) of burst capabilities.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The CV-212 Variable Light Frequency Laser Rifle showed up in SB1, and it was originally (as Doom III pointed out long ago) just a VF version of the C-12.
It's right there in the name:
"CV-212" is simply "C-12" with an extra V and an extra 2.
Palladium is pretty simple when it comes to naming things, and it's plain to see that the CV-212 is named what it is because it was a variation of the same platform.

The CV-212 originally (SB1 7th printing p. 57) had a ROF of "Aimed, Burst, Wild," just like the original RMB C-12.
This is because the CV-212 was simply a VF version OF the C-12.
The only real difference is that the CV-212 got rid of the E-Cannister option in favor of an energy cable that could connect with

I think you're confusing the CV-212 with the CV-213.

In the original Rifts Sourcebook, the CV-212 still listed the cannister option.

It was the CV-213 (on page 34) which had "20 or power pack hand link" for skelebots.

This didn't just remove cannisters as an option: it also removed long E-clips (30 shots) and also if you check, the CV-213 does not have the ability to fire SDC shots like the CV-212 and C-12 do.

The CV-212 also weighed more (8lbs instead of 7lbs) compared to the C-12 and the CV-213 :)

These are differences we still saw as of CWC on pages 94/126.

Killer Cyborg wrote:AND both weapon descriptions say "The rifle can also be set to fire in a single shot mode or a burst of five."

I'm assuming by 'both' you mean the C-12 and CV-212, because the "burst of five" phrase was removed from the CV-213 on page 34 of Rifts Sourcebook. Somewhat confusing because you've referred to the CV-212 having an energy cable...

The energy cable was introduced to the CV-212 on page 94 of CWC, but was not an option for it in the 1st Rifts Sourcebook.

Further complicating our recollections is that the CWC version of the CV-212 has that cable leading to a worn cannister (rather than a skelebot reactor)...

Even weirder is CWC 94 mentions "Skelebots are typically given the dual backpack" .. but this is clarified on page 126: it's talking about the FASSAR-30 who don't have a handlink but might occasionally want to use a CV-213 instead of their standard-issue C-200 rail gun. Obviously wasting the backpacks on the FASSAR-20s would be pretty silly since they get unlimited shots from a hand-link.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The key difference is that with the CV-212 that sentence directly follows a description of multiple damage settings, but with the CV-212 the sentence follows a description of the weapon being "a sturdy, reliable rifle that can survive a fair amount of combat abuse," and so forth.

Which is pretty hilarious, because pg 33 of the Rifts Sourcebook only assigned 5 MDC to the "robot modified version" of the CV-212 (the CV-213) which was way lower than "Typical Coalition Rifle" (30 MDC) on CBp14. But then... didn't SB come out before CB? Maybe we didn't know MDC of guns at that point? CWCp125 boosted the CV-213 to 30 MDC too, so I imagine the CV-212 would have the same as the C-12 now.


Doubtful either is more durable than the C-10 though, which probably is also 30 MDC. I guess "typical" allows some wiggle room. Maybe we could speculate the C-10 has 29 MDC and the C-12 has 31 MDC?

There was MDC-creep for skelebots in general though:
    Hands: 10>22
    Arms: 30>45
    Vibro-Blades: 5>25
    Legs: 50>70
    Head: 40>60
    Main: 130>150

Not sure why CWCp125 mentions "both have been beefed up in regard to mega-damage capacity" though: yes the FASSAR-20 was beefed, but isn't this the first time we've seen stats for the FASSAR-30? There's no previous thing to compare to for it to be 'beefed' in respect to...

If he wanted these to be the new 20/30 models then I think he ought to have said the old lower-MDC skelebots in Sourcebook 1 still existed, but were supposed to have been called the FASSAR-10s... given the conspicuously lack of a 'gen 1' skelebot.

That was done with the PA-06A SAMAS too: wings crept from 30 to 50 (it at least noted "improved MDC" there) and ammo drum crept from 25 to 35 (no notation)

CWCp136 notes MDC increases for the IAR-2 Abolisher (from SB35) although it was only the hands/sensor/gunner hatch/main body which got boosted, the arms/legs/cannons/gun/spotlights/inner hatch/RPC remained the same.

I would take a similar approach: rename the SB version the "IAR-1". After all, we're missing that designation: the Enforcer was the UAR-1 (Urban Assault, not Infantry Assault).

Killer Cyborg wrote:Yet another variant is The CV-213, which is the skelebot version of the CV-212 (which is the VF version of the C-12, which is itself a larger version of the C-10).
Originally (SB1) identical to the CV-212 except that it had an energy cable for hooking to robots and such, the CV-213 has the same stats,

Except as mentioned above: lower weight, no SDC firing ability, no usage of long E-clips.

Killer Cyborg wrote:because of its tie to the CV-212, we can safely assume that the 4d6 setting is once again a burst setting, just as with the CV-212 and the C-12.

No we can't, because there was never evidence for that interpretation of the C-12 or the SB's CV-212.

Killer Cyborg wrote:It's either THAT, or we assume that the CS simultaneously decided that the CV-213 should have an energy cable that gives it unlimited ammunition in the hands of a robot, AND that the weapon should lose the burst feature in favor of an option to fire a single 4d6 MD shot instead of the 2d6 MD shot that uses the same amount of energy.
Which doesn't make much sense.

The original CV-213 never lost burst capability. SBp34 said "aimed, burst wild". All they removed was the silly note about 5 shots which didn't make sense since it was neither 20% or 50% of the 20-shot capacity it had from a short clip.

CWCp126 nerfed the ROF of course, which is just part of the group effort done to the C-10/C-12/CV-212 in an across-the-board nerf.

Killer Cyborg wrote:CWC doesn't change or update the CV-213 any.

Yes it did: as mentioned, it changed "aimed, burst or wild" to "equal to the number of hand". Plus 'payload' made a note about the FASSAR-30s lacking the hand link.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RUE likewise doesn't make any changes, but because the C-12 and the CV-212 have seen various changes since SB1/RMB days, newcomers will likely think that the CV-213 functions differently than those other weapons.

*checks RUE 255, chortles*

I never noticed this before, but the MDC for the FASSAR-20 skelebots listed here is actually the lower amounts from SBp33, not the higher amounts for CWCp125.

RUE 256 actually does make a change to the CV-213... ROF is now "Each blast counts as one melee attack". Essentially same meaning as CWCp126 "number of hand" but still a change.

I understand the 4D6 MD single shot being retained for the CV-213 alarms you (since RUE 258 replaces that on the C-12 with a 6D6 MD 3-shot burst) but also on RUEp258 is the CV-212 also retaining a 4D6MD single shot.

This places the CV-212/CV-213 in league with the JA-11 (retained on RUEp27) which also can do 2D6 or 4D6 per single shot, and also has variable capabilities, so the easiest explanation is that the CS has duplicated the JA-11 laser tech.

RUEp270 retains that obscure "10 shots short 30 shots long" weirdness for the JA-11 though. Especially glaring weirdness since it STILL falls immediately after the generic L-20 which is "40 shots short 50 shots long" as it did in RUEp225.

It doesn't seem to be too much to ask that long clips give a consistent % of extra shorts compared to standard/short clips reflecting their consistent pricing in relation to them, does it?
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Axelmania wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:Palladium...
a) Has never listed the burst damage for any of those settings.

If 5 shots was intended to follow standard rules (20% of 25 or 50% of 10) then there wouldn't have been a need to do that.


Not entirely sure what you're trying to say here, but...
it's not intended to follow standard burst rules; it's meant to be more ammunition efficient than just using the standard "short burst" option, which would be 4d6 MD for a 6 shot burst.
20% of 30 shots is 6 rounds. The C-12 does it in 5.

More conspicuous would be why there's no mention of a "burst of 13/25" or "burst of 5/10" for long/full bursts there too.


:?

Or why the C-18 ("Standard, see Modern Weapon Proficiency Section") or C-10 ("Aimed, burst, wild; see Modern Weapon Proficiencies") do not mention burst length in their "pre-Weight" descriptive paragraph (I won't call it flavor text?)


Those don't have preset bursts.
So why WOULD they mention burst length....?
They just use the standard rules.
Again, no idea where you're coming from, or where you're trying to go.

Even though the C-12 (and the C-14) have higher single-damage shots, CWC removed their burst capabilities ("Rate of Fire: Equal to number of combined") so the pulse allows the CP-40/CP-50 to do more damage in a single attack, despite having inferior damage-per-shot than the C-12/C-14.


CWC didn't remove the burst capabilities from the C-12. The C-12 still has a 5-shot preset burst; it's right there in the description, right where it's always been.
Where Palladium screwed up initially is that guns with a preset burst are incompatible with the Aimed, Burst, Wild ROF, and they fixed that in CWC by correcting the ROF.


Killer Cyborg wrote:c) Has never again had any CS weapons that could fire bursts of 4d6 MD blasts.

Why would we expect to see that? Kev decided it was too powerful and nerfed the RAW by removing the burst capability for the C-12 the same way her nerved the long/full burst multipliers from x5/x10 to x3/x7 in CB.


That's just dream stuff in your head.
Kev has never said anything about the C-12 being too powerful.
The CP-40 has INCREASED firepower over the C-12, according to canon, which is incompatible with your idea that the C-12 was considered to be too powerful.

The 4D6 MD attack is a single shot.


Repeating a false claim does not make it true.
Find some kind of support, if you want to make that claim credibly.

They just stripped it (and the C-10) of burst capabilities.


Never happened. The C-12 still is and always has been capable of a 5-shot preset burst.
Stop ignoring canon.

I think you're confusing the CV-212 with the CV-213.


You're wrong.

The energy cable was introduced to the CV-212 on page 94 of CWC, but was not an option for it in the 1st Rifts Sourcebook.


Correct.
That is what I was referring to.

Killer Cyborg wrote:because of its tie to the CV-212, we can safely assume that the 4d6 setting is once again a burst setting, just as with the CV-212 and the C-12.

No we can't, because there was never evidence for that interpretation of the C-12 or the SB's CV-212.


I've presented the evidence.
I can explain it more clearly if you need me to, but don't pretend that there's NO evidence.
Let me know where you got confused.

The original CV-213 never lost burst capability. SBp34 said "aimed, burst wild". All they removed was the silly note about 5 shots which didn't make sense since it was neither 20% or 50% of the 20-shot capacity it had from a short clip.


See, that's where you're going wrong. One of the places, anyway.
You're dismissing canon because you think it's "silly," instead of taking it into account.
But it's still canon, whether you like it or not.

CWCp126 nerfed the ROF of course, which is just part of the group effort done to the C-10/C-12/CV-212 in an across-the-board nerf.


Incorrect.
CWC 91 still lists the C-10's ROF as Aimed, Burst, Wild, because it uses the standard burst rules.
The reason why the C-12 and the CV-212 were changed is because they NEVER were intended to use the standard burst rules; they have a 5-shot preset burst instead.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RUE 256 actually does make a change to the CV-213... ROF is now "Each blast counts as one melee attack". Essentially same meaning as CWCp126 "number of hand" but still a change.


Not a change; just a rephrasing. It means the exact same thing.

I understand the 4D6 MD single shot being retained for the CV-213 alarms you


It doesn't disturb me; it never happened.
There never was a 4d6 MD single shot for the CV-213. It always had the same 4d6 MD preset burst that the C-12 and CV-212 had.

(since RUE 258 replaces that on the C-12 with a 6D6 MD 3-shot burst)


RUE doesn't do that, though.
When RUE first came out, the stats for the C-12 and the CV-212 were swapped, so for a brief time the C-12 appeared to have the same 3-shot pulse for 6d6 MD that the CV-212 had, and the CV-212 appeared to have the C-12's 4d6 MD 5-shot preset burst, but that was fixed by the second printing.
IIRC, it was even addressed in the errata.

but also on RUEp258 is the CV-212 also retaining a 4D6MD single shot.


Negative.
My 1st Printing version of RUE still describes the weapon as having a preset burst of 5 shots. That's still the 4d6 MD setting.
No version of any book EVER describes the 4d6 MD setting as a "single shot."
That's an assumption people make that flies in the face of all the evidence to the contrary.

My 2nd Printing version of RUE describes the CV-212 as having a preset burst of three instead of a burst of 5, and guess what?
That 4d6 MD is gone, replaced by this:
Mega-Damage:
Setting 1: 2d6 MD
Setting 2: (Burst) 6d6 MD
Setting 3: 6d6 SDC


Palladium did NOT get rid of a 4d6 MD single shot in favor of a 6d6 MD 3-shot pulse.
Setting 2 has always been a burst setting.
Palladium just got around to clarifying it.

This places the CV-212/CV-213 in league with the JA-11 (retained on RUEp27) which also can do 2D6 or 4D6 per single shot, and also has variable capabilities, so the easiest explanation is that the CS has duplicated the JA-11 laser tech.


The JA-11 actually DOES have a 4d6 MD single-shot setting, but it's not the same as the C-12.
We know the 4d6 setting on the JA-11 is a single shot because the weapon is incapable of firing bursts.
Just as we know that the 4d6 setting on the C-12 is a burst setting, because the weapon describes a 5-shot burst that would otherwise have no damage listing for that setting (and, of course, all the other stuff).
Last edited by Killer Cyborg on Mon Mar 02, 2020 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
HarleeKnight
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 11:01 pm
Comment: For the White Rose!!!
Location: South-East of Arzno

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by HarleeKnight »

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Axelmania wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:Palladium...
a) Has never listed the burst damage for any of those settings.

If 5 shots was intended to follow standard rules (20% of 25 or 50% of 10) then there wouldn't have been a need to do that.


Not entirely sure what you're trying to say here, but...
it's not intended to follow standard burst rules; it's meant to be more ammunition efficient than just using the standard "short burst" option, which would be 4d6 MD for a 6 shot burst.
20% of 30 shots is 6 rounds. The C-12 does it in 5.

More conspicuous would be why there's no mention of a "burst of 13/25" or "burst of 5/10" for long/full bursts there too.


:?

Or why the C-18 ("Standard, see Modern Weapon Proficiency Section") or C-10 ("Aimed, burst, wild; see Modern Weapon Proficiencies") do not mention burst length in their "pre-Weight" descriptive paragraph (I won't call it flavor text?)


Those don't have preset bursts.
So why WOULD they mention burst length....?
They just use the standard rules.
Again, no idea where you're coming from, or where you're trying to go.

Even though the C-12 (and the C-14) have higher single-damage shots, CWC removed their burst capabilities ("Rate of Fire: Equal to number of combined") so the pulse allows the CP-40/CP-50 to do more damage in a single attack, despite having inferior damage-per-shot than the C-12/C-14.


CWC didn't remove the burst capabilities from the C-12. The C-12 still has a 5-shot preset burst; it's right there in the description, right where it's always been.
Where Palladium screwed up initially is that guns with a preset burst are incompatible with the Aimed, Burst, Wild ROF, and they fixed that in CWC by correcting the ROF.


Killer Cyborg wrote:c) Has never again had any CS weapons that could fire bursts of 4d6 MD blasts.

Why would we expect to see that? Kev decided it was too powerful and nerfed the RAW by removing the burst capability for the C-12 the same way her nerved the long/full burst multipliers from x5/x10 to x3/x7 in CB.


That's just dream stuff in your head.
Kev has never said anything about the C-12 being too powerful.
The CP-40 has INCREASED firepower over the C-12, according to canon, which is incompatible with your idea that the C-12 was considered to be too powerful.

The 4D6 MD attack is a single shot.


Repeating a false claim does not make it true.
Find some kind of support, if you want to make that claim credibly.

They just stripped it (and the C-10) of burst capabilities.[/qutoe]

Never happened. The C-12 still is and always has been capable of a 5-shot preset burst.
Stop ignoring canon.

I think you're confusing the CV-212 with the CV-213.


You're wrong.

The energy cable was introduced to the CV-212 on page 94 of CWC, but was not an option for it in the 1st Rifts Sourcebook.


Correct.
That is what I was referring to.

Killer Cyborg wrote:because of its tie to the CV-212, we can safely assume that the 4d6 setting is once again a burst setting, just as with the CV-212 and the C-12.

No we can't, because there was never evidence for that interpretation of the C-12 or the SB's CV-212.


I've presented the evidence.
I can explain it more clearly if you need me to, but don't pretend that there's NO evidence.
Let me know where you got confused.

The original CV-213 never lost burst capability. SBp34 said "aimed, burst wild". All they removed was the silly note about 5 shots which didn't make sense since it was neither 20% or 50% of the 20-shot capacity it had from a short clip.


See, that's where you're going wrong. One of the places, anyway.
You're dismissing canon because you think it's "silly," instead of taking it into account.
But it's still canon, whether you like it or not.

CWCp126 nerfed the ROF of course, which is just part of the group effort done to the C-10/C-12/CV-212 in an across-the-board nerf.


Incorrect.
CWC 91 still lists the C-10's ROF as Aimed, Burst, Wild, because it uses the standard burst rules.
The reason why the C-12 and the CV-212 were changed is because they NEVER were intended to use the standard burst rules; they have a 5-shot preset burst instead.

Killer Cyborg wrote:RUE 256 actually does make a change to the CV-213... ROF is now "Each blast counts as one melee attack". Essentially same meaning as CWCp126 "number of hand" but still a change.


Not a change; just a rephrasing. It means the exact same thing.

I understand the 4D6 MD single shot being retained for the CV-213 alarms you


It doesn't disturb me; it never happened.
There never was a 4d6 MD single shot for the CV-213. It always had the same 4d6 MD preset burst that the C-12 and CV-212 had.

