Popular weapons *PWN* better ones in RPGs

[Whisky]

I like how whenever we mention JA2 we all start gushing about our experiences with it. It's a good game.

Usually I end up going for weapons that I think are cool in real life; in 1.13 there's a lot of guns to pick from and many of them have only small differences in stats. Some exceptions apply, I like the Mosin Nagant but it's not so good in JA2 1.13 because of the bolt and there being far better rifles for sniping.

 

[GarfunkeL]

You know that the meticulous blacksmithing katanas required was due to the poor quality of Japanese iron and steel? Not because it made the sword somehow magically better.

 

[SniperHF]

Arguing about which weapons should be more accurate than others in RPGs or even shooters based on real life research is pretty stupid in general. If weapon A IRL is more accurate than weapon B the difference in a practical battle situation is still largely nothing. If we are talking about weapons in good working order that is. The difference is generally in millimeters in normal situations not even inches. And even the difference of inches is pretty irrelevant if you are talking about soldiers shooting off hand while their heart rates are racing in distances of 300m or less. Trigger control, breathing, eyesight, arm strength, and other physical/mental diciplines are much more relevant than the type of weapon vis-a-vis accuracy.

So really if you wanna argue for researched weapons in your RPGs you should also argue for the character system having SIGNIFICANTLY more impact on combat effectiveness than weapons. Thus making most of your first argument moot anyway.

 

[Darth Roxor]

P. fitting analogy for sure

An analogy that won't make sense until you study how to use a katana and stop thinking of sword fights as two metal sticks clashing with one another repeatedly.

Roger that sensei. Now could you please enlighten us plebs on how katana is so fundamentally different from every other sword ever

grorious nippon steel cut thru tanks

 

[odrzut]

katana being much better than an European broadsword in all respects

Katana is hard enough, but also flexible - it reverberates so it doesn't get stuck when going through human body. It's long enough but not exceedingly so. It has weight, but is not heavy enough to lose effectiveness if you lose muscle mass. It allows powerful cutting without losing balance or creating large openings for counterattack.

If I was stuck in a zombie apocalypse and had to choose a blunt weapon, I'd find an abandoned dojo to loot, and stock up on katanas.

Katanas were made from poor quality steel because Japan had no good steel deposits (hence the weird and time-consumming smithing technique). That's the reason they were so thick (see for yourself but not on modern-made katana replicas as these are made using the same technique that European swords use). Historic katana is heavier and thicker than European bastard sword, while being shorter than them (when you only count the blade not the hilt). Bastard sword can be used with one hand because it's lighter. Katanas are 2-hands only because of the weight. And the reach is better with bastard sword (2-handed grip reduces reach because with 1-handed grip you can skew your body and move one arm closer to the enemy - try for yourself).

Thick sword isn't very good at cutting - more flesh to displace = worse cutting power. Yes katana is curved but not vey curved. Sabres were curved a lot more AND were less thick than katanas.

The thickness of Katana is also because it wasn't spring-tampered. European swords were tampered 2 times, onc for hard edge, the second so the spring back into shape instead of bending. Katanas only have hardened edge - you can bend katana much easier than European sword so they need the thickness.

The steel problems is also why you are not supposed to parry with katana.

If you want ultimate cutting sword take a sabre. top-most 1/3rd of the blade was for cutting (both edges), the rest was for parrying and you actually could parry with it because it was a good steel. You could use it with one hand effectively, even on a horse. That's why in the end of white weapons era in Europe everybody used sabres - they were good for what they do. But that was recent development, before that each century a different weapon was the most popular. That's progress for you.

Meanwhile in Japan they were stuck with XV-th century work-around technology because tradition.

 

[laclongquan]

Eh? That's exactly what endear FOT to us: it try to cleave to reality abit more.

The concept of shooting like firehose instead of taking aimed shot is realistic as fuck. You are American, I am sure you can find at your fingertip a magazine article listed the amount of bullets shot per estimated wound in Iraq. The number is just insane. So in FOT, when you shoot like free bullets, it's pretty realistic and I love them for it.

Sniping, especially at mid game when we deal with tough supermutants, fall to cover shoot. How you use it is to get high ground and let snipers autoshoot any one within their HUGE range to draw them toward ambush zone you have prepared. In late game you use callshot eye to get a golden bb on robot. Also autoshoot, because TB shoot is terrible slow.

AK-clone instead of FNFAL because a very simple central concept of AK: durability. You throw it into a mudhole. One week later pick it up, do a simple clean then shoot. That's what it is: durable. Belgian and US guns has one similar huge weakness: they are too complicated and require constant maintainance. There's the basis behind why so many AK survive but not much US guns.

