Twilight 2013

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Gabe The Gun

Had our first session of 2013 and all I gotta' say is I love this system, the game is great! I don't see ANY reason sombody wouldn't like it. Its got my vote for sure!!!!!!!!!!

Hang on. Such a strong recommendation and you haven't tried it out in combat yet?

[Snake Eyes]

Well, character generation is a rather compelling undertaking.

[Gabe The Gun]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Hang on. Such a strong recommendation and you haven't tried it out in combat yet?

We have had our first engagement in combat and my original statement remains unchanged!
2013 is a GREAT game, I don't see ANY reason someone would not like this game! It is totally worth the money to buy the book. You would NOT be dissapointed. Just be prepared for some heavy studying thats all.

[Gabe The Gun]

Well, it all started something like this in short.
We needed some info. Went to an ureputable scumbag for some info exchanging. A meet was set up. We met. Scumbag #2 wasn't REALLY Scumbag #2. We give them the finger and start walking away. Thay raise weopons and theeennn..................
A PC pulls a pistol and starts melting faces before they knew what hit em' , then my PC turns to a bunker with 2 NPC's manning an MG-42 in a bunker and melts one of thier faces with a 6 round aimed burst. Then another PC and Snake Eyes PC start exploding people from a sniper position they had set up the day before, And when I mean EXPLODEING people thats EXACTLY what I mean! Snake Eyes PC is calling shots w/ Lapua rounds, and the other sniper PC is calling shots with a .50 cal.
It was like a ballet of face melting carnage, beautiful! Well done brother Snake. And fill in any details I mite have missed dude, I was just trying to spit out a quik report.

[HorseSoldier]

454 Casull --> Not a serious gunfighter's gun in the real world, but in a game it kind of depends on how stridently realistic you want to be. On the plus side, using a revolver of any sort in a T2K/apocalyptic/etc setting makes keeping up with your brass easy. A source for bullets with which to reload it would be more of a trick in Europe.

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

<snip> but in a game it kind of depends on how stridently realistic you want to be. <snip>

This is exactly why we came up with a three stage system. The default level, Stage 2, is what most normal gamers would expect, striving for a balance between crunch and speed of play. Stage 1 is for the people who really don't care about anything except the most basic of rules and want to focus on the story and speed of play. Stage 3 is for people who want to know the fine details of everything and want to mimic reality as closely as possible, though not to the level of games like Phoenix Command and Rolemaster.

The beauty is, the stages are designed to be interchangeable. You want detailed task/skill resolution but don't care about combat, mix and match the stages to give you what you want. I'm not going to open a debate about the backstory, but the ruleset itself is very solid. Not perfect, but pretty damned good.

[Snake Eyes]

I think the only thing Gabe missed was some well-timed 40mm HEDP carnage on his guy's part. Over three exchanges of fire, in relatively clear weather on a calm morning, my guy went four for six with center mass hits against moving and partially concealed hostiles in previously marked and ranged locations with a Desert Tactical .338 Lapua SRS from a fixed prone firing position at ~200m distance in at least one case thru a cinder block wall. He didn't hit on every shot, but that which he hit, he either killed or removed from further tactical consideration.

And, in defense of 2013's levels of staged rule interchangeability, it should be noted and loudly disclaimed that our group tends to play out on the extra-crispy fringe of crunch - including miniatures and house rules to make certain aspects even more complicated. Sometimes it flows clunkier than we'd like but we have fun and at the end of the day that is what it's all about.

[Gabe The Gun]

Originally Posted by Snake Eyes

I think the only thing Gabe missed was some well-timed 40mm HEDP carnage on his guy's part. Over three exchanges of fire, in relatively clear weather on a calm morning, my guy went four for six with center mass hits against moving and partially concealed hostiles in previously marked and ranged locations with a Desert Tactical .338 Lapua SRS from a fixed prone firing position at ~200m distance in at least one case thru a cinder block wall. He didn't hit on every shot, but that which he hit, he either killed or removed from further tactical consideration.

And, in defense of 2013's levels of staged rule interchangeability, it should be noted and loudly disclaimed that our group tends to play out on the extra-crispy fringe of crunch - including miniatures and house rules to make certain aspects even more complicated. Sometimes it flows clunkier than we'd like but we have fun and at the end of the day that is what it's all about.

Well said Snake.

[Graebarde]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

454 Casull --> Not a serious gunfighter's gun in the real world, but in a game it kind of depends on how stridently realistic you want to be. On the plus side, using a revolver of any sort in a T2K/apocalyptic/etc setting makes keeping up with your brass easy. A source for bullets with which to reload it would be more of a trick in Europe.

The bullets would not be the constraining factor I think in the reload process in Europe or other locations (even in US after the TDM), rather the primers. Bullets can be cast from lead (or gold??? silver??) where as the primers are MUCH more difficult to construct, not saying it can't be done, just extremely difficult. Even more so than powder.. Which lends a thought of revolver v. semiauto.. I think you could use black powder in ANY revolver load (experimentation required for the proper amount of course) while I seriously doubt you could get a semi-auto to function for long using said 'dirty' propellant. ?????

Grae

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by Graebarde

The bullets would not be the constraining factor I think in the reload process in Europe or other locations (even in US after the TDM), rather the primers. Bullets can be cast from lead (or gold??? silver??) where as the primers are MUCH more difficult to construct, not saying it can't be done, just extremely difficult. Even more so than powder.. Which lends a thought of revolver v. semiauto.. I think you could use black powder in ANY revolver load (experimentation required for the proper amount of course) while I seriously doubt you could get a semi-auto to function for long using said 'dirty' propellant. ?????