(since RUE 258 replaces that on the C-12 with a 6D6 MD 3-shot burst)


RUE doesn't do that, though.
When RUE first came out, the stats for the C-12 and the CV-212 were swapped, so for a brief time the C-12 appeared to have the same 3-shot pulse for 6d6 MD that the CV-212 had, and the CV-212 appeared to have the C-12's 4d6 MD 5-shot preset burst, but that was fixed by the second printing.
IIRC, it was even addressed in the errata.

but also on RUEp258 is the CV-212 also retaining a 4D6MD single shot.[/quote

Negative.
My 1st Printing version of RUE still describes the weapon as having a preset burst of 5 shots. That's still the 4d6 MD setting.
No version of any book EVER describes the 4d6 MD setting as a "single shot."
That's an assumption people make that flies in the face of all the evidence to the contrary.

My 2nd Printing version of RUE describes the CV-212 as having a preset burst of three instead of a burst of 5, and guess what?
That 4d6 MD is gone, replaced by this:
Mega-Damage:
Setting 1: 2d6 MD
Setting 2: (Burst) 6d6 MD
Setting 3: 6d6 SDC


Palladium did NOT get rid of a 4d6 MD single shot in favor of a 6d6 MD 3-shot pulse.
Setting 2 has always been a burst setting.
Palladium just got around to clarifying it.

This places the CV-212/CV-213 in league with the JA-11 (retained on RUEp27) which also can do 2D6 or 4D6 per single shot, and also has variable capabilities, so the easiest explanation is that the CS has duplicated the JA-11 laser tech.


The JA-11 actually DOES have a 4d6 MD single-shot setting, but it's not the same as the C-12.
We know the 4d6 setting on the JA-11 is a single shot because the weapon is incapable of firing bursts.
Just as we know that the 4d6 setting on the C-12 is a burst setting, because the weapon describes a 5-shot burst that would otherwise have no damage listing for that setting (and, of course, all the other stuff).


If the 4D6 damage setting is because it's the 5 shot burst would it really have made it into production. That's 2 shots out of 5 that hit. That is extremely inefficient. It's expected in a rail gun that's kicking like a mule, but not in a hand held laser rifle. If the best they could do was 2 in 5, that burst setting would have never been put in. If people are going to argue that it must lessen the damage for each shot in the burst fire, then I would argue that why does it still cost you five shots then.
There are two kinds of people in this world... 1: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
User avatar
jaymz
Palladin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by jaymz »

It would have been put in because at the time of publication that was exactly what a short burst did, x2 damage, regardless unless it was a machine gun.

Palladium retroactively changed the rules on how it could be fired without correcting the weapon itself. Prior to the rules change, it made sense and was an in setting explanation as to why they switched to the CP-40 pulse rifle.

You have to remember, you cannot apply such real world logic into these arguments since A - it's not the real world especially when it comes the coalition and B - palladium doesn't bother to fix anything retroactively by and large when it comes to their changing of rules....which the c-12 debate is a shining example of.
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

jaymz wrote:It would have been put in because at the time of publication that was exactly what a short burst did, x2 damage, regardless unless it was a machine gun.


Specifically, if it used the "regular" burst rules (at the time), it would have been SIX shots for 4D6MD, so the 5-shot burst was "better" than the basic burst. (Just reinforcing what you're saying)

Palladium retroactively changed the rules on how it could be fired without correcting the weapon itself. Prior to the rules change, it made sense and was an in setting explanation as to why they switched to the CP-40 pulse rifle.

You have to remember, you cannot apply such real world logic into these arguments since A - it's not the real world especially when it comes the coalition and B - palladium doesn't bother to fix anything retroactively by and large when it comes to their changing of rules....which the c-12 debate is a shining example of.


/rant

There's that, and the fact that perfect scaling should NEVER be a thing, from a game-mechanics standpoint.

Thats why i dislike a lot of the pulse weapons, because they tend to have perfect scaling, which is bad for gameplay.

As an example, since pulse weapons (once the province SOLELY of Wilks, Triax, and the L-20, which was supposedly a pre-Rifts design) became the default standard, it led to a lot of newer writers assuming that perfect scaling on Bursts was supposed to be a thing, and newer weapons in books like Black Market have perfect scaling even on non-pulse weapons that do absurd damage (there's a Machine Gun that does better-than-rail-gun-damage, among other things).

Pulse weapons should still be better than non-pulse weapons, but they shouldn't scale perfectly. Id deal with this by making pulses do more consistent damage (so, instead of a weapon doing 2D6 per shot doing 6D6 on a pulse, i'd have it do like, 3D6+10 or something)

/endrant
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Axelmania »

Killer Cyborg wrote:it's not intended to follow standard burst rules; it's meant to be more ammunition efficient than just using the standard "short burst" option, which would be 4d6 MD for a 6 shot burst.
20% of 30 shots is 6 rounds. The C-12 does it in 5.

Why do you think it would be a % of 30 (long clip) instead of 20 (short clip) ?

Killer Cyborg wrote:
More conspicuous would be why there's no mention of a "burst of 13/25" or "burst of 5/10" for long/full bursts there too.

:?

I think you're good at math and intuitive enough to understand how I got those numbers in respect to the previously used math.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Those don't have preset bursts.
So why WOULD they mention burst length....?
They just use the standard rules.
Again, no idea where you're coming from, or where you're trying to go.

You seem to be assuming the 5-shot burst is some custom preset burst when it could just be a mistake based on a last minute change to payload.

Killer Cyborg wrote:CWC didn't remove the burst capabilities from the C-12. The C-12 still has a 5-shot preset burst; it's right there in the description, right where it's always been.

Since you bring that up, it STILL says "also", meaning it is separate from the earlier point.

Meaning that "single shot or a burst of five" would also be an option for the SDC blast.

It's all very clear.

"The rifle has three settings"
"setting one: 4D6"
"setting two: 2D6"
"setting three: 6D6"
"can also be set to fire a single shot or a burst"

3x2=6

Not to mention unlike the first statement (a count of 3, implying a 4th damage setting does not exist) the 2nd statement is open ended, mentioning 2 things the gun can do ROF-wise but not giving a final count of ROF settings.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Where Palladium screwed up initially is that guns with a preset burst are incompatible with the Aimed, Burst, Wild ROF, and they fixed that in CWC by correcting the ROF.

The ROF was also changed for the C-14 and C-27 so I don't think you have a solid basis for implying that had to be the reason the ROF was changed.

Though I'll hand it to you, the intactness of the C-18 and C-10 ROF is suspicious.

Killer Cyborg wrote:That's just dream stuff in your head.
Kev has never said anything about the C-12 being too powerful.

Kev doesn't necessarily write soliloquies about every nerf he makes. The nerfing of the ROF for the C-12/C-14/C-27 speaks for itself. The bursts were powerful so that's pretty obviously why he changed them to 'equal to number of attacks' implying they don't burst as standard for energy weapons anymore.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The CP-40 has INCREASED firepower over the C-12, according to canon, which is incompatible with your idea that the C-12 was considered to be too powerful.

First and foremost I should remind you that the CP-40 was not directly compared to the C-12.

An "advantage to both" (collectively CP-40 and CP-50) was expressed, without naming a particulr weapon. Since they are "infantry assault rifles" this could be a comparison to the C-10, the C-12 or the C-14.

I will secondly remind you that when I talk about C-12 being too powerful, I am not isolating it: the C-14 and C-27 were also quite powerful, and also had their ROF nerfed.

That 'too powerful' consideration is out-of-universe though.

In-universe, the "powerful" (burst for x2 or x3 or x7) versions no longer exist.

To compare "increased firepower" you can only compare to the versions as printed in CWC.

On that basis: while the 40/50 do not have a stronger damage per blast than any of the preceding weapons, they do have better damage economy.

Whether you look at that as damage per second (6D6) or shots per e-clip (21 per standard, slightly better... still 30 for long though) 'firepower' clearly refers to something other than per-shot.

Since we know that, it doesn't matter that the C-12 fires a 4D6 shot and the C-14 fires a 3D6 shot: that's still less than the firepower of 6D6 per action that the 40/50 can do.

Funny enough, the only old assault rifle which can match the 40/50 in damage-per-action is the LIGHT one, the C-10. It still has burst capability on CWC 91, so it could fire a 2D6x2 short burst (4 shots in 1 action) or 2D6x3 long burst (10 shots in 1 action) or 2D6x7 full burst (20 shots in 1 action). Although the C-10's long burst is able to roughly match the dice-per-second (keeping in mind 6D6 is not exactly 2D6x3) it obviously suffers in E-clip economy in doing so.

Given the separate mention of 'rapid pulse firing action', if you think 'increased firepower' can't refer to the dmg/sec resulting from that, it can only refer to the economy (+1 shot) from the short E-clip. What else is there? Single shot damage is same. Range is same. A mere TIE is not 'increased'.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
The 4D6 MD attack is a single shot.


Repeating a false claim does not make it true.
Find some kind of support, if you want to make that claim credibly.

The support is in how it is phrased. 3 damage settings each of which can be fired two ways.

The omission of specifics as to how to deal with the damage a 5-shot burst did doesn't mean you can just invent it refers only to the 4D6 and that there was no bursting of the SDC shots.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
I think you're confusing the CV-212 with the CV-213.


You're wrong.

The energy cable was introduced to the CV-212 on page 94 of CWC, but was not an option for it in the 1st Rifts Sourcebook.


Correct.
That is what I was referring to.


You could have worded it better. Review:
    This is because the CV-212 was simply a VF version OF the C-12.
    The only real difference is that the CV-212 got rid of the E-Cannister option in favor of an energy cable that could connect with
In that context, one could assume you are talking about the difference between the C-12 and the CV-212 rater than the difference between the CV-212 in the SB and CWC.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
The original CV-213 never lost burst capability. SBp34 said "aimed, burst wild". All they removed was the silly note about 5 shots which didn't make sense since it was neither 20% or 50% of the 20-shot capacity it had from a short clip.


See, that's where you're going wrong. One of the places, anyway.
You're dismissing canon because you think it's "silly," instead of taking it into account.
But it's still canon, whether you like it or not.

KC it seems like you are ignoring the significance of how the CV-213 removed mention of the burst-of-five whose presence you believe to be so critical to explaining how the CV-213 can do 4D6 damage in a shot.

If you read CWC p 126 there is absolutely nothing indicating that the 4D6 MD is a burst. That would be important to know to know what bonus to apply to strike with it, or if it could be parried.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The reason why the C-12 and the CV-212 were changed is because they NEVER were intended to use the standard burst rules; they have a 5-shot preset burst instead.

Yet the CV-213 which is part of the same family, removed that part you think is so important.

Almost like the author realized it didn't belong and just neglected to remove it from the C-12 and CV-212 too.

Killer Cyborg wrote:There never was a 4d6 MD single shot for the CV-213. It always had the same 4d6 MD preset burst that the C-12 and CV-212 had.

So why is there absolutely NOTHING AT ALL in the CV-213 description referencing this mysterious burst?

The author intentionally removed the "burst of five" line from it.

When an author wants to distinguish between single-shot damage and burst damage, they do so.

We see this all the time. We see this on the very next page: CWCp127 describes the C-200 used by the FASSAR-30 this way: "A full damage burst fires 20 rounds and inflicts 4D6 M.D.; a single round does 1D4 M.D."

The CV-213 is not written that way. There's nothing at all in SB1 or CWC to indicate the CV-212 fires a burst to get that 4D6.

We see this contrast in the main book itself:
Rifts224: NG-57 "Two settings: 2D4 or 3D6 MD"
Rifts225: L-20 "2D6 MD single shot or 6D6 multiple pulse burst"

The C-12 and CV-213 "settings" resemble the NG-57 (single shot, two damage options) and not the L-20, where when it is a burst we are told it is.

I mean, I suppose I can speculate that the Wilk's Laser Wand does 1D4 SDC with a single shot, and that using it's 'standard' rate of fire, I can invent bursts to explain it's other settings. 1D6 must be a burst of 2 wand lasers, 2D6 a burst of 4, 3D6 a burst of 6, and one MD a burst of 10 lasers. Yay.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
(since RUE 258 replaces that on the C-12 with a 6D6 MD 3-shot burst)


RUE doesn't do that, though.
When RUE first came out, the stats for the C-12 and the CV-212 were swapped, so for a brief time the C-12 appeared to have the same 3-shot pulse for 6d6 MD that the CV-212 had, and the CV-212 appeared to have the C-12's 4d6 MD 5-shot preset burst, but that was fixed by the second printing.
IIRC, it was even addressed in the errata.

Well it did but then it didn't, so "doesn't" being present tense, you're right.

Good catch, Pg 14/19 of https://palladiumbooks.com/images/Docum ... Eratta.pdf does indeed revert the DAMAGE on RUEp258...

Notice the distinction between these though:
    Mega-Damage: 2D6 M.D. or 4D6 M.D
    Mega-Damage: Setting One: 2D6 M.D. single shot, Setting Two (Burst)
We see from the errata for the CV-212 that when there is a single/burst dichotomy, they list it.

They don't do that for the C-12. The change of "burst of five" to "burst of three" probably means it just has an even more awesome short burst. Instead of using 20% of payload (4 shots) it uses three. VICTORY. So go ahead and spend 3 shots to get x2 damage.

That's the most logical thing to do, since otherwise we won't know what doing the 3-shot burst with the 6D6 SDC damage setting will accomplish.

Killer Cyborg wrote:No version of any book EVER describes the 4d6 MD setting as a "single shot."
That's an assumption people make that flies in the face of all the evidence to the contrary.

There is not any contrary evidence. You just want to assume it conveniently fills the 5-shot/3-shot void.

Supporting evidence is the precedent we see in other weapons, that we are explicitly told single/burst when damage is given for both. That's because it's always been important to note that to know what strike roll is needed.

Killer Cyborg wrote:My 2nd Printing version of RUE describes the CV-212 as having a preset burst of three instead of a burst of 5, and guess what?
That 4d6 MD is gone, replaced by this:
Mega-Damage:
Setting 1: 2d6 MD
Setting 2: (Burst) 6d6 MD
Setting 3: 6d6 SDC


Palladium did NOT get rid of a 4d6 MD single shot in favor of a 6d6 MD 3-shot pulse.
Setting 2 has always been a burst setting.
Palladium just got around to clarifying it.


That's just them tweaking the CV-212 to resemble the CP-40, which had already been done in CWC94.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The JA-11 actually DOES have a 4d6 MD single-shot setting, but it's not the same as the C-12.
We know the 4d6 setting on the JA-11 is a single shot because the weapon is incapable of firing bursts.
Just as we know that the 4d6 setting on the C-12 is a burst setting, because the weapon describes a 5-shot burst that would otherwise have no damage listing for that setting (and, of course, all the other stuff).

"would otherwise have no damage listed" is not justifiable grounds to just declare that damage not specified as being burst is burst.

When we look at how this is presented in the JA-11 or the NG-57 it's the same format. Single shot unless otherwise indicated.

We know the C-14 could do a 3D6 laser, we know the JA-11 could do a 2/4 dice lase, it's nothing massive to get one's head around.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:if it used the "regular" burst rules (at the time), it would have been SIX shots for 4D6MD, so the 5-shot burst was "better" than the basic burst. (Just reinforcing what you're saying)

If based on the long e-clip capacity and not the short, an issue which I don't recall ever being resolved.

6 is 1/5 of 30
4 is 1/5 of 20

5 (1/5 of 25) obviously seems like a fair compromise if the writer doesn't know which clip size to base the % on.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Axelmania wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:it's not intended to follow standard burst rules; it's meant to be more ammunition efficient than just using the standard "short burst" option, which would be 4d6 MD for a 6 shot burst.
20% of 30 shots is 6 rounds. The C-12 does it in 5.

Why do you think it would be a % of 30 (long clip) instead of 20 (short clip) ?


Several reasons:
1. Because that's the default example for a short burst on p. 34 of the RMB.
Short Bursts fire 20% of the entire magazine; i.e., 30 round magazine--6 rounds/bullets are fired.
It's just a generic example, but it indicates what Palladium thinks of as standard or default.
2. Because if we assume a 20 round magazine in the case of the C-12, the gun makes no sense. It has a 5-shot preset burst, and 20% of a 20 round mag would only be 4 shots. So the addition of the preset burst would serve no advantage over just firing short bursts--it would inflict the same amount of damage as a standard short burst, but it'd cost an extra shot's worth of energy.
3. Because the C-12 can take three types of ammunition (in the RMB anyway): Short E-Clips (20 rounds), Long E-Clips (30 rounds), and E-Canisters (30 rounds).
Two out of three of these are 30-round, and whatever size e-clip is used, the e-canister always only has 30 rounds.
So even if you're using a short e-clip, you're still using a 30 round canister too.
30 rounds of ammunition is the standard for the weapon, the most common.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
More conspicuous would be why there's no mention of a "burst of 13/25" or "burst of 5/10" for long/full bursts there too.

:?

I think you're good at math and intuitive enough to understand how I got those numbers in respect to the previously used math.


It's not about math; it's about context, or lack thereof.
I have no idea what you're talking about there, how it fits into the conversation, or why.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Those don't have preset bursts.
So why WOULD they mention burst length....?
They just use the standard rules.
Again, no idea where you're coming from, or where you're trying to go.

You seem to be assuming the 5-shot burst is some custom preset burst when it could just be a mistake based on a last minute change to payload.


"The rifle can also be set to fire a single shot or a burst of five."
Key word is "set."
It's a preset burst by definition. No assumption involved; the weapon has a single shot setting, and it has a 5-shot setting.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Axelmania »

KC one question I think worth answering about RMB 203.

Why is the C-10 a "Light Assault" / "light laser" while the C-12 is a "Heavy Assault" / "heavy laser" ?