Honey you are in the army now. O ooooo you are in the army now.

FN FAL > M16 in Fallout Tactics

At least that. AK47 was a quite respectable gun in FOT, pretty much THE standby gun of the middle-game, excellent for fighting Beastlords and Deathclaws* until Super Mutants started showing up with their murderous big guns and their high HP and DR/DT.

FOT was also a bit bizarre because sniping was fail there. Sniper rifles and called shots sucked, the way to victory was to fire as many shots as you could - totally different from original games, where called shots were king.


*which were quite lame in FOT, for some reason. Multiplayer balance? Afraid of throwing real deaths at early game?

The problem there is even worse
There should be no FN FAL or M16 in Fallout Tactics. I would't have minded the AK47 because it was cannonical (There was a AK-112 in Fallout - It was terribad, btw. Better used for selling or kindling), but the rest simply didn't belong. When you consider all the WWI and WWII weaponry in that game, you wonder if all factions are getting their guns from museums or something. Hell, I would't mind seeing a old, pre-divergence gun pop-up - Say, hand-made post nuclear AK47 clones, the Browing HP 1911 was well-done, but the rest were bullshit.

Another problem is that most devs (esp. pre-google devs) had no grasp of guns whatsoever, so the result is that you had weirdness where a pistol >>> assault rifle. Fallout/2 is a good example of this, all the assault/battle rifles are crap inferior even to SMGs, what you want are good guns like Desert Eagle, Hunting Rife, Combat Shotty, Sniper Rifle, 14mm, .223 Pistol, etc. Remember the FN-FAL in FO2? Horribad crap gun, ammo modifier was good but the damage was wtf and it had a 10-round burst that was simply DERP. Assault Rifle was same thing. To someone who had a friend in military telling me FN-FAL was one hell of a gun, it was simply frustrating. Only Assault Rifle that was good was the H&KG11(E), and it weirdly had a SMG model AND counted as a two-handed weapon - What the fuck.

 

[Turrul]

AK's in wasteland is a logical. Even children could do its maintenance, that's why 12 year olds in Africa can use it.

Only problem is that It's kinda weird to have all those AK's since they're a Soviet weapon. Considering Fallout's setting, I don't think there'd be many Soviet weapons in America.

 

[Johannes]

The concept of shooting like firehose instead of taking aimed shot is realistic as fuck. You are American, I am sure you can find at your fingertip a magazine article listed the amount of bullets shot per estimated wound in Iraq. The number is just insane. So in FOT, when you shoot like free bullets, it's pretty realistic and I love them for it.

Most of the bullets shot are suppression fire. Most hits do come from aimed shots.

 

[DraQ]

True, katana is an optimization marvel because of an attempt to make shitty wapanese steel count.
And yeah, surprisingly (considering its arpeegee depictions) it was actually heavier than western bastard sword.

Though wasn't katana technically usable 1h for a strong and skilled individual? Wapanese famous duelist-troll Musashi even dual wielded IIRC.

If you want ultimate cutting sword take a sabre. top-most 1/3rd of the blade was for cutting (both edges), the rest was for parrying and you actually could parry with it because it was a good steel. You could use it with one hand effectively, even on a horse. That's why in the end of white weapons era in Europe everybody used sabres - they were good for what they do.

 

[odrzut]

Notice I said that about XXth century sabres - Polish and Hungarian XVIII-th century ones, while good for the time were worse just because the materials were worse back then.

 

[Gozma]

Why didn't I hear the katanas = heavy thing in the eurosword vs. nipponsword recurring internet battles of a few years ago (of which I was a mostly a pro-eurosword noncombatant), is this new research

Edit - Also in 1.13 I just use stuff chambered in 5.56 because there are huge amounts of it and you can have a guy rip off suppression with a SAW for a thousand turns without running out. Also to avoid the P90/Russiaboo weapons where they give them like 3x armor piercing subsonic bullets and shit

 

[Hobo Elf]

katana being much better than an European broadsword in all respects

Katana is hard enough, but also flexible - it reverberates so it doesn't get stuck when going through human body. It's long enough but not exceedingly so. It has weight, but is not heavy enough to lose effectiveness if you lose muscle mass. It allows powerful cutting without losing balance or creating large openings for counterattack.

If I was stuck in a zombie apocalypse and had to choose a blunt weapon, I'd find an abandoned dojo to loot, and stock up on katanas.

Katanas were made from poor quality steel because Japan had no good steel deposits (hence the weird and time-consumming smithing technique).