Grae

I agree with Grae on this - primers are difficult at best to make without proper equipment and raw materials.

I also think that using blackpowder loads in a semi auto or full auto would rapidly clog everything up with residue / fouling to the extent that after as little as 5 - X? rounds you would in effect have a singleshot weapon like a bolt action or similar .Also -getting the required amount of power to move the mechanism could be a problem in small caliber autos like 9mm. Unless you have quite potent blackpowder and reliable loading data ,getting an auto to work is hard -all in my humble opinion .A revolver like the .454 would be a good choice as you could use a hard load of BP ,and because the length of the chamber leaves wide tolerances regarding the fit of the cartridge after its been reloaded.

There has been written some OT sci-fi material on it called "Guns of the South" by mr.Turtledove i think .(AKs in the Civil War )

But when that is said , designing an auto small arm for blackpowder loads isnt totally unrealistic - I believe it could be done .I do not however see that it would be possible to make it very accurate or reliable on the level of modern firearms -you would need a system that is geared towards handling major fouling and uneven quality of cartridge and load .Even then it would only be able to function properly a limited number of rounds -whereas something like the AK-47 can take hundreds or thousands of modern cartridge rounds without being fieldstripped.

Further ,I think the brass would present a major obstacle a little down the road .Modern brass can be reloaded 10-20 times or so depending on quality ,loads etc .But they have tight tolerances regarding dimensions etc meaning that 1/32 of an inch differnce could mean a jam .

In a revolver type weapon this would not be as critical as the chamber allows for this.Most modern firearms will easily handle the pressures from blackpowder loads - theoretically it generates a lot less pressure than nitrate based propellants.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Graebarde

The bullets would not be the constraining factor I think in the reload process in Europe or other locations (even in US after the TDM), rather the primers. Bullets can be cast from lead (or gold??? silver??) where as the primers are MUCH more difficult to construct, not saying it can't be done, just extremely difficult. Even more so than powder.. Which lends a thought of revolver v. semiauto.. I think you could use black powder in ANY revolver load (experimentation required for the proper amount of course) while I seriously doubt you could get a semi-auto to function for long using said 'dirty' propellant. ?????

I agree. You should be able to keep a revolver firing indefinitely using black powder loads.

[pmulcahy11b]

Most lever-action rifles function well with blackpowder rounds -- many these days are specifically designed for it, for use by Cowboy Action enthusiasts. They offer you a decent rate of fire while still being able to use blackpowder rounds, and many are chambered for revolver rounds, allowing you to interchange rounds between your rifle and revolver if necessary.

[HorseSoldier]

Originally Posted by Graebarde

The bullets would not be the constraining factor I think in the reload process in Europe or other locations (even in US after the TDM), rather the primers. Bullets can be cast from lead (or gold??? silver??) where as the primers are MUCH more difficult to construct, not saying it can't be done, just extremely difficult. Even more so than powder.. Which lends a thought of revolver v. semiauto.. I think you could use black powder in ANY revolver load (experimentation required for the proper amount of course) while I seriously doubt you could get a semi-auto to function for long using said 'dirty' propellant. ?????

Grae

Provided you had dies to make the bullets with, or the skills to make them (a lot of stuff in T2K is real easy if you have the knowledge to build the tools needed to build the tools . . .).

Revolvers and black powder should work out well -- all revolver cases are oversized for what they are and so you'd better be able to deal with the drop in power by switching to black powder. You'd still have fairly anemic loads compared to +P+ smokeless loadings, but you'd be putting rounds downrange when a semi-auto couldn't.

Blackpowder will work in semi-autos if you're willing to accept that your weapon is going to be a straight-pull bolt action. You likely wouldn't ever get enough pressure to cycle actions built for more modern powders at all, or possibly just enough to get misfires even if the weapon is spotlessly clean.

[Graebarde]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

Provided you had dies to make the bullets with, or the skills to make them (a lot of stuff in T2K is real easy if you have the knowledge to build the tools needed to build the tools . . .).

Too true.. KNOWLEDGE is the KEY weapon in survival, along with APPLICATION for said knowledge.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Graebarde

Bullets can be cast from lead (or gold??? silver??)

Does anyone know any real information about using these metals in bullets? I've heard that a gold bullet would be dense and heavy, but pretty soft; it would have poor penetration, but make a bigger mess than a dumdum on soft tissue. I don't have any real idea what the characteristics of a silver bullet would actually be.

I remember asking this on the Yahoo group about 10 years ago, but never really got a good answer: on some cop show, they couldn't at first find the bullet in the body, even though there was no exit wound. It turns out that the bullet was made of ground beef frozen in liquid nitrogen. Other than the difficulties of keeping such a bullet frozen, what would the characteristics of a ground-beef bullet really be?

I saw an episode of Mythbusters a few months ago, where they tested the idea of an ice bullet. Turned out that every time they tried to fire the ice bullet (even when frozen in liquid nitrogen), the bullet just shattered inside the barrel and did no damage to the target. So that idea's out the window.

[HorseSoldier]

Hmmm -- interesting question, and I don't really have any answers.

Silver is nearly the same specific gravity as lead, so a silver bullet should retain energy and such as well as a lead projectile. No idea on how the other characteristics of the metal would translate into ballistic performance.

I'd think a gold bullet would behave like a lead one, only be quite a bit heavier. You might have to use some sort of gas check or similar to protect the base of the bullet from powder gasses (and some sort of jacket as well if you're using it in an autoloader).