I guess you could say it refers to the weight of the weapons (5lbs v 7lbs) but to me it sounds like it's talking about the strength of the laser itself.

The C-14 by comparison has no adjective. It is merely an "assault laser" which does 3D6.

So if 3D6 is non-adjective, then "Light" being 2D6 and "Heavy" being 4D6 seems pretty appropriate here.

The "assault laser" doing MORE damage in a single shot than the "heavy assault laser" doesn't jam.
The "light assault" / "light laser" doing SAME damage in a single shot as the "heavy assault" / "heavy laser" doesn't jam.

I would also highlight this part about the C-10
    "2D6 M.D., no variable settings"
    "Rate of Fire: aimed, burst, wild"

These lines are consecutive, so I don't think the writer would not notice them in respect to each other.

"No variable settings" seems to be clearly referring to how the C-10 has a fixed damage-per-shot.

Since it could "burst" in the main book, it DID have a burst setting, and could do 2D6x2 on a short burst (whether that's 4 or 6 shots *shrugs*)

So "variable settings" under damage, per the precedent set in the C-10, is a reference to damage-per-shot.

Just like we see with the NG-57 and JA-11's laser

When a weapon can merely burst (like with the JA-11's ion) this isn't represented in the damage section as a 'damage setting' without a disclaimer, because in the main book when we do see bursts listed in the damage section (like the L-20) the writer saw the need to state that, which was not stated for the C-12.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Because that's the default example for a short burst on p. 34 of the RMB.
Short Bursts fire 20% of the entire magazine; i.e., 30 round magazine--6 rounds/bullets are fired.
It's just a generic example, but it indicates what Palladium thinks of as standard or default.

Yeah but then they go and give 10-shot payloads to the C-18 and C-27...

The reason I'm thinking short is because it's the "standard E-Clip" meaning that long/cannister are non-standard.

Given the copy and paste habits I wouldn't be surprised if 6/30 came from some earlier game too.

Killer Cyborg wrote:2. Because if we assume a 20 round magazine in the case of the C-12, the gun makes no sense. It has a 5-shot preset burst, and 20% of a 20 round mag would only be 4 shots. So the addition of the preset burst would serve no advantage over just firing short bursts--it would inflict the same amount of damage as a standard short burst, but it'd cost an extra shot's worth of energy.

While I would agree it doesn't make sense operating under your "the 4D6 is the burst" approach (why use 5 shots for 4D6 when you could use 4 shots for 2D6x2 ?) I think you realize it could make sense if the 4D6 represented a single-shot higher setting, and we simply didn't know what the 5-shot burst's multiplier was.

For example, under the 2/5/10 original system, perhaps a 5-shot was intended to be a x3 before Long was demoted there.

Or: maybe instead of a
"5 shots instead of 6 short burst from a long clip"
..
"5 shots instead of 10 long burst from a short clip"

Killer Cyborg wrote:3. Because the C-12 can take three types of ammunition (in the RMB anyway): Short E-Clips (20 rounds), Long E-Clips (30 rounds), and E-Canisters (30 rounds).
Two out of three of these are 30-round, and whatever size e-clip is used, the e-canister always only has 30 rounds.
So even if you're using a short e-clip, you're still using a 30 round canister too.
30 rounds of ammunition is the standard for the weapon, the most common.

Short is still 'standard' so it makes sense to base it off the standard unless it can't use it like the C-27.

The C-12 can take a canister but that doesn't mean one's in there, it just has a port to attach it.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:
More conspicuous would be why there's no mention of a "burst of 13/25" or "burst of 5/10" for long/full bursts there too.

:?

I think you're good at math and intuitive enough to understand how I got those numbers in respect to the previously used math.


It's not about math; it's about context, or lack thereof.
I have no idea what you're talking about there, how it fits into the conversation, or why.


Firstly: I will point out there is a conspicuous omission of the rate of fire of the C-18 and the C-10 and the C-14 lasers.

It would've been usefully descriptive to talk about that.

There is also conspicuous omission of any short/long/full capabilities of the C-12, supposing it has them, and not just 1-shot/5-shot.

As best I understand your argument for RMB it would be something akin to 'it's already mentioned under rate of fire, so this SPECIAL mention is for some SPECIAL rule'.

In that sense though I disagree. If that IS the case, why specify single-shot?

Single-shot is definitely no special rule.

So rather than it being "I'm mentioning ROF to expand it" we might consider KS' motive to instead be "I'm mentioning ROF to limit it".

Like perhaps maybe the C-10 (one MD setting of 2D6) could do usual bursting (2D6x2 ; 2D6x5 ; 2D6x10) but the C-12, since it had to make room for a bunch of new features (a 4D6 MD single-shot setting, a 6D6 SDC single-shot setting, a port for a cannister) had to limit it's bursting capabilities to just 1 kind of burst (instead of 3) but the other neglected to tell us what the multiplier was.
    *Perhaps it was x2 short... an inferior ratio if based on a 4/20 burst but a superior ratio if based on a 6/30 burst.
    *Perhaps it was x3 or x4... a custom "medium" burst
    *Perhaps it was x5 long... a superior ratio either way
They "they just omitted the multiplier" is an approach I think is worth considering.

Or... as I mentioned earlier, a 5-shot burst was intended to be a 50% (long) burst on some 10-shot ammo capacity of a Short/Standard E-Clip and KS just never removed it (well, he DID remove it for the CV-213 in the Rifts Sourcebook, let's keep THAT in mind) after buffing the "shots per short clip" from 10 to 20 like he neglected to do for the JA-9 and JA-11.

The JA-9 and JA-11 are important precedents here.
These are pre-Rifts designs.
Kevin Siembieda may well have written these rifles BEFORE he wrote the C-10 and C-12 and C-14
Meaning he could've written other rifles with 10 shots per short based on that.

In fact, we see that: the NG-L5 Northern Gun Laser Rifle (pg 225) though oddly the NG-33 Laser Pistol has 20 shots... pretty much the inverse of the C-18 relationship with the trio of CS laser rifles though, weird eh?

To me it makes complete sense for the rifle to have a lesser payload from a short clip: the NG-L5 does triple the damage of the NG-33.

This goes to show the HUGE leap from the C-18 to the C-20 in CWC90 though. KS even added (less efficient energy delivery system) to it. The CS still doesn't seem to have matched efficiency of the L-20 though: 40 shorts of 2D6 MD from a short E-clip is AMAZING.

Anyway, getting back to rewrites : KS wrote the C-18 using the less efficient energy delivery system of 10 shots per E-clip. The JA-9's 10 shots of 2D6 is barely better. It's basically as efficient as the NG-33 pistol except it's getting double the damage instead of half the shots.

Weirdly the JA-11 (like the NG-33 and I think also the C-12) doesn't consume more energy for the higher damage setting, but that's the weirdness we see with Wilks Laser Wand/Torch to an even larger degree, so I just figure we're meant to ignore that.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:Those don't have preset bursts.
So why WOULD they mention burst length....?
They just use the standard rules.
Again, no idea where you're coming from, or where you're trying to go.

You seem to be assuming the 5-shot burst is some custom preset burst when it could just be a mistake based on a last minute change to payload.


"The rifle can also be set to fire a single shot or a burst of five."
Key word is "set."
It's a preset burst by definition. No assumption involved; the weapon has a single shot setting, and it has a 5-shot setting.


I think I need clarification here, do you also think the C-12 could fire x5 / x10 bursts like the C-18 and C-10 in the main book? Or are you taking the approach it could not?
User avatar
jaymz
Palladin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by jaymz »

All this presumes palladium

A - is consistent in their writing

B - has half a clue as to how their own material affects anything else on the next page let alone in another book

Which in both cases is utterly proven to not be true with nearly 40 years precedent setting material published as evidence.
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Axelmania »

I also just want to say that having an epic 4D6 single-shot makes the commando hunting Nxla in Psyscape using the C-12 seem a lot less stupid.
User avatar
Mack
Supreme Being
Posts: 6298
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:01 am
Comment: This space for rent.
Location: Searching the Dinosaur Swamp
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Mack »

KS is an excellent narrative writer. We all love the concepts he creates; the places, the events, and the people involved. That's where his strength lies.

However, KS is not a technical writer. I would not ask him to author an instruction manual on how to program a VCR. That's simply not how his mind works. He sees a tabletop RPG as a form of storytelling, where the RPG rules are merely a guide used to aid the story. This is why we don't see solid definitions and often need to interpret his intent when it comes to the math and mechanics of the game.

On top of that, PB is a very small business. It doesn't have the resources to employ a large team of play-testers and editors. Things slip through.

The C-12 (RMB version) is a victim of all of that. The burst rules were copied from another game, and the weapon's narrative text didn't fully articulate the author's intent. Thus for the 20 years I've been on this forum, ever year or so we get a C-12 debate. And given all the revisions and the years, trying to decipher KS's original intent when he wrote a short paragraph 30 years ago is hazardous proposition. At this point, I'm not convinced he knows what he originally intended.

Frankly, there is no 'right' answer.
Some gave all.
Love your neighbor.
Know the facts. Know your opinion. Know the difference.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Axelmania wrote:KC one question I think worth answering about RMB 203.

Why is the C-10 a "Light Assault" / "light laser" while the C-12 is a "Heavy Assault" / "heavy laser" ?


I brought up the same question back in the day, when I was on your side of the issue, and for the same reasons.
;)

I guess you could say it refers to the weight of the weapons (5lbs v 7lbs) but to me it sounds like it's talking about the strength of the laser itself.


It would be logical in a vacuum to assume that it's talking about the strength of the laser itself.
But that doesn't seem to be the case.
Unfortunately, Palladium may very well have called it a "heavy" laser simply due to the weight. There's always been a view that's what "WP Heavy" and "WP Heavy Energy Weapons" were describing: weapons that were physically weighty, stuff too big/bulky for the somebody to carry/use unless they were particularly strong.
I'm not convinced, but it's certainly a possibility. But it'd take a new thread to sort that one out.

My opinion would be that Palladium called the C-12 a "heavy" asssault laser rifle from a combination of things (in no particular order):
a) It is actually heavier
b) It's meant to fire bursts as a rule, and the C-10 is meant to fire single shots as a rule. This results in an increase of damage simply due to the nature of bursts, and this was enough to make the weapon "heavy." While the damage per shot is the same (2d6), the damage per attack is different (2d6 for the C-10, 4d6 for the C-12).
c) It has twice the ammunition capacity.
d) Palladium isn't always great at naming things sensibly.

The C-14 by comparison has no adjective. It is merely an "assault laser" which does 3D6.


The CP-40 is just a "Pulse Laser Rifle," and the CP-50 is an "Assault Pules Laser & Grenade Launcher."
Why the difference? Especially when the CP-40 is just a pulse version of the C-12?

In the really-real world, an Assault Rifle is:
a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.

The C-10 may or may not be selective fire. We know it was capable of Aimed, Burst, or Wild shots, but that's true of all semi-automatic weapons as a rule (CB1 8-9).
The C-12 is capable of selective fire under any incarnation and interpretation.
The C-14 was listed as being capable of selective fire in the RMB, but that was changed/nerfed in CWC, making it strictly a Single Shot weapon that is incapable of burst fire. It is still listed as an "Assault Laser" even after it very clearly DOES NOT have selective fire.

Already it looks like Palladium isn't using the term "assault rifle" the way it's used in the real world, and that becomes more clear the more we look, because the next important trait for something to be an "assault rifle" is that it must use an intermediate cartridge.
Obviously none of these weapons use actual cartridges, but the equivalent for a laser assault rifle would be that it uses something like an "intermediate laser."
In the real world, this distinction is what separates weapons like the M-16 with it's .223 rounds from a weapon like an M-14 with it's larger 7.62×51mm NATO rounds. The weapons are functionally the same, but the difference in the size of ammunition alone is what make the M-16 an Assault Rifle, and the AR-10 a Battle Rifle.

What this all boils down to is that IF Palladium fully understood the terminology they were using, then the implication would be that all "assault" laser rifles would inflict roughly the same damage per shot, and it would be "intermediate" damage. In which case it would have made sense for them to label the C-10 as an "Assault Laser Rifle," the C-14 as a "Battle Laser Rifle," and the C-12 either "Assault Laser Rifle" OR "Battle Laser Rifle" depending on how much damage a single shot was intended to inflict.
BUT they probably didn't know any of this, and were just going with whatever they thought sounded cool or appropriate.

So if 3D6 is non-adjective, then "Light" being 2D6 and "Heavy" being 4D6 seems pretty appropriate here.


That WOULD make sense, I agree, but Palladium's use of terminology with weapons very often doesn't make any sense, so whether or not that interpretation does make sense has little value.

The "assault laser" doing MORE damage in a single shot than the "heavy assault laser" doesn't jam.


But the "heavy assault laser" doing more damage per average attack WOULD make sense: 4d6 MD is still more damage than 3d6, even if it takes multiple shots to do it.

The "light assault" / "light laser" doing SAME damage in a single shot as the "heavy assault" / "heavy laser" doesn't jam.


That would depend entirely on how Palladium meant "heavy" in this context.

I would also highlight this part about the C-10
    "2D6 M.D., no variable settings"
    "Rate of Fire: aimed, burst, wild"

These lines are consecutive, so I don't think the writer would not notice them in respect to each other.

"No variable settings" seems to be clearly referring to how the C-10 has a fixed damage-per-shot.


lol
See, to ME it's clearly referring to how the C-10 lacks any preset burst options.
Speaking of which...

Since it could "burst" in the main book, it DID have a burst setting, and could do 2D6x2 on a short burst (whether that's 4 or 6 shots *shrugs*)


The bolded portion is where I think you're perhaps a bit confused.
The C-10 has no burst setting.
It is capable of bursts, but any semi-automatic weapon or fully automatic weapon is capable of bursts, whether or not they have a burst setting.
In case it helps any, I'll explain what a "burst setting" or "preset burst" actually IS:

With modern military firearms, there are very often three different settings when it comes to rate of fire.
1. Single Shot (Semi-automatic): Each time the trigger is activated, a single round is fired.
2. 3-Round Burst: Each time the trigger is activated, three rounds are fired.
3. Fully Automatic: Each time the trigger is activated, the weapon continues to fire rounds until the trigger is released.

The C-10 was capable of firing burst, yes, but as I pointed out earlier that simply means that it was either a semi-automatic weapon (one shot per trigger activation) or a fully automatic weapon (continuous fire as long as the trigger is depressed).
In fact, we're told (CB1 p. 9) specifically:
Unless otherwise noted, most energy weapons are considered to be automatic weapons. Only weapons that state a specific limited number of shots per melee are not automatic.
And
An automatic weapon can fire a burst by simply holding the trigger down. As long as the trigger is held in place the weapon fires.

This indicates that the C-10 is a fully automatic rifle, although Palladium does seem pretty fuzzy on distinguishing semi-automatic from fully automatic.
RAW, the C-10 is a fully automatic rifle.
That means it doesn't have a burst setting; it can simply fire bursts due to its nature.

The C-12, on the other hand, can be set to fire a single shot or a burst of five.
Which means that it is NOT fully automatic; it can only fire a single shot or a preset 5-shot burst.
This conflicts directly with the "Aimed, Burst, Wild" ROF, because that ROF means that the weapon can fire varying bursts, and the C-12 can ONLY fire 5-shot bursts.
This is why I say that the CWC change in the ROF was a "correction" and not a "nerf," because the sentence stating that the weapon has a 5-shot burst setting conflicts directly with the original "Aimed, Burst, Wild" ROF.
The both could not have been true originally, therefore either the sentence describing the 5-shot burst was a mistake OR the A,B,W ROF was a mistake.
CWC's change tells us WHICH was a mistake.

So "variable settings" under damage, per the precedent set in the C-10, is a reference to damage-per-shot.


IF your interpretation is correct, then surely there are some other weapons that follow that same model of specifying when they only have one damage setting?

Just like we see with the NG-57 and JA-11's laser


Those weapons necessarily have multiple damage for their single shot settings, though.
The NG-57 does not list any preset bursts, therefore neither of the settings could be a burst setting. Also, the ROF of Standard means that it only fires single shots unless there is a preset burst option specified.
The JA-11 flat-out tells us that the laser is only capable of firing single shots, therefore both listed damages are necessarily for a single shot.

The C-12, on the other hand, fits better into the model we see when dealing with other weapons that have a preset burst setting:
L-20 Pulse Rifle lists damage as 2d6 MD per single shot, or 6d6 MD per burst. Two listed damages, one for each preset firing option.
Other pulse rifles work the same way, as do rail guns, and so forth.
Unlike the C-12, these other weapons tend to specify which setting is for the burst, and which is single shot, but that doesn't mean it's not what Palladium was intending.
If the 4d6 MD setting is NOT the burst setting, then that would mean that the weapon still stands out as an anomaly in that it's the only weapon where Palladium specifies a preset burst, but never lists the damage for that setting.

Take a moment and think about an alternate universe where the L-20 Pulse Rifle
a) Describes the 3-shot pulse in the weapon description.
b) Lists two damages: 2d6 and 6d6 MD, but does not say what either of those damages represent (single shots or pulses)

Would you feel it was more logical to assume that
-The rifle has a 2d6 single shot setting, a 6d6 single shot setting, AND the potential to pulse for either 6d6 or 12d6 MD, with these pulse damages simply being unlisted
or
-The 2d6 MD setting is for the described single shot, and the 6d6 MD setting is for the described preset pulse?

Unfortunately, I'm not currently aware of any other weapon that shares the vagueness of the C-12 when it comes to damage and burst settings, except for other direct relatives such as the CV-212 and CV 213.
But take a good look at the CV-212 for a moment.

