What's new
Star Army

Star ArmyⓇ is a landmark of forum roleplaying. Opened in 2002, Star Army is like an internet clubhouse for people who love roleplaying, art, and worldbuilding. Anyone 18 or older may join for free. New members are welcome! Use the "Register" button below.

Note: This is a play-by-post RPG site. If you're looking for the tabletop miniatures wargame "5150: Star Army" instead, see Two Hour Wargames.

  • If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
  • 📅 October and November 2024 are YE 46.8 in the RP.

Closed I propose a idea: non power armored units should be allowed to use and make teir 4 weapons.

These suggestions have been dropped by the suggestor or rejected by staff.
ShadowWalker

ShadowWalker

Inactive Member
Given the state of the wiki and lack of a proper if any hard ruling on things I propose an idea. Non power armored infantry can use weapons up to tier 4, I have a couple reasons for this and in a moment, I'm going to go over them with you all.


the statement "It's too powerful for an infantry man to have one." This doesn't really hold up well as an excuse, often doweled out as an excuse by older members and game masters. Yet a quick search threw the wiki you will find a varying degree of weapons that not only meet tier 4 (anti light power armor but sometimes exceed that). The Mutagenic Assault weapon and the lepra are some examples of this, the MAW, for instance is a teir 5 (anti medium power armor) weapon made by the star army and non-power armor infantry can use it without issue. and the Rythankins have a teir 4 pistol that you don't need power armor because "its anti-matter."


Another reason as stated above is no one seems to ever want to fallow the teir 4 or higher is limited to power armor due to rule of cool or some reason. and when you bring it up to them their cookie cutter response it "its sci fi, the calibers and stuff don't make sense that's just how it is." but such a statement interferes with what they said above. So either there's really a rule that states that or its a opinion that is chosen to be followed by certain people and not for others.

So, with the fallowing examples showing that there's either a lack of understanding how to treat the ruling when it comes to sci vs convential or semi realistic weapons. or due to wanting to do the rule of cool, the tier four weapon types being used by non-power armored individuals is a touchy subject so to solve headaches i think non power armored individuals should be able to have infantry weapons of at maximum tier 4 weapons. to not only solve this problem and put it to bed but also allow people in character who may play independents to still have a fighting chance when they can't afford power armor.
 
Upvote -4 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
They’ve been able to, Shadow, since August 5th, 2010.

[Will be editing this into a more permanent post later today, as I need to go get breakfast, go to class, then go back to my dorm and sleep after pulling an all-nighter.]

- - -

Edit: Turning it into a separate post, as you either can't insert quotes into an edited post or do so in a way that escapes my befuddled brain at the moment. [Angry Frost noises intensify]
 
Last edited:
Yup. This has been a thing. Unfortunately, widespread knowledge of this ruling has not permeated as far as it needs to, even in NTSE.

This fact has given me many headaches, even to the point of shorting many of my works, and derivitives made by others, including the Mjolnir pistol based on the Storm Rifle ammunition. It even stopped me from producing varient ammunition articles for the Storm Rifle, such as blankfire, training shock-gel, and slug.
 
ShadowWalker said:
to not only solve this problem and put it to bed but also allow people in character who may play independents to still have a fighting chance when they can't afford power armor.
Click to expand...


This last part comes from a very common misunderstanding of the Tier system. Taking a closer look at v3:

With this said, if a weapon was made to cause damage to a light armor (Tier 4) on multiple hits, it should not be considered a light anti-armor (Tier 4) weapon. While the weapon can be described as being used to assault such targets, when it comes to the tier the author should, depending on the intended effect of the weapon, consider whether the weapon will prove lethal on a single hit for a heavy personnel (Tier 3) or medium personnel (Tier 2) target and label it as such.

To give an example, the Light Armor Service Rifle was designed for use near friendly assets where the potential collateral damage of more powerful weapons was not desired. As such, while it has frequently been employed in an anti-armor role the weapon can be better thought of as a heavy anti-personnel (Tier 3) weapon, as a single shot to a vital area - such as the head or torso - is likely to incapacitate such a target (or penetrate Mishhuvurthyarcarapace), but would take longer to chew through power armor.
Click to expand...

Remember that equal tier is for reliably one-shotting something. People in Mindys very often carry tier 3 weapons. Two shots from a Tier 3 is like one from a tier 4, and a magdump is enough for 5 or 6. A tier 4 weapon is a very destructive weapon, and I also am not sure that people appreciate the gap between tier 3 and 4 is much much bigger than the gap between 2 and 3 or 3 and 5.

And even if a Tier 3 weapon weren't enough to reliably deal with PA to the point they are used by major factions for PA on PA engagements, here's one more thing to consider: as far as being a gritty independent barely scraping by, why do the odds need evened? Doesn't that take away from the whole theme and aesthetic of playing gritty independents? To solve problems the way they do, not the way major factions do, which is with expensive hardware.
 
