From Archive: G11

[kato13]

kcdusk 12-03-2005, 03:57 AM In v1.0 i complained the G11 SMG was overpowered, where most SMG/BR/AR had ROF of 3 (each 1 representing a burst of 3 or so bullets) the G11 was a 5!


I was told this is becasue the G11 ROF is so high in real life. I lived with it.


Now in v2.2, the G11 has a ROF of 3 - bullets not bursts - whereas most other SMG have 4 or 5. Its now the G11 that is slow (underpowered).


Tell me, did the G11 slow down or did other guns speed up :-)


No, really, why has the G11 gone from being overpowered to run of the mill, & more importantly which one is right? The G11 isnt head and shoulders above the others now.

********************

ChalkLine 12-03-2005, 04:34 AM The G11 is an amazing firearm, it's an assault rifle that in true German style addresses the problems of combat in ways not done before. One of the requirements for the weapon was it had to put three rounds in a very tight group, too tight for a conventional round to achieve because HK worked out that it needed a rate of 2000 rpm, all three bullets must leave the barrel before the recoil impulse is felt! Normal ammo will cook off at this fire rate (and you can't get rid of the brass fast enough), so HK went with caseless.


Now you can see what has happened, you can get off an enormous amount of accurate three round bursts, which is the 5 x 3 rounds in v1.0, but it's still only a 3 round burst which is how v2.0 and v2.2 handled it.


However, and this seems to have been missed by the T2K designers, the weapon can also fire at a more normal 600 rpm for automatic fire, and it's superior balance and less felt recoil should allow you to keep more rounds on target here.

********************

Targan 12-03-2005, 07:58 AM Maybe you could treat the G11's three rnd burst as a single shot for to-hit purposes, with all three rounds hitting at short range, 1d2+1 hitting at medium, 1d2 hitting at long range and one round hitting at extreme.

********************

Badbru 12-03-2005, 09:34 AM Just picking out something you posted KC that I'm not sure you're clear on, forgive me if you are, all weapons that fire bursts can fire up to FIVE bursts per turn. The number in the ROF column in the weapon descriptions tell you how many bullets are fired in each burst.

Thus G11 up to Five bursts of three bullets each

M249SAW up to FIVE bursts of ten bullets each.

This is because each combat turn is FIVE seconds in duration.

********************

Lindgaard 12-03-2005, 09:42 AM Hello 'KC

Please note that the G11's recoil is : ss 2 brst 3


that allows a pc to fire a lot of shots/bursts without penalties


regards

Lindgaard

********************

kcdusk 12-03-2005, 01:24 PM Yep, was clear on that thanks badbru.


G11 5*3 = 15 bullets


AKM 5*5 = 25 bullets


The thread was just about how in v1.0 the G11 fires comparitively more bullets than in 2.2 verse other weapons.

********************

[Legbreaker]

Anyone have any idea how much a magazine (empty) and individual rounds weigh? Best I can find is the projectile at 3.25 grams and weapon plus 100 rounds 700 grams more than unloaded.

[Legbreaker]

Better give this query a bump now it's been shifted from the archive - Thanks Targan! :P

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Anyone have any idea how much a magazine (empty) and individual rounds weigh? Best I can find is the projectile at 3.25 grams and weapon plus 100 rounds 700 grams more than unloaded.

Future Weapons lists it as 0.17 lb (0.08 kg) for an unloaded magazine, 0.75 lb (0.34 kg) for a loaded magazine with 50 rounds... so ~5.25 grams per round of loose ammo.

- C.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

This is what one of my friends did to stat out the G11 and AN94
I'm basically just quoting him here...

"Full-auto ROF:5, Recoil- SS:2, Brst:4, Range:50
3-rd Burst ROF:3, Recoil- Brst:2, Range:55
With the AN-94, the 2-rd burst Recoil should probably be Brst:1, Range:+5
For me, that gives enough game difference to reflect the real world improvement of such a high ROF without making the weapon the ultimate BFG"

[Legbreaker]

I was just thinking about the G11 and wondered if anyone knows if the designers ever thought about marrying it to a grenade launcher of some type?
It seems to be the way of the future for most weapon systems so it would be reasonable to expect it to happen if the G11 had been issued as planned. My guess is though that a dedicated GL wouldn't have happened until at least the very late 90's, perhaps not even until today.