In SB1, the CV-212 is essentially the same as the C-12:
"The rifle can also be set to fire in a single shot mode or a burst of five."
Mega-Damage: 2d6 MD or 4d6 MD
ROF: Aimed, Burst, Wild.

In CWC:
"The rifle can be set to fire in a single shot or a burst of three."
Mega-Damage: 2d6 MD per single shot or 6d6 MD per triple burst.
ROF: Equal to the combined number of hand to hand attacks of the user.

The most obvious change is that the 5-shot burst setting has been replaced with a 3-shot pulse setting.
But notice what else happened the moment that 5-shot burst setting was removed?
The 4d6 MD setting vanished entirely, being replaced with a 6d6 MD setting that is specified to belong to the NEW burst setting.

IF the 4d6 setting was a single-shot setting, and the weapon was previously capable of firing 5-shot bursts for 8d6 MD, then this gun was simply nerfed. The single shot maximum damage was cut in half, and the burst setting max damage was cut down by 25%!
It wouldn't make any sense for the CS to do things that way in-game, just as it wouldn't make any sense for the CS to take a gun with an 8d6 burst and replace it with a new gun that had a 6d6 pulse.
And it wouldn't make any sense for Palladium to do tweak the CV-212 that way either, because it would be a deliberate nerf of a single variant of a line of rifles, while the others were either NOT nerfed, or were nerfed in seemingly random different ways.

Meanwhile, it WOULD make sense if:
-The CS in-game was replacing their previous preset bursts with the new technology of preset pulses, so they replaced the C-12 (2d6 MD per shot, or 4d6 MD per 5-shot burst) with the much more efficient CP-40 that also has a higher damage ceiling (2d6 MD per shot, 6d6 MD per pulse).
They didn't have nearly as many CV-212s, so they modified the existing weapons instead of putting out a brand new rifle, so the old 4d6 MD burst went away, and the new 6d6 MD pulse took that setting's place.
-Palladium out-of-game was trying to upgrade the Coalition's firepower (which was HUGE part of the reason for the book, to catch up with power creep and make the CS more deadly villains), so they created new pulse-versions of their previous guns (C-12, C-18, etc.), but for some reason (lack of space, lack of time, or simple laziness) simply changed previous CV-212's old burst setting to a new pulse setting without making it a whole new gun.

When a weapon can merely burst (like with the JA-11's ion) this isn't represented in the damage section as a 'damage setting' without a disclaimer, because in the main book when we do see bursts listed in the damage section (like the L-20) the writer saw the need to state that, which was not stated for the C-12.


I could just as easily say "When a weapon lists a preset burst setting, this burst is always listed in the damage section."
Any way you slice it, the C-12 (and variants) aren't set up like other weapons.
Which is Palladium's real mistake, ultimately; they were sloppy and vague, and they strayed from their normal formulas for weapon stats.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Because that's the default example for a short burst on p. 34 of the RMB.
Short Bursts fire 20% of the entire magazine; i.e., 30 round magazine--6 rounds/bullets are fired.
It's just a generic example, but it indicates what Palladium thinks of as standard or default.

Yeah but then they go and give 10-shot payloads to the C-18 and C-27...


The fact that some weapons stray from the default of the writers does not mean that they have a different default.

The reason I'm thinking short is because it's the "standard E-Clip" meaning that long/cannister are non-standard.


I'd say that the shorter clips are non-standard in weapons like the C-12 or JA-11.

Given the copy and paste habits I wouldn't be surprised if 6/30 came from some earlier game too.


It DID, because Palladium has a long history of basing burst damage on 30-round magazines instead of 20-round shorter magazines.
They did it that way with modern weapons, and they stuck to the pattern with future weapons.

I mean, what's your alternative?
That Palladium, when designing the C-12, consciously made the decision that even though a normal short burst for a 20-round mag would be 4 rounds, that the C-12 would be extra inefficient and have a 5-shot preset burst, wasting an extra shot every time...?

Killer Cyborg wrote:2. Because if we assume a 20 round magazine in the case of the C-12, the gun makes no sense. It has a 5-shot preset burst, and 20% of a 20 round mag would only be 4 shots. So the addition of the preset burst would serve no advantage over just firing short bursts--it would inflict the same amount of damage as a standard short burst, but it'd cost an extra shot's worth of energy.

While I would agree it doesn't make sense operating under your "the 4D6 is the burst" approach (why use 5 shots for 4D6 when you could use 4 shots for 2D6x2 ?)
I think you realize it could make sense if the 4D6 represented a single-shot higher setting, and we simply didn't know what the 5-shot burst's multiplier was.


That would leave the giant, gaping question of: Why do we NOT KNOW THE DAMAGE OF THAT BURST SETTING?
Also, the rather sizeable question of "Why did the CS (or Palladium) replace a rifle with a 4d6 MD single shot and a 8d6 short burst, with a more expensive rifle that does 2d6 MD on a single shot and 6d6 MD on a burst?
Also, the question of "If the CS has the tech for a burst-capable 4d6 MD laser, why do we ONLY ever see it with the C-12 and variants?"

I wouldn't count any of that as "it could make sense."

Killer Cyborg wrote:3. Because the C-12 can take three types of ammunition (in the RMB anyway): Short E-Clips (20 rounds), Long E-Clips (30 rounds), and E-Canisters (30 rounds).
Two out of three of these are 30-round, and whatever size e-clip is used, the e-canister always only has 30 rounds.
So even if you're using a short e-clip, you're still using a 30 round canister too.
30 rounds of ammunition is the standard for the weapon, the most common.

Short is still 'standard' so it makes sense to base it off the standard unless it can't use it like the C-27.


It might make sense in a vacuum... but it's not IN a vacuum.

The C-12 can take a canister but that doesn't mean one's in there, it just has a port to attach it.


:roll:

It makes no sense to assume that 2 out of 3 of the common ammo capacities for the C-12 are not the standard for that weapon.

Firstly: I will point out there is a conspicuous omission of the rate of fire of the C-18 and the C-10 and the C-14 lasers.

It would've been usefully descriptive to talk about that.


What do you mean "omission?"
Those weapons all do have ROFs listed.

There is also conspicuous omission of any short/long/full capabilities of the C-12, supposing it has them, and not just 1-shot/5-shot.


The fact that it has a 5-shot burst means that it is necessarily incapable of short, long, or full bursts (other than the preset 5-shot short burst).

Like perhaps maybe the C-10 (one MD setting of 2D6) could do usual bursting (2D6x2 ; 2D6x5 ; 2D6x10) but the C-12, since it had to make room for a bunch of new features (a 4D6 MD single-shot setting, a 6D6 SDC single-shot setting, a port for a cannister) had to limit it's bursting capabilities to just 1 kind of burst (instead of 3) but the other neglected to tell us what the multiplier was.


Yes, the C-10 could fire the usual bursts, but the C-12 replaced this ability with just one kind of burst.
It does show us what the multiplier is, though, in that it lists the damage for that preset burst: 4d6 MD.

Or... as I mentioned earlier, a 5-shot burst was intended to be a 50% (long) burst on some 10-shot ammo capacity of a Short/Standard E-Clip and KS just never removed it (well, he DID remove it for the CV-213 in the Rifts Sourcebook, let's keep THAT in mind) after buffing the "shots per short clip" from 10 to 20 like he neglected to do for the JA-9 and JA-11.


I see zero reason to assume or believe that KS ever intended the C-12 or any variant to use 10-shot clips. That would make everything make less sense, which should never be the goal.
He didn't remove the burst option for the CV-213; he simply neglected to mention it, because it was a shorthand weapon description stuck under a robot's description, instead of a full weapon description of its own. When he added the description of the robot power cable, that ate up a lot of the room that would otherwise have been spent repasting the part about the 5-shot burst.

The JA-9 and JA-11 are important precedents here.
These are pre-Rifts designs.
Kevin Siembieda may well have written these rifles BEFORE he wrote the C-10 and C-12 and C-14
Meaning he could've written other rifles with 10 shots per short based on that.


You're really, really reaching, and I don't see anything in that direction worth grabbing.

The CS still doesn't seem to have matched efficiency of the L-20 though: 40 shorts of 2D6 MD from a short E-clip is AMAZING.


NOTHING matches the efficiency of the L-20!
That thing is nuts.

Weirdly the JA-11 (like the NG-33 and I think also the C-12) doesn't consume more energy for the higher damage setting, but that's the weirdness we see with Wilks Laser Wand/Torch to an even larger degree, so I just figure we're meant to ignore that.


Yeah, a lot of weapons are that way. Palladium was apparently just being lazy, not wanting to complicate things by requiring increased power for different levels of single-shot firepower (with a few exceptions).

You seem to be assuming the 5-shot burst is some custom preset burst when it could just be a mistake based on a last minute change to payload.


It's a "mistake" that we see consistently through every incarnation and update of the C-12 and CV-212, and it uses the same phrasing as the CP-40 and other weapons.

"The rifle can also be set to fire a single shot or a burst of five."
Key word is "set."
It's a preset burst by definition. No assumption involved; the weapon has a single shot setting, and it has a 5-shot setting.


I think I need clarification here, do you also think the C-12 could fire x5 / x10 bursts like the C-18 and C-10 in the main book? Or are you taking the approach it could not?[/quote]

It not only could NOT fire x5 or x10 bursts like other weapons, it necessarily could not.
Just like the L-20, the C-40R, and every other weapon with a preset burst/pulse setting.
The preset burst is incompatible with the standard burst/spray rules.

In the early days of Rifts, it wasn't clear whether you could use the p. 34 Burst/Spray rules on the single-shot setting for those weapons, using semi-automatic rapid-fire to fire off multiple rounds in one attack, BUT this was covered in online Errata:
https://palladiumbooks.com/58-resources ... te-of-fire
Pulse rifles (like the Wilks 457) can NOT fire bursts on the single shot setting, but must be set for a burst.

Weapons with preset burst capabilities can not use the burst/spray rules from p. 34, even on the single-shot setting.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Mack wrote:KS is an excellent narrative writer. We all love the concepts he creates; the places, the events, and the people involved. That's where his strength lies.

However, KS is not a technical writer. I would not ask him to author an instruction manual on how to program a VCR. That's simply not how his mind works. He sees a tabletop RPG as a form of storytelling, where the RPG rules are merely a guide used to aid the story. This is why we don't see solid definitions and often need to interpret his intent when it comes to the math and mechanics of the game.

On top of that, PB is a very small business. It doesn't have the resources to employ a large team of play-testers and editors. Things slip through.

The C-12 (RMB version) is a victim of all of that. The burst rules were copied from another game, and the weapon's narrative text didn't fully articulate the author's intent. Thus for the 20 years I've been on this forum, ever year or so we get a C-12 debate.


I wholeheartedly agree with all of that!
:ok:

And given all the revisions and the years, trying to decipher KS's original intent when he wrote a short paragraph 30 years ago is hazardous proposition. At this point, I'm not convinced he knows what he originally intended.

Frankly, there is no 'right' answer.


I'd say that there definitely IS a right answer, whether or not we can ever know what it is, and whether or not KS remembers what it is.
But when that weapon was written, there was a vision and and intent as to how the weapon was intended to function, and there's a HUGE difference between "the gun has a 4d6 single-shot" and "the gun has a 4d6 5-shot burst."
When I asked KS about the weapon back in 2005, he didn't hesitate a bit before telling me that the 4d6 setting was the burst setting, and I have no real reason to doubt him on that issue.

And we do have more than just that one short paragraph to go on:
-We have the overall patterns of Palladium, and their styles of writing, game balance, and weapon descriptions/stats.
-We have multiple variations of that one weapon, and a history of changes to those weapons that we can analyze.

I mean, if KS were to run Rifts, there's most likely a single answer to how HE would run the C-12.
And it's pretty important to know what that answer IS, because as you've pointed out, this discussion has been going on for 30 years.
I'm positive I'm correct, but it's one of those areas where:
a) It'd take only minor effort on Palladium's part to resolve the confusion.
b) It's one of those frequent obstacles that prevent us on the forums from coming together to just simply discuss various adventures, experiences, and ideas we have for the game world.
It's hard for people to come together really well on subjects where their fundamental understandings about common and key aspects of the game vary so drastically.
It all goes back to the old "Glitterboy vs...." threads, where no matter what people pitted the GB against, there was never anything close to consensus, because we're often playing with different GBs that move differently, that have differently-functioning weapons, that have differently-functioning pylons, and so on and so forth, AND the same level of differences apply to whatever the GB is up against as well.

In order to meaningfully discuss the world of Rifts, we need to be able to meaningfully discuss the things within that world, and that means coming to some kind of mutual understanding about them.
Even if not everybody can be 100% on the same page, looking at the exact same picture, we are obliged out of necessity to try to reconcile our different views through often unfortunately long discussions.
The alternative is that we all shrug, and have few conversations with any more depth than:
"Rift is cool."
"Yeah, Rifts IS cool."
(End of discussion.)
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
jaymz
Palladin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by jaymz »

Add in 13 printings with differences between them as well as reprinted items in other books with more differences among them and yeah....it is easy to see why there are constant rules and mechanics arguments on these boards frequently.

What my RMB says as a 3rd printing will differ in some aspect from someone with 12th or 13th printing and never have I seen any errata or anything when each subsequent printing is made of any book as to what changes there may be. THAT is problematic.
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Axelmania wrote:I also just want to say that having an epic 4D6 single-shot makes the commando hunting Nxla in Psyscape using the C-12 seem a lot less stupid.


Agreed.
It would also make sense that the CS was considered the top (native) tech in North America, and that their armies were seriously feared by so many.
When I ran the C-12 under my original (mis)understanding of how the weapon worked (4d6 MD single shots, plus bursts/sprays as per p. 34), the PCs always feared CS troops, especially in large groups.
Being able to rip an e-clip for 4d6x10 MD was a pretty powerful option to have, especially if you could follow it up the next round by ripping an e-cannister for the same amount of damage!

And skelebots?
I had them fire Long Bursts for 4d6x5 MD (4d6x3 MD) per attack, simply because they didn't have to worry about running out of ammo.
Skelebots were incredibly fearsome when I ran things that way.

There are a lot of things that make more sense when you play things that way... there are just more things that don't make sense.
:(

(My current home-brew patch to fix the C-12, btw, is to change the 5-shot burst for 4d6 MD into a 5-shot PULSE for 1d6x10 MD. That leaves the weapon as described "It remains a favorite infantry workhorse and will remain in service for at least another decade," while still allowing for the switch to the CP-40 to make sense simply due to ammo conservation. A 5-shot pulse means 6 pulses before a long clip or e-canister gets eaten up, versus 10 pulses with a 3-shot pulse.
Troops like the firepower of the C-12, but the CS likes the efficiency of the CP-40.)
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

jaymz wrote:Add in 13 printings with differences between them as well as reprinted items in other books with more differences among them and yeah....it is easy to see why there are constant rules and mechanics arguments on these boards frequently.

What my RMB says as a 3rd printing will differ in some aspect from someone with 12th or 13th printing and never have I seen any errata or anything when each subsequent printing is made of any book as to what changes there may be. THAT is problematic.


Agreed.

Take our current conversation, for example.
For all I know, the NEWEST printing of RUE has a new C-12 description and stats that makes everything crystal clear for once.... but we're all still arguing over old issues because we don't even know about the update!
;)
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
jaymz
Palladin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by jaymz »

RUE in general makes the CP-40 pointless honestly as it got rid of the 5 burst setting of the C-12 altogether for a 3 shot burst doing 6d6 (at least it did in my first printing....)
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

jaymz wrote:RUE in general makes the CP-40 pointless honestly as it got rid of the 5 burst setting of the C-12 altogether for a 3 shot burst doing 6d6 (at least it did in my first printing....)


This was pointed out up-thread to have been a mistake in the first printing that even got actual, official errata on the website.

Its still supposed to be a 5-shot burst for 4D6.

I made the same argument, and the errata was linked.
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
jaymz
Palladin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by jaymz »

See? I missed that lol

13 printings of rmb. 3 printings of rue. Multiple printings if cwc. All have slight variations somewhere.

Mind you the fact it was changed in rue 1st printing to me means there was intent to change it otherwise why not just copy paste the original text.....
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Axelmania »

KC one question I'd like to ask is what difference you would see between a "burst setting" and a "pulse setting", like say the L-20 had.

Is there any difference?

Killer Cyborg wrote:See, to ME it's clearly referring to how the C-10 lacks any preset burst options.

Or damage toggle options options, like the Wilks Wand, Wilk's Laser Torch, JA-11 or NG-57 (or IMO the C-12, but I understand that's the issue of contention)

Killer Cyborg wrote:The C-10 has no burst setting.
It is capable of bursts, but any semi-automatic weapon or fully automatic weapon is capable of bursts, whether or not they have a burst setting.
In case it helps any, I'll explain what a "burst setting" or "preset burst" actually IS:

With modern military firearms, there are very often three different settings when it comes to rate of fire.
1. Single Shot (Semi-automatic): Each time the trigger is activated, a single round is fired.
2. 3-Round Burst: Each time the trigger is activated, three rounds are fired.
3. Fully Automatic: Each time the trigger is activated, the weapon continues to fire rounds until the trigger is released.

The C-10 was capable of firing burst, yes, but as I pointed out earlier that simply means that it was either a semi-automatic weapon (one shot per trigger activation) or a fully automatic weapon (continuous fire as long as the trigger is depressed).


One of the frustrating things about this is there doesn't seem to be any rules difference between:

1) I hold down a trigger and 2+ shots fire in a single action (full automatic)
2) I pull trigger multiple times and 2+ shots fire in a single action (semi-automatic)
3) I pull trigger once and 2+ shots fire in a single action (burst setting)

All 3 of them would hit at +1 instead of +3 in the original rules, as far as I understand.