Yuuki said:
A tier 4 weapon is a very destructive weapon, and I also am not sure that people appreciate the gap between tier 3 and 4
Click to expand...

Have you seen the crazy ass deathworlds the Duskerians come from? 188604, then Sirrus? on 188604, we had terrorists, rebels with tanks, EMPs, drop bears, and the occasional Mishhu.

Sirrus has megafauna. Pack Roaches are low middle of the food chain. The Tier 4 Storm Rifle is an iconic weapons platform that is perfectly suited to the environment the Duskerians call home.

Also, I'd happily call a Javelin missile a Tier 5 or 6, easily. (Real world Javelin.) The M2 Browning is definitely a T5.
 
It was made to kill WWI tanks which used paper thin mild steel. A modern abrams is definitely only in the Armor tier, not mecha tier. Likely Tier 6, but maybe only 5.

Please remember I've put literally thousands of rounds through these systems, often against actual live targets in theater. I am well acquainted with the capabilities of the US weapons inventory to a degree that I assure you, not even Char is familiar.

I would go so far as to say 20mm is still Tier 3 by SARP rules.
 
I present the Anzio 20-50

An anti-material rifle that fires 20x100mm shots that can take out non-WW2 tanks.

It's capable of being fired unarmoured.

1663675479132.png
 
Yuuki said:
It was made to kill WWI tanks which used paper thin mild steel. A modern abrams is definitely only in the Armor tier, not mecha tier. Likely Tier 6, but maybe only 5.

Please remember I've put literally thousands of rounds through these systems, often against actual live targets in theater. I am well acquainted with the capabilities of the US weapons inventory to a degree that I assure you, not even Char is familiar.

I would go so far as to say 20mm is still Tier 3 by SARP rules.
Click to expand...
Then what's the Mk 19? 🍿
 
Deleted User said:
How. this thing COULD and WOULD take out a power-armour vehicle.
Click to expand...
Tier 3 is highly likely to do that!

edit: Also remember: that thing isn't easily moved and carried by one person maneuvering under fire, it's almost a crew-served weapon. so if it is tier 4, then that's the reason for the exception. I have crew served tier 7's.
 
So, I agree but we have to keep one thing in mind:

Weapon Handling - Any weapon above Tier 3 that is able to be used by personnel should have very poor handling characteristics. What I mean is that it's not something you can run around with like an assault rifle in Call of Duty, with the expectation of being able to immediately acquire and fire on targets at close range. Instead, you're normally lying prone somewhere or are crouched, with the weapon itself mounted on a solid surface. For personnel, that's not a primary weapon, it's a specialist system used for very specific situations.

In other words, you're sacrificing agility for firepower.
 
Last edited:
I mean crew served weapons are basically the infantry's way of jumping tiers.
Also, brain goes brrrr but since weapons are generally designed for very specific roles, I don't see why we're so worried about tier jumping when it's those kinds of contexts. Like a guided ATGM probably won't kill an infantry formation moving in the open but it'll kill an armored vehicle.
 
yeah that's what I mean about it not technically being an individual weapon. If something like that or like @Deleted User post is tier 4 it's not violating anything because it's not something GI Joe is running around with. It's something that is carried, possibly by multiple people, and set up in place. This doesn't violate anything, because it's an emplaced weapon, not a Personnel-tier character using it as an individual weapon.

And let's get into the whole LAW/AT-4 thing. Those aren't just non-reusable, they aren't even issued as a weapons system, they are issued as a single round of ammunition. Someone isn't running around with a tier 5 or 6 weapon. They've got a cumbersome single piece of ammo like an underwing missile then when it's done it's done. If you're thinking of anything like a recoilless rifle that's a crew-served weapon like Locke posted like I was typing. I think people with LAW type weapons are just fine because it's one and done, ammunition not a weapon. Crew served weapons overtier are fine because the soldier isn't carrying it.

edit I accendentally deleted the last part talking about the mk19 as crew served oops
 
Ok, so I did a large number of conversions on the wiki during the work party. There were of course things that violated the things I'm about to say, but this was my sense of it in terms of what a single person who wasn't in power armor could carry.

Tier 1: Pistols
Tier 2: Heavy Pistols, Light Rifles
Tier 3: Superheavy pistols, most rifles, shotguns
Tier 4: Anti-materiel Rifles
Tier 5: Single use special weapons (ex. shoulder launched anti-armor missile)
Tier 6+: Just no.

A tier 4 weapon can be carried by infantry, it's just heavy/awkward/requires special consideration. A tier 5 weapon should be nearly prohibitively heavy and awkward but still possible. Tier 6+ I don't think should be possible by a single person. However, a T6 could probably be broken down and carried/used by two people. (Think sniper/spotter or heavy machine gun type thing)
 
Alrighty. Turns out the class I'm in is covering stuff that I already know, thus I'm going to take a shot (pun not intentional) at addressing Shadow's post, as I'm fairly certain it as made due to a conversation him, I, and several other members had a few hours ago. If this is rambly or too blunt, apologies; I have been up for an excessively long amount of time at this point. Anyhoo, without further ado...

