Forum

The REL and ARM values seem out of whack without much variation. Almost every firearm is REL A while most rifles and MGs are ARMOR 0.

With REL, I'd think only the most reliable of firearms should have a REL of A, that would be an AKM or a FN MAG (arguably). Others would be lower REL (like the finicky M16A1--hell even my M16A2 C7 clone in the service used to jam every 100-200 rounds or so, when clean, on the range and in good weather).

The 12.7x108 clearly has the highest penetration of the small arms presented, shouldn't that be ARMOR 0 and go up from there?

ARMOR is added to any armor the target wears; lower is better. The weapons rated as 0 are all correct; if you want to increase a rifle's ARMOR, you should also increase its DAM. This makes them more effective against unarmored targets, the majority you're likely to encounter, and so it's a bad idea. Also, there is very little rifle rated armor around in period even before its expenditure after 3 years of war is accounted for.

Not knowing the condition of your C7 when you finally got it heavily skews any value of the anecdote. I have had both old and new guns in service and newer guns are generally more reliable. Shocking, I know. Starting basically everything at REL A is as good a mechanic as any. Otherwise, feel free to roll for starting reliability of any equipment the PCs have; the probably hasn't been kind and the setting no longer assumes the PCs start reasonably fresh.

ARMOR is added to any armor the target wears; lower is better. The weapons rated as 0 are all correct; if you want to increase a rifle's ARMOR, you should also increase its DAM. This makes them more effective against unarmored targets, the majority you're likely to encounter, and so it's a bad idea.

Fair enough. It's further complicated by the fact that the ARMOR rating also encapsulates everything including .38 Special through anti-vehicle KE weaponry and various explosive warheads. I mean, a TOW has ARMOR -2 and my aforementioned Duskha round, still has a 0. Most of it comes down where FL decided to set that zero and scale they used (and the deterministic game design that led to those values and mechanic).

I have had both old and new guns in service and newer guns are generally more reliable.

And my experience has generally been the reverse, as that C7 was off-the-rack fresh and the 50-year old C5 in our tank never malfunctioned, ever. You're right though, it's all anecdotes and everybody's got one. This led me to a little bit of a rabbit hole looking at Mean Rounds Between Stoppages and Failures though. Here's one:

The M240 had 2,962 MRBS and 6,442 MRBF, compared to the M60's 846 MRBS and 1,669 MRBF. As a result, the M240 was declared the winner and accepted into infantry service. Although the M60 was lighter, had better balance, was more controllable, and there were many in the inventory, it did not work reliably enough.

Ok so the M60 has a REL B in game. Let's look at some others. M249: 1300 MRBS. M4: 3600. Shouldn't the M4 have a higher REL than the M240 and all the other weapons of I've listed? What's the difference between a MRBS of 846, 1,300 and 3,600?

I don't follow references to REL being letters? REL is a number, with the highest being 5. So when you say the M60 has a REL of B, don't you mean 4?

Honestly, putting a *tad* of variance in the REL set isn't that difficult. I personally set really simple weapons (revolvers, bolt-actions) to REL 6 - a bonus - and really shite weapons to REL 4 or 3, and occasionally roll for a weapon's existing REL to top it off. The rulebook stats are just suggestions - if you think equipment should be less reliable, make it so.

I thought rel had more to do with it mechanically working or not...rather than chance of it jamming (which is in the combat/ammo dice).

"REL stands for reliability rating. Wear and damage can reduce this rating, but it can never go above its starting value." Pg 92 players manual.

All the zip/pipe home rew guns are REL3 (same with improvised mortar). So most of the normal manufactured guns are all 5..with the few exceptions like m60 starting at a 4.

So REL seems more about it eventually breaking if you dont take care of it/repair it. Barrel change outs, springs or other parts etc.

Think of it as hitpoints/damage your gun or vehicle can take.

Pg 65
"PUSHING & RELIABILITY: If you push your roll, you must also re-roll all ammo dice not showing or . Ammo dice have a symbol on the one (1) side, just like base dice. When pushing, each on a base die or an ammo die will reduce the reliability rating of the weapon by 1. Any rolled in the initial roll (before pushing) are also counted.
This means rolling more ammo dice will risk damaging your fi rearm – but only when you push the roll. If your weapon breaks due to pushing, it does so after the current attack is resolved. Read more about damage to gear and repairs on page 91.
WEAPON JAM: If you roll two or more on your base dice or ammo dice after pushing, your weapon jams immediately after resolving the attack (any or rolled still apply), in addition to the reduced reliability.
Until the jam is cleared, the weapon cannot be fi red.
Clearing a jam is a slow action and requires a skill roll for the weapon (i.e. RANGED COMBAT or HEAVY WEAPONS).
Multiple attempts are allowed."

I am guessing the m60 is a REL4 due to the barrel melt issues more than others?? I remember hearing stories of change outs and issues etc.

Found this quick to give visual and more : https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/ ... of_an_m60/

That's one criticism that's been mentioned, yes... the level of abstraction of REL doesn't really have anything to do with the odds of rolling a jam right here, right now.

However, in a prolonged fight, and especially one where you're using a lot of ammo (dice), it does definitely come into play, as you might see that starting 4 drop down to a 2 pretty quick. Or that the weapon you brought into the fight but haven't had a chance to clean in a while starts ticking down to 2, then 1...

As a rule, if the players found a weapon in the field, I rarely if ever gave it to them with its max reliability rating. This made factory-fresh weapons both very desirable and something that caught attention right away. And if they found something REALLY cool, it was often close to broken! Keeps them busy, which pays dividends!

I was just thinking about the criticism that weapons jam if two or more 1s are showing on base and ammo dice after pushing a roll regardless of REL. As a suggestion, when two or more 1s are showing on base and ammo dice after pushing a roll, make a JAM CHECK by rolling a single D8. If the D8 roll is greater than the weapon's normal (unreduced) REL, it jams. This would give the following chances of jamming:

REL - - - Chance of Jam
8+ - - - - - - - None - - - -
7 - - - - - - - - 13% - - - - -
6 - - - - - - - - 25% - - - - -
5 - - - - - - - - 38% - - - - -
4 - - - - - - - - 50% - - - - -
3 - - - - - - - - 63% - - - - -
2 - - - - - - - - 75% - - - - -
1 - - - - - - - - 88% - - - - -

For most weapons (REL 5) they would only jam about a third of the time. For some unreliable weapons like the M60 machinegun (REL 4) they would jam 50% of the time. For crude, improvised weapons like the Zip Gun (REL 3) they would jam about two-thirds of the time.

If you wanted to make the chance of jamming higher then you could instead use a D10 (REL 5: 50%, REL 4: 60%, REL 3: 70%) or D12 (REL 5: 58%, REL 4: 67%, REL 3: 75%).

As a suggestion, when two or more 1s are showing on base and ammo dice after pushing a roll, make a JAM CHECK

It is a decent suggestion for those that want to relate jams to REL, that rolling a jam forces a roll against REL (easier might be just a D10 against REL to avoid the jam...so a REL 5 avoids the jam roll 50% and a REL 1 would only avoid 10%, or would take that jam rolled 90% of the time).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_malfunction shows all the varies types of failures.

Considering the fact that the MTTF (mean time to failure) for most firearms is thousands of rounds. I don't have an issue with the occasional jam being rolled...and REL ticking down to zero as you push it/not maintain it.