You'd think that semi-auto would be more exhausting (more finger motion) and harder to aim (you can't simply keep it pulled and focus on aiming) but that's not the case. Of course... with no distinction ever made, I guess it doesn't matter. I don't see why he spent the space to explain it if he wouldn't actually APPLY the difference in weapon stats or descrips.

Which means it would be important to note if the 4D6 was a burst, since you're effectively -2 to strike compared to a 2D6 aimed single shot.

If "I pull the trigger once" resulted in two possible outcomes (whether this is the JA-11/NG-?? single shot both ways, or single/burst as you propose with C-12) then you presumably also need to switch some button on the gun to change what a single trigger pull does...

That makes me wonder... is this a "free action" so to speak, or are characters meant to spend 1 melee action toggling the gun setting like they would if they were replacing the e-clip?

Killer Cyborg wrote:This conflicts directly with the "Aimed, Burst, Wild" ROF, because that ROF means that the weapon can fire varying bursts, and the C-12 can ONLY fire 5-shot bursts.
This is why I say that the CWC change in the ROF was a "correction" and not a "nerf," because the sentence stating that the weapon has a 5-shot burst setting conflicts directly with the original "Aimed, Burst, Wild" ROF.

Corrections can be nerfs, and nerfs can be disguised as corrections. Not always clear.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The both could not have been true originally, therefore either the sentence describing the 5-shot burst was a mistake OR the A,B,W ROF was a mistake.
CWC's change tells us WHICH was a mistake.

I disagree in two capacities.

Capacity one using your approach (that 5 is a preset non-short non-long burst because it was ALWAYS a 20/30 payload and not a 10-shot payload) is how it might've worked is it could be aimed/burst/wild in the default (one shot is possible) version, and if you toggled the weapon to "preset burst" mode, then only in that mode could you not use normal bursts because the preset over-rode it.

Capacity two: my "it was written with 10 shots from a standard clip like the JA rifles" theory.

What changes Palladium makes down the line don't always mean it was the intent all along. Sometimes nerfs do get disguised as "corrections".

Killer Cyborg wrote:
So "variable settings" under damage, per the precedent set in the C-10, is a reference to damage-per-shot.


IF your interpretation is correct, then surely there are some other weapons that follow that same model of specifying when they only have one damage setting?

I'm not sure what you mean by this, could you explain what I should be looking for?

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Just like we see with the NG-57 and JA-11's laser


Those weapons necessarily have multiple damage for their single shot settings, though.
The NG-57 does not list any preset bursts, therefore neither of the settings could be a burst setting.

If you take my approach (C-12 was originally written with a 10-shot payload and last-minute tweaked) then the 5-shot is not referring to preset bursts, it's referring to a long (50%) burst.

Then it's just "why not also mention the 3-shot short burst and 10-shot full burst?" which we would ask.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Also, the ROF of Standard means that it only fires single shots unless there is a preset burst option specified.

Also disagreeing here.

"Standard" and "Aimed/Burst/Wild" were originally synonymous. Basically there was no "standard" explained in the MWS so the "standard" (as CB pointed out) was that energy weapons were burst-capable.

The idea that "Standard" means "can't burst" was one of those sneaky "nerf as correction" things they slipped into the GM's guide.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The JA-11 flat-out tells us that the laser is only capable of firing single shots, therefore both listed damages are necessarily for a single shot.

Nonetheless, it uses the same damage notation as the C-12.

The C-12 damage is written like the JA-11 not the L-20.


Killer Cyborg wrote:The C-12, on the other hand, fits better into the model we see when dealing with other weapons that have a preset burst setting:
L-20 Pulse Rifle lists damage as 2d6 MD per single shot, or 6d6 MD per burst. Two listed damages, one for each preset firing option.

Yes but it SPECIFIES it. The C-12 doesn't. Everywhere else, if a higher variable damage setting is a burst, it spells that out like mad.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Other pulse rifles work the same way, as do rail guns, and so forth.

...and every single one USES WORDS to say that. Not just a pair of numbers, which everywhere else (Wilks Wand, Wilks Torch, JA-11 and NG-57) means single shot

Killer Cyborg wrote:Unlike the C-12, these other weapons tend to specify which setting is for the burst, and which is single shot, but that doesn't mean it's not what Palladium was intending.

I think it does mean that.

Can you find one single other example where they don't spell it out in words when a higher amount is a burst and not a singles-shot variation?

Killer Cyborg wrote:If the 4d6 MD setting is NOT the burst setting, then that would mean that the weapon still stands out as an anomaly in that it's the only weapon where Palladium specifies a preset burst, but never lists the damage for that setting.

Only riding your assumption that 5-shots is a preset and not merely a 50% burst of a 10-shot clip, which is my theory.

IE they wrote C-12 with 10 shots per short (as with the JA-9 and JA-11) and then doubled it (because Mary Sue) but didn't correct 5-shot to 10-shot in doing so.

Or figured "hey, just x5 as usual for a long burst even though it's double payload, because why should it waste double the shots to get the same multiplier?"

JA9/JA11 had perfect long/full bursts with a short clip (all 5/10 shots hit) so what would be wrong with letting the C-12 do that too?

Killer Cyborg wrote:Take a moment and think about an alternate universe where the L-20 Pulse Rifle
a) Describes the 3-shot pulse in the weapon description.
b) Lists two damages: 2d6 and 6d6 MD, but does not say what either of those damages represent (single shots or pulses)

Would you feel it was more logical to assume that
-The rifle has a 2d6 single shot setting, a 6d6 single shot setting, AND the potential to pulse for either 6d6 or 12d6 MD, with these pulse damages simply being unlisted
or
-The 2d6 MD setting is for the described single shot, and the 6d6 MD setting is for the described preset pulse?


I would assume they were both single-shot settings and that I didn't know how much damage a pulse did.

Luckily, since it IS spelled out, it's a false dilemma.

Killer Cyborg wrote:it WOULD make sense if:
-The CS in-game was replacing their previous preset bursts with the new technology of preset pulses

This dials back to the opening line of my post...

What distinction do you draw between preset-burst and preset-pulse?

Killer Cyborg wrote:they replaced the C-12 (2d6 MD per shot, or 4d6 MD per 5-shot burst) with the much more efficient CP-40 that also has a higher damage ceiling (2d6 MD per shot, 6d6 MD per pulse).

The C-10 could do 2D6*2 using a 4-shot burst.

Why would you even code a 4D6 burst consuming 5 shots for the C-12?

That's the problem with the logic.

Your rebuttal to this seems to be "so that my argument makes sense, % fired is always based on long clips" so that 20% of 30 is 6 shots and C-12 performs better.

I just can't accept that, short is "standard", % consumption should be based on what's standard.

Based on your theory, the C-10 could only fire a "full" burst of 30 shots using a long clip, and couldn't fire a "full" burst if it only had a short clip in it.

Is that basically what you're saying here?

Whereas a "long" burst (10 shots to me, 15 shots to you) would consume 75% (15/20) of the payload of a short clip used by the C-10?

Killer Cyborg wrote:I'd say that the shorter clips are non-standard in weapons like the C-12 or JA-11.

It would help if we had one instance where a "long" clip was referred to as a "standard" clip.

Then we'd know it was a floating situational adjective that could apply to ANY clip.

Or even a "standard" cannister for a C-27 plasma.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Given the copy and paste habits I wouldn't be surprised if 6/30 came from some earlier game too.


It DID, because Palladium has a long history of basing burst damage on 30-round magazines instead of 20-round shorter magazines.

They did it that way with modern weapons, and they stuck to the pattern with future weapons.

If I entertain this...

Please explain how short clips got introduced here (any pre-Rifts ideas?) and how they're 20 for C-10/C-12/C-14 and 10 for C-18/JA-9/JA-11 ?

Killer Cyborg wrote:I mean, what's your alternative?
That Palladium, when designing the C-12, consciously made the decision that even though a normal short burst for a 20-round mag would be 4 rounds, that the C-12 would be extra inefficient and have a 5-shot preset burst, wasting an extra shot every time...?

The alternative is that 5-shot burst for a 10-round clip is the 50% burst doing x5 damage.

Which the JA-9/JA-11 can do if you base % consumption on short clips, which are the STANDARD in Rifts, not Longboys).

Killer Cyborg wrote:That would leave the giant, gaping question of: Why do we NOT KNOW THE DAMAGE OF THAT BURST SETTING?


Killer Cyborg wrote:Also, the rather sizeable question of "Why did the CS (or Palladium) replace a rifle with a 4d6 MD single shot and a 8d6 short burst, with a more expensive rifle that does 2d6 MD on a single shot and 6d6 MD on a burst?

4D6x2, not 8D6

The answer is: Palladium ret-conned the ROF of the C-12 just like they did the C-10 and C-14 and C-27. They NEVER EVER (in continuity) could use the burst rules.

Your question is tantamount to asking "why did the CS replace the C-27 which could fire a 6D6x5 (~3D6x10 like a boom gun!) long-burst in a single action with a pathetic "Heavy Plasma" that could only put out 1D6x10 per action?

The answer is: because they retconned the C-27's capabilities (removed burst options) it wasn't replacing a 300% gun with a 100% gun, it was replacing a 60% gun with a 100% gun.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Also, the question of "If the CS has the tech for a burst-capable 4d6 MD laser, why do we ONLY ever see it with the C-12 and variants?"

CWCp174 has a 4D6 laser with only 35 MDC, not that far off from rifle MDC.

Burst-capable seems irrelevant since they had nerfed laser bursting at this point.

Killer Cyborg wrote:It makes no sense to assume that 2 out of 3 of the common ammo capacities for the C-12 are not the standard for that weapon.

Long and Canister are never called standard, so I persist.

gotta jet, write rest later
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Axelmania wrote:KC one question I'd like to ask is what difference you would see between a "burst setting" and a "pulse setting", like say the L-20 had.

Is there any difference?


A pulse is a kind of burst.
So a pre-set pulse is a kind of pre-set burst.
Does that help?

One of the frustrating things about this is there doesn't seem to be any rules difference between:

1) I hold down a trigger and 2+ shots fire in a single action (full automatic)
2) I pull trigger multiple times and 2+ shots fire in a single action (semi-automatic)
3) I pull trigger once and 2+ shots fire in a single action (burst setting)

All 3 of them would hit at +1 instead of +3 in the original rules, as far as I understand.


That is my understanding as well.
On one hand, I like the simplicity. On the other hand, I also find it lacking.

You'd think that semi-auto would be more exhausting (more finger motion) and harder to aim (you can't simply keep it pulled and focus on aiming) but that's not the case. Of course... with no distinction ever made, I guess it doesn't matter. I don't see why he spent the space to explain it if he wouldn't actually APPLY the difference in weapon stats or descrips.

Which means it would be important to note if the 4D6 was a burst, since you're effectively -2 to strike compared to a 2D6 aimed single shot.

If "I pull the trigger once" resulted in two possible outcomes (whether this is the JA-11/NG-?? single shot both ways, or single/burst as you propose with C-12) then you presumably also need to switch some button on the gun to change what a single trigger pull does...

That makes me wonder... is this a "free action" so to speak, or are characters meant to spend 1 melee action toggling the gun setting like they would if they were replacing the e-clip?


Yes, I'd say that switching ROF or damage settings would effectively be a Free Action, if such a thing were to exist in Palladium's games.
I've never had it take a full action, and I've never seen anybody require that.

Killer Cyborg wrote:This conflicts directly with the "Aimed, Burst, Wild" ROF, because that ROF means that the weapon can fire varying bursts, and the C-12 can ONLY fire 5-shot bursts.
This is why I say that the CWC change in the ROF was a "correction" and not a "nerf," because the sentence stating that the weapon has a 5-shot burst setting conflicts directly with the original "Aimed, Burst, Wild" ROF.

Corrections can be nerfs, and nerfs can be disguised as corrections. Not always clear.


True. In this case, we know that a correction was in order, and we do not know if a nerf occurred.
So I see no reason to assume that the correction entailed any kind of nerf.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The both could not have been true originally, therefore either the sentence describing the 5-shot burst was a mistake OR the A,B,W ROF was a mistake.
CWC's change tells us WHICH was a mistake.

I disagree in two capacities.

Capacity one using your approach (that 5 is a preset non-short non-long burst because it was ALWAYS a 20/30 payload and not a 10-shot payload) is how it might've worked is it could be aimed/burst/wild in the default (one shot is possible) version, and if you toggled the weapon to "preset burst" mode, then only in that mode could you not use normal bursts because the preset over-rode it.


That's addressed in the Errata, where it discusses Pulse Rifles.
It COULD be argued that perhaps the C-12's preset burst operates differently than the pre-set bursts on Pulse rifles (and/or that the single shot setting operates differently), BUT that's needlessly multiplying entities.
There's no reason to assume that the C-12's burst setting works any differently than a pulse setting, except in that the C-12's setting is a non-pulse burst.

Capacity two: my "it was written with 10 shots from a standard clip like the JA rifles" theory.


I don't see how that theory would help or change anything significantly.

What changes Palladium makes down the line don't always mean it was the intent all along. Sometimes nerfs do get disguised as "corrections".


For example?

Killer Cyborg wrote:
So "variable settings" under damage, per the precedent set in the C-10, is a reference to damage-per-shot.


IF your interpretation is correct, then surely there are some other weapons that follow that same model of specifying when they only have one damage setting?

I'm not sure what you mean by this, could you explain what I should be looking for?


You've pointed out that the C-10's damage is listed as: 2d6 MD, no variable settings.
But in order for that to have a specific meaning, we'd need to find other weapons that also have a statement like "no variable settings" in the damage listing.
I don't know of any off hand, but there may be some somewhere.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Just like we see with the NG-57 and JA-11's laser


Those weapons necessarily have multiple damage for their single shot settings, though.
The NG-57 does not list any preset bursts, therefore neither of the settings could be a burst setting.

If you take my approach (C-12 was originally written with a 10-shot payload and last-minute tweaked) then the 5-shot is not referring to preset bursts, it's referring to a long (50%) burst.


What if it WAS?
I have no idea where you're going with that tack.
Unless it's just "But IF it worked in this way that we have no real evidence to support, THEN the 4d6 setting wouldn't be the burst setting because that'd be a long or full-clip burst, and the damage is too low."
But that's very "if a frog had wings..." kind of stance to take IMO.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Also, the ROF of Standard means that it only fires single shots unless there is a preset burst option specified.

Also disagreeing here.

"Standard" and "Aimed/Burst/Wild" were originally synonymous. Basically there was no "standard" explained in the MWS so the "standard" (as CB pointed out) was that energy weapons were burst-capable.

The idea that "Standard" means "can't burst" was one of those sneaky "nerf as correction" things they slipped into the GM's guide.


Actually, I misspoke there.
I should have said something like "Also, the ROF of "Standard" for the NG-57 means that it can fire bursts/sprays as per p. 34, but that it does NOT have a preset burst option unless one is specified.
Because no preset burst option is specified, we know that neither of the damage listings are for a preset burst.
There is no indication that weapons would ever list damages for NON preset bursts, as those damages can be found on p. 34 of the RMB.

Does that make more sense?

Killer Cyborg wrote:The JA-11 flat-out tells us that the laser is only capable of firing single shots, therefore both listed damages are necessarily for a single shot.

Nonetheless, it uses the same damage notation as the C-12.

The C-12 damage is written like the JA-11 not the L-20.


Correct. Which is one reason why I originally stood where you stand now.
The difference is that with the C-12, there is a specified preset burst which has no damage listed, unless that 4d6 MD setting IS the burst setting.
And that when the burst is changed, as with the CV-212, that second damage setting disappears and is replaced with the new burst setting.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The C-12, on the other hand, fits better into the model we see when dealing with other weapons that have a preset burst setting:
L-20 Pulse Rifle lists damage as 2d6 MD per single shot, or 6d6 MD per burst. Two listed damages, one for each preset firing option.

Yes but it SPECIFIES it. The C-12 doesn't. Everywhere else, if a higher variable damage setting is a burst, it spells that out like mad.


Everywhere else, if a weapon has a preset burst, it spells out that burst damage.
So either the C-12 is unique in that it describes a preset burst that it never lists damage for,
OR
the C-12 is unique in that it describes a preset burst, and it does list the damage for it, but it does NOT specify which damage is the burst setting.
Any way we look at things, the C-12 is unique in how things are described.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Other pulse rifles work the same way, as do rail guns, and so forth.

...and every single one USES WORDS to say that. Not just a pair of numbers, which everywhere else (Wilks Wand, Wilks Torch, JA-11 and NG-57) means single shot


Yup.
See previous response; any way we slice it, the C-12 is not written up like other weapons.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Unlike the C-12, these other weapons tend to specify which setting is for the burst, and which is single shot, but that doesn't mean it's not what Palladium was intending.

I think it does mean that.

Can you find one single other example where they don't spell it out in words when a higher amount is a burst and not a singles-shot variation?


Can YOU find one single other example where they describe a preset burst for a weapon, but then do NOT list the burst damage?
;)

Killer Cyborg wrote:If the 4d6 MD setting is NOT the burst setting, then that would mean that the weapon still stands out as an anomaly in that it's the only weapon where Palladium specifies a preset burst, but never lists the damage for that setting.

Only riding your assumption that 5-shots is a preset and not merely a 50% burst of a 10-shot clip, which is my theory.


Why the holy heck would it be a 50% burst from a 10-shot clip....?
And where's the damage for THAT listed...?
And why 50% from a 10 shot clip, instead of 100% from a 5-shot clip, or 1% of a 500 shot clip....?
:? :? :?

