Canister shot
Posted: Tue 03 Feb 2026, 13:27
I'm thinking about adding canister/beehive/APERS rounds for cannons to the system, but I'd like some input on how to do it.
Let's use a 105mm tank cannon for reference.
A Twilight 2000-era NATO 105mm canister round contains between 800-2000 metal balls that have a listed range of 200-300 meters, and about a 10 degree spread.
My first instinct was to use the shotgun rules on a vehicle cannon scale, and dropping the penalty individual targets, but the more I thought about it, I realized that it wasn't making the canister round an area effect weapon.
So I figured I'd adapt the directional blast rules, giving the canister round a range value (how many hexes until the directional blast expands) and a Blast power, based off the what the HE round of the gun produces.
According to my untrustworthy AI companion substituting for my lacking math skills, a 10 degree cone would pass 20m width (closer to 3 hexes than 1 hex) at 114m and 40m width (closer to 5 hexes than 3) at 228m. If we round those numbers down to 10, we get nice 10, 20, 30 intervals, and B, C, D blasts at up to 100m, 200m and 300m respectively. Yay. This works out pretty well for a 105mm canister shot, giving it range 10 and Blast B.
I have two issues.
1. Assuming most cannons have a rough 10 degree spread, mapping sufficiently close to expand cone at every 10 hexes, there's little room for varying range, except by varying blast power, meaning that if I were to stat the FV101 Scorpion's 76mm canister round (range 100m) it would just be a straight line of Blast D, with all the force of a wet fart - unpleasant but not life threatening. That might be fair. One could possibly uncouple the range value from the cone, and have the separate range value dictate when blast power decreases, so a 76mm might have blast C range 5, meaning that it's blast "cone" would fall completely within the straight initial 10 hex line, but be Blast C for the first 5 hexes and blast D for the second 5. One could even spice it up to Blast B and Range 3. It might invite too much complexity though.
2. This is the big kicker: This becomes a huge auto-hit blast area. Maybe this is fair, but it still becomes an insanely effective suppression tool. Should there be an attack roll involved? A miss reducing blast power by one step? Is using a "blast template" for a direct attack just a bad idea? I'm worried it might outperform regular blast weapons outright. Granted, for a tank, it would be very close range, inviting all sorts of man-portable dangerous shenanigans.
Thoughts? Opinions? Ridicule?
Let's use a 105mm tank cannon for reference.
A Twilight 2000-era NATO 105mm canister round contains between 800-2000 metal balls that have a listed range of 200-300 meters, and about a 10 degree spread.
My first instinct was to use the shotgun rules on a vehicle cannon scale, and dropping the penalty individual targets, but the more I thought about it, I realized that it wasn't making the canister round an area effect weapon.
So I figured I'd adapt the directional blast rules, giving the canister round a range value (how many hexes until the directional blast expands) and a Blast power, based off the what the HE round of the gun produces.
According to my untrustworthy AI companion substituting for my lacking math skills, a 10 degree cone would pass 20m width (closer to 3 hexes than 1 hex) at 114m and 40m width (closer to 5 hexes than 3) at 228m. If we round those numbers down to 10, we get nice 10, 20, 30 intervals, and B, C, D blasts at up to 100m, 200m and 300m respectively. Yay. This works out pretty well for a 105mm canister shot, giving it range 10 and Blast B.
I have two issues.
1. Assuming most cannons have a rough 10 degree spread, mapping sufficiently close to expand cone at every 10 hexes, there's little room for varying range, except by varying blast power, meaning that if I were to stat the FV101 Scorpion's 76mm canister round (range 100m) it would just be a straight line of Blast D, with all the force of a wet fart - unpleasant but not life threatening. That might be fair. One could possibly uncouple the range value from the cone, and have the separate range value dictate when blast power decreases, so a 76mm might have blast C range 5, meaning that it's blast "cone" would fall completely within the straight initial 10 hex line, but be Blast C for the first 5 hexes and blast D for the second 5. One could even spice it up to Blast B and Range 3. It might invite too much complexity though.
2. This is the big kicker: This becomes a huge auto-hit blast area. Maybe this is fair, but it still becomes an insanely effective suppression tool. Should there be an attack roll involved? A miss reducing blast power by one step? Is using a "blast template" for a direct attack just a bad idea? I'm worried it might outperform regular blast weapons outright. Granted, for a tank, it would be very close range, inviting all sorts of man-portable dangerous shenanigans.
Thoughts? Opinions? Ridicule?