ShadowWalker said:
Given the state of the wiki and lack of a proper if any hard ruling on things I propose an idea. Non power armored infantry can use weapons up to tier 4, I have a couple reasons for this and in a moment, I'm going to go over them with you all.


the statement "It's too powerful for an infantry man to have one." This doesn't really hold up well as an excuse, often doweled out as an excuse by older members and game masters.
Click to expand...
The reason for this, Shadow, is because that Tier 4 weapons with high rates of fire - assault rifles, submachine guns, etc. - are generally pieces of equipment that are bulky, ammo-hungry (for ammo, be it power packs or bullets, that itself isn't exactly small or light), and very recoil- or backblast-heavy, to the point where firing even a small burst is often enough to severely injure (or even kill) someone without the protection and/or synthetic strength afforded by powered armor. Tier 4 weapons with a low rate of fire - such as the "anti-material rifles" I mentioned on Discord - don't have this issue, however, as they fire slowly enough to prevent recoil from being an issue (provided they're fired in the correct position) and make it feasible to carry their ammunition around.

There's also a second reason - namely, balance - though I'll be covering that in greater detail below.

ShadowWalker said:
Yet a quick search threw the wiki you will find a varying degree of weapons that not only meet tier 4 (anti light power armor but sometimes exceed that). The Mutagenic Assault weapon and the lepra are some examples of this, the MAW, for instance is a teir 5 (anti medium power armor) weapon made by the star army and non-power armor infantry can use it without issue. and the Rythankins have a teir 4 pistol that you don't need power armor because "its anti-matter."
Click to expand...

Of the weapons you mentioned on Discord, namely the "Maw rifle, 20mm chemrail pistol, Addis anti matter pistol, Slag rifle v1, And storm rifle v1 and 2"...
  • The IRIS-MAW is, in addition to being a weapon that its creator, Ethereal, has said to be overtiered, is something that is heavier then the M240 SAW and thus not exactly man-portable.
  • The 20mm is a single-shot breech-loading pistol (rifle, really, but that's beside the point) with a maximum range of 16 kilometers, thus making it the equivalent of an anti-material rifle.
  • Deleted User's LEPRA pistol - which fires some kind of plasma-laser hybrid, not anti-matter - has to charge up for a fairly significant amount of time (2.5 seconds) before firing.
  • I wasn't able to find anything on a "SLAG rifle v1," unfortunately, unless you're referring to the Maverick's sniper rifle form - which, well, is basically an anti-material rifle.
  • The first version of the Storm Rifle and the 2A model of the second Storm Rifle version shoot Tier 2 rounds that are effectively equivalent to a single Tier 4 round, while the 2B model of the second Storm RIfle version is mounted and, to the best of my knowledge, incapable of being fired "from the hip" by unarmored individuals - thus making it a moot comparison.
Now, are all of these weapons anti-material rifles? No, and that's something I was wrong on. They all, however, have a "gimmick" which prevents them from shooting too rapidly - which brings me to my next point:

ShadowWalker said:
Another reason as stated above is no one seems to ever want to fallow the teir 4 or higher is limited to power armor due to rule of cool or some reason. and when you bring it up to them their cookie cutter response it "its sci fi, the calibers and stuff don't make sense that's just how it is." but such a statement interferes with what they said above. So either there's really a rule that states that or its a opinion that is chosen to be followed by certain people and not for others.
Click to expand...

Although I can't speak for @demibear, when I said that "Calibers in SARP make zero fucking sense," I meant calibers for vehicle- and starship-sized weapons, not personal and power armor-sized weapons (which in my opinion actually make some sense); regardless, however, the reason most (not all, most) Tier 4+ weapons are restricted to power armor is - in addition to the reasons provided earlier - due to balance, the reasoning for such Yuuki does a brilliant job of explaining here. Letting individuals outside of power armor use lightweight rapid-fire Tier 4+ weapons would drastically lessen the survivability of power armor within the setting - and I feel fairly confident when I say that such a thing would severely conflict with a core element of Star Army.

ShadowWalker said:
So, with the fallowing examples showing that there's either a lack of understanding how to treat the ruling when it comes to sci vs convential or semi realistic weapons. or due to wanting to do the rule of cool, the tier four weapon types being used by non-power armored individuals is a touchy subject so to solve headaches i think non power armored individuals should be able to have infantry weapons of at maximum tier 4 weapons. to not only solve this problem and put it to bed but also allow people in character who may play independents to still have a fighting chance when they can't afford power armor.
Click to expand...
Yuuki already did a good job of rebutting this in their post I linked earlier - and besides, as I stated earlier in this thread and this post, it's entirely possible for independent characters to easily access Tier 4 weapons (and beyond, in the case of RPGs and such).

Apologies for the abrupt ending; class is ending soon and I'm really, really, really tired. >_<
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top