IE they wrote C-12 with 10 shots per short (as with the JA-9 and JA-11) and then doubled it (because Mary Sue) but didn't correct 5-shot to 10-shot in doing so.

Or figured "hey, just x5 as usual for a long burst even though it's double payload, because why should it waste double the shots to get the same multiplier?"

JA9/JA11 had perfect long/full bursts with a short clip (all 5/10 shots hit) so what would be wrong with letting the C-12 do that too?


I have no understanding of why you think any of that would help anything, much less your argument.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Take a moment and think about an alternate universe where the L-20 Pulse Rifle
a) Describes the 3-shot pulse in the weapon description.
b) Lists two damages: 2d6 and 6d6 MD, but does not say what either of those damages represent (single shots or pulses)

Would you feel it was more logical to assume that
-The rifle has a 2d6 single shot setting, a 6d6 single shot setting, AND the potential to pulse for either 6d6 or 12d6 MD, with these pulse damages simply being unlisted
or
-The 2d6 MD setting is for the described single shot, and the 6d6 MD setting is for the described preset pulse?


I would assume they were both single-shot settings and that I didn't know how much damage a pulse did.

Luckily, since it IS spelled out, it's a false dilemma.


It IS.
And at least you're consistent.
But you'd have been wrong.
Consider that.
;)

Killer Cyborg wrote:they replaced the C-12 (2d6 MD per shot, or 4d6 MD per 5-shot burst) with the much more efficient CP-40 that also has a higher damage ceiling (2d6 MD per shot, 6d6 MD per pulse).

The C-10 could do 2D6*2 using a 4-shot burst.

Why would you even code a 4D6 burst consuming 5 shots for the C-12?

That's the problem with the logic.


The C-10 could do 2d6x2 MD with a 4-shot burst, IF and only if it had a 20-round clip.
In which case, you could fire FIVE 4d6 bursts before you reloaded.
If you used a Long E-Clip in your C-10, you'd have 30 shots... but it would still only be FIVE bursts before you ran out of ammo, even though you now hold more ammo per mag, and even though you're doing the same amount of damage.
Unless you're firing Single Shots, there's no advantage in having a Long Clip with a C-10.

The C-12 could do 4d6 MD on a 5-shot burst.
With a short clip, this would mean only 4 short bursts before you ran out of ammo, which is more inefficient than the C-10 using the same clip.
But with a Long E-Clip, that 5-shot burst would mean that you could fire SIX bursts before you ran out of ammunition.
Same deal with the E-Canister.

Fully loaded with a Long E-Clip and an E-Canister, the C-12 could fire 60 single shots or 12 bursts.
Fully loaded with a Long E-Clip, the C-10 could fire 30 single shots or 5 bursts.

You don't see advantage in the C-12?

I mean, ultimately it comes down to the flaws in Palladium's Burst rules. It's the same kind of issue as the NG-57 being able to inflict 3d6x10 MD with 10 shots from a Full Clip Burst, versus the JA-11 inflicting the same damage with 3x the ammunition on a Full Clip Burst.
Ideally, in early Rifts, you want a single-shot machinegun, because that would allow you to inflict x10 (or x20!) damage per round.

Your rebuttal to this seems to be "so that my argument makes sense, % fired is always based on long clips" so that 20% of 30 is 6 shots and C-12 performs better.


Hm.
My argument is more that the C-12's preset burst was optimized for long clips and e-canisters than for short clips.
The number of shots you use almost always comes from the size mag you use, not from what kind you CAN use.
Why the CS didn't give the gun a 4-shot burst for 4d6 MD, I can't really say. Maybe they didn't have the tech. Maybe Palladium did it for some kind of metagame reason or because it'd be unbalanced somehow.

I just can't accept that, short is "standard", % consumption should be based on what's standard.

Based on your theory, the C-10 could only fire a "full" burst of 30 shots using a long clip, and couldn't fire a "full" burst if it only had a short clip in it.

Is that basically what you're saying here?


Nope!
Hopefully the previous answers have clarified.
Your questions have, I THINK, clarified a bit why you're hung up on the "10 shot mag" theory, though.
IF the 5-shot burst setting would inflict x5 damage as if it was a Long Burst, and also IF the shots per burst are based on a set theoretical number instead of the size of the current magazine capacity, THEN... What? I guess you're thinking that the C-12 would have a 5-shot burst based on a 10-shot mag that it doesn't use, allowing it to have 6 Long Bursts per magazine...?

Please explain how short clips got introduced here (any pre-Rifts ideas?) and how they're 20 for C-10/C-12/C-14 and 10 for C-18/JA-9/JA-11 ?


Not entirely sure what you're asking, but pre-rifts guns (i.e., modern weapons that would be represented in HU, etc.) can and do have 20 round mags sometimes.

4D6x2, not 8D6


They're the same in Palladium math.

The answer is: Palladium ret-conned the ROF of the C-12 just like they did the C-10 and C-14 and C-27. They NEVER EVER (in continuity) could use the burst rules.


Huh?

Your question is tantamount to asking "why did the CS replace the C-27 which could fire a 6D6x5 (~3D6x10 like a boom gun!) long-burst in a single action with a pathetic "Heavy Plasma" that could only put out 1D6x10 per action?


It IS kinda like that.
And one can either imagine a cabal in which Palladium secretly changes and nerfs things, then denies it,
OR
one can imagine a Palladium that doesn't have their act together, that makes mistakes sometimes, and later clarifies things.
With the C-27, the issue is that the ROFs were never properly explained, and that the ROF of "Standard" means different things in different weapons.
In plasma cannons, it means "cannot fire bursts" unless otherwise noted.
It was never intended to fire bursts/sprays; Palladium just was unclear on their explanation.
No retconning necessary.
No needlessly multiplying things.

They didn't replace a C-27 that could fire bursts for 6d6x5; that weapon never existed.
It only appeared that it might exist, because Palladium was crap at defining their ROFs.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Also, the question of "If the CS has the tech for a burst-capable 4d6 MD laser, why do we ONLY ever see it with the C-12 and variants?"

CWCp174 has a 4D6 laser with only 35 MDC, not that far off from rifle MDC.


The nose-mounted gun on the Black Lightning?
Single shot only, NOT a burst-capable weapon.

Burst-capable seems irrelevant since they had nerfed laser bursting at this point.


It's entirely relevant.
If the CS had weapons capable of burst-firing based on a 4d6 MD starting point, much of CWC would look a lot different.
That helicopter could have a laser that fires for twice as much damage, just for starts.
But even Wilk's, the expert in lasers, did NOT (last time I checked) have a burst-capable 4d6 laser.
Nobody does.

Edit:
Colonel_Tetsuya lists a few, but they don't really negate the point.
Last edited by Killer Cyborg on Fri Feb 21, 2020 12:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
Colonel_Tetsuya
Champion
Posts: 2172
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Colonel_Tetsuya »

Killer Cyborg wrote:It's entirely relevant.
If the CS had weapons capable of burst-firing based on a 4d6 MD starting point, much of CWC would look a lot different.
That helicopter could have a laser that fires for twice as much damage, just for starts.
But even Wilk's, the expert in lasers, did NOT (last time I checked) have a burst-capable 4d6 laser.
Nobody does.
And nobody ever did.


There are a few, but they are pretty rare, and generally (one single exception IIRC) beyond the tech of North America (being from off-world, for the most part). The ones available on Rifts Earth:

- The Kittani "knock-off" of the Wilks 457, the K-4, does 3D6+6 per shot and pulses for (Why they would bother to knock off Earth weapons when they can clearly do better, who knows)
- The JA-12 does 4D6 per shot and pulses for 1D6x10+10
- The Wilks 1000 Pulse Laser Cannon - does 5D6+3 per shot, pulses for 3D4x10 (better than perfect scaling!), but as its labeled as a "Cannon" despite being man portable with enough strength (only weighs 40lbs, and the power pack is only another 30 and could be worn on the back), i can also be totally on board with this not counting.

The rest are all off-world tech (HI-Lasers and the like). Technically, the Kittani weapon could be "off world", but since it can be obtained on Rifts Earth, i listed it.

The JA-12 is the one that sorta sticks out. Its one of the few creations of CJ where i can say "Nah, Kevin was right" - it should never have existed. The entire JA line of weapons is ... off. If they are Pre-Rifts German designs... how does Triax not have the plans for them? Or DO they have the plans for them? If they DO, why are their brand-newest sniper lasers still inferior to the JA-11?

If they are being produced in North America (which is implied - its a Pre-Rifts german design, but like the L-20, is produced by lots of different sources)... why is Wilks' laser technology still so far behind it, when theyve had almost 100 years to acquire samples and reverse engineer them (and Wilks started with a Pre-Rifts tech base for lasers when they uncovered the Wilks' factory).
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Axelmania »

Hey KC you know how I said I couldn't find a 4D6 laser which could burst? I take that back.

WB5p146 the TX-43 can do that. It had 3 settings and was "aimed/burst/wild" (which I guess is stronger language than 'standard' but I still think 'standard' is synonymous originally)

So maybe CS had similar laser-tech?

One thing I do note about Triax/NGR is they started adding "per shot" to many of the damage listings. Perhaps because by that point (were there forums in 1994?) people might've been having arguments about the C-12 already since RMB didn't use 'per shot' for it's damages?

Not all of them though... on pg 144 for example the TX-26 has it, the WR-10/TX-11/TX-16 do not...

As for your mention that bursts assume 30 rounds... how would you cover RMB224 Automatic Pistols? That's 7/8/13 rounds! Can they not burst?

Killer Cyborg wrote:A pulse is a kind of burst.
So a pre-set pulse is a kind of pre-set burst.
Does that help?

No, I'm looking to see if you draw any distinctions between a "pulse burst" and a "non-pulse burst", I guess.

Killer Cyborg wrote:I've never had it take a full action, and I've never seen anybody require that.

Requiring someone to spend a melee attack toggling their JA-11 from 2D6 up to 4D6 or vice versa sounds fun.

Killer Cyborg wrote:This conflicts directly with the "Aimed, Burst, Wild" ROF, because that ROF means that the weapon can fire varying bursts, and the C-12 can ONLY fire 5-shot bursts.
This is why I say that the CWC change in the ROF was a "correction" and not a "nerf," because the sentence stating that the weapon has a 5-shot burst setting conflicts directly with the original "Aimed, Burst, Wild" ROF.

Corrections can be nerfs, and nerfs can be disguised as corrections. Not always clear.


Killer Cyborg wrote:we know that a correction was in order, and we do not know if a nerf occurred.
So I see no reason to assume that the correction entailed any kind of nerf.

We don't know WHICH correction was in order.

In my view, it would be simply removing the 5-shot statement, like the CV-213 already did in SB1. The CV-212 and C-12 just seemed like they were lagging behind in that respect.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Capacity two: my "it was written with 10 shots from a standard clip like the JA rifles" theory.


I don't see how that theory would help or change anything significantly.

It changes how we can interpret 5 shots.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
What changes Palladium makes down the line don't always mean it was the intent all along. Sometimes nerfs do get disguised as "corrections".


For example?

The idea that "standard" rate of fire meant "no bursting" in the GMG, flies in the face of "full auto" being the standard for energy weapons in general.

Killer Cyborg wrote:You've pointed out that the C-10's damage is listed as: 2d6 MD, no variable settings.
But in order for that to have a specific meaning, we'd need to find other weapons that also have a statement like "no variable settings" in the damage listing.
I don't know of any off hand, but there may be some somewhere.

You usually would not have to bother listing that, I think they did so due to it being an earlier version of the C-12 which does have one.

We do have other examples of 'variable setting' damages, and you seem to agree that every single one which doesn't list 'burst' is single-shot except for the C-12.

Closest example I could find to "no variable settings" is on WB5p148, the WR-17 mentions "one setting" for it's laser, obviously since the ion lists 2 settings.

Killer Cyborg wrote:What if it WAS?
I have no idea where you're going with that tack.
Unless it's just "But IF it worked in this way that we have no real evidence to support, THEN the 4d6 setting wouldn't be the burst setting because that'd be a long or full-clip burst, and the damage is too low."
But that's very "if a frog had wings..." kind of stance to take IMO.

My approach is that the 4D6 is 1 shot and the 5 shots had nothing to do with it and was just general commentary on how many shots constituted a long burst.

Full bursts basically being pointless since you could just do 2 long bursts in a row for the same effect. Actually a BETTER effect since you could force 2 dodges. Maybe the only possible benefit is you only get 1 surprise attack?

Killer Cyborg wrote:I should have said something like "Also, the ROF of "Standard" for the NG-57 means that it can fire bursts/sprays as per p. 34, but that it does NOT have a preset burst option unless one is specified.

Makes sense

Killer Cyborg wrote:Because no preset burst option is specified, we know that neither of the damage listings are for a preset burst.

I think we know that even if one were specified, since precedent is that damage which is a burst (like the 1D4x10 for a SAMAS railgun or 6D6 for a NG railgun) gets spelled out as that everywhere else. The C-12 neglecting to do that makes it too much a shot in the dark to think that's the reason 4D6 is there.

Killer Cyborg wrote:There is no indication that weapons would ever list damages for NON preset bursts, as those damages can be found on p. 34 of the RMB.

Does that make more sense?

Agree, but keep in mind I've never argued for the 4D6 being as non-preset burst (because that would be 2D6x2, not 4D6)

I do understand why you're open to this, since the L-20's triple pulse is 6D6 rather than 2D6x3.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The difference is that with the C-12, there is a specified preset burst which has no damage listed, unless that 4d6 MD setting IS the burst setting.

I don't see any dilemma here. Remember how the GBK for the longest time mentioned mini-missiles (which were pictured) but neglected to list them under Weapon Systems? I think they 1st showed up in Xiticix Invasion?

Same thing IMO. Knowing a capacity is there doesn't mean we should expect the specifics to be there.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And that when the burst is changed, as with the CV-212, that second damage setting disappears and is replaced with the new burst setting.

WHICH time it changed?

The RUE-swap fiasco seems like the correction to 3 shots was due to absorbing text related to the triple-pulse 6D6 they put, and they just left the three>five alone when they put the 4D6 back.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The C-12, on the other hand, fits better into the model we see when dealing with other weapons that have a preset burst setting:
L-20 Pulse Rifle lists damage as 2d6 MD per single shot, or 6d6 MD per burst. Two listed damages, one for each preset firing option.

Yes but it SPECIFIES it. The C-12 doesn't. Everywhere else, if a higher variable damage setting is a burst, it spells that out like mad.


Killer Cyborg wrote:Everywhere else, if a weapon has a preset burst, it spells out that burst damage.
So either the C-12 is unique in that it describes a preset burst that it never lists damage for,
OR
the C-12 is unique in that it describes a preset burst, and it does list the damage for it, but it does NOT specify which damage is the burst setting.

You forgot the option 3: the C-12 never had a preset burst. Two ways to explain that:
    A) 5 shots refers to a short burst, 20% of a payload of 25 shots, a compromise between the 20/30 short/long extremes to avoid arguments
    B) 5 shots refers to a long burst, 50% of a payload of 10 shots, which the C-12 could've been originally written as (like the JA9/11)

The thing again being overlooked here: in the Rifts Sourcebook, the CV-213 removed the '5 shots' text but kept the 4D6.

That implies the author felt the text was irrelevant (there was no 5 shot burst) but that the 4D6 represented a single powerful shot the Skelebot could do with the CV-213.

Killer Cyborg wrote:any way we slice it, the C-12 is not written up like other weapons.

Unless we acknowledge it had a mysterious 5-shot burst just like the GBK had special mini-missiles. They just didn't detail them.

Or: 5 shots is a leftover artifact of a 10-shot system which SB editor realized should be taken out when statting skelebot equipment, but that revelation was never repeated because editors miss lots of stuff and changes made in previous books don't always make it to future ones (ergo, the MDC boost that Skelebots got in CWC is not repeated in RUE, where they're back down to their low MDC from the SB)

Killer Cyborg wrote:Unlike the C-12, these other weapons tend to specify which setting is for the burst, and which is single shot, but that doesn't mean it's not what Palladium was intending.

I think it does mean that.

Can you find one single other example where they don't spell it out in words when a higher amount is a burst and not a singles-shot variation?


Killer Cyborg wrote:Can YOU find one single other example where they describe a preset burst for a weapon, but then do NOT list the burst damage?
;)

But I reject the idea of it being a preset burst, I just view it as either a compromise-burst (20% of 25) or an ancestored burst (50% of 10)

Killer Cyborg wrote:Why the holy heck would it be a 50% burst from a 10-shot clip....?

Due to us having other examples of laser rifles only getting 10 shots from an average clip.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And where's the damage for THAT listed...?

There's no need, you'd use standard rules: x5 (later x3).

Killer Cyborg wrote:And why 50% from a 10 shot clip, instead of 100% from a 5-shot clip, or 1% of a 500 shot clip....?
:? :? :?

It's the answer most in balance with other examples, since there are other laser rifles that only get 10 shots from a short clip.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
IE they wrote C-12 with 10 shots per short (as with the JA-9 and JA-11) and then doubled it (because Mary Sue) but didn't correct 5-shot to 10-shot in doing so.

Or figured "hey, just x5 as usual for a long burst even though it's double payload, because why should it waste double the shots to get the same multiplier?"

JA9/JA11 had perfect long/full bursts with a short clip (all 5/10 shots hit) so what would be wrong with letting the C-12 do that too?


I have no understanding of why you think any of that would help anything, much less your argument.

What would it help other than my argument?

It clearly helps it: JA-9 getting 10 shots of 2D6 at 2000ft is perfect grounds for thinking the C-10 and C-12 originally did too.