If one was in the pipeline, would it have been a standard 40mm or would they have tinkered with the idea a bit and gone with something else such as 25mm, 37mm or even developed some type of caseless?

Would use of rifle grenades, perhaps of the BTU variety, have been contemplated?

Thoughts?

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Would use of rifle grenades, perhaps of the BTU variety, have been contemplated?

I'm a big fan of BTU grenades in the T2K universe but I think the 4.7mm round would be a bit under-powered for BTU grenades. The round relies on high velocity combined with small diameter; not much muzzle energy to work with. I could be wrong though. 5.56mm isn't much more powerful and it seems to work fine for BTU grenades.

I completely agree that had the G11 gone into large scale production there would have been a GL program alongside it. I would bet on a 40mm system.

[HorseSoldier]

Probably just some adaptation of the existing HK-69 GL, given the time frame and such, if the German Army identified a requirement for a 40mm GL to go with the G11.

[Legbreaker]

I'm wondering if they might not have gone the 25mm route using the research the US was doing into systems such as the XM-307 and XM-25.
The aim of the G11 was after all to minimise weight while maximising ammunition carried. The advanced 25mm ammo appears to do this admirably (although I'm sure there's glitches to work out).
I'm thinking they may have taken that a step further too and made it caseless given much of the chemistry was already done for the 4.7mm round.
Perhaps something like the Metal Storm GL could have been looked at. http://world.guns.ru/grenade/austr/metal-storm-e.html

By today, it could have developed into an absolutely outstanding system.

[pmulcahy11b]

As a tangent to Leg's post, I am having a hell of a time trying to come up with a good way to simulate, in t2K terms, MetalStorm weapons. One, I haven't been able to find any hard data on weight or barrel length, though these can be given an educated guess. I can't find anything on muzzle velocity at all. There's also a strange thing about MetalStorm weapons: their stacked rounds.

The first round out of the barrel has a certain amount of barrel length to work with. The next round has a little more barrel length to work with, possibly making it a bit more accurate. The third round has a little more barrel length to work with, etc.

And then, there's the cyclic rate of fire. A MetalStorm-type rifle might be able to put 20 rounds well downrange before the shooter would feel the recoil from the first round. Would there even be any recoil modifiers in game terms?

And for the most part, you don't have a mechanical system anymore. This cuts down on felt recoil even more, plus a lot of the ancillary "rattling and shaking" that most automatic weapons have to some degree as a part of their mechanical action.

It's like chokes on a shotgun. I've been wrestling with this for a while, fruitlessly.

[B.T.]

Leg,

I have never heard of the idea, to amalgate grenade launcher and G11. I served 1985 to 1986, at a time, where the G11 project had not been cancelled. IIRC the "Granatpistole" (a.k.a. HK-69) had just been fielded. It was the only weapon we tossed around, but never shot with. From these facts I'd guess, the Bundeswehr did not plan an underslung grenade launcher. The "Granatpistole" would have been the choice at that time IRL.

In the game I use HK-69 as part of the regular armament of the Bundeswehr. In the "yellow bible" it says, the TGS can be attached to all battle and assault rifles. This would include the G11, in my opinion. I personally let the TGS appear only in units equipped with G3 or G41, but if a player would like to put a TGS underneath his G11, I'd let him.

[pmulcahy11b]

The G-11 is just shaped very different from any other rifle. Every weapon requires some sort of adapter to allow it to accept an underslung grenade launcher (even if it's just a MIL-STD-1913 rail); I would think, however, that the adapter required in this case would be peculiar to the G-11, because of its shape.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

One aspect of the MetalStorm system is that because the system is controlled electronically, each round could be factory set to have the same accuracy despite the differences in barrel length each subsequent round would get. Support weapon versions of the MetalStorm concept apparently made use of this feature to have a programmable spread if multiple rounds were to be fired on the same target.
All in all, it just makes the concept that much more of a problem to model in a game

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

As a tangent to Leg's post, I am having a hell of a time trying to come up with a good way to simulate, in t2K terms, MetalStorm weapons. One, I haven't been able to find any hard data on weight or barrel length, though these can be given an educated guess. I can't find anything on muzzle velocity at all. There's also a strange thing about MetalStorm weapons: their stacked rounds.