It's not even a weird smithing technique. I know people like to credit Japanese smiths as magical sages who came into secret wisdom and understanding to invent the folding technique, but the truth is that Europe was already using this technique thousands of years before Japan invented it. It was eventually dropped in favor of better techniques, but Japan had no such luxury as their weak ore demanded them to fold.

Edit: And I just want to add that Japanese swordsmiths still use the folding technique because it is required to by law, despite being utterly obsolete.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Also

 

[MrMarbles]

katana being much better than an European broadsword in all respects

Katana is hard enough, but also flexible - it reverberates so it doesn't get stuck when going through human body. It's long enough but not exceedingly so. It has weight, but is not heavy enough to lose effectiveness if you lose muscle mass. It allows powerful cutting without losing balance or creating large openings for counterattack.

If I was stuck in a zombie apocalypse and had to choose a blunt weapon, I'd find an abandoned dojo to loot, and stock up on katanas.

Katanas were made from poor quality steel because Japan had no good steel deposits (hence the weird and time-consumming smithing technique). That's the reason they were so thick (see for yourself but not on modern-made katana replicas as these are made using the same technique that European swords use). Historic katana is heavier and thicker than European bastard sword, while being shorter than them (when you only count the blade not the hilt). Bastard sword can be used with one hand because it's lighter. Katanas are 2-hands only because of the weight. And the reach is better with bastard sword (2-handed grip reduces reach because with 1-handed grip you can skew your body and move one arm closer to the enemy - try for yourself).

Thick sword isn't very good at cutting - more flesh to displace = worse cutting power. Yes katana is curved but not vey curved. Sabres were curved a lot more AND were less thick than katanas.

The thickness of Katana is also because it wasn't spring-tampered. European swords were tampered 2 times, onc for hard edge, the second so the spring back into shape instead of bending. Katanas only have hardened edge - you can bend katana much easier than European sword so they need the thickness.

The steel problems is also why you are not supposed to parry with katana.

If you want ultimate cutting sword take a sabre. top-most 1/3rd of the blade was for cutting (both edges), the rest was for parrying and you actually could parry with it because it was a good steel. You could use it with one hand effectively, even on a horse. That's why in the end of white weapons era in Europe everybody used sabres - they were good for what they do. But that was recent development, before that each century a different weapon was the most popular. That's progress for you.

Meanwhile in Japan they were stuck with XV-th century work-around technology because tradition.

In addition to lightness, reach and strength the eurosword could also sport more than one edge for cutting and, crucially, a swordhilt. I'd very much like a swordhilt. Wouldn't want to be called "Stumpy" the rest of my life, but maybe that's just me.

 

[odrzut]

Why didn't I hear the katanas = heavy thing in the eurosword vs. nipponsword recurring internet battles of a few years ago (of which I was a mostly a pro-eurosword noncombatant), is this new research

Because these battles are fought by fanboys.

http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?94993-Japanese-sword-vs-European-sword-surprised

EDIT: regarding the weight of katana vs eurosword - it depends on the length, but for the same length katana will be heavier.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Though wasn't katana technically usable 1h for a strong and skilled individual? Wapanese famous duelist-troll Musashi even dual wielded IIRC.

You can dual wield it with a wakisazhi or another kind of short sword, which looks wicked cool but it's not the greatest idea because you'll still be holding a heavy sword with one hand. Musashi is famous because he's badass, not a good example of what regular fags can do.

grorious nippon steel cut thru tanks

 

[Fowyr]

Only problem is that It's kinda weird to have all those AK's since they're a Soviet weapon. Considering Fallout's setting, I don't think there'd be many Soviet weapons in America.

You forgot about China's invasion.
It's probably something like a Chinese clone of AK (Type 56 assault rifle. Of course, IRL it was first produced in 1956, but I can't remember point of divergence of Fallout and RL) or just an exact chinese copy. And I believe that China shipped shitton of them. Real-real shitton of them. Just look at photos of Sino-Vietnamese War. It was 1979 and they still massively used Type 56 carbine (Chinese copy of SKS), Type 56 AR and Type 56 machine gun (Soviet RPD, abandoned by SU long ago).
So I believe that they used everything from Gauss rifles to old C96 Mausers.

 

[SymbolicFrank]

AK-clone instead of FNFAL because a very simple central concept of AK: durability. You throw it into a mudhole. One week later pick it up, do a simple clean then shoot. That's what it is: durable. Belgian and US guns has one similar huge weakness: they are too complicated and require constant maintainance. There's the basis behind why so many AK survive but not much US guns.