Only two other possibilities exist:
1) KS originally wrote both rifles with 20 shots apiece but then halved the payload of the JA-9 because it's supposed to be inferior somehow
2) KS originally wrote these guns with the final 20/10 payloads we see in publication, even though that's weird and makes no sense because they have the same range/damage and the same payload (30 shots) when using a long clip (meaning they're just as efficient in that respect, but somehow C-10/C-12 are uber-efficient with short clips OR the JA-9 is uber-wasteful with short clips?

Killer Cyborg wrote:But you'd have been wrong.
Consider that.

No, if it was written that way, it would've had different intentions, so I would've been right.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The C-10 could do 2d6x2 MD with a 4-shot burst, IF and only if it had a 20-round clip.
In which case, you could fire FIVE 4d6 bursts before you reloaded.

I refuse to call 2D6x2 bursts "4d6 bursts", sorry. Too much confusion in this world. Your burst is ODD.

Killer Cyborg wrote:If you used a Long E-Clip in your C-10, you'd have 30 shots... but it would still only be FIVE bursts before you ran out of ammo, even though you now hold more ammo per mag, and even though you're doing the same amount of damage.
Unless you're firing Single Shots, there's no advantage in having a Long Clip with a C-10.

Unless of course the author expected us to calculate the shots based on the % of the standard clip and not of extended clips.

HU2p75 seems to at least partially recognize the problem exists, though it tries to address it in a clumsy way:
    Damage from a Long Burst:
    Roll the damage dice for ONE round x5 for clips with 30-50 rounds,
    or ONE round x2 if the clip has 15 or less rounds.
The problem there is twofold:
1) clips with 16-29 shots aren't given a multiplier at all
2) there's absolutely no incentive at all to long-burst with clips of 15 or less, because short bursts still ALWAYS do x2 damage so you would just use those and spend fewer shots.

About the only exception I can think of is "Firing a Burst" specifies bursts are "three or more bullets at a time", so a 2-shot burst actually could not exist.

So to be able to short burst at all (20%) you would need to use 3 shots... meaning you would need an ammo capacity of 15 shots to do it.

HU2 is extra magical also because they actually do try to distinguish between semi-auto and full-auto, I just noticed for the first time ever today:
    semi-automatic weapons require an extra melee action to squeeze off a long burst or to empty the clip in a full melee burst

This is still kinda incomplete though: still makes short bursts interchangeable.

Short/Long taking the same length never made sense to me anyway. I'd rather it be 1/2/3 for full-auto and 2/3/4 for semi-auto.

There is mention "some have a switch to change them from full automatic to semi-automatic" but no explanation of WHY you would use such a switch. There should be some kind of disadvantage to full-auto fire which explains why you wouldn't keep it on.

"My hand could seize up and I couldn't stop shooting" comes to mind, I guess? Like if you were hit with Bio-Manipulation: Paralysis mid-burst?

Killer Cyborg wrote:The C-12 could do 4d6 MD on a 5-shot burst.
With a short clip, this would mean only 4 short bursts before you ran out of ammo,
which is more inefficient than the C-10 using the same clip.
But with a Long E-Clip, that 5-shot burst would mean that you could fire SIX bursts before you ran out of ammunition.

I understand how in the world where you think shots-fired is based on % of long clips for rifles how 4D6 from 5 shots would be better than 2D6x2 from 4 shots.

I just don't think that's the solitary (or even best) explanation for why 4D6 and 5 shots are both there.

The CV-213 keeping 4D6 and ditching 5 shots speaks against it.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Fully loaded with a Long E-Clip, the C-10 could fire 30 single shots or 5 bursts.

Based on your approach, I think you're meaning 6 bursts of 5 shots :)

I will also point out that the JA-9 can also shoot 6 long bursts of 5 shots from a long clip, because that's not a standard clip :)

A lot of weapons don't even list shots per long clip so why would we be basing it on those?

Killer Cyborg wrote:You don't see advantage in the C-12?

I mean... maybe the advantage of the C-12 (pg 203) is it took a weird variant of the standard e-clip that cost 6000 instead of the usual 5000 (pg 223) so maybe there's 2 standards of e-clips (like there's 2 systems of credits) and the CS' more expensive standard clip could give laser rifles twice the payload? *shrug*

Killer Cyborg wrote:I mean, ultimately it comes down to the flaws in Palladium's Burst rules. It's the same kind of issue as the NG-57 being able to inflict 3d6x10 MD with 10 shots from a Full Clip Burst, versus the JA-11 inflicting the same damage with 3x the ammunition on a Full Clip Burst.

That's only true if you're basing this on your assumption that % payload is calculated from long clips instead of short clips for rifles capable of taking short clips.

I'd be calculating it on STANDARD payload so it's 10 shots for a full burst either way, and a long clip would allow the JA-11 to do 3 consecutive "full-clip" bursts of 3D6x10 with it's ion.

Sort of like how I would not expect a "full" burst to empty BOTH the e-clip and the e-cannister of weapons which had both.

This resembles RMB34's idea that a "long" burst could simply be 30% instead of 50% for high-payload clips, or if you were using 100% you'd get a higher multiple than x10, as you point out next...

Killer Cyborg wrote:Ideally, in early Rifts, you want a single-shot machinegun, because that would allow you to inflict x10 (or x20!) damage per round.

RMB34 says it would be x20 for machinegun, x10 for submachinegun.

Of course, the basic description of burst is "shooting of several rounds", so I think that plurality requires at least TWO to constitute a burst.

CB9 has a similar "a burst is when two or more blasts are fired in rapid succession"

Killer Cyborg wrote:My argument is more that the C-12's preset burst was optimized for long clips and e-canisters

How's that any better than "the C-12's non-preset burst was written for 10 rounds from a short clip" ?

Killer Cyborg wrote:The number of shots you use almost always comes from the size mag you use, not from what kind you CAN use.

That's clearly not the case with pulses, so perhaps it was never intended to be a constant-% variable-shots.

Perhaps it was always intended to be a %-based-on-standard clip / constant shots / variable %-based-on-current clip model?

Killer Cyborg wrote:Why the CS didn't give the gun a 4-shot burst for 4d6 MD, I can't really say. Maybe they didn't have the tech. Maybe Palladium did it for some kind of metagame reason or because it'd be unbalanced somehow.

The NG-L5 (RMBp225) really goes laughing all the way to the bank either way.

With 10short/20long instead of 20short/30 long, getting the exact same multipliers compared to the C-10 based on its percentages means (assuming the multiplier represents number of rounds which hit) means it's more accurate.

This approach is supported by CB9 "the normal damage is multiplied by two, meaning two of the four rounds struck". Process of elimination means 2 rounds missed.

Short Burst: 20% of 10/20/30 shots means 2/4/6 shots ... if 2 hit then it's either 0/2 miss for NG-L5 and 2/4 miss for the C-10
Long Burst: 50% of 10/20/30 means 5/10/15 ... if 5 hit then it's either 0/5 miss for the NG-L5 and 5/10 miss for the C-10

The end result of this is that the NG-L5 should in theory mean less collateral damage to adjacent targets, since there are fewer wasted shots.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Nope!
Hopefully the previous answers have clarified.

If you're operating on a "% consumed is constant no matter what clip" then why would that only apply to bursts but not for single shots? It doesn't really mesh in terms of physics.

"% consumed in-respect-to-standard clip" being the constant works better.

Killer Cyborg wrote:I guess you're thinking that the C-12 would have a 5-shot burst based on a 10-shot mag that it doesn't use, allowing it to have 6 Long Bursts per magazine...?

Why not? That's how I think the JA-9 works.

It aligns with CB9 "Generally, every burst of two to ten rounds/energy blasts counts as one melee attack".

Short/Long bursts cost 1 melee attack. Meaning a long burst should not exceed 10 rounds. Meaning at most it should be based on a 20-round payload in Rifts, not a 30-round payload.

Basing it on a 30-round payload (long clip) would mean 15 rounds fired off in a single action, which falls outside these general guidelines.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Please explain how short clips got introduced here (any pre-Rifts ideas?) and how they're 20 for C-10/C-12/C-14 and 10 for C-18/JA-9/JA-11 ?


Not entirely sure what you're asking, but pre-rifts guns (i.e., modern weapons that would be represented in HU, etc.) can and do have 20 round mags sometimes.

I'm talking more the JA series which is basically golden age MD e-clip-using tier, let's no go back into the bullets/SDC ages.

Killer Cyborg wrote:
4D6x2, not 8D6


They're the same in Palladium math.

Sometimes, but not always.

Palladium occasionally gives the option to switch between 10D6 and 1D6x10 but that doesn't mean it's ALWAYS an option to do that: ONLY when we are specifically told that's an option.

I basically treat that like a variable setting which only certain guns which specify the option enjoy.

Killer Cyborg wrote:It IS kinda like that.
And one can either imagine a cabal in which Palladium secretly changes and nerfs things, then denies it,

I thought we had pretty much proven this by now.

Killer Cyborg wrote:OR
one can imagine a Palladium that doesn't have their act together, that makes mistakes sometimes, and later clarifies things.

Both can be true. It's not an either/or.

Killer Cyborg wrote:With the C-27, the issue is that the ROFs were never properly explained, and that the ROF of "Standard" means different things in different weapons.
In plasma cannons, it means "cannot fire bursts" unless otherwise noted.
It was never intended to fire bursts/sprays; Palladium just was unclear on their explanation.
No retconning necessary.
No needlessly multiplying things.

Except the CB already clarified the opposite. Pg 9:
    Only weapons that state a specific number of shots per melee are not automatic.
    ..
    An automatic weapon can fire a burst by simply holding the trigger down.


I'm pretty sure that's meant to refer to stuff like:

    1) the CR-1 (RMB204) which for example mentions 1 per melee or 3 with a team...
    2) RMB225's Grenade ROF for the NG-Super (4 shots based on a payload of 6 inside / 8 outside = 14 total)
    3) RMB239's Laser Utility Finger (4 per melee) or Laser Finger Blaster (3 per melee)
    4) RMB245's Stun Gun (blaster) : 5 per melee

One could interpret "equal to the total number of hand to hand" on RMB196 (Enforcer's CR-2T) as a "specific number" even though that's a variable specific.

This approach does make sense in respect to the JA-11 on 225 since the laser says "equal to the total number of hand" too, and we specifically know it can't burst.

Note how "number of hand" doesn't appear on any of the other handheld weaopns in RMB, and no other handheld weapon AFAIK is specified as being limited to single-shot like the JA-11's laser is and listing anything other than "number of hand".

Can you find any weapons that list standard but are explicitly "single shot only" or "no bursts" ?

WB5p144 has another "single shot only, no burst" laser, the TX-11, and it is also conspicuously the ONLY hand weapon which lists "number of hand" rather than "Standard".

We only find the inverse ("number of hand" but allows multiple shots per action) such as the TX-41/TX-42 on the next page. But listing "specific number" does not mean the weapon is non-automatic, it doesn't mean it's limited to firing single shots. The Pulse Rifles setting isn't full-auto, after all, it's 3-shots per trigger-pull.

Killer Cyborg wrote:They didn't replace a C-27 that could fire bursts for 6d6x5; that weapon never existed.
It only appeared that it might exist, because Palladium was crap at defining their ROFs.

They weren't crap though.

They defined ROF just fine for the JA-11 and the TX-11. They knew the importance THERE of defining "only single shots".

If that was intended for the plasma, why wouldn't we also see that there?

The WR-19/WR-20 on WB5p148 still used "standard" despite the recurrance of the "number of hand" usage for the TX-11. Pretty sure WB5 was post-CB so KS had just written up the whole "no specific number = automatic fire" rule, and would've known the importance to do that for plasma guns if that's what he wanted for them.

We even see this later in the book, on page 212 for the Gargoyle Grenade Mace, ROF is "one per each melee action". whereas the Gargoyle Laser Mace adjacent to it does NOT say this, it says "STANDARD".

Pg 214 also drives this home: "number of hand" for the Kittani Energy Lance, which "Only fires single shots".

This hails back to Atlantis 137 with two more examples:
K-1 Sniper Laser ROF "number of hand" + "can not fire bursts"
K-EF Plasma Ejector ROF "Standard"

Killer Cyborg wrote:
Burst-capable seems irrelevant since they had nerfed laser bursting at this point.


It's entirely relevant.
If the CS had weapons capable of burst-firing based on a 4d6 MD starting point, much of CWC would look a lot different.


The starting point no longer exists as of CWC, because the C-12 was rewritten as a "number of hand" ROF, which makes it no longer an automatic weapon.

This was a nerf-retcon, just like with the C-27, to make them weaker.

Killer Cyborg wrote:even Wilk's, the expert in lasers, did NOT (last time I checked) have a burst-capable 4d6 laser.
Nobody does. And nobody ever did
Edit: Colonel_Tetsuya lists a few, but they don't really negate the point.

I think the existence of the Triax 4D6 burst capable laser DOES negate your point. Although they're higher-tech than CS in several respects, they manage to be in sync with each other in some other respects.

You have to remember that the CS was on the cusp of emulating (and perhaps even slightly EXCEEDING) Triax tech.

The perfect example of this is how the C-18 (2D4 for 10 shots) was replaced with the C-20 (2D6 for 21 shots, w/ option for long clips) which surpasses the TX-20 "Short" Laser Pistol on WB5p143 (better payload from short clip, can use a long clip).

If the CS gave such priority to a SIDEARM (ie a backup weapon, or maybe something an officer would emphasize) then their standard field weapon (the C-12) would be even more high-priority and benefit from the emphasis of most of their research.

So it ALREADY being on par with the TX-43 Light Assault Laser Rifle makes complete sense to me.

I mean heck, the TX-43 is basically a clone of the C-12 except for the inability to use a cannister, and getting 30 from and FSE i/o Long. Plus the added clarifier "per shot" which they probably intended to put in the C-12 but forgot by the time WB11 was being written.

Well.. one other downside is while the TX-43 can fire a 6D6 SDC blast there's no note of "six SDC shots equals one MD blast" so in that respect the C-12 is also superior, because it can fire 120 sdc shots instead of 20 like the TX-43.

The NGR fell behind the CS in this respect, because they diversified while the CS focused on optimizing their bread-and-butter standard-issue.

As for the mystery of why the TX-42 (1D4x10 per action) is standard issue instead of the TX-43 (4D6x2 per 20% short burst) the TX-42 could (40 shot FSE payload) fire 13 of those from and FSE. Even using my "it's based on the short %" approach, you could only get SEVEN four-shot short bursts from the 30-shot payload an FSE gives the TX-43.

The TX-42 was a magical "greater than it's sum" weapon since 1D4x10 is in every respect superior to 2D6x3 or 6D6 or however you want to put it. That's where Triax put it's R&D and why the TX-43 is basically an afterthought which the CS was able to outperform.

We of course have to keep in mind that by the time WB5 was out, CB had nerfed burst multiplier to x3 long meaning the inefficiency made the 4D6x3 long burst (10 shots IMO) from the TX-43 and C-12 not so attractive.
User avatar
Killer Cyborg
Priest
Posts: 27955
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 2:01 am
Comment: "Your Eloquence with a sledge hammer is a beautiful thing..." -Zer0 Kay
Location: In the ocean, punching oncoming waves
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Killer Cyborg »

Edit:
Okay, I had to scroll past my own post here, which took a while. Obviously my back-and-forth with Axel is getting a bit out of hand size-wise.
I'm going to edit this down a bit to remove redundancies, and I'll be more succinct in the future.
:wink:

Axelmania wrote:
Killer Cyborg wrote:A pulse is a kind of burst.
So a pre-set pulse is a kind of pre-set burst.
Does that help?

No, I'm looking to see if you draw any distinctions between a "pulse burst" and a "non-pulse burst", I guess.


:?
That would BE the distinction: one is a pulse, and the other is NOT a pulse.
I assume you understand the difference between pulses and regular bursts, so I don't understand what other distinction you're looking for.

We don't know WHICH correction was in order.

In my view, it would be simply removing the 5-shot statement, like the CV-213 already did in SB1. The CV-212 and C-12 just seemed like they were lagging behind in that respect.


Let me know if I have this right.

In your theory, Palladium:
a) Accidentally included a claim that the C-12 had a setting for 5-shot bursts.
b) They later corrected the CV-213 by removing that mention and replacing it with a description of the robot-link cable.
c) When CWC came out, Palladium made the decision to use an altered version of the same text in the CP-40, but did not choose to correct the C-12's description. They also altered the CV-212's version of this text, again without correcting the actual C-12.
d) When the RGMG came out, Palladium again did not correct the erroneous mention of the 5-shot burst.
e) When RUE came out, Palladium accidentally swapped the CV-212's description/stats with that of the C-12. Palladium patched this mistake in the RUE Errata, and they swapped the descriptions in later printings of RUE, BUT they still never bothered to correct the erroneous statement that the C-12 has a 5-shot burst setting, and they never bothered to mention this accidental sentence in any online errata.

Is that about right?

The idea that "standard" rate of fire meant "no bursting" in the GMG, flies in the face of "full auto" being the standard for energy weapons in general.


What part of the RGMG are you talking about...?
:?

Killer Cyborg wrote:You've pointed out that the C-10's damage is listed as: 2d6 MD, no variable settings.
But in order for that to have a specific meaning, we'd need to find other weapons that also have a statement like "no variable settings" in the damage listing.
I don't know of any off hand, but there may be some somewhere.

You usually would not have to bother listing that, I think they did so due to it being an earlier version of the C-12 which does have one.


I think they did it due to the C-10 being a earlier version of the C-12 that lacks the variable settings for ROF.

We do have other examples of 'variable setting' damages, and you seem to agree that every single one which doesn't list 'burst' is single-shot except for the C-12.


Correct.
Because (AFAIK) only the C-12 (and spinoffs) describes a gun that can fire in Single Shots or Preset Bursts, then lists two damages without specifying which damage goes to which ROF setting.

Closest example I could find to "no variable settings" is on WB5p148, the WR-17 mentions "one setting" for it's laser, obviously since the ion lists 2 settings.


THAT weapon helpfully specifies "per single shot."

My approach is that the 4D6 is 1 shot and the 5 shots had nothing to do with it and was just general commentary on how many shots constituted a long burst.


Except that...
-There is zero mention that this would be a Long Burst.
-No other weapon ever makes an off-hand commentary of how many shots it would take to make any of the bursts from p. 34, because it's already spelled out on that page.
-There is no mention or indication that the C-12 ever was intended to have a 10-shot short clip.
-We know that the 5-shot burst is a setting, and that the single shot option is a setting. Which means that the gun can't use the standard burst/spray rules.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Because no preset burst option is specified [with the NG-57], we know that neither of the damage listings are for a preset burst.

I think we know that even if one were specified, since precedent is that damage which is a burst (like the 1D4x10 for a SAMAS railgun or 6D6 for a NG railgun) gets spelled out as that everywhere else.


Not quite accurate.
RGMG 122
The CP-40 Pulse Laser Rifle is listed with Mega-Damage being:
Setting One: 2d6 MD or Setting 2: 6d6 MD.

Of course, CWC tells us in the damage listing that the 6d6 setting is for the pulse, but the RGMG does NOT.
I suppose you could argue that it's a change, and that as of the RGMG the CP-40 was intended to have a 2d6 setting, a 6d6 setting, AND a pulse option on top of those... but would you really make that argument?

(Can't find any other examples off-hand, but that doesn't mean there aren't any.)

The C-12 neglecting to do that makes it too much a shot in the dark to think that's the reason 4D6 is there.


Again, any way you slice it, the C-12 isn't described like other weapons.
Either it has a burst setting that it never lists the damage for, or it DOES list the damage, but doesn't specify that the damage is FOR that burst.
With all the evidence, I think it's pretty clear which way the gun was intended to work.

Killer Cyborg wrote:There is no indication that weapons would ever list damages for NON preset bursts, as those damages can be found on p. 34 of the RMB.

Does that make more sense?

Agree, but keep in mind I've never argued for the 4D6 being as non-preset burst (because that would be 2D6x2, not 4D6)

I do understand why you're open to this, since the L-20's triple pulse is 6D6 rather than 2D6x3.


It is far, far, far, far from only the L-20 that does things that way.
Hell, even in the RMB, look at the rail guns.
C-40R does 1d4 MD per shot, and 1d4x10 MD on a burst... NOT 10d4.
NG-101 does 1d4 per shot, and 6d6 MD on a burst, NOT 9d6.
NG-202 is same as the C-40R.

And in SB1...
Wilk's 457 does 3d6+2 per shot, and 1d6x10 MD on a pulse (NOT 9d6+6)
TX-500 does 1d4 per shot, 6d6 per burst.
TX-30 does 2d6 per shot, 6d6 per pulse.

That's the standard for Palladium math, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find an exception to the rule.

Killer Cyborg wrote:The difference is that with the C-12, there is a specified preset burst which has no damage listed, unless that 4d6 MD setting IS the burst setting.

I don't see any dilemma here. Remember how the GBK for the longest time mentioned mini-missiles (which were pictured) but neglected to list them under Weapon Systems? I think they 1st showed up in Xiticix Invasion?


But there are two key differences:
1. The mini-missiles DID show up eventually.
2. There was nothing in the stats that could possibly BE those mini-missiles in the original entry.

As opposed to the C-12, which has never added a new damage for that burst, and has never removed the description of the burst setting.
For 30 years, the C-12 has had 3 damage settings.
Setting 1: 2d6 MD (with no direct indication whether this is a single shot or a burst)
Setting 2: 4d6 MD (with no direct indication whether this is a single shot or a burst)
Setting 3: 6d6 SDC (with no direct indication whether this is a single shot or a burst)

AND the C-12 has had a 5-shot burst setting with no direct indication what the damage for the burst is.

If all three settings are for single shots, then the 5-shot burst setting damage remains a mystery.
But if Setting 2 is for the 5-shot burst, then that mystery vanishes.
As does the mystery for why the CP-40 would replace the C-12, when it appeared to have significantly less firepower.
As does the mystery for why the CS has never had another 4d6 MD burst-capable weapon.

One simple answer resolves most issues around the weapon.

Killer Cyborg wrote:And that when the burst is changed, as with the CV-212, that second damage setting disappears and is replaced with the new burst setting.

WHICH time it changed?


The time where the weapon went from SB1 57's
The rifle can also be set to fire in a single shot mode or a burst of five...
Setting 1: 2d6 MD
Setting 2: 4d6 MD
Setting 3: 6d6 SDC


to CWC 94's
The rifle can be set to fire in a single shot or a burst of three...
Mega-Damage: 2d6 MD per single shot or 6d6 MD per triple burst.
SDC Damage: 6d6 SDC per single blast.


The weapon remained the same in the RGMG.
In the first printing of RUE, those stats got swapped with the C-12's, but in later editions of RUE the stats were swapped back, and the CV-212's stats were again the same as in CWC, although phrased differently:
The rifle can also be set to fire in a single shot or a burst of three...
Setting One: 2d6 MD
Setting Two: 6d6 MD (Burst)
and a Setting Three (SDC): 6d6 SDC.


IF the 4d6 MD setting was a single shot setting.... where did it go....?

(Again, if the 4d6 setting was the burst setting, there's no mystery here. The old burst got replaced with a new pulse setting, so the old burst damage no longer applies.)

Killer Cyborg wrote:The C-12, on the other hand, fits better into the model we see when dealing with other weapons that have a preset burst setting:
L-20 Pulse Rifle lists damage as 2d6 MD per single shot, or 6d6 MD per burst. Two listed damages, one for each preset firing option.

Yes but it SPECIFIES it. The C-12 doesn't. Everywhere else, if a higher variable damage setting is a burst, it spells that out like mad.


Everywhere else, if a gun has a burst in the description, that damage is listed in the damage section.
So either the C-12 is unlike "everywhere else" in that it failed to mention that the burst setting is the burst setting, OR the C-12 is unlike "everywhere else" in that it failed to list the damage for a preset burst.
(OR the C-12 is unlike "everywhere else" in that it accidentally spent a sentence describing a burst setting that was never intended to exist, but that has never been removed from the weapon's description).

Killer Cyborg wrote:Everywhere else, if a weapon has a preset burst, it spells out that burst damage.
So either the C-12 is unique in that it describes a preset burst that it never lists damage for,
OR
the C-12 is unique in that it describes a preset burst, and it does list the damage for it, but it does NOT specify which damage is the burst setting.

You forgot the option 3: the C-12 never had a preset burst.


That's not a viable option, because the text flat-out tells us that it can be "set to single shot or a five shot burst."
That's a specific setting, a preset burst.

The thing again being overlooked here: in the Rifts Sourcebook, the CV-213 removed the '5 shots' text but kept the 4D6.


I've addressed this before:
The CV-213 is described as "the robot modified version of the Coalition's new CV-212." (SB1 34)
That means that it's the same weapon unless otherwise specified, but "not mentioning a feature" is NOT the same as "otherwise specifying" that the weapon lacks that feature.
And since the CV-213 is described under a Robot's description, instead of being its own weapon entry, it's pretty clear that Palladium cut some of the CV-212's description (including mention of the burst) in favor of substituting the CV-213's robot link, which IS different from the CV-212.
Weapon descriptions that are under robots, vehicles, etc., are often abbreviated compared to full descriptions in the entry for a weapon itself.

Beyond that, we can recognize that it makes no sense for the a weapon that could fire bursts, and to reduce that weapon to single shots only while giving it a cable that allows it to have effectively infinite ammunition.

Killer Cyborg wrote:any way we slice it, the C-12 is not written up like other weapons.

Unless we acknowledge it had a mysterious 5-shot burst just like the GBK had special mini-missiles. They just didn't detail them.


That's still "not written up like other weapons."

Or: 5 shots is a leftover artifact of a 10-shot system which SB editor realized should be taken out when statting skelebot equipment, but that revelation was never repeated because editors miss lots of stuff and changes made in previous books don't always make it to future ones (ergo, the MDC boost that Skelebots got in CWC is not repeated in RUE, where they're back down to their low MDC from the SB)


The rules of the game are "Short bursts fire 20% of the entire magazine," NOT "short bursts fire 20% of one hypothetical magazine the weapon is capable of carrying, regardless of the capacity of the actual magazine that's IN the weapon when you fire."

Killer Cyborg wrote:Why the holy heck would it be a 50% burst from a 10-shot clip....?

Due to us having other examples of laser rifles only getting 10 shots from an average clip.


OTHER rifles having 10 shots per short clip don't have anything to do with the C-12.

HU2p75 seems to at least partially recognize the problem exists


HU2 was written LONG after Rifts, so it doesn't really affect how the C-12 or C-10 were written up.

But if you're saying "the burst rules have always been problematic," I agree.

I will also point out that the JA-9 can also shoot 6 long bursts of 5 shots from a long clip, because that's not a standard clip :)


It can't, though.
A long burst from a long clip in a JA-9 is going to be 15 shots: 50% of the 30-round capacity.

Killer Cyborg wrote:You don't see advantage in the C-12?

I mean... maybe the advantage of the C-12 (pg 203) is it took a weird variant of the standard e-clip that cost 6000 instead of the usual 5000 (pg 223) so maybe there's 2 standards of e-clips (like there's 2 systems of credits) and the CS' more expensive standard clip could give laser rifles twice the payload? *shrug*


The advantages in the C-12 are that it can get 6 short bursts from long clip or canister, as opposed to the C-10 that can only get 5 short bursts from a short clip, or 5 short bursts from a long clip.
(Also, there's a SDC setting, presumably to conserve energy when shooting squishies)

Killer Cyborg wrote:The number of shots you use almost always comes from the size mag you use, not from what kind you CAN use.

That's clearly not the case with pulses, so perhaps it was never intended to be a constant-% variable-shots.


Pulses aren't based on mag size at all.

If you're operating on a "% consumed is constant no matter what clip" then why would that only apply to bursts but not for single shots? It doesn't really mesh in terms of physics.


I don't make the rules.

Killer Cyborg wrote:OR
one can imagine a Palladium that doesn't have their act together, that makes mistakes sometimes, and later clarifies things.

Both can be true. It's not an either/or.


But the simplest explanation that fits the faces is the incompetence without the cabal.

One could interpret "equal to the total number of hand to hand" on RMB196 (Enforcer's CR-2T) as a "specific number" even though that's a variable specific.
This approach does make sense in respect to the JA-11 on 225 since the laser says "equal to the total number of hand" too, and we specifically know it can't burst.


I'd count "equal to the total number of hand to hand" and variants as being a specific number of shot per melee.
If you have 6 attacks, that's only 6 shots.
And this is what ROF the C-27 was updated to in CWC, in order to clarify how the weapon is intended to work.

Note how "number of hand" doesn't appear on any of the other handheld weaopns in RMB, and no other handheld weapon AFAIK is specified as being limited to single-shot like the JA-11's laser is and listing anything other than "number of hand".

Can you find any weapons that list standard but are explicitly "single shot only" or "no bursts" ?


The key word there is "explicitly."

But there's the Fletcher 12 light rail gun (RGMG 118), which "fires single shots," but has a ROF of "Standard.
There's the PN-50 Splatter Gun (same page), which has ROF of "Standard, including bursts!" which isn't what you asked for, but it IS an indication that "standard" doesn't always include bursts.
And there's the NE-6 Magnum Plasma Cartridge Revolver, with it's ROF of "Standard; each shot counts as one melee attack."

Probably some other stuff out there, too.

Killer Cyborg wrote:They didn't replace a C-27 that could fire bursts for 6d6x5; that weapon never existed.
It only appeared that it might exist, because Palladium was crap at defining their ROFs.

They weren't crap though.

They defined ROF just fine for the JA-11 and the TX-11. They knew the importance THERE of defining "only single shots".


No... :-?
Palladium never defined what the Rates of Fire meant in the original books.
They'd tell us "standard" or "equal to the number of combined attacks" or "Aimed, Burst, Wild," but they only bothered to define those terms in the online errata, which has problematic definitions.

If that was intended for the plasma, why wouldn't we also see that there?


Because "Standard" appeared to mean different things depending on which weapon it was applied to, AND Palladium apparently thought we'd all "just use common sense" to decrypt their intended meaning.
The results were unclear in many areas, which is why they clarified by changing the C-27's ROF in CWC.

I mean, the alternative is that they intended for the plasma cannon to be able to unload a clip at somebody for 6d6x10 MD, and later changed their minds.
But it doesn't seem plausible that they'd have a man-portable weapon that could do that kind of damage, for that low of a cost.

Killer Cyborg wrote:If the CS had weapons capable of burst-firing based on a 4d6 MD starting point, much of CWC would look a lot different.


The starting point no longer exists as of CWC, because the C-12 was rewritten as a "number of hand" ROF, which makes it no longer an automatic weapon.


It never WAS an automatic weapon; the preset burst precludes that possibility.

I think the existence of the Triax 4D6 burst capable laser DOES negate your point. Although they're higher-tech than CS in several respects, they manage to be in sync with each other in some other respects.


See the bolded portion of your own answer.
Best case you have here is "it is possible that maybe the CS had some tech on par with Triax, but they decided to abandon that tech in favor of more expensive, less-powerful weaponry."
Last edited by Killer Cyborg on Mon Feb 24, 2020 12:05 am, edited 2 times in total.
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell

Check out my Author Page on Amazon!
User avatar
Orin J.
Adventurer
Posts: 678
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 1:00 pm
Location: a west coast

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Orin J. »

This isn't a topic about energy weapon fire so much as about palladium's editing issues at this point...
User avatar
jaymz
Palladin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by jaymz »

Palladium edits?
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/
User avatar
Zer0 Kay
Megaversal® Ambassador
Posts: 13730
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:59 pm
Location: Snoqualmie, WA

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Zer0 Kay »

Blue_Lion wrote:
Nekira Sudacne wrote:Correct. The general Burst rules were cut and "Standard" rate of fire no longer exists. Energy weapons are either single shot or pulse, which counts as a single shot with no penalties to strike (unless aimed or called when W.P. bonuses are halved. also modern W.P.'s are now broken down by type and they don't all have the same bonus progression). Going by the updated SDC guns in Merc Ops under GAW, it seems 3-round bursts is the limit of most guns, while machineguns have defined short and long bursts that do specific damage for 10 or 20 rounds per burst. No such thing as a full melee burst at all that I can find.

It is more accurate to say that only weapons with burst stats can now do bursts now. Do to the laser vulcan on the iron heart main battle tank. PG 108 rifts mercenaries. It is a energy weapon that says it does bursts. It would be in theory possible to make other burst fire energy weapons.
(In my games I allow creation of Laser mini guns would fire bursts doing similar damage to rail guns, 1d4X10 or 1d6X10 depending on size. So they do not break the game damage wise. Making one would require a weapons engineer but typically require special power packs. )

Laser mini guns are stupid. Allowing a laser minigun to fire burst basically gives it the ability to spray an are. It basically makes the weapon a constant beam or cutting laser. So instead of making it a stupid laser mini gun just introduce freaking constant beam cutting lasers does the damage as listed across a "sprayed" area
:thwak: you some might think you're a :clown: but you're cool in book :ok: :thwak:--Mecha-Viper
BEST IDEA EVER!!! -- The Galactus Kid
Holy crapy, you're Zer0 Kay?! --TriaxTech
Zer0 Kay is my hero. --Atramentus
The Zer0 of Kay, who started this fray,
Kept us laughing until the end. -The Fifth Business (In loving Memory of the teleport thread)
User avatar
jaymz
Palladin
Posts: 8457
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:33 pm
Comment: Yeah yeah yeah just give me my damn XP already :)
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Contact:

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by jaymz »

Um, just to be sure, any weapon that can burst fire can in theory spray an area and not be a "constant beam".

Full auto M-16
M-60 GPMG
Full auto pistols
and yes even laser rifles (or ion, particle and plasma) if they can burst fire.....
I am very opinionated. Yes I rub people the wrong way but at the end of the day I just enjoy good hard discussion and will gladly walk away agreeing to not agree :D

Email - jlaflamme7521@hotmail.com, Facebook - Jaymz LaFlamme, Robotech.com - Icerzone

\m/
User avatar
Zer0 Kay
Megaversal® Ambassador
Posts: 13730
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:59 pm
Location: Snoqualmie, WA

Re: Energy weapon burst firing

Unread post by Zer0 Kay »

jaymz wrote:Um, just to be sure, any weapon that can burst fire can in theory spray an area and not be a "constant beam".

Full auto M-16
M-60 GPMG
Full auto pistols
and yes even laser rifles (or ion, particle and plasma) if they can burst fire.....


Yup. Your just looking at it reverse from the way I am. A machinegun does different damage based on the type of attack. The laser would do the same. It doesnt increase just because you decided to spray.
:thwak: you some might think you're a :clown: but you're cool in book :ok: :thwak:--Mecha-Viper
BEST IDEA EVER!!! -- The Galactus Kid
Holy crapy, you're Zer0 Kay?! --TriaxTech
Zer0 Kay is my hero. --Atramentus
The Zer0 of Kay, who started this fray,
Kept us laughing until the end. -The Fifth Business (In loving Memory of the teleport thread)
Post Reply

Return to “Rifts®”