The first round out of the barrel has a certain amount of barrel length to work with. The next round has a little more barrel length to work with, possibly making it a bit more accurate. The third round has a little more barrel length to work with, etc.

And then, there's the cyclic rate of fire. A MetalStorm-type rifle might be able to put 20 rounds well downrange before the shooter would feel the recoil from the first round. Would there even be any recoil modifiers in game terms?

And for the most part, you don't have a mechanical system anymore. This cuts down on felt recoil even more, plus a lot of the ancillary "rattling and shaking" that most automatic weapons have to some degree as a part of their mechanical action.

It's like chokes on a shotgun. I've been wrestling with this for a while, fruitlessly.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by B.T.

I have never heard of the idea, to amalgate grenade launcher and G11.

Neither had I which was the purpose of my question. However, given the moves in the last decade or so for more intergrated weapons systems with lots of bells and whistles, it seems like something they'd play about with.

Originally Posted by B.T.

I personally let the TGS appear only in units equipped with G3 or G41, but if a player would like to put a TGS underneath his G11, I'd let him.

If the Australians could fit an M203 under a Steyr AUG, then anything is possible!
HOWEVER, it wasn't easy or quick and took some serious work. I'd imagine the G11 would have a similar long development process and it's not something that could be done by PCs in the field in T2K. In T2013 on the other hand it's plausible a G11 GL or an adaptor system could have been developed and could potentially be attached and removed in the field.

[Bullet Magnet]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Neither had I which was the purpose of my question. However, given the moves in the last decade or so for more intergrated weapons systems with lots of bells and whistles, it seems like something they'd play about with.


If the Australians could fit an M203 under a Steyr AUG, then anything is possible!
HOWEVER, it wasn't easy or quick and took some serious work. I'd imagine the G11 would have a similar long development process and it's not something that could be done by PCs in the field in T2K. In T2013 on the other hand it's plausible a G11 GL or an adaptor system could have been developed and could potentially be attached and removed in the field.

If something could be developed for the G11, it's possible someone could have come up with it in T2K. What we didn't have here in the real world is a war to get someone to say "We need it". So, possibly, when someone had the tools and materials to work with, the right thing was concocted.

Now, whether or not your GM will be generous enough to allow this is another matter.

[Legbreaker]

I just don't see that happening for T2K.
The F88 Steyr was issued well before the G11 was to have been to the Germans. The GL attachment for the Steyr AUG took a few years to develop and we already had set a precedent of underbarrel GLs by our earlier adoption of the M16/M203 combination. I'm not sure the Germans had bothered with the concept and therefore probably wouldn't have had the same drive to develop a system for the G11 in time for issue in T2K.

Take a look at the scale of issue for the US forces prior to 2000 IRL. Then look at what it is today. I'm not just talking GLs here though but all the additional bit and peices which now seem to be standard issue on almost every US rifle. It's really only the last decade where a bog standard rifle has been seen as just not good enough.

[B.T.]

Paul is certainly right, in pointing out, that the shape of the G11 is unique.
And Leg is certainly right, when he says, it would be time consuming and requiring some toolshopping, to fit a GL to the G11.

I'm not shure, if I did understand that right: In the rules (V2.2 defenitely!) there is a newer variant of the M203 GL, the PIP model. I think it is the TALON in Kevin Dockery: "Compendium of modern firearms" by R. Talsorian Games. The TALON uses a device, at the time of publication, that Dockery describes as: " ... a quick release for the weapon combined with a universal mounting bar ...".
I can imagine, that the way to bring G11 and an underslung GL together, would copy that system. Maybe, as an interim solution, such a system might have been pruduced by H&K. But as said above, I think such a combo would be not in widespread use.

No ideas about T2013. But why not? The inovative ideas (OICV!) where there. And nowadays you cannot produce weapons without rail system. Even rail sysems for FN 2000 and the Steyer AUG exist!