An FN FAL is about as durable as an AK-47. There was a long thread at some weapons forum about a guy that hadn't cleaned his FAL he used every week for years, and it still worked very well. With a lot of other people chiming in with likewise stories. Although most people thought it was a shame and that you need to keep your guns spotless at all times. Probably because otherwise their M16s stop working

 

[mondblut]

Like, an M16 consistently being more accurate, having a larger range and doing more damage than an FN FAL

Uh, where? In JA2, E5/762, JA1 (replace FAL with M14) the 7.62x51 battle rifles are consistently superior to modern assault rifles statwise, save for being heavy and using less ammo per magazine (i.e. the things that actually matter most IRL, but are nearly pointless in games )

The only exception that comes to mind is the False Fallout where a clear G3 clone is inferior to a chinese AK clone, both being chambered to 5.56 though. But, I guess, just because a 22nd century assault rifle looks like G3 it doesn't necessarily perform like one, just ask the tank crews in Warhammer 41914.

 

[SymbolicFrank]

Another thing about the Katana vs. European sword: most European swords used in battle against armored opponents were either used for bashing (the large two-handers) or for piercing. And the better the quality of the steel became, the thinner the point could be. That's why most later long swords are triangular.

After the introduction of firearms, speed and horseback riding became more popular, and the use of plate armor declined. That's why sabres became popular.

 

[a Goat]

True, katana is an optimization marvel because of an attempt to make shitty wapanese steel count.
And yeah, surprisingly (considering its arpeegee depictions) it was actually heavier than western bastard sword.

Though wasn't katana technically usable 1h for a strong and skilled individual? Wapanese famous duelist-troll Musashi even dual wielded IIRC.

Musashi didn't dual wielded katanas in a way you'd think.
He used second one(probably custom-made) as a parrying dagger, a technique he borrowed from Portuguese sailors(who tended to fight duels with samurais and usually won them because better technique).

Japan was backwards when it comes to fencing, perhaps because katanas were last-resort side weapons and they focused on bows, lances and naginatas. That's why Japanese were so hard into fast, surprise attacks with it.

 

[odrzut]

Regarding the XXth century sabres (and now I'm entering the fanboy territory) Polish wz. 34 sabre was quite nice: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szabla_wz._34

It was 82.5cm long, weighted 0.91 kg. The technical tests that all these sabres received by army had to pass were:

• when dropped free from the height of 2 metres it was to pierce a steel sheet 2 millimetres (0.079 in) thick
• cut five 5 mm steel bars without damaging the edge
• survive a powerful blows into a hardwood stub with the flat and the spine, without any damages to the blade
• the blade pressed against a hardwood stub was to bend 150 millimetres (5.9 in) to either side without breaking or deforming
• the sheath placed flat on two bricks was to survive a 120 kilograms (260 lb)

Try that with older weapons, especially katanas

Of course Poland would be better off buying more tanks and planes in 1934-1939 instead of these sabres, but war won against USSR in 1920 made the wrong impression on Polish army that cavalry is still teh shit.

 

[shihonage]

Also

I just tried cutting someone with a hammer and that didn't work either. What a cruel world.

In addition to lightness, reach and strength the eurosword could also sport more than one edge for cutting and, crucially, a swordhilt. I'd very much like a swordhilt. Wouldn't want to be called "Stumpy" the rest of my life, but maybe that's just me.

Katanas have tsuba. It is a hand guard.

many words

One could say that the habit of not parrying with katanas is what actually forced better martial technique to be developed around them. You never want to come to full stop in a swordfight. You never want to stop your energy, or even your opponent's energy. The blade is an extension of you, and like you, it must be alive.

Lightness tied to improved usability is another questionable assertion. Less mass is not good for cutting through resistant human body. Another questionable assumption is that improved reach with one-handed swords has no negative tradeoffs, such as loss of balance and power. Finally, katanas are quite usable with one hand. There are techniques where you pull out the katana and immediately cut your opponent in the same movement.

In short, your post is a mix of factual information on sword manufacturing, mixed with subjective opinion on their comparative usability.

 

[Norfleet]

Jagged Alliance 2

Where the C7 is the best weapon?

Is it? I seem to recall favoring the FAL over it also. Having had and used both in the game, the FAL was still my weapon of choice over it.

Only problem is that It's kinda weird to have all those AK's since they're a Soviet weapon. Considering Fallout's setting, I don't think there'd be many Soviet weapons in America.

You underestimate the AK. More AKs have been made than every other assault rifle put together.

 

[Raghar]

In addition to lightness, reach and strength the eurosword could also sport more than one edge for cutting and, crucially, a swordhilt. I'd very much like a swordhilt. Wouldn't want to be called "Stumpy" the rest of my life, but maybe that's just me.

Normally you use this